Pinewood
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 12/07/04
Posts: 825
Loc: 40.77638º N 73.982652 W
|
|
My attention was drawn to the following post by Holger Merlitz:
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/digitalbino.html
where he describes a binocular with fewer optical components and more electronics and digital processing.
Does anyone have any thoughts about such a binocular?
Happy observing,
Arthur Pinewood
--------------------
Bread is not enough. We demand circuses!
|
BobinKy
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 1683
|
|
Arthur...
I have three thoughts. (1) If the quality difference between film and digital photography is any prelude to digital binoculars, I am holding on to my porro binoculars.
(2) New technology usually means current technology gets cheaper. Let the fools buy the new stuff--I will look for bargains on the classic binoculars.
(3) Maybe Sky & Telescope magazine will sell lots of ads for digital binoculars and Tony and Gary will get a pay raise. 
--------------------
Bob
38°N
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 14732
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Not unrealistic at all.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Pinewood
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 12/07/04
Posts: 825
Loc: 40.77638º N 73.982652 W
|
|
Quote:
Arthur...
I have three thoughts. (1) If the quality difference between film and digital photography is any prelude to digital binoculars, I am holding on to my porro binoculars.
(2) New technology usually means current technology gets cheaper. Let the fools buy the new stuff--I will look for bargains on the classic binoculars.
(3) Maybe Sky & Telescope magazine will sell lots of ads for digital binoculars and Tony and Gary will get a pay raise.
Hello Bob,
I think that such a binocular is possible but perhaps impractical. IF Porros and roof binoculars are resonably robust and under normal usage do not suffer from catastrophic failure, although over time the image is constantly degraded by minor lack of collimation, dirt and other problems. Everything digital device seems to me to be prone to sudden death, which would be no great worry for the backyard astronomer or a avocational bird watcher. For maritime, search and rescue or military use, such a binocular would be questionable. In such uses a binocular has to be robust because there is little reduncancy.
Clear skies,
Arthur Pinewood
|
Wes James
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 3459
|
|
Quote:
For maritime, search and rescue or military use, such a binocular would be questionable.
You need to be aware the level of technology the military already has- and uses. They are flying aircraft for reconnaissance and even attack purposes via unmanned remote control vehicles. They are predicting the latest fighter- the Joint Forces Strike Fighter will be the last manned fighter we see. Pilots at my airfield practice all the time flying night vision goggles. Take off's and landings, flying the pattern. If we have this kind of technology today, and much much more, an electronic pair of binoculars are mere childs play if they chose to develop them. Remember, we're talking about night vision goggles for pilots wearing these things while flying... which they do in aircraft ranging from helicopters to fighters. If reliablity were that big an issue, that wouldn't be happening. Of course, the other forces use them, too... for many purposes.
--------------------
Wes
Atlantic Beach, FL
Some bino’s from Miyauchi 5x32 Binon's up through Garrett 20x110 Signature's,
Some telescopes from a Stellarvue 80mm NHNG up through a couple of 8” reflectors…
And a wonderful 4.25" Delmarva Shiefspiegler!
Some good friends, made here on C/N.
Oh- several cats and a wonderful wife!
Anyone want a cat???? :-O
"When your work speaks for itself- Don't Interrupt" -Gamble Rogers
|
harbinjer
super member
Reged: 12/17/08
Posts: 127
Loc: Southeastern Minnesota
|
|
As soon as you're not getting the same, real photons, there's cool stuff you could do. You could make one larger Monocular, with binocular output, showing the same thing in each eye. You could also make it binocular, or even trinocular in objectives. Also, it could integrate longer, so that you could get a deeper view. Like "live"-imaging. You might even be able to do a good job with zoom.
Another thing possible is to integrate something like a MySky into it. You could also potentially do different bands like IR or UV, or have swap in Narrowband filters. Or any filter, really.
The sky's the limit(or not), but image quality will be the problem. I'm not sure the small screens are up to the challenge, today.
|
Wes James
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 3459
|
|
Quote:
You could make one larger Monocular, with binocular output, showing the same thing in each eye. You could also make it binocular, or even trinocular in objectives.
If you think about the sound processing done in music- just a simple chorus or reverb- you could perhaps do something similar with the video signal to each optic channel/eyepiece- producing a 3-D or dimensional effect.
Wes
|
pcad
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 01/17/05
Posts: 1768
Loc: Connecticut
|
|
We've seen devices like this in the movies. Who didn't want the binoculars Luke used in the first Star Wars film? More recently Spy/Adventure films like the two "XXX" films feature electronically enhanced binoculars.
A binocular device incorporating all the features Holger describes should be possible. Probably no more difficult than a camcorder with night vision and two oculars.
On the downside, decent camcorders can still be expensive even without nightvision. Then there's the thorny issue about batteries and the limitations associated with them. If you don't like the Canon binoculars due to their need for batteries, try a camcorder someday. You'll appreciate the Canons afterwards. 
--------------------
Peter
Telescopes 25 - 318 mm
Binoculars 15 - 88 mm
Microscope 50x - 1000x
|
Wes James
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 3459
|
|
Giving further thought to this topic, I realize I personally draw a distinct line between optics and electronics. Seeing something through fine optics is one thing- seeing an electronic image of it takes it into a totally different realm- such as looking at a computer screen, or TV. I can google any image of anything I want on the computer... what do I need some electronic device for??? Either I want to see the real thing- or in image of it. When it becomes an image, the entire personality of optics is lost to me. Yes, I realize- we even have a guy in our club who observes with a security camera with a lens on it playing into a monitor. I find the image totally without character. A static-y screen with 3 fuzzy blobs on it means nothing to me. Just my personal point of view, no offense intended to those who enjoy viewing on a screen. Me- I like the optics. They're pretty- and shiny~ *grin*
Wes
|
Rich V.
