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

Starstructure 25.6" F/3.7 Binocular Telescope Walkaround

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 John Vogt

John Vogt

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 249
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2005

Posted 17 September 2021 - 04:28 PM

Came across this video today, I don't think it has been previously posted here.

 

Incredible, innovative job by Mike Zammit of Starstructure:

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=zIm_kxkB39A

 

John

 

 


  • George N, Dennis_Oz, turtle86 and 12 others like this

#2 sanbai

sanbai

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,338
  • Joined: 18 May 2019
  • Loc: Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 17 September 2021 - 10:01 PM

Jaw dropping. Views should be incredible. Equivalent to a 35" but with true binocular views.

Not an easy job to get both scopes perfectly aligned and collimation in place (or easy to adjust) upon changing IPD.

Bravo to StarStructures. I'll give them a call if a lottery brings me into the multimillionaires club. Although I don't know if I would like to deal with such type of scope. I guess Tom Dey's monocular NMT is, overall, easier to deal with.

Really awesome.

#3 CrazyPanda

CrazyPanda

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,139
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2012

Posted 17 September 2021 - 10:18 PM

Wow!



#4 turtle86

turtle86

    Mr. Coffee

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,204
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2006

Posted 19 September 2021 - 07:00 PM

Super awesome!  If I ever win the Powerball this would be on my short list!


  • m11 and sanbai like this

#5 sanbai

sanbai

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,338
  • Joined: 18 May 2019
  • Loc: Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 19 September 2021 - 09:50 PM

I don't know the price, but I guess That on top of the regular price for two single telescopes there's a large extra fee on making sure you have a right binocular experience. Merging the images at all the potential magnification is not easy. Don't forget that the mirrors should also match.

Any idea on the level of precision required?
Which are the tolerances of our brain for little errors in matching magnification and alignment?

Maybe @TOMDEY can say something about, he has true 16" JMI(?) binos, with Fullum mirrors and, not less, a huge knowledge in the related topics.

Edited by sanbai, 19 September 2021 - 10:26 PM.


#6 starzonesteve

starzonesteve

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 752
  • Joined: 17 May 2014
  • Loc: Central Alabama

Posted 19 September 2021 - 10:11 PM

I'm guessing that the build for the binocular scope was considerably more than the cost of two tubes. The work on the upper assembly, including remote operation of eyepiece motors, must have been very time consuming. I'm not sure if Mike Zammit has ever done this before, but I know that when he does something he wants to do it right. What a brilliant idea for an observatory scope, since it never has to go anywhere. I'm sure the height is nearly perfect for the average standing observer. My hats off to both the builder and the owner.


  • Bob S., turtle86 and sanbai like this

#7 sanbai

sanbai

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,338
  • Joined: 18 May 2019
  • Loc: Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 19 September 2021 - 10:25 PM

One thing to note is that this telescope does not allow the use of 2" eyepieces.
However, I don't thing this is a big issue

1) The owner probably has the budget to have an alternative telescope for wider fields.

2) at f/3.7 a 13 Ethos gives you already a 3.5 mm exit pupil, which is wide enough for most applications. That's more than the 31T5 in my C8 edge scope, and it's rare that I prefer a 55mm over this combination. A Nagler 16T5 brings you to 4.3 mm exit pupil. A 24mm panoptic with a more than decent 68┬░AFOV brings you to almost 7mm!

And well, maybe the owner is just happy with cheap old Huygens! The owner certainly saves some bucks by buying 1.25" filters instead of 2" ones, and savings are double because it's a bino! :)

Edited by sanbai, 19 September 2021 - 11:40 PM.


#8 clivemilne

clivemilne

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 690
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2011
  • Loc: West Oz

Posted 19 September 2021 - 11:37 PM

I don't know the price, but I guess That on top of the regular price for two single telescopes there's a large extra fee on making sure you have a right binocular experience. Merging the images at all the potential magnification is not easy. Don't forget that the mirrors should also match.

Any idea on the level of precision required?
Which are the tolerances of our brain for little errors in matching magnification and alignment?

Maybe @TOMDEY can say something about, he has true 16" JMI(?) binos, with Fullum mirrors and, not less, a huge knowledge in the related topics.



The tolerance for focal length is 2% maximum, but more realistically, 1%.

The tolerance for image merger is around a thousandth of an inch in the vertical and a bit looser on the horizontal... Depending on magnification.

The equivalent aperture is around 1.2x... or 31", give or take...

