54 replies to this topic

[NinePlanets]

I sat on the fence a few years before I decided to step off and gamble my money on these wide-field, low power Galilean binoculars. I've never been impressed with any sort of Galilean telescopes, field glasses or opera glasses and I suspected that they were just an expensive, trendy gimmick; but based on others' comments and experiences, I considered that these specialty items, with their wider than typical fields, might actually fill a niche in my astro-equipment arsenal.

Click here to view the article

[therealdmt]

Good article and comparison, Nine. My results have been somewhat similar with my 2x54 and 2.1x42 constellation binoculars

[Sincos]

Good report based on personal use of the 2x54’s . They definitely fill a niche that I didn’t know needed filling before using them . Love the VW/CrownVic analogy. Find they are excellent for judging sky conditions before dragging out telescope and other bits and bobs .

[Richard O'Neill]

Currently, the Orion binoculars are not available.

[NinePlanets]

Currently, the Orion binoculars are not available.

Richard, these binocs are available sold under other names than Orion. Orion was just one importer of this Chinese product. Look for them under Omegon or Sky Rover brands. It apears that they are also available under the Kasai Trading brand. I suspect the name of the real manufacturer will be revealed at some point...

[djeber2]

Great report.  I am also considering getting one of these units.

[Cotts]

2x54mm is a 27mm diameter exit pupil. Seems like a lot of wasted photons?  If your eyes only open to, say, 6mm, and you want a magnification of 2x then the objective aperture need only be 12mm diameter.  

 

Wondering if you put that 12mm sized aperture mask on one half of the binos and then blink-tested them would you even notice a difference?  My money is on no.

 

Same thing for the 2.3x by 40 pair, just different numbers.

 

 

Dave

[DVexile]

2x54mm is a 27mm diameter exit pupil. Seems like a lot of wasted photons?  If your eyes only open to, say, 6mm, and you want a magnification of 2x then the objective aperture need only be 12mm diameter.  

 

Wondering if you put that 12mm sized aperture mask on one half of the binos and then blink-tested them would you even notice a difference?  My money is on no.

 

Same thing for the 2.3x by 40 pair, just different numbers.

 

 

Dave

These are Galilean telescopes, not Keplerian, so the exit pupil is virtual and inside the telescope.  The objectives are large because they are required to be for a wide FOV Galilean design, it has nothing to do with exit pupil. This therefore also means the objectives of a wide FOV Galilean must be very fast, like F/2 or faster, and so that requires comparatively exotic lens element designs compared with more typical Keplerian telescopes/binoculars.

 

If you put a 12mm mask on as you suggest the result would be an obvious and severe restriction of the FOV.  Again, very different from a Keplerian design.

Edited by DVexile, 01 September 2024 - 11:39 PM.

[highfnum]

had both for awhile

 

yes     

 

the Orion is somewhat better

[30mmgunpilot]

Great write-up! I bought these as a Christmas gift for my wife, opera glasses don’t ya know…they work great for that too….

[careysub]

I also have both, and prefer the larger model. Lovely for scanning the skies, especially looking at the structure of the Milky Way.

 

These are great for night time outreach.

[sunrag]

Yes, the Orion 2x54 is great! The FOV is huge, and stars at the edge do look sharp.  I keep it my car, in case I find myself on a country road at night. 

[NinePlanets]

I might add this note:

 

When looking out my bedroom window at night I prefer the little 2.3x40mm Kasai's over the bigger Orion unit, simply because the Orion's larger field tends to take in a streetlight down the road a bit, spoiling the view; whereas the Kasai's narrower field provides the wide field view without the street light.

 

But outside under the sky? Orion 2x54mm every time now.

