44 replies to this topic

[4Brunco]

It appears here with TS brand:

 

https://www.teleskop...-Teleskope.html

 

and here with Tecnosky brand:

 

http://shop.tecnosky...idebino&Score=1

 

Characteristics:

interpupillary regulation 54.45- 77

free opening 28mm

prism size 30mm

31.8mm Optical path length 118.66mm

self-centering locking of eyepieces

approximate weight 718gr

 

Looks very good, meybe Baader Maxbright II killer, but I really don't like the 1.25" nose. It will be vinetting.

 

Edited by 4Brunco, 15 October 2019 - 03:30 AM.

[denis0007dl]

Yep, that binoviewer comes alive thanxs to me 

I give China texted idea, drawings etc....

...and I take and ask ZERO money and profit of all that, so hope that says how my heart is big for you folks!

 

My suggested dea and goal was:

 

1. big binoviewer enough to support all 1.25" eyepieces without vignetting

2. affordable price for all of you folks 

3. real self centring eyepiece holders

4. T2 rotatable system on telescope side

 

Here you can see first model I got on test on January 2018.

 

What I discovered:

 

*T2 system rotatable didnt work good, and was not good attached

*bino takes way too long light path-didnt measure exactly

*wing sides semi transparent, and if there is side light, it incomes inside bino which affect pict qality

*too big pronounced fingernails on both sides, which cut good part of effective Clear Aperture

*mechanic quality and sturdiness is proportional to price

*high light transmittion

 

Overall, very good bino for price asked!

 

Kind regards

Denis

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

[B 26354]

V-E-R-Y interesting. Thank you, Denis!  

 

Just might be this year's Christmas present to myself!  

[4Brunco]

Denis : I know it, you mentioned before, that somthing is happening. But this is better than I expexted. Thanks

Odoslané z SM-G930F pomocou Tapatalku

[4Brunco]

DENIS please, do you know if the 1.25" nose can be removed/changed?

Odoslané z SM-G930F pomocou Tapatalku

[denis0007dl]

DENIS please, do you know if the 1.25" nose can be removed/changed?

Odoslané z SM-G930F pomocou Tapatalku

Yes it can, but dont know thread size at the moment.

[4Brunco]

Yes it can, but dont know thread size at the moment.

Great, we will see. Any thread can be converted.

Odoslané z SM-G930F pomocou Tapatalku

[mrsjeff]

V-E-R-Y interesting. Thank you, Denis!

Just might be this year's Christmas present to myself!

I like how you think!

[rob.0919]

Very interesting, and a price to 'throw the cat amongst the pigeons'.

 

And as the OP mentioned, where does that leave the Baader Maxbright, and the Mk V for that matter.........?

 

 

Denis :  can we assume the manufacturers have rectified any issues you found with the proto-type ?

             And TS have listed a lightpath length of 118mm ; pretty good and similar to the Baader viewers.

Edited by rob.0919, 16 October 2019 - 10:25 AM.

[denis0007dl]

No, light path is definetly much more than 118mm!
Its much larger than even very long BinoVue.

Prisms are not changed (still very big fingernails).

All in all, its much better value IMO than new Baader unit.

Only advantage of Baader is, much less light path taken.

[Eddgie]

No, light path is definetly much more than 118mm!
Its much larger than even very long BinoVue.

Prisms are not changed (still very big fingernails).

All in all, its much better value IMO than new Baader unit.

Only advantage of Baader is, much less light path taken.

Yes, light path length is always an important issue and if they did not use T2 threads, that is a very serious omission, though I would think that once the thread is known, someone like Rafael at RAF Camera will start providing T2 adapters the way he does for Orion, WO, and Arcturus BVs.

While the TS web page suggests that most of their scopes have enough back focus to reach focus with this BV, I have my doubts, and that is especially true if the light path is more than 118.5 mm, though they say that this is what it is, and for now, I would have no reason to challenge that, but in general, most refractors out there today are not going to reach focus with this BV even if it is T2 ready.

 

And if the purpose of buying a big prism binoviewer is to get a bigger true field, then if you have to use even a 1.25x GPC, you won't really have an advantage over a short light path BV that can reach focus without  a GPC.

 

But the price is very compelling, and if it really is 118.5mm light path, I suspect it will pose serious marketing challenge to the Maxbright II.  It checks the self centering diopter, user collimateable, and big prism boxes, and that is a lot of product for the price, but even if it is only 118.5mm, I don't think I would have enough focus travel to reach focus a 1x, and if I can't do that, I am not interested and will continue using my short light path Orion.  

If one is going to have to use a 1.25x GPC anyway, then yes, this could be a great deal.

Edited by Eddgie, 16 October 2019 - 11:54 AM.

[Eddgie]

 

If one is going to have to use a 1.25x GPC anyway, then yes, this could be a great deal.

And if I were Baader, here is how I would challenge.