The main advantage of binoculars is qualitative (as distinct from quantitative)... And viewing comfort. It's the difference between seeing a picture of the grand canyon versus actually being there... It becomes real, as if you are transported out in to space.
  • sanbai likes this

#9 m11

m11

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 142
  • Joined: 21 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 20 September 2021 - 02:13 AM

Looks amazing and the attention to detail and engineering is next level. waytogo.gif

 

That is one lucky owner. grin.gif


  • turtle86 likes this

#10 RobertMaples

RobertMaples

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 573
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2017
  • Loc: Murfreesboro, TN

Posted 20 September 2021 - 02:21 PM

One thing to note is that this telescope does not allow the use of 2" eyepieces...

He says in the video 2" max for the eyepiece barrel.

 

I like the part where he says "what makes this scope really unique" when talking about the wireless Interpupillary Distance adjustment - yeah, that really sets it apart from all the other 25.6" binoscopes out there!smile.gif


  • m11 likes this

#11 sanbai

sanbai

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,338
  • Joined: 18 May 2019
  • Loc: Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 20 September 2021 - 02:49 PM

He says in the video 2" max for the eyepiece barrel.

I like the part where he says "what makes this scope really unique" when talking about the wireless Interpupillary Distance adjustment - yeah, that really sets it apart from all the other 25.6" binoscopes out there!smile.gif

What he meant is that at the minimum IPD you can still use an eyepiece with a 2" thick *body*, but not thicker. This is not about 2"-class eyepieces. Thus, at minimum IPD you can use something as big as an Ethos 13, but using it's native 1.25" barrel, not the build-in 2" "adapter".

The focusers are only 1.25", and the tertiary mirrors 1.8". So no, you can't use a native 2" eyepiece. Again, this is a really minor issue for such a telescope, budget and applications.

#12 clivemilne

clivemilne

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 690
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2011
  • Loc: West Oz

Posted 20 September 2021 - 04:39 PM

Came across this video today, I don't think it has been previously posted here.

Incredible, innovative job by Mike Zammit of Starstructure:

https://www.youtube....h?v=zIm_kxkB39A

John


Nice scope,
But innovative?

I can't see anything here that wasn't done 20 years ago.

One thing not stated in the video is that image merger is achieved by adjusting the primary collimation... That method is really only suitable for permanent set ups.

#13 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 52,271
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 20 September 2021 - 05:10 PM

What he meant is that at the minimum IPD you can still use an eyepiece with a 2" thick *body*, but not thicker. This is not about 2"-class eyepieces. Thus, at minimum IPD you can use something as big as an Ethos 13, but using it's native 1.25" barrel, not the build-in 2" "adapter".

The focusers are only 1.25", and the tertiary mirrors 1.8". So no, you can't use a native 2" eyepiece. Again, this is a really minor issue for such a telescope, budget and applications.

If he meant "2" body" for the eyepiece, then the 61mm wide Ethos 13 wouldn't work at all.

If the IPD is adjustable from 54 to 75, it's possible SOME 2" eyepieces would work OK.


  • sanbai likes this

#14 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 16,211
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008
  • Loc: South Texas

Posted 20 September 2021 - 05:12 PM

Nice scope,
But innovative?

I can't see anything here that wasn't done 20 years ago.

One thing not stated in the video is that image merger is achieved by adjusting the primary collimation... That method is really only suitable for permanent set ups.

That was my question--can it be moved, or is it only for permanent setup.



#15 clivemilne

clivemilne

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 690
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2011
  • Loc: West Oz

Posted 20 September 2021 - 05:32 PM

That was my question--can it be moved, or is it only for permanent setup.


In the sense that a grand piano is transportable... Yes. But that is not what it is designed for.

#16 sanbai

sanbai

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,338
  • Joined: 18 May 2019
  • Loc: Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 20 September 2021 - 05:56 PM

The video says it's going to be permanent in an observatory.

I don't see why it has to be innovative. It has to be robust, reliable, durable... When innovations become standard they aren't innovations anymore, but are still as good as they were. If nothing has surpassed the technology, go for it.

I didn't order a NMT because it was innovative (they are somehow) but because it's a proven design at or near the state of the art (and I like such design).
  • turtle86 and m11 like this

#17 RobertMaples

RobertMaples

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 573
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2017
  • Loc: Murfreesboro, TN

Posted 21 September 2021 - 12:18 AM

What he meant is that at the minimum IPD you can still use an eyepiece with a 2" thick *body*, but not thicker. This is not about 2"-class eyepieces. Thus, at minimum IPD you can use something as big as an Ethos 13, but using it's native 1.25" barrel, not the build-in 2" "adapter".

The focusers are only 1.25", and the tertiary mirrors 1.8". So no, you can't use a native 2" eyepiece. Again, this is a really minor issue for such a telescope, budget and applications.

