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

need advice on Binoviewers

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#26 Eddgie

Eddgie

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 26,885
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 10 January 2020 - 03:28 PM

Hey Ed, as a side note, how good are those cheap Nikon zooms? Same as the Celestron ect, but not in the class of the more expensive Baader zooms?

Thanks, Bob

I am not the best one to ask about the differences in eyepieces because except for edge of field performance, I find that eyepieces rarely make enough performance difference at the center of the field to bother me about which ones I use, so I tend to pick my eyepieces based on other factors rather than the magic dust quotient.  Of axis performance in wide field eyepieces is a much different issue, and here, I think ES and Telvue are the best out there.

 

As for the bargain Nikons, they are very simple design and find them to have center of the field performance that is as good most other eyepieces I have used.  The main reason I use them in the binoviewers though is that they are very light weight, and have a decent zoom range.  I use these for planetary work in the dob and the 106 triplet (though I rarely do planetary in the triplet, more just an occasional look. Just not enough scope to do serious planetary observations). 

 

So, the very very very best that I can say about them is that I like them and for planetary, they seem to work pretty well.   I have warned though that I am not an "eyepiecenista".  If find that using binoviewers made far far more difference to planetary viewing than this or that eyepiece.  As long as I am using a binoviewer for solar system work, the actual eyepieces I use don't seem to make much difference to me so I usually base my preference on other factors like mag range, weight, or whether the tops rotate when the eyepiece is zoomed (for solar, I use eye guards and if the top moves when zooming, that is bad for me, so that is why I don't use the Nikons for my solar scope). 


Edited by Eddgie, 10 January 2020 - 03:33 PM.


#27 REC

REC

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,849
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2010
  • Loc: NC

Posted 10 January 2020 - 04:17 PM

I am not the best one to ask about the differences in eyepieces because except for edge of field performance, I find that eyepieces rarely make enough performance difference at the center of the field to bother me about which ones I use, so I tend to pick my eyepieces based on other factors rather than the magic dust quotient.  Of axis performance in wide field eyepieces is a much different issue, and here, I think ES and Telvue are the best out there.

 

As for the bargain Nikons, they are very simple design and find them to have center of the field performance that is as good most other eyepieces I have used.  The main reason I use them in the binoviewers though is that they are very light weight, and have a decent zoom range.  I use these for planetary work in the dob and the 106 triplet (though I rarely do planetary in the triplet, more just an occasional look. Just not enough scope to do serious planetary observations). 

 

So, the very very very best that I can say about them is that I like them and for planetary, they seem to work pretty well.   I have warned though that I am not an "eyepiecenista".  If find that using binoviewers made far far more difference to planetary viewing than this or that eyepiece.  As long as I am using a binoviewer for solar system work, the actual eyepieces I use don't seem to make much difference to me so I usually base my preference on other factors like mag range, weight, or whether the tops rotate when the eyepiece is zoomed (for solar, I use eye guards and if the top moves when zooming, that is bad for me, so that is why I don't use the Nikons for my solar scope). 

Thanks Ed. Yeah, the light weight, size and cost is a good combination for the planets, moon in the BV. I wouldn't want to buy another Baader zoom for the BV as they are heavy and expensive. If they perform like a good plossl on axis, that all I would care about for the small size of the planets. I mainly use my BV in my C102 4" frac and my C-8. I'll have to take a look at the current price of them.



#28 Eddgie

Eddgie

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 26,885
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 10 January 2020 - 05:42 PM

Well, the Nikons were the fire sale ones from a couple of years ago?  They were like $20 apiece?  There are some from higher end spotting scopes that are supposed to be better and also some microscope conversions that are supposed to be better.  But that is what I mean.   There is always something that is supposed to be better, but for me personally, the differences in performance for planets is not enough to have anxiety about. 

 

I did love the Hyperions though but I went through two sets of focuser tube bearings and a focuser tube on the scope due to the weight of the Binotron and the Baader's did not help that at all. 

 

I try to keep the weight down now, and since I only use BVs for planetary these days (image intensified for most other stuff, occasional BV use for doubles maybe) the Nikons and the cheap zooms I use in the Lunt are both more than good enough for my humble tastes. I could not do solar system observing without BVs though.  That is a real improvement to me.



#29 REC

REC

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,849
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2010
  • Loc: NC

Posted 12 January 2020 - 02:19 PM

Yeah, I remember that $20 fire sale from CN, should have bought a pair back then. Oh well, have to stick with the pairs I use.




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