Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Vixen SG 2.1x42 Widefield Binoculars

  • Please log in to reply
558 replies to this topic

#51 GlennLeDrew  Happy Birthday!

GlennLeDrew

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15,850
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 01 June 2014 - 09:45 AM

That's hardly a 'comparison'. A difference in magnification of a factor of 1.4 becomes significant. A factor of very nearly 3 is like night and day. The little guy provides what might be called 'owl vision'; the Sard would be closer to 'bionic vision.' And the 30 and 12 degree FOVs are rather wildly different, too.

#52 ianatcn

ianatcn

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 562
  • Joined: 26 May 2010
  • Loc: Hampshire, UK

Posted 01 June 2014 - 11:31 AM

Totally agree with Glenn, I have both and they are excellent at what they do - but they do different things. With the Vixen SG after a while I forget there is anything between my eyes and the sky. The Sard is a reassuringly heavy lump that provides a wide field, excellent eye relief and still quite possibly the best 6x experience out there (apart from maybe one of Glenn's specials).

I have low power binoculars some with better transmission than the Sard, some with better edge of field correction but none that give me the same viewing experience. I paid what was to me a lot at the time, but now I can't even remember how much that was and they aren't going anywhere!

Likewise, for an opera glass the Vixen SG may look expensive, but there is nothing out there doing the same job as well as the SG does it.

All I can say is I am very glad to have both in my armoury. Both get used extensively on star vistas and both complement each other.
  • Swedpat likes this

#53 bicparker

bicparker

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,374
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Texas Hill Country

Posted 06 June 2014 - 02:06 AM

I used the Vixen SG 2.1x42's at Texas Star Party. Brian, the USA Vixen distributor had one demonstrator pair that he let me use for the night. He said they aren't available yet for sale in the USA, but probably would be soon.

The views of the Milky Way were quite amazing. Because you could see the star details much better instead of amorphous star clouds, and because of the wide angle view, the view looked almost 3 dimensional with depths in the star clouds. the H2 regions stood out almost appearing to float in the dense star fields.

After getting a bit emotionally lost in the Milky Way, I moved on to more pragmatic viewings. Quite frankly this ended up being a great way to augment my star hopping. I could easily pick out dimmer stars and easily translate that into where I needed to place the Telrad for my Dob. I used views from around the sky ranging from Centaurus to Virgo and Leo, to Ursa Major. As a friend mentioned to me, "These are like reading glasses for the stars!".

They are well done and I will likely order these when they become available here in the USA.

#54 edwincjones

edwincjones

    Close Enough

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,443
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004

Posted 06 June 2014 - 10:14 AM

thanks for the heads up on availability here in USA soon
I also want to get a pair

edj

#55 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,319
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 06 June 2014 - 10:49 PM

If one swivels one's eyes so as to gaze askance toward the field edge, it's to be expected that aberrations will become more visible. And more importantly, additional aberrations are virtually certain to result.

Instead, gaze only toward the field center, letting peripheral vision utilize the outer field. The view overall will be better for it.


+1. Pan your head not your eyes.

#56 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,319
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 06 June 2014 - 10:54 PM

Totally agree with Glenn, I have both and they are excellent at what they do - but they do different things. With the Vixen SG after a while I forget there is anything between my eyes and the sky. The Sard is a reassuringly heavy lump that provides a wide field, excellent eye relief and still quite possibly the best 6x experience out there (apart from maybe one of Glenn's specials).

I have low power binoculars some with better transmission than the Sard, some with better edge of field correction but none that give me the same viewing experience. I paid what was to me a lot at the time, but now I can't even remember how much that was and they aren't going anywhere!

Likewise, for an opera glass the Vixen SG may look expensive, but there is nothing out there doing the same job as well as the SG does it.

All I can say is I am very glad to have both in my armoury. Both get used extensively on star vistas and both complement each other.


I believe Kasai 2.3x40 are still available from Japan, but you need to order it direct from them, and price changes as foreign exchange rate changes. They will give you a short term quote in your currency( or paypall in yen?).

#57 davidmcgo

davidmcgo

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,419
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2004
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 09 June 2014 - 05:30 PM

Can someone who has the Vixen see if it would also work as a doubler held behind the eyepieces of a 10x70? I think that could be a nice selling feature if It does well in that role.

Dave

#58 GlennLeDrew  Happy Birthday!

GlennLeDrew

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15,850
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 09 June 2014 - 07:54 PM

Dave,
As a doubler behind an eyepiece, the FOV will be *small.*

I just tried my 2.3X40 behind a 7X35. The AFoV is estimated at 12 degrees. At the resultant 16X, the TFoV is about 0.75 degrees. It was hard to eliminate lateral color, and overall the image revealed no detail that was not seen directly.