[therealdmt]

I thought I might add that for me, comparing my 2x54 and 2.1x42 constellation binoculars, I said my results were "somewhat similar" because, well, for one, I’m not comparing my 2x54 to a 2.3x40. The 2.1x42 is a different binocular than a 2.3x40, so my results would inherently be somewhat different than NinePlanets’. But anyway, in comparing my own two, I’d particularly note that the smaller binocular vignettes somewhat, which isn’t ideal, and the 2x54 produces a brighter image, so those are some nice points in favor of the 2x54. Also, the 2x54 comes with a nice softcase and a neck strap, whereas the 2.1x42 has only a thin nylon pouch and a wrist strap; so, more points in favor of the 2x54. Oh yeah, and the 2x54 can directly use 2" filters (though I haven’t really used this capability).

 

However, I don’t know why, but I clearly consistently have a little difficulty achieving a comfortable focus for both eyes with the 2x54. It’s almost inevitably (for me) a fiddly process. And even after I’ve nailed it, there’s always eventually a feeling of some eye strain or headache/slight nausea for me with the 2x54 if I use it too long. Meanwhile, with the 2.1x42, focusing isn’t a particular issue and I don’t get that headache or eye strain feeling afterwards. Finally, with the wide view of the 2x54, I’ve often found a finger inadvertently getting into view. I can of course hold it so that a finger doesn’t intrude, but with the 2.1x42, I don’t have to think about it — the view is naturally "finger-free", lol. And the 2.1x42 is somewhat lighter and more compact.

 

Accordingly, if I had to keep only one, it might be the 2.1x42. Might. I’m still always drawn to the wider, brighter view of the 2x54. The vignetting with the 2.1x42 definitely isn’t ideal. So, I keep both

————-

 

Oops, it’s the 2.1x42 that can take regular 2" filters directly. I only tried it once or twice (didn’t see any improvement under marginal conditions), so I’d forgotten. SkyRover makes some special large diameter broaderband UHC-type filter for the 2x54 though

Edited by therealdmt, 08 September 2024 - 08:59 PM.

[Epick Crom]

Great article NinePlanets!

 

I recently acquired the Kasai 2x54mm.  I like them a lot as they do a great job as my lowest power, widest field of view instrument for observing.  They are keepers for sure!

[NinePlanets]

Great article NinePlanets!

 

I recently acquired the Kasai 2x54mm.  I like them a lot as they do a great job as my lowest power, widest field of view instrument for observing.  They are keepers for sure!

Are the Kasai 2x54's identical to the Orions other than the label?

[Epick Crom]

Are the Kasai 2x54's identical to the Orions other than the label?

From what I've read here on CN, I believe that they are identical to the Orion 2x54's. Since Orion has shut down I was after the Orion 2x54's initially but they are hard to find so I got the Kasai based on what I read here on CN. 

 

No complaints about the Kasai 2x54's,  they perform great, sharp and virtually no aberrations. I estimate the true field of view to be around 28°

[macastronomer]

Thank you for this review. I have had the Orion 2x binos since they were first introduced and I really love what they do. I have convinced several people to buy them, and one of them gave me the best description. "They are like reading glassed for the sky." Perfect way to describe what they do.

 

But, now that Orion is going away... I've been looking at alternatives since others would like the same set, and I haven't found anything with the same capabilities. As I understand it, Orion had a patent on how these were constructed. Is there a current patent holder on that now or is somebody else able to come along and make them?

[therealdmt]

Thank you for this review. I have had the Orion 2x binos since they were first introduced and I really love what they do. I have convinced several people to buy them, and one of them gave me the best description. "They are like reading glassed for the sky." Perfect way to describe what they do.

 

But, now that Orion is going away... I've been looking at alternatives since others would like the same set, and I haven't found anything with the same capabilities. As I understand it, Orion had a patent on how these were constructed. Is there a current patent holder on that now or is somebody else able to come along and make them?

Sky Rover is the house brand of the OEM and sells their version of the 2x54:

https://skyroveropti...lso-uhc-filters

[Joshua Roth]

Interesting way of dealing with what I presume to be night myopia as well as getting a very wide field immersive view of the night sky! (For various reasons these binos probably won't work for me, which is why I rely on my stargazing eyeglasses.) Thanks for this great review! - JR

[DVexile]

Sky Rover is the house brand of the OEM and sells their version of the 2x54:

https://skyroveropti...lso