265 replies to this topic

[Odiefly]

My experience is people not aware of them!! Starparty last month 300 people I was only one had pvs14 ,10 people I talked to dozen newcomers an old timers about nightvision non of them had any idea about them,, How ever when I give nightvision pvs14 binoculars to look at the milkyway, they go nuts an can't wait too look. They can't believe ther eyes, when I tell them the price they stay away!! Again I believe people not aware of them!!

[firemachine69]

My experience is people not aware of them!! Starparty last month 300 people I was only one had pvs14 ,10 people I talked to dozen newcomers an old timers about nightvision non of them had any idea about them,, How ever when I give nightvision pvs14 binoculars to look at the milkyway, they go nuts an can't wait too look. They can't believe ther eyes, when I tell them the price they stay away!! Again I believe people not aware of them!!

 

 

My local club had a member do a presentation on his NV, I'd say fully 70% had never heard of it. I just about died when he said the price, however, considering it was a basic Gen 2+ intensifier. 

[Second Time Around]

It seems as though there are 3 issues.

1) Very few know that NV for astronomy even exists. I certainly didn't until I read about it on CN. So it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation unless we spread the word.

2) The cost is prohibitive. But many amateurs have more tied up in eyepieces let alone scopes.

3) Purists consider NV unnatural, even cheating, and won't even look through them. Whilst I can understand this, NV is of course very different to EAA. To me NV looks just like looking through an ordinary eyepiece but better.

I find the best way to get those who haven't used NV excited is to show them the Milky Way at 3x with an h-alpha filter. Then I tell them to imagine what the Orion Nebula looks like!

[MarkMittlesteadt]

I will never understand the idea that any enhancement we can acquire to be able to see what the naked eye cannot is somehow "cheating".

 

No one told me there would be a test. 

 

This is supposed to be an enjoyable hobby. How one gets there and achieves everything they seek is all just part of the fun. 

 

I was a purely visual observer for most of the last 30+ years occasionally dipping my toes into EAA and AP. Until recently, I was strictly visual with just a small scope and EP's, but I built a very nice, quality EAA rig. I've only put about $1600 into that, and even that little amount was done over time as I could afford bits and pieces of it. 

 

Would I like to try NV? Absolutely! Will I ever be able to afford it? I seriously doubt it. So there are a few of us that don't use NV solely because of the cost with even entry level NV devices. 

Edited by MarkMittlesteadt, 05 August 2023 - 10:42 AM.

[WheezyGod]

If astrophotography and EAA already do what NVD does but way better for the same or lower price, why would you take half measures?

AP is a different thing. You’re producing a photo of one object over the course of a night. Yes that photo has way more detail and color, but it’s almost like a different hobby. It’s like comparing a sports game to a movie about sports.

EAA is closer to NV, but you’re still waiting for results. It definitely does better on galaxies, but EAA has to wait 5min on globular clusters and the 30+ min for nebula to see what NV can see live. In addition, one of the iPhone apps being developed will have EAA capabilities which can be used with NV. No cables, laptop, or cmos camera needed. EAA doesn’t give you the ability to explore Cygnus or the Milky Way. It’s still one object at a time. Not looking to put down EAA because I want to do it myself, but I’d be curious to hear your reasoning even though it’ll likely bring this topic off topic.

Separately, I noticed there’s a lot of non-NV individuals. Is there something on CN that shows threads with a lot of recent activity or a list of new threads?

[davidgmd]

Sure, lower cost would increase market penetration of NV. Mainstream? What does that mean, everyone has one? Not likely IMO. Fifty percent of amateur astronomers? More likely slow growth over time as people had an opportunity to try them.

 
I get the “I don’t want to look at a screen” and the “I want to see the original photons” arguments. I felt the same way until a club member shared views through one at a star party. The real-time, out under the stars experience was close enough to the real thing for me, and was what it took for me to join the NV club. Lower price alone wouldn’t have won me over without a first-hand look.