 

No refractor is going to reach focus with this if it is used with a standard diagonal.  This means that the buyer of other brands will have to purchase a T2 diagonal and 2" nose and maybe even a GPC.

 

In the past, Baader provided kits that included the nose and your choice of GPC and if they are smart they will do it again and this time, have a kit that includes a T2 diagonal. IF they can make a bundle price that is cheaper than what you would spend buying one of these new BVs and the necessary adatpers, connectors, diagonal and nose, then that might keep them in the game. 

 

This is how AP marketed the Mark V.  The Mark V looked pretty expensive, but when you bought it, you got the quick connector and the 1.25" mirror diagonal, so considering it was turn key, the price was more reasonable. 

 

(Also, you refractor guys should note that Christen could have spec'ed the 1.25" Zeiss prism diagonal and both of these are similar in cost, but  Christen sold the mirror.  I think he did that because likely buyers want the best, and I think Christen would tell you that for a fast refractor, the mirror is a better choice. )

[Eddgie]

Oh, and the 110mm light path of the Maxbright II vs the 118.5mm and possibly longer light path of the new BV if it has to use an aftermarket T2 adapter could make all the difference in reaching focus and not reaching focus at native focal length. 

 

This is the penalty for big prisms.  The bigger the prism, the longer the light path and the longer the light path, the more chances you won't reach focus without a GPC, and if you can reach focus without a GPC in a smaller prism binoviewer, you will get a bigger true field than you might with a bigger prism BV that requires a GPC. 

 

And that is why light path matters and why some may still find the Maxbright to be the better binoviewer.

 

If I bought the new Maxbright with a new T2 mirror, I could reach focus for sure with my 106LE,  If I had to use a 121.5mm light path, I would not be able to reach focus (if I wanted to use the mirror, which I do, but if I would settle for a small prism diagonal I might be able to reach focus with this new BV.  It would be very close, but I think I might just get in under the wire.)

[StarAlert]

Oh, and the 110mm light path of the Maxbright II vs the 118.5mm and possibly longer light path of the new BV if it has to use an aftermarket T2 adapter could make all the difference in reaching focus and not reaching focus at native focal length. 

 

This is the penalty for big prisms.  The bigger the prism, the longer the light path and the longer the light path, the more chances you won't reach focus without a GPC, and if you can reach focus without a GPC in a smaller prism binoviewer, you will get a bigger true field than you might with a bigger prism BV that requires a GPC. 

 

And that is why light path matters and why some may still find the Maxbright to be the better binoviewer.

 

If I bought the new Maxbright with a new T2 mirror, I could reach focus for sure with my 106LE,  If I had to use a 121.5mm light path, I would not be able to reach focus (if I wanted to use the mirror, which I do, but if I would settle for a small prism diagonal I might be able to reach focus with this new BV.  It would be very close, but I think I might just get in under the wire.)

Eddgie,

My Tak 100DL has 223mm of back focus. Will I be okay with either of these options?

[emilslomi]

Eddgie,

My Tak 100DL has 223mm of back focus. Will I be okay with either of these options?

1.25" diagonal - yes, but would have to have T2 connector and 2" nose to take advantage of the prism size.

2" diagonal - bino also needs a new connector, the rest is counting millimeters and prayers until there is a confirmed path length.

Sorry about taking your call Eddgie,

 

Emil

Edited by emilslomi, 16 October 2019 - 01:37 PM.

[Eddgie]

Eddgie,

My Tak 100DL has 223mm of back focus. Will I be okay with either of these options?

Yes, that should be far more than enough. 

 

The light path through a standard 1.25" diagonal is about 75mm and if the light path though the binoviewer is 118.5mm, then you are under 200mm so plenty of room even for eyepieces that take some inward focuser travel (Hyprion zooms for example).

 

Now, you might not be able to use a 2" diagonal if the light path is longer than stated.  The 2" would have a light path of 100mm (or more) and if the BV has a light path of 118.5, it is going to be cutting it close.  Some eyepieces might not reach focus. Again, if they have understated the light path though, 2" might not be an option. 

 

With a standard 1.25" diagonal though you will be fine, and with a T2, you will get a noticeably improved fully illuminated image circle.

[Eddgie]

The OP getting a good answer (like yours) is more important to me than me having to be the one that answers it.

[emilslomi]

Rationally, it is no challenge to the Baader MB2, which deducting the tax on the announced price is not much if any more expensive, which does not need to get jerry-rigged to take advantage of it's prism size and which (I have looked through it - mounted on a TEC 140 with 12 mm Morpheus) is optically convincing and a beautiful piece of craftsmanship.

Sorry about this stupid analogy, which I to my deepest regret can not hold back. But did anybody ask what would happen to the AP 130 when the APM 140 came out?

 

Emil

Edited by emilslomi, 16 October 2019 - 02:19 PM.

[denis0007dl]

 

This is the penalty for big prisms.  The bigger the prism, the longer the light path and the longer the light path...

 

 

Not always.

Here play role as well mechanics OVERALL built!