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 1395
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada, USA
|
|
I agree, Wes! I get considerable pleasure from seeing the ACTUAL ancient photons that have traveled so long just to illuminate my retinas! 
That's the connection I'm looking for in my astro persuits.
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/75/150x100 Saturn III, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
edwincjones
Postmaster
Reged: 04/10/04
Posts: 5669
|
|
I like the old style binoculars better,
but that is probably where binos are going.
edj
|
beachchairbill
professor emeritus
Reged: 11/06/08
Posts: 508
|
|
Any pictures of our future binoculars?
BB
|
DJB
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1590
Loc: Lisle NY
|
|
Hi all,
I am an older analogue guy. However, I AM impressed with digital technology.
If digital fails, usually the problem is a circuit, but, more than likely, it is a poblem with connectors/contacts inside the unit.
My experence is that most problems arise when the humidity changes dramatically, such as in summer and winter. Just my thoughts, FYI.
Best regards,
Dave.
|
Luigi
Post Laureate
Reged: 07/03/07
Posts: 4947
Loc: MA
|
|
There is no doubt that electronic bins will eventually outperform pure optical bins. You can already get an idea by comparing AP to visual or for a more real-time equivalent, a Malincam or image intensifier EP to visual. Of course nothing goes on in real-time in the night sky so looking at a still picture is fundamentally no different. The difference is, the ancient photons from the stars are hitting an image sensor, not your retina. It's kind of like watching something on TV rather than in person. It comes down to a subjective appreciation of the experience, not a technical argument.
--------------------
17.5" f/5 Dob. IM-715 MCT. 120ED. Lunt 60mm Ha.
Zeiss, Leica, Fujinon, Nikon, Pentax, Bushnell bins
|
Bensi
sage
Reged: 02/22/09
Posts: 239
Loc: Italy, Near Rome
|
|
Of course, technological change, the binoculars offer very special
always ... but less classic binoculars!
For me as a collector who gets excited to look in a telescope of 100 years or 20 years ago ... nothing changes but for a professional or military change much.
I think Merlitz is right!
--------------------
Marco Bensi
Telescope
C.P.GOERZ 1270/110 - 1910
Binoculars Gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/37533746@N03/sets/72157622478972171/
Blog: http://blog.libero.it/GOERZ/
Edited by Bensi (09/01/09 04:41 PM)
|
KBK
member
Reged: 08/05/09
Posts: 68
|
|
Right now, you are going to need the power supply for a 1080P lcd chip and associated LED's for the RGB, plus the associated circuitry. However, I'm not sure that LCD panels of this type -at this time- are capable of the high switching speed required to do a RGB image in one eye with one LCD panel.
Look to wearable HUDs/imagers that are of the highest resolution for use in CAD systems to get an idea of the challenges and costs involved.
Right now, we are looking at limited production devices coming in at the $10-20k street price range This is at 1080P resolution (1080 pixels tall and 1920 pixels wide), if someone decided to market such a thing.
Unless Zeiss does the optics (two sets, here, innne and outie!) ..it is also going to look like XXXX.
|
DJB
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1590
Loc: Lisle NY
|
|
Hi all,
Several of you have made some very compelling points, with which I agree.
Why the "which" above. Because none of us knows what will come out of the digital world--binoculars too. I think I shall just wait and see, so to speak. Just my opinions.
Best Regards,
Dave.
|
Mark9473
Post Laureate
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 3216
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
I think it's certainly cool to contemplate such a device.
One thing doesn't add up for me though; the sensor would need to be placed at the focal plane of the objectives, and without prisms to fold up the light path, that would make for a fairly long instrument. I don't think too many of us would be happy with binoculars that are 50% longer than today. So I don't quite get how Holger projects compact binocular bodies.
--------------------
Mark
Leica 8x20; Vixen 8x42; Swift 8.5x44, 10x50 and 20x80; TS 7x50; Orion 15x63; Docter 15x60
WO Megrez II 80 FD + Baader 90° T2 Amici
|
Rich V.
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 1395
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada, USA
|
|
Mark, I don't see why the light path couldn't be folded via a mirror as the placement of the sensor isn't important. The sensors could then be located between the objectives on that end. Any reversals of the image could be done by the processor. This would add bulk instead of length, though, as well as other possible aberrations so perhaps not an ideal solution either.
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/75/150x100 Saturn III, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
Pepin The Short
member
Reged: 11/24/06
Posts: 36
Loc: Wroclaw, Poland
|
|
Quote:
(2) New technology usually means current technology gets cheaper. Let the fools buy the new stuff--I will look for bargains on the classic binoculars.
Not necessarily - electronics gets cheaper and cheaper, while good optics still has its price. Mass production of high quality SSD memory modules or TFT displays can be fully automated, while making good optics still require some skilled craftsmanship. That's why Fujinons 10x50 still cost the same, while for the same money you can get more and more inches of LCD TVs or GHZ in laptops.
Ultimately, there will be need for good FMC lenses in all this electronic devices – just as in reflex digital photo cameras you need a premium objective. And these are expensive stuff.
For me, the interesting opportunity that this new electronic technology brings, is overcoming limitations connected wit objective - magnification - exit pupil ratio. Perhaps it would be possible to build a binocular with very large aperture and low magnification, still delivering to one's small exit pupil all the gathered light. Imagine an 7x80 instrument – wouldn't it be great to enjoy wide fields with enormous number of stars, due to increased limiting magnitude? Or what about viewing Orion nebula or M31 with 20x200 instrument? For such a view, just for one moment I can sacrifice the feeling that I'm actually catching real photons which have traveled through the space.
Greetings
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 