[Uwe Pilz]

Most observers cannot imagine how close to traditional visual observation a NVD is. The experience most have are the electronic viewfinders of modern cameras, where you have a computer screen (opposite to our luminescent screen).

 

When I was a child, X-ray was mad with roentgenoscopy ("Durchleuchtung" in German). No use of film but a large screen where you could see the luminescent image for a few minutes. My mother had tuberculosis in her younger days, so this kind of investigation was made form time to time. The doctor let me see this image. I was around 4 or 5 years then.

These screens were large, but the visual impression was similar to (filtered NVD). A rather dim image, nothing comparable to a bright LCD screen.

[C.Hay]

Hell's bells, this roentgenoscopy sounds gruesome. I copy-edited a textbook on X-ray technology around 1990. It stressed that radiation exposure had been reduced from decade to decade by a factor of ten. So doing the sums this meant that around 1960 people were getting doses for one image about 1000 times greater than in 1990.

 

But back to topic, I can echo that using an NVD is suprisingly close to traditional visual observation. I wasn't expecting it at all, but I immediately foud that handheld use feels much like using binoculars. Telescopic NVD use is also a similar experience to traditional faint fuzzy hunting when going after the more elusive nebulae.

[davidgmd]

I wasn't expecting it at all, but I immediately foud that handheld use feels much like using binoculars. Telescopic NVD use is also a similar experience to traditional faint fuzzy hunting when going after the more elusive nebulae.

  
Ahh, hand-held use! My wife will come out for a quick look through the scope at the planets, to see a bright nebula or different-colored doubles, but 15-30 seconds is her limit. Put her in a zero-gravity recliner looking up with the hand-held NV device, and she is loving it! To quote: “Now this I could get into!” I’m going to have some competition for “screen time” if it’s clear out for the Perseids this weekend.

  
I’ve only had the thing a couple of weeks, most of which have been cloudy or smoky, so I’ve had it out only a few nights. I’m still too awestruck to fully comprehend its capabilities.

[Napp]

I guess I fall into the unconvinced category.  I got back into the hobby about 8 years ago.  I got a used goto 8 inch sct to start and then got into manual DOB’s and binoculars.  I’m really enjoying ‘catching up’ on what I missed by not sticking with the hobby.  I’m a star hopper and and yeah there is something special about those photons falling into my eyes.  I’ve completed and am working on various Astronomical League programs.  I’m not a Luddite - I mostly use Sky Safari on an iPad as my atlas in the field.  I really enjoy the hunt for objects.  When I was a kid and the family would go on vacation my father would give me a roadmap and make me navigator.  I use gps now but I still want to see the overall picture and understand the ‘roadmap’ view.  I don’t like blindly following the gps.  
 

I’m well aware of NV.  I’ve looked through several devices at star parties including an NV on a 32 inch DOB.  I have to admit that it provided a spectacular view of the Horsehead nebula.  However, if a pile of cash suddenly landed in my lap I would most likely buy a 20 inch New Moon, a binocular telescope and a full set of Tele Vue Ethos and Naglers.  If I had money left over I’d get a night vision device as a supplement.  Why would I choose this path?  Because I’m enjoying building my skills.  Maybe it’s a pride thing.  But I enjoy the hunt and then teasing out things that are hard to see.  I used to have a ‘76 280Z with straight rack and pinion steering and a manual transmission.  It was so much more fun to drive than the newer cars with computer controlled everything.  The newer cars do too much of the driving.  It’s not me and my skills.  So, yes, NV shows things that a telescope alone won’t show me.  There are times I would enjoy that view - especially as I get older.  But for now my eyesight and health are still good enough to enjoy the view of the telescope and my eye/brain.  NV for me at this point is kinda like looking up pictures of the object on the internet instead of me doing the work.

[sixela]

But I enjoy the hunt and then teasing out things that are hard to see.

That doesn't go away with an NVD, only you'll be hunting even fainter and more obscure stuff.

