I was able to conduct my nightly observations using both the Oberwerk 127 SD and the APM 120 90 ED Apo binoculars. Both were outstanding performers on the same objects that were used in my last post. Open and globular star clusters, galaxies, nebula and double stars, Were the subjects of this observation session. This comparison was done over a period of two clear nights. The observation was performed in Moab, UT dark sky conditions.
The eyepieces used were APM 24mm UFF, 12.5 Morphs, Oberwerk 22mm, and.14mm. I am going to say the Oberwerk 22mm grading was excluded when there was a rattling inside each eyepiece (glass was fine, but concerned if this would effect getting good focus). The mounts were fork type, and the tripod a 161MK2B. A star bound chair completed the ensemble.
The Obies were great performers, great glass as per general description of the binocular on the Oberwerk website. I have tested these new binos in AZ sky conditions at Picket Post (our star party meeting place), but I felt the skies were darker in Moab. It proved to be the better location to compare these great binos.
With all sets of eyepieces used, here were the results for the 127’s:
- amazing views of objects selected. Especially regarding M104, M81/82, M108, M 97, M109, M13, M92, M100, Leo Triplet, and the carbon stars T and X Cancri.
- Very crisp details in the GC’s M13 and M92. Outer stars mottled and individual.
- Images such as M81, M65, were like looking at M31 with 10x50 (just slightly smaller) through the 12.5 Morphs for example. The side views of M82 and NGC 3623, were like thick fuzzy needles.
- The stars were pinpoint, and the star fields were rich in contrast. The carbon stars were very beautiful to look at.
The real issue with these binos, are the Oberwerk eyepieces. I do not think that these held up very well for wide and high powered views. These performed better in my Oberwerk 82’s. I am not sure about Oberwerk 100 owners opinions (since my 100’s are APM). They were a bit difficult to focus (great for my 82’s), and I never achieve the views I wanted. So based on my two eyes, I would have to say my sweet spot were using the APM 24 UFF. The 12.5 Morphs were great for a high power. I will be trying my TV Delos 10mm on these binos when I get home. Depending on what is comfortable for you, choose your eyepieces. Other than that, the 127 is definitely a good performer.
The 120’s were also great performers. All observations were done on the same picked objects. The APM 24mm, and the 12.5 Morphs were used. Just to make it interesting I used the Oberwerk 14mm as well.
All the objects observed were just as beautiful and a thrill to observe. Many details of the objects were just the same with the 120’s, as with 127’s. Again using the Oberwerk 14mm on the 120’s a little better, however they belong on my 82’s.
The APM 120’s are longer (660 FL) and weigh 20lbs. The fork mount attaches easily to the tripod, and the binos are easy to attach to the mount with their lock screws. Mine did not come with a case, so I store it in a Pelican iM 2950 (with the wheels).
The Oberwerk 127 are shorter (650 FL) and weigh 24 lbs. the fork mount requires a bayonet adapter for the tripod. Mounting the binos to the mount just takes one turn with a single lock screw (very heavy duty and a strong lock screw by the way). The binos come with their own heavy duty case and are wheeled as well. Very sturdy setup.
Of the two binos used, it was very close. The technicality was not visual performance. It was in setting up. The APMS are easier and slightly less time to mount. That is a great convenience for people who desire a good performing extra giant bino without completely throwing their back out. Hey, four lbs makes a difference!
Both are stellar performers. A little side note: while I was adjusting my view with my 127’s, I accidentally pushed them a bit and was treated to NGC 2976!
This comparison does not contain overly emphasized technical data of the binos, but an opinion of a visual observing ugly sailor.
Edited by duck2k, 05 May 2021 - 07:10 PM.