A Galilean is not ideal for this, as its FOV depends directly on objective aperture. Replacing the 41mm objective with an exit pupil of 7mm and smaller will reduce the Galilean's FOV accordingly.

A Keplerian system (having a positive eyepiece, not negative) retains its full field in this application.

#59 davidmcgo

davidmcgo

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,419
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2004
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 09 June 2014 - 08:07 PM

Ah, thanks Glenn. I forgot about the exit pupil becoming the virtual aperture at that point.

Dave

#60 edwincjones

edwincjones

    Close Enough

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,443
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004

Posted 22 June 2014 - 02:36 PM

Vixen optics US has them listed at top of page,
but buy now button not working yet

#61 edwincjones

edwincjones

    Close Enough

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,443
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004

Posted 23 June 2014 - 12:09 PM

buy now button working, so
vixen SG order placed today with Vixen Optics US
$299.00 US

edj

#62 davidpitre

davidpitre

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,564
  • Joined: 10 May 2005
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 27 June 2014 - 07:51 PM

So no way to attach filters to the Vixens?

#63 ianatcn

ianatcn

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 562
  • Joined: 26 May 2010
  • Loc: Hampshire, UK

Posted 28 June 2014 - 07:28 AM

Not without making up something like a delrin adapter to slip over objective housings and threaded for filters. What at first sight appears to be threads is actually just concentric circles for stray light suppression.

#64 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,352
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 29 June 2014 - 03:17 AM

I need a pair of these Vixens, no question about it.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

#65 stargazer193857

stargazer193857

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,874
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Southern Idaho

Posted 01 July 2014 - 01:45 PM

Can you see that M31 looks like a galaxy (oval with brighter center) direct vision using these binoculars? What do you think is the minimum magnification to do so? My 7x35 are more than enough, though I want the wide view of 2.1x.
Can you see M13 with averted vision in these? Can you make out any craters on the moon?

#66 Sgt

Sgt

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,378
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Under the southern horn of the bull

Posted 01 July 2014 - 01:54 PM

If you are very short sighted, like me, then the vixens may not have enough focus travel to accommodate glasses free viewing.

#67 davidmcgo

davidmcgo

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,419
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2004
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 01 July 2014 - 05:13 PM

How many diopters short are you? I'm about 2 diopters myopic myself these days (blame it on the iPad and iPhone!) and almost out of travel on my Zeiss 10x40 BGATs if I use them without my glasses.

Dave

#68 Sgt

Sgt

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,378
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Under the southern horn of the bull

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:11 AM

I'm 4 point something in my strongest eye and I couldn't reach focus. Not at home so can't look at my eye prescription to be more specific sorry.

#69 davidmcgo

davidmcgo

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,419
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2004
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 02 July 2014 - 11:00 AM

That helps, they might still work for me!

Dave

#70 TCW

TCW

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,287
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2013

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:18 PM

The exit pupil on a 2.1 x 42 binocular would be something like 15 or 20mm. This idea is intriguing but what is the point in such a huge exit pupil?

#71 stargazer193857

stargazer193857

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,874
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Southern Idaho

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:23 PM

Because the tubes of light on a Galilean eyepiece diverge instead of converging. So if you want a wide field of view and decent eye relief, you need a large exit pupil so that the top of a light tube will still catch the bottom of your iris. Otherwise, you have to get up really close to get a full view.

I have not drawn it out and don't fully picture it, but basically the large objectives give a large exit pupil which allows a larger apparent field of view with decent eye relief. The trade off is the edges are pretty blurry with the low f# objective, especially if you use the full eye relief or are off center.

#72 TCW

TCW

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,287
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2013

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:28 PM

Eye relief is a short 8 mm. I don't get it yet.

#73 stargazer193857

stargazer193857

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,874
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Southern Idaho

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:38 PM

The eyepiece is concave concave. It is not the convex convex we are all used to. It is Galilean and produces and upright image. The eyepiece is in front of the objective focal point instead of behind it. The exit pupil is inside the system, not out in front of the eyepiece. The tubes of light diverge before they even exit the glass. You have to get your iris opening up close to the eyepiece to get a full field of view.

#74 stargazer193857

stargazer193857

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,874
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Southern Idaho

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:41 PM

It is very low power, and very wide angle, and has an exit pupil to give maximum light to the eye. That combination forces low f#'s that don't do so well inside of prisms for uprighting. Hence, the Galilean eyepiece is used, and the eye relief that comes with it. The Galilean system at 2x can be 1/3 as long a light path as a normal Keplerian system, making the prisms pointless.

#75 TCW

TCW

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,287
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2013

Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:47 PM

I am very near sighted - about 4.5 diopters. Would these work for me without glasses?


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics