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

Scopes to totaly binocular viewing

  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#26 hallelujah

hallelujah

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,731
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Loc: North Star over Colorado

Posted 12 February 2020 - 12:06 PM

Neck comfort keeps me liking telescopes, not having to look up.

Down into a Newt or diagonal is painless by comparison.

Not a problem. 

 

https://oberwerk.com...ular-telescope/

 

Stan


  • Bob4BVM and 25585 like this

#27 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 81,760
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 12 February 2020 - 03:25 PM

Not a problem. 

 

https://oberwerk.com...ular-telescope/

 

Stan

 

45 degree eyepieces are no fun viewing at higher elevations.

 

Binoculars and telescopes have different strengths and weaknesses. For many objects, telescopes, either mono or with a binoviewer are more capable, more practical. Most higher magnification viewing is better suited to a telescope.

 

On nights of good seeing, I'll work close doubles and bright planetaries at close to a 1000x, the planet's, 400x.

 

I think that planetary observing is best done with a telescope. And the easy setup and simple mounting of something like a 10 inch Dobsonian goes a long way in comfort..

 

Jon


  • 25585 likes this

#28 treadmarks

treadmarks

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,017
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2016
  • Loc: Boston MA

Posted 12 February 2020 - 03:33 PM

As in... sell your telescopes and go binocular-only? I don't think I'd ever do that. There's too many things that require a telescope for a good view. Do I have casual binocular-only sessions? Sure, lots of them. I don't do any "serious" binocular-only sessions because I don't have access to dark enough skies. I only do that when I am in a place where the Milky Way is plainly visible.


  • Jon Isaacs, The Ardent and 25585 like this

#29 salico

salico

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 654
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2016
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 12 February 2020 - 04:31 PM

I use two BTs: An ED 120 and a LOMO80, so a mix of Binocs and scopes... not as eaysgoing as binocs, but with the power of true scopes... Soon there will follow a 12" BT...2017-04-16 22.03.43klein.jpg APO80-6.jpg


  • The Ardent, Corcaroli78, 25585 and 1 other like this

#30 hallelujah

hallelujah

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,731
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Loc: North Star over Colorado

Posted 12 February 2020 - 05:23 PM

45 degree eyepieces are no fun viewing at higher elevations.

 

Jon

Jon,

 

My apologies...

I must have been sleep walking while typing....

 

https://www.telescop...60/p/132191.uts

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=gmNruLwzuks

 

Stan
 


Edited by hallelujah, 12 February 2020 - 06:07 PM.

  • Jon Isaacs and 25585 like this

#31 Cestus

Cestus

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 135
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 13 February 2020 - 02:17 PM

I don't think this is an either/or debate. More of both/and or simply personal preference. I do know of older folks who give up telescopes and move to binoculars due to ease of use. They just want to still do some stargazing. There is nothing wrong with that. Others just like binoculars. Nothing wrong with that either. I'm sort of in that category. I wouldn't mind someday getting the Obie BT-82, but cash wise it isn't practical at this point.



#32 j.gardavsky

j.gardavsky

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 667
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 13 February 2020 - 03:30 PM

Over most of the decades in my life, I have had just binoculars, once a small double refractor purchased during my short visit to Detroit.

Should you ask me how many binoculars I have owned, I don't know, fifty, or more, more for sure (?)

Now, I am downscaling the arsenal, keeping just the binos which are needed, and which are the best for me.

 

The refractor (mono) is just my side-by instrument, and the spotter is for the travels,

JG


  • Corcaroli78 likes this

#33 KennyJ

KennyJ

    The British Flash

  • *****
  • Posts: 36,539
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Lancashire UK

Posted 13 February 2020 - 03:40 PM

Just in case anyone is misled by my earlier post, I'm not suggesting binoculars are necessary "better" than telescopes, just that I happen to like binoculars a whole lot more than I do telescopes.

 

Kenny


  • Jon Isaacs and ArsMachina like this

#34 ArsMachina

ArsMachina

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 830
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 13 February 2020 - 04:20 PM

We already discussed the size, weight and ease of use of the instruments.

We also discussed seeing conditions, binocular addition, coma and other things.

But we did not yet discuss what and why to observe with these instruments.