[rgk901]

Separately, I noticed there’s a lot of non-NV individuals. Is there something on CN that shows threads with a lot of recent activity or a list of new threads?

yes that's how I read this forum..by recent everything...

not sure why I'd only stick to only one thing? goes counterintuitive to your message of spreading the NV word as well

[WheezyGod]

I guess I fall into the unconvinced category. I got back into the hobby about 8 years ago. I got a used goto 8 inch sct to start and then got into manual DOB’s and binoculars. I’m really enjoying ‘catching up’ on what I missed by not sticking with the hobby. I’m a star hopper and and yeah there is something special about those photons falling into my eyes. I’ve completed and am working on various Astronomical League programs. I’m not a Luddite - I mostly use Sky Safari on an iPad as my atlas in the field. I really enjoy the hunt for objects. When I was a kid and the family would go on vacation my father would give me a roadmap and make me navigator. I use gps now but I still want to see the overall picture and understand the ‘roadmap’ view. I don’t like blindly following the gps.

I’m well aware of NV. I’ve looked through several devices at star parties including an NV on a 32 inch DOB. I have to admit that it provided a spectacular view of the Horsehead nebula. However, if a pile of cash suddenly landed in my lap I would most likely buy a 20 inch New Moon, a binocular telescope and a full set of Tele Vue Ethos and Naglers. If I had money left over I’d get a night vision device as a supplement. Why would I choose this path? Because I’m enjoying building my skills. Maybe it’s a pride thing. But I enjoy the hunt and then teasing out things that are hard to see. I used to have a ‘76 280Z with straight rack and pinion steering and a manual transmission. It was so much more fun to drive than the newer cars with computer controlled everything. The newer cars do too much of the driving. It’s not me and my skills. So, yes, NV shows things that a telescope alone won’t show me. There are times I would enjoy that view - especially as I get older. But for now my eyesight and health are still good enough to enjoy the view of the telescope and my eye/brain. NV for me at this point is kinda like looking up pictures of the object on the internet instead of me doing the work.

Yup fair points. If you’re enjoying what you have now there’s no need to get anything else. There’s the argument that you don’t know what you’re missing out on but you’ve already looked through night vision so you have some perspective on what it’s capable of.

Many of us who got NV got it because at a certain point we weren’t satisfied with what we were able to see, or got exposed to NV and couldn’t shake off the thought that we could be seeing so much more. The hobby for me was starting to dwindle when I was using glass only and I was mostly only excited about going to darker skies which were quite infrequent. Someone pointed out NV to me and once I saw what it was capable of I knew that was my next step.

With NV some of us are still looking at those faint objects. Some from what I can tell tend to look at the best objects over and over again that look similar to a picture would to your point. If mag 8 globs can be detected but mag 9 cannot for a given observer with certain equipment in whatever skies they have then NV can get them up to mag 11-12 or so. Many more galaxies and nebula also become detectable.

Edit: Didn’t see Sixela had already made one of the points I did.

Edited by WheezyGod, 07 August 2023 - 12:31 PM.

[Napp]

Yup fair points. If you’re enjoying what you have now there’s no need to get anything else. There’s the argument that you don’t know what you’re missing out on but you’ve already looked through night vision so you have some perspective on what it’s capable of.

Many of us who got NV got it because at a certain point we weren’t satisfied with what we were able to see, or got exposed to NV and couldn’t shake off the thought that we could be seeing so much more. The hobby for me was starting to dwindle when I was using glass only and I was mostly only excited about going to darker skies which were quite infrequent. Someone pointed out NV to me and once I saw what it was capable of I knew that was my next step.

With NV some of us are still looking at those faint objects. Some from what I can tell tend to look at the best objects over and over again that look similar to a picture would to your point. If mag 8 globs can be detected but mag 9 cannot for a given observer with certain equipment in whatever skies they have then NV can get them up to mag 11-12 or so. Many more galaxies and nebula also become detectable.

Edit: Didn’t see Sixela had already made one of the points I did.