My bad, I watched it again and I had missed where he did in fact say they were 1.25" focusers.  Seems strange to me, with ~2400 mm focal length that really limits your widest field of view.  There could be reasons for it though.  For example, with the tertiary mirrors bringing the focusers parallel to the tube, you're going to have more of the light cone outside the tube, necessitating a bigger secondary mirror.  The 2" focuser would need a bigger secondary as well, and maybe he felt the combination would make the secondary to large.



#18 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 52,271
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 21 September 2021 - 09:24 AM

I missed that too.

1.25" focusers?  On a 25".

Really?

A Moon and planets scope?



#19 ihf

ihf

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,170
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2019
  • Loc: California, USA

Posted 21 September 2021 - 09:44 AM

Not everyone can use 2 inch eyepieces in a bino. It was clear from the video that they cared about covering the whole IPD range. Now at f/6 this scope would have been limited. At f/3.7 they can get a 6.5mm exit pupil using the APM24 UFF. They could have made it a tiny bit faster. But overall it is a bino. IPD matters - and 2 inches tend to restrict IPD to >= 62mm.

 

They are really only missing out on 1-4 bino eyepieces with 1.25 inches: UFF30 (too long for f/3.7), 22T4, 21E, 17E (the TV are all a little fat and may need mods, or may not work at all for the buyer - say Ethos with glasses).


Edited by ihf, 21 September 2021 - 10:09 AM.


#20 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 52,271
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 21 September 2021 - 10:08 AM

I assume f/3.7 is WITH coma correctors?  It must be.  Otherwise, the scope(s) would be unusable.

= 2406mm focal length.  Max field of view 39' of field with 1.25" eyepieces.

That's about the same as the widest field in a C14, which has a lot less aperture.

 

There are, of course, literally thousands of objects that would be fine for.

This could be a really powerful galaxy machine!


  • ihf likes this

#21 RLK1

RLK1

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,487
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2020

Posted 21 September 2021 - 12:33 PM

I assume f/3.7 is WITH coma correctors?  It must be.  Otherwise, the scope(s) would be unusable.

= 2406mm focal length.  Max field of view 39' of field with 1.25" eyepieces.

That's about the same as the widest field in a C14, which has a lot less aperture.

 

There are, of course, literally thousands of objects that would be fine for.

This could be a really powerful galaxy machine!

The video says it has built-in paracorrs within the focusers so your max field calcs are probably correct.



#22 clivemilne

clivemilne

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 690
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2011
  • Loc: West Oz

Posted 21 September 2021 - 01:10 PM

The 1.25" constraint would be a minor inconvenience.

I have found using giant binoculars that a 2.5 to 3.5mm exit pupil covers 95% of what you are drawn to look at. At f3.7, that translates to 9mm / 13mm.

One benefit of binocular vision is that you are able to perceive detail at lower magnification, so even looking at planets, the need to go above 200x is rare.

It's also fair to say that the experience of binocular vision is sufficiently different such that it will change your observing habits. The more novelty or the more there is to see in an object, the bigger the qualitative improvement there is to be had. The showpiece objects in the sky are just jaw dropping... bright galaxies like 5128 with it's intricate dust lane structure or M83 where you can see the Oiii / star forming regions clump along the arcs of the spiral arms -Outstanding ..... Faint galaxies - not so much, they're not really that more engaging than what you see with cyclops vision.

Double stars or clusters - amazing - the colour contrast is stunning.

Dark nebula, curiously, probably benefit more than anything by virtue of binocular vision... You have to be there.

Anyway, point being... It's a sufficiently different experience that the merit function of monocular telescope eyepiece selection only has a certain degree of overlap, so assumptions derived from it might not be entirely useful.

~c

#23 clivemilne

clivemilne

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 690
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2011
  • Loc: West Oz

Posted 21 September 2021 - 01:20 PM

And for what it is worth...

Baader Morpheus are my number 1 choice for giant binoculars. Their combination of fov, exit pupil behaviour and ergonomics / physical form is unmatched imho.

Ethos I would put at number 2.
Whilst the view is better, their physical form is a limitation which will rule them out for a number of people

Nagler type 4 (with the insta-just removed) honourable mention.

#24 clivemilne

clivemilne

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 690
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2011
  • Loc: West Oz

Posted 21 September 2021 - 01:32 PM

For this scope, Morpheus 17.5, 14, 12.5 & 9 would be all you'd ever need, so I would start with that.

Add the Doctor 12.5, Ethos 10, Ethos 8.... If you wanted to spend some money.

#25 ihf

ihf

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,170
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2019
  • Loc: California, USA

Posted 21 September 2021 - 02:58 PM

I am really curious what the final eyepiece selection would be (but doubt we would know). While the Morpheus are highly popular in slower f/5 binos Don reports they are not so great in faster dobs. Combined with long eye relief and narrow IPD the wider AFOV eyepiece choices become rather limited with current production.




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