 

Double splitting needs high magnification and resolution, a telescope is the way to go.

I never was interested in any double splitting.

 

To see details on the surfaces or clouds of planets high magnification and resolution does help a lot.

Here a telescope also has great advantages but seeing conditions are the limiting factor.

I do like observing planets but am happy when I can see Jupiter moons, some clouds, Saturn ring with division, few Mars details.

This all is possible with binoculars, at least good enough for my needs and wishes.

 

The moon can be observed with telescopes and binoculars, I always prefered the impressive "3D" look though binoculars

 

For DSO it depends.

If you are a faint fuzzy hunter you need a huge telescope, the biggest one you can afford.

If you like breathtaking wide angle views of the milky way, the double cluster, M31, M42 and other brighter and popular DSO a (big) binocular is the better tool in my eyes.

 

I never liked big equipment perhaps even with electric driven tracking.

I want it easy so I am restricted to low to mid magnification, what is not really a limitation for me

My interest in amateur astronomy is to see pleasing things with my own eyes and so a pair of glass lenses is the best tool for me.

 

 

Jochen


  • Jon Isaacs, Corcaroli78 and j.gardavsky like this

#35 jcj380

jcj380

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,639
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2014
  • Loc: 42N 88W

Posted 14 February 2020 - 01:49 PM

I have sporadic problems merging images with binos.  Some nights no problem, other nights everything except the moon is double.  I've tried focusing with glasses, without glasses, 10x50s, 7x35s, 8x32s (I think), 15x70s, and it's not limited to any one pair / brand.

 

I don't know if it's an aging thing or fatigue or simply that all of the binos I've tried were out of collimation or what, but an 80mm frac on a lightweight tripod consistently works better for me except for really quick looks.  And if things are double, I'm only going to be using one eye anyway, so I might as well just use a scope (or maybe a monocular).

 

I'd like to get a pair of good quality 20x80s, but I'm reluctant to spend any more money on experimenting.


Edited by jcj380, 14 February 2020 - 01:50 PM.

  • Corcaroli78 and Cali like this

#36 Corcaroli78

Corcaroli78

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 552
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2009
  • Loc: 55N, 9E, Denmark

Posted 14 February 2020 - 01:57 PM

Over most of the decades in my life, I have had just binoculars, once a small double refractor purchased during my short visit to Detroit.

Should you ask me how many binoculars I have owned, I don't know, fifty, or more, more for sure (?)

Now, I am downscaling the arsenal, keeping just the binos which are needed, and which are the best for me.

 

The refractor (mono) is just my side-by instrument, and the spotter is for the travels,

JG

Hi JG,

 

Same case here, the telescope is complementary to my binoculars and most of my stuff is vintage, I doubt to acquire a high end actual model of Zeiss, Swaro or Leica...

 

Downsizing on the other hand is not an option :-) i still own too few compared with some members, but just selling the duplicated items.

 

Carlos  


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#37 Corcaroli78

Corcaroli78

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 552
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2009
  • Loc: 55N, 9E, Denmark

Posted 14 February 2020 - 02:01 PM

My interest in amateur astronomy is to see pleasing things with my own eyes and so a pair of glass lenses is the best tool for me.

 

 

Jochen

+1


  • ArsMachina likes this

#38 KennyJ

KennyJ

    The British Flash

  • *****
  • Posts: 36,539
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Lancashire UK

Posted 14 February 2020 - 02:05 PM

I much prefer using both eyes to just the one, whether using naked eye(s) or magnifying instruments.

 

To me, a single telescope is a compromise I find increasingly reluctant to accept.

 

Kenny


  • Binojunky and ArsMachina like this

#39 j.gardavsky

j.gardavsky

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 667
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 14 February 2020 - 03:02 PM

I have sporadic problems merging images with binos.  Some nights no problem, other nights everything except the moon is double.  I've tried focusing with glasses, without glasses, 10x50s, 7x35s, 8x32s (I think), 15x70s, and it's not limited to any one pair / brand.

 

I don't know if it's an aging thing or fatigue or simply that all of the binos I've tried were out of collimation or what, but an 80mm frac on a lightweight tripod consistently works better for me except for really quick looks.  And if things are double, I'm only going to be using one eye anyway, so I might as well just use a scope (or maybe a monocular).