Fair points, also.  Certainly, things can change and for some of the same reasons you cited I could see my desires and attitudes changing.  For now I have a couple of reachable darker to dark sites.  I’m healthy enough to load my equipment and go observe there.  I’m enjoying what I’m doing - not as much as I’d like but NV can’t punch through clouds either.  As I get older that will change, though, I hope not soon.  

 

My home sky is heavily light polluted.  The eastern side is Bortle 7 on good nights. The western sky is worse on even good nights.  For now star hopping and teasing out targets with binoculars or DOB at home is a fun challenge.  At some point I won’t be able to travel to dark sites as easily, my eyesight could decline or maybe I could tire of straining to see objects.  I could see NV being a way to rejuvenate my efforts in those cases.  But for now I’m enjoying what I’m doing.

[PEterW]

The life of an NV astronomer is quite often a lonely one, we know we can see things better, but many find reasons not to “see the light” or “join the green side”(for those with older tubes).
It’s not for everyone and it costs rather too much, but there are few tools that can show so much, so engagingly… seeing the full scale of the nebula enwrapped Orion, with the Meissa nebula for a head… M42 is a SMALL nebula!
I just wish NV could he more available for outreach, being able to “switch on the Milky Way” for city kids. Rather than show them a picture, pop an NV in their hand and let them explore the milky way themselves.

Peter

[Jeff Morgan]

 I’m enjoying what I’m doing - not as much as I’d like but NV can’t punch through clouds either.  

 

Sometimes ... it can.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[bobhen]

Fair points, also.  Certainly, things can change and for some of the same reasons you cited I could see my desires and attitudes changing.  For now I have a couple of reachable darker to dark sites.  I’m healthy enough to load my equipment and go observe there.  I’m enjoying what I’m doing - not as much as I’d like but NV can’t punch through clouds either.  As I get older that will change, though, I hope not soon.  

 

My home sky is heavily light polluted.  The eastern side is Bortle 7 on good nights. The western sky is worse on even good nights.  For now star hopping and teasing out targets with binoculars or DOB at home is a fun challenge.  At some point I won’t be able to travel to dark sites as easily, my eyesight could decline or maybe I could tire of straining to see objects.  I could see NV being a way to rejuvenate my efforts in those cases.  But for now I’m enjoying what I’m doing.

Enjoyment is important and is certainly one way to measure success. However, seeing more might deliver even more enjoyment.

 

With NV, the ability to observe from home and not to have to travel, which I'm sure causes you to miss some observing opportunities, will increase your time under the sky. And more time observing might also increase your level of enjoyment

 

I live in a Bortle 8-9 location, which I'm guessing is even worse than your location, and using NV has given me the ability to see objects that were previously invisible. That capability has certainly increased my level of enjoyment and I'm confident NV would do same for you.

 

Moonlight, low transparency, very thin clouds and light pollution all impact deep sky observing. However, NV mitigates those impacts a lot more than using regular glass eyepieces. And that singular and unique NV capability might also increase your enjoyment.

 

Like you, I certainly enjoyed deep sky observing before NV. But all the reasons above are why NV has "increased" my level of observing enjoyment, which is of course why after 7-years I continue to use and enjoy NV observing. 

 

Bob

[Odiefly]

Sometimes ... it can.

[Odiefly]

Well said!!

[Joko]

Sometimes ... it can.

I agree 😃
If I'm allowed I share the full post for better understanding.

 

Edited by Joko, 08 August 2023 - 07:51 AM.

[ABQJeff]

While price is a major factor, I don’t want to go to NV until I complete at least a first run thru of major lists visually. I got into astronomy for the peaceful communing with nature and giving me the experience that Messier, Herschel, etc. all the way back to ancient antiquity, had in looking at the night sky. Basically walking the paths of our ancestors. This includes dark adapted naked eyeballs looking at the glory of clear, dark skies (especially on undeveloped native lands that look the same since before Eurpoeans arrived).

That being said I am not anti-NV. I see NV as a new ‘expanded’ experience thus a ‘graduation’ of sorts. Just, I live in Bortle 4-5 and my dark site is Bortle 1-2, so there is plenty for me to classically see first. Then I am onto NV, after I ‘Herschel-ed’ my way thru my lists.

