Quote:

---

Simple. I tried an eye patch and, with both eyes open, all I saw was a black field image from my patched eye.
I tried a black field mounted on the side of the scope. Both eyes open, all I saw was the black scope.
If I squint and close the unused eye, all I see is what the open eye sees.
But I've done this for 49 years, so whatever muscles are used are pretty strong. I can observe for 10 hours in a row with one eye closed with no muscle or eye strain whatsoever.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

The latter I still don't understand if the observer wants to look at dimmer DSO. <<with a BVer>>

---

As my buddy Inigo might say: "Lemme 'splain"

But since there's so little space to do so, lemme sum up...

Quote:

---

It's not just our eyes that are all a little different from each other. We also process and interpret visual data a little differently.

---

Quote:

---

There I spend most of the time locating and observing DSO toward the LM of my telescope.

---

Gosh- that's like:
1) brewing a pot of coffee 'cuz you like the aroma... then dumping the whole carafe down the drain... or
2) observing Jupiter's GRS as it barely crests the limb of the planet, then packing the scope up & calling it quits for the nite... or
3) buying a huge tub of super-chunk peanut butter, then straining out & eating only the chunks... because you like nuts!


OTOH, i get a kick outta viewing galaxies, dim or bright, then cruising their immediate area looking for faint "companions". I dig it ALL!

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The latter I still don't understand if the observer wants to look at dimmer DSO. <<with a BVer>>

---

As my buddy Inigo might say: "Lemme 'splain"

But since there's so little space to do so, lemme sum up...

---

I'll let EdZ do the 'splainin':

Re: Equivalent effective aperture with bino

The gist of the 'splainin' is that an 11" scope with a binoviewer will be the equivalent of a 9.2" scope. This is similar to my own experience when binoviewing my 10" and 8" Dobs. There is some detectable loss of light grasp.

Mike

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Now, what baffles me is:

Quote:

---

There I spend most of the time locating and observing DSO toward the LM of my telescope.

---

---

Well, I'm not going to travel 50 miles, a two-hour round trip, to spend all night looking at the bright stuff I could have stayed home to see! Now, I'm not saying I don't look at the showcase Messiers and NGC objects, especially if my family is with me. But I'd say at least 80% of the time I'm trying to find those dim beasties I'd have absolutely nil chance of seeing at my red zone home. Even beyond that, I spend most of the 80% locating and observing objects I've never seen before, even at the dark site. To me this is the most logical course of action which makes the best use of my time and resources.

But to each their own. De gustibus non est diputandum.


Mike

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

... an 11" scope with a binoviewer will be the equivalent of a 9.2" scope.

---

Yup, that's the pie-are-squared aspect of "splitting" the signal to two eyes, from ONE objective.... yet i believe, in Ed Z's most excellent 'splainin', he goes on discuss & describe the "additive" aspect of bringin' TWO eyes to bear on viewing the same object. Here is where i believe the variations in our eye-brain wiring come into play! Seems like i recall that, for Ed Z, it's a few decimals of magnitude grasp lost- on the whole, net sum. Not entire magnitudes, as the aperture "split" & raw numbers might imply.

This squares, roughly, with what my own eyes see... altho i s'pect my own wiring varies (as does everyone's, this way or that ) tending to favor the bino gains where *faintness* is considered. Some of that may be my picking up "movement" better with both eyes, where dim objects are spotted while panning the scope? I dunno... i simply go with what i see.

Quote:

---

But I'd say at least 80% of the time I'm trying to find those dim beasties I'd have absolutely nil chance of seeing at my red zone home.

---

Yeah, i know whereof you speak! And i s'pect it comes down to niggly details, percentages, & tastes? I might be the same- only at 70%, and "orange" at home. That, and i'm always game to see NEW aspects to old friends... it's been over five years since bumping up from a 10" SCT to a 15" Dob, and i'm STILL not "over" the rush the difference has made- objects bright or dim!

Quote:

---

To me this is the most logical course of action...

---

Observe long & prosper, Mike! I guess for me, when i'm out under the stars, it's like Ellie Arroway (in 'Contact') stating "No words to describe it... they should've sent a poet!"

But whether looking at the *bino* aspect, or the "planetary EP" aspect, it is a multi-faceted equation! For the OP, using an 8" SCT in SoCal, the atmospheric "seeing" in some areas there is legendary- here's a key place to look for increased performance ("planetary" or otherwise ) from one's EPs; watch for better seeing conditions, and/or go find them- like getting away from hot pavement & buildings, vents & rooftops, & finding viewing environments that take particular advantage to the atmo's "laminar flow" coming off the Pacific.