 

I'd like to get a pair of good quality 20x80s, but I'm reluctant to spend any more money on experimenting.

This problem is well known, it has something to do with the muscles coordination around the eyes.

What helps is to train the eyes (rolling the eyes like mad), and eventually prescription pills dilluting the blood.

Medical doctors won't help you, besides selling you prescription glasses.

 

Best,

JG
 



#40 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 81,760
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 14 February 2020 - 08:57 PM

I much prefer using both eyes to just the one, whether using naked eye(s) or magnifying instruments.

 

To me, a single telescope is a compromise I find increasingly reluctant to accept.

 

Kenny

 

They're all compromises, telescopes, binoculars, naked eye.

 

I pretty much go with what's the most comfortable,  what's the easiest to setup and deal with for a given performance level, for a particular object or class of objects.

 

Jochen discussed a variety of objects in the context of telescope versus binoculars. This is how it works for me:

 

I enjoy big wide fields of view, hand held, binoculars rule, mounted telescopes rule. Part of this is that I've invested in telescopes and eyepieces that are very good at this, arguably the best money can buy.  This wide field thing is really the richest field thing.  Scanning the Milky Way with a 82 degree AFoV and a 6mm exit pupil is amazing whether one is using 50mm binoculars or a 400 mm telescope. 

 

Most objects are small so they need higher magnifications to be seen best. Globular clusters For example, even the largest and brightest are much better resolved in a larger telescope than in binoculars. And most globulars are small, definitely telescope material. Open clusters, except for those too large to fit in the field of view, they can be transformed in a telescope, M7 is a good example.

 

Galaxies, if I want to see galaxies at their best, the bright ones like M51 look like photos in a 20 inch plus scope, galaxies that are invisible in binoculars can be quite detailed in a large scope. Galaxy hunting is the province of a larger telescope.

 

Planetary nebulae are generally small and are best seen at high magnifications.  The Eskimo Nebula or the Saturn Nebula, Cleopatra's eye, these can be stunningly detailed in a larger scope. Large nebulae like the North American and the Veil, these interesting in binoculars with filters, something I can only jury rig, but they're a different world in a large scope.  Orion is stunning in a large scope, the stars seen, the details visible.

 

For the planets and double stars, a telescope is capable of showing more planetary detail, splitting closer double stars.  

 

For me, it comes down to opportunities and time.  i spend a lot of time observing, 400-600 hours in a normal year.  In a typical month, I might spend 10 nights in a row observing from the dark skies of the high desert.  That's a lot of time looking at the sky. 

 

Jon


  • John F, hallelujah, ArsMachina and 1 other like this

#41 sonny.barile

sonny.barile

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,290
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2010
  • Loc: In the glow.....somewhere between the city and the stadiums.

Posted 15 February 2020 - 01:09 PM

The Orion 100mm ed binoscope looks like a very good compromise between binoculars and telescopes. What would be some of the compromises for this type of unit? 



#42 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 17,743
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 16 February 2020 - 10:34 AM

The Orion 100mm ed binoscope looks like a very good compromise between binoculars and telescopes. What would be some of the compromises for this type of unit? 

I have had the APM Semi Apo's for several years and IMO the only downside if the need for a stable Mount and the loss of the "grab 'n' go" factor.

Of course you need two of each eyepiece and can only use 1.25" but it's still a worthy compromise


  • sonny.barile likes this

#43 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 81,760
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 16 February 2020 - 10:46 AM

The Orion 100mm ed binoscope looks like a very good compromise between binoculars and telescopes. What would be some of the compromises for this type of unit? 

 

I would say they could be a good companion to a larger telescope. Compared to a $2600 4 inch refractor, you're giving up some high magnification resolution and color correction and low power field of view.

 

Jon


  • sonny.barile likes this

#44 sonny.barile

sonny.barile

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,290
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2010
  • Loc: In the glow.....somewhere between the city and the stadiums.

Posted 16 February 2020 - 11:23 AM

I have had the APM Semi Apo's for several years and IMO the only downside if the need for a stable Mount and the loss of the "grab 'n' go" factor.