Yes price lowering will make NV more common, I would say as common as AP or EAA, but not mainstream. Mainstream will always be core visual (all the world’s astronomers start with 1x(4-7) binoculars…)

[bikerdib]

My take on it; I've been observing for over half a century with 99.9% of it being visual through an eyepiece.  I tried some film AP back in the early 1980s, man that was DIFFICULT.  One out of 15 photos wasn't a good ratio for me so I stopped.  I probably could have gotten better at it but just wasn't interested in persuing it.  Lots of better photos in books at that time (yes, I mean actual paper books).

 

Forward to a few years ago when I decided to do some EAA (actually I call it real time AP because I do longer/more subs).  Again, I was able to get some pretty nice  color images that I saved as viewed with no intention or desire to sit at a computer and process (manipulate) the pics on my computer.  Lots of REALLY BETTER images available online if I want to look at a computer screen.

 

Lastly, I'm waiting on my NVD to arrive Monday.  I'm getting one to see the really faint objects that the growing light pollution from nearby houston is causing in my northeast sky.  I will still be mostly visual through an eyepiece without the NV.  I have scopes that give very high detail (for lack of a better term lets say  Hi Definition) and will always prefer pinpoint stars to the ones through a NVD.  NV is just a bandaid to help sometimes if I want to see something washed out by light pollution.  I could see where it would be almost always necessary if the observer lives in the middle of a city but I still have Bortle 4.5 skies to everywhere except torards the northeast.

 

So, mainstream, yes for those in the city, never for anyone with skies of Bortle 5 or darker... IMO

Edited by bikerdib, 13 August 2023 - 02:42 PM.

[Sebastian_Sajaroff]

I suspect that "everyone with sky darker than B5" must be, at most, 10% of the amateur population.
Most people I speak or write to are flooded by LP.
I’m sure NVD will turn mainstream as soon as it reaches decent prices.

[Mauro Da Lio]

I can tell my approach because I am considering a NVD.

 

First, I am a Deep Sky observer. I regularly travel to B3-B2.5 sky (or B4 if there are clouds at B3). I booked a vacation in Crete at B2 and other past holidays in Pantelleria at B2.5. I plan to fly to La Palma soon. I never observe at Home.

I began with a Celestron 8, then jumped onto 16 inches, then onto 24". Why? Because, with smaller apertures, the list of objects that show detail is very limited. With 24", almost all exotic objects have their distinct personality (you may have a glimpse of what I mean at Bertrand Laville's deep sky drawings https://www.deepsky-drawings.com ).

 

I eventually bought a 10" Sumerian compact scope for air travel to dark destinations.

 

Then I heard of these "image intensifiers." At first, the word "image intensifiers" made me think that I could transform the 10" into a larger scope (say into a 24 equivalent). Unfortunately, "image intensifiers" does not work as aperture amplifiers. Some things (H-alpha) become accessible that would not be possible in any larger aperture. However other things have little improvement.

 

The big advantage of NVDs is elevating the surface brightness into the mesopic range. This way, one can use the cone system with its higher resolution and capture details that would remain fuzzy in much larger scopes.

 

However, I have seen that dim and very dim objects that are easy to see with glass literally disappear with NVD. I suspect the EBI lowers the contrast in the case of such dim objects. This is, for example, the case of tiny PNs, face-on galaxies, etc. An emblematic case is NGC891: under a B5 sky, the bright bulge and the dust lane were better seen with NVD, but the outer regions, which were still detectable on glass, were not visible.

 

So, Can NVD become mainstream? The answer is no, because it does not replace aperture.

 

We may reformulate the question: what kind of observers will use it as their default (if not unique) observing method, and what other types may use it as a complement?

 

Some people do not move to the dark sky and observe with light pollution; others like large fields, and others like H-alpha on top. NVD might be mainstream for them (the only barrier remaining is the cost).