For example, that Zeiss have 30mm and 31.5mm prisms, and have light path 109mm only in such setup!

 

New TS bino can have much less, if they made low profile eyepiece holders, but there can be also done more to save more light path on different bodybuilt changes... 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Eddgie]

Well, we don't know if it is T2 or not, but if it is not, then in my opinion, that was a bad miss.

 

Baader does a great job with light path management.  The clamp system for the eyepieces is a good example of this.  Compression diopters are excellent, but the downside is that they take some extra height on the eyepiece towers to allow for the travel on the treading of the compression system.   One can easily see that the Baader tower is shorter than the tower on the new BV and between this and the slightly larger prisms, you get at least 8.5mm more light path. 

 

For people like StarAlert, these few millimeters won't matter though. 

 

On the other hand, they allow user collimation, and that is a big plus.

 

And for most people, the extra tiny amount of aperture is not going to matter, and if they can't reach focus without a GPC and that is their goal, then the new TS unit will not be an option.  We simply don't have the final specs and interface info though. 

 

I think it is great though that there is another option, but from what I see now, if I had to choose one, I would lean towards the Baader, but that is because I know I could reach focus with it (though to do so, I would need to buy a new Baader diagonal). 

Now I have no dog in this hunt.  I only really use binoviewers for planetary, solar, and double star work these days, and for that my inexpensive Orion bionviewer is all I need. 

[Eddgie]

Not always.

Here play role as well mechanics OVERALL built!

For example, that Zeiss have 30mm and 31.5mm prisms, and have light path 109mm only in such setup!

 

New TS bino can have much less, if they made low profile eyepiece holders, but there can be also done more to save more light path on different bodybuilt changes... 

This BV does not have self centering diopters or eyepiece clamps, and does not appear to have the ability to collmate by user.

  

That though does not make your statement at all less true.  If you can do without some kind of self centering diopters, you can indeed save some light path. The compromise in this case is that you have six screws to manipulate when changing eyepieces

. 

Still, my compliments to you.  It is a beautiful binoviewer and I always enjoy seeing examples of your engineering and craftsmanship. 

Edited by Eddgie, 16 October 2019 - 02:10 PM.

[denis0007dl]

This BV does not have self centering diopters or eyepiece clamps 

True!

 

 ...does not appear to have the ability to collmate by user.  

Not true! That Zeiss bino can be collimated by end user very easily by shifting eyepiece holders plates!

 

 

That though does not make your statement at all less true.  If you can do without some kind of self centering diopters, you can indeed save some light path. The compromise in this case is that you have six screws to manipulate when changing eyepieces.

True!

 

 

Still, my compliments to you.  It is a beautiful binoviewer and I always enjoy seeing examples of your engineering and craftsmanship. 

Thank you!

Your and mine knowledge and experience definetly fulfill full binoviewers world picture, and much much more of that

[StarAlert]

Yes, that should be far more than enough. 

 

The light path through a standard 1.25" diagonal is about 75mm and if the light path though the binoviewer is 118.5mm, then you are under 200mm so plenty of room even for eyepieces that take some inward focuser travel (Hyprion zooms for example).

 

Now, you might not be able to use a 2" diagonal if the light path is longer than stated.  The 2" would have a light path of 100mm (or more) and if the BV has a light path of 118.5, it is going to be cutting it close.  Some eyepieces might not reach focus. Again, if they have understated the light path though, 2" might not be an option. 

 

With a standard 1.25" diagonal though you will be fine, and with a T2, you will get a noticeably improved fully illuminated image circle.

I recently ordered a T2 Astro Amici prism with 48mm of light path. I want to use the diagonal for binoviewers and terrestrial. I hope it’ll work. 

https://www.baader-p...schichtung.html

 

Edited by StarAlert, 16 October 2019 - 04:28 PM.

[rob.0919]

I recently ordered a T2 Astro Amici prism with 48mm of light path. I want to use the diagonal for binoviewers and terrestrial. I hope it’ll work. 

https://www.baader-p...schichtung.html

I think you should be fine.

I have the same Baader Amici you list, and i can focus natively with it with the Mk5 with my 140 which has a back focus of 170mm or so.

[noisejammer]

...  Also, you refractor guys should note that Christen could have spec'ed the 1.25" Zeiss prism diagonal and both of these are similar in cost, but  Christen sold the mirror.  I think he did that because likely buyers want the best, and I think Christen would tell you that for a fast refractor, the mirror is a better choice.

Eddgie, I have the standard mirror diagonal (which came with the Mk V) and the Zeiss-spec prism. In my scope (TOA150) with my eyepieces (ZAO II) and using my eyes, I find the prism produces an obviously better image.

 

I typically observe at high power using the 1.7x GPC (f/12.5) or a BARCON ( ~ f/14.7). Nevertheless, I can't see any spherochromatism, even when the system is operating at f/7.3.

 

Another thread (see this post) has discussed the optical differences between the Christen triplets and the TOA design. This may be significant.