Of course you need two of each eyepiece and can only use 1.25" but it's still a worthy compromise

 

I would say they could be a good companion to a larger telescope. Compared to a $2600 4 inch refractor, you're giving up some high magnification resolution and color correction and low power field of view.

 

Jon

Thanks gentlemen.

I have a Nexstar 8se and use WO binoviewers with a Badder T2 diagonal and short adapters. I added the Baader and short adapters to get back as much field as I could. 

I live just a few miles from NYC so my skies are very washed out. I can only see the brightest of M objects and of course Venus, Jupiter, and Saturn are all viewable when there. Faint fuzzies are out of reach even on moonless nights. The 8 inch SCT in this configuration has a very small field and it leaves me wanting. I enjoy the many open clusters but I am unable to take in enough of a view to truely enjoy them in their glory.  I find myself deterred by lugging all of this equipment around and I have not used my sky portal WiFi in a long while because it just isn’t any fun. I’m having more fun just star hopping but it’s a pain with the remote controls.  I recently pointed a cheap pair of tiny  binoculars at the sky (haven’t done that in years) and felt reinvigorated. I’m thinking good binoculars may get me what I am looking for. However, I am spoiled by my aperture so a pair of 40mm binoculars isn’t going to cut the mustard. 100mm ED’s on a fork are affordable for me and may be just the ticket. 

As far as portability I guess it’s relative. It seems more grab and go than the equipment I have now. (and am not using so much)

I have been reading up on Vixen 126, APM 100, Obiwerk 100, and Orion 100. ED and semi-apo  are tricky descriptions to decipher through when reading through marketing literature. 



#45 Bob4BVM

Bob4BVM

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,113
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2015
  • Loc: W. Oregon

Posted 17 February 2020 - 02:23 AM

Neck comfort keeps me liking telescopes, not having to look up. Down into a Newt or diagonal is painless by comparison. 

 

But I do like wide field views. My first refractor was & is a 500mm, first eyepiece a 32mm Erfle. They will be the last as well I expect, peaches & cream - maybe a Barlow too.

 

I have a bino viewer to use if wanted.

no matter the equipment. one should make himself as comfortable as possible for maximum enjoyment.  No excuse to be craning your neck...    https://www.cloudyni...no-chair/page-4

 

CS

Bob


Edited by Bob4BVM, 17 February 2020 - 02:29 AM.

  • j.gardavsky likes this

#46 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 81,760
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 17 February 2020 - 09:01 AM

no matter the equipment. one should make himself as comfortable as possible for maximum enjoyment.  No excuse to be craning your neck...    https://www.cloudyni...no-chair/page-4

 

CS

Bob

 

Chairs like those are a project just to haul out, takes away the grab and go, quick and free aspects of binoculars. 

 

For me, looking down while seated is more comfortable than lying on my back looking up. 

 

Jon



#47 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 81,760
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 17 February 2020 - 09:20 AM

I’m having more fun just star hopping but it’s a pain with the remote controls.  I recently pointed a cheap pair of tiny  binoculars at the sky (haven’t done that in years) and felt reinvigorated. I’m thinking good binoculars may get me what I am looking for. However, I am spoiled by my aperture so a pair of 40mm binoculars isn’t going to cut the mustard. 100mm ED’s on a fork are affordable for me and may be just the ticket.

 

 

Binoculars are a different world, the free and easy experiences of a 40 or 50 mm binocular disappear with 100 mm binoculars. The field of view is narrow, they're heavy so a mount is needed.

 

For me, I'm not "spoiled" by aperture even though my most used scopes at the 16 inch and 22 inch. These are tools to be used. For some objects, a large scope is best, hunting down faint galaxies and nebulae, exploding globulars, these and many other things are better done with 20 inch plus scopes.

 

But there's an another whole world out there that's best seen with 7x35s and 10x50s.. Don't discount the virtues of small apertures to provide a different experience..

 

And too.. if you're having fun star hopping, if your using a telescope, that's really best done with a Dobsonian. An 8 inch Dob with the right eyepiece can provide a 2.2 degree field, not much narrower than 100mm binos. And its easy, intuitive, more like hand held binos. 

 

Jon


  • paulsky and SkyRanger like this


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