 

Other people observe only from the darkest place they can afford, are continuously hunting for newer objects (having completed the classical ones), like galaxies, tiny PNs (not because they like tiny things but because the largest ones are very few), and a plethora of other objects. For these, NVD is a new tool to extend their options. Not mainstream, as they will continue to use large diameters and glass.

 

I think I am in the second group.

 

The price of NVD is high. I would have never bought one by only reading the reviews. People need to see with their eyes before committing such amount of resources, and they need to understand whether the device fits their observing needs and style (which may not be aware of). I was lucky to find an NVD that was available for rent. Otherwise, I would never jump in (still unsure to jump in).

[ABQJeff]

I can tell my approach because I am considering a NVD.

 

First, I am a Deep Sky observer. I regularly travel to B3-B2.5 sky (or B4 if there are clouds at B3). I booked a vacation in Crete at B2 and other past holidays in Pantelleria at B2.5. I plan to fly to La Palma soon. I never observe at Home.

I began with a Celestron 8, then jumped onto 16 inches, then onto 24". Why? Because, with smaller apertures, the list of objects that show detail is very limited. With 24", almost all exotic objects have their distinct personality (you may have a glimpse of what I mean at Bertrand Laville's deep sky drawings https://www.deepsky-drawings.com ).

 

I eventually bought a 10" Sumerian compact scope for air travel to dark destinations.

 

Then I heard of these "image intensifiers." At first, the word "image intensifiers" made me think that I could transform the 10" into a larger scope (say into a 24 equivalent). Unfortunately, "image intensifiers" does not work as aperture amplifiers. Some things (H-alpha) become accessible that would not be possible in any larger aperture. However other things have little improvement.

 

The big advantage of NVDs is elevating the surface brightness into the mesopic range. This way, one can use the cone system with its higher resolution and capture details that would remain fuzzy in much larger scopes.

 

However, I have seen that dim and very dim objects that are easy to see with glass literally disappear with NVD. I suspect the EBI lowers the contrast in the case of such dim objects. This is, for example, the case of tiny PNs, face-on galaxies, etc. An emblematic case is NGC891: under a B5 sky, the bright bulge and the dust lane were better seen with NVD, but the outer regions, which were still detectable on glass, were not visible.

 

So, Can NVD become mainstream? The answer is no, because it does not replace aperture.

 

We may reformulate the question: what kind of observers will use it as their default (if not unique) observing method, and what other types may use it as a complement?

 

Some people do not move to the dark sky and observe with light pollution; others like large fields, and others like H-alpha on top. NVD might be mainstream for them (the only barrier remaining is the cost).

 

Other people observe only from the darkest place they can afford, are continuously hunting for newer objects (having completed the classical ones), like galaxies, tiny PNs (not because they like tiny things but because the largest ones are very few), and a plethora of other objects. For these, NVD is a new tool to extend their options. Not mainstream, as they will continue to use large diameters and glass.

 

I think I am in the second group.

 

The price of NVD is high. I would have never bought one by only reading the reviews. People need to see with their eyes before committing such amount of resources, and they need to understand whether the device fits their observing needs and style (which may not be aware of). I was lucky to find an NVD that was available for rent. Otherwise, I would never jump in (still unsure to jump in).

I agree and identify with what you say.  I dont ever see NV taking over my viewing thru glass

As far as other comments on who is going to go extinct first, I say traditional AP/EAA is more at risk than us visual observers (and I include NV in that).  Once the new robot scopes get good enough at a good price point, they will boom.  Look what cell phone cameras did to photography.  Sure there will be a few remaining specialists/professionals (just as there are true photographers) but for the masses just taking photos for fun, a cheap, simple device I see taking a majority of the business once that threshold is reached.  That is what I am waiting for (who needs to mess with spacers and backfocus and tilt and etc. just to show a quick pic to Mom or wife on what you saw last night).

 

Meanwhile visual is about the intimate experience, minimizing what is between your eyes and the heavens (and NV is less intrusive in that aspect than EAA).  Robot scopes can’t replace (yes augment) that type of astronomy experience.