Next would be making efforts to get the SCT thermally stable- perhaps a "CAT-cooler" to get the thermals out of the sealed tube, and the temps of the glass & metal therein to ambient- matching that of the outside air.

So when cooled, collimated, and under good conditions, the individual variations within EP types can now be more clearly seen & appreciated. Then, if the scope's optics are really good, the ultimate nuances of the better EPs can hold sway!

Getting a look thru a variety of scopes, types, and EPs- like at a local/regional star-party, one can begin to see what the variations look like... as well as experience what one's own tastes prefer in EP types & ergonomics. It makes little sense to buy a specialized $400 EP, only to find it's uncomfortable for your personal "software" to look thru!... or is just as blurry in one's scope as a $20 Plossl.

Having followed my own advice (well, that which distilled from months & years of studying thru CN university ), having optimized my scope & viewing prep, i was quite notably blessed by the performance of a truly specialized "Planetary" EP- a 10mm Carl Zeiss Jena Ortho. I could clearly see it perform a half-notch better than some other, excellent glass i'd been using... being compared A-B in the same scope, same time. However, i'm betting any such excellence would've been obscured, if not entirely lost, had i run the same EP comparo in my previous scope, especially when it hadn't reached thermal equilibrium... and/or the atmo conditions were not particularly good.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

While the light that reaches each eye is cut in half, the brain does a function called "Summation," in which it adds the light back together. The image is still dimmer than with monovision, but the binocular summation helps your eye do better resolution.

---

Not with my eye/brain.

I can just about read the bottom line on the optician's eye testing chart with my right (distance dominant) eye alone (with the correct distance correction lens in). With my left eye alone, the bottom two lines are illegible. (This is still "perfect" vision in optical terms). With both eyes together, I can no longer read the bottom line. Overload from the less good signal, I suspect.

I use binoculars for observing brighter variable stars (in the mag. 6 to 9 range). I always leave one eye capped ... because I get a clearer image that way, in fact it enables me to see stars at least half a magnitude fainter. This is despite the loss of (a little more than half) of the light that a beam splitter entails not being a factor when using duplicate objectives. There is NOTHING wrong with the binoculars!

Reducing glare DOES help me see fine detail on planets ... the mechanism doesn't matter but less glass / less surfaces means less scatter, which helps.

---

Brian,
You should be able to focus each eyepiece separately to some extent, even if it's just by pulling one out a little. Once both eyes are in focus, you might have a better experience.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Brian,
You should be able to focus each eyepiece separately to some extent, even if it's just by pulling one out a little.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Brian,
You should be able to focus each eyepiece separately to some extent, even if it's just by pulling one out a little.

---

Neither eye focuses very much any more. And if the balance isn't quite right, I get a thumping headache very quickly. This really interferes with being able to see anything well. It's much more comfortable to be monocular.

---

Well, that makes it an easy choice!

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Yes, i know. I'm right-handed & right-eyed. Yet my oldest son, who is VERY similar to me in many, many ways- and is right-handed, is left-eye dominant. Took us a while to figure that out (as a child he was having a very difficult time aiming an air-rifle... till we discovered the *why*!)

---

I've worked as a volunteer instructor at our local public archery range, which gives free lessons to first-time archers. A vital part of the first-time training session is testing for eye dominance, along the lines of Don's test. The only difference is that you have the student hold out their hands, make a small aperture and look at the instructors face. Which ever eye the instructor sees is the dominant eye. Very simple and reliable test.

Cross-dominance (opposite dominant hand from dominant eye) is fairly common, maybe 5% occurence (utterly non-scientific. That would make a great grammer-school science fair project...) My stepson is right-handed but left-eye dominant. When he switched, he immediately improved his shooting. I have heard that there has never been a U.S. national shooting champion who shot cross-dominant. There have been successful archers, but that is because they had some physical impedement that required shooting on one side or the other.

It took Foster several weeks to get comfortable with left-handed shooting, but now years later he does not even think about. He got his Army sharp-shooter ribbon left handed, and then just for fun re-qualified right-handed. Ambi-occular?

Non-dominance is a much rarer occurence. Less than 1% I would guess, perhaps much less. It is infrequent enough that when an instructor discovers a student with no eye dominance, they will often call over the other instructors to see for themselves.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Franz,
If you try inexpensive binos and they work well, then you're in business, and getting off cheap! If they don't work well, though, try really good ones before giving up on the whole idea.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

FWIW, instead I'm planning on the Baaders that Eddgie suggested.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Please remember this... No matter what you use, the best way to improve your planetary performance is not with eyepeices or binoviewers... It is to develop patience.

---

... and etc. ...



Mike

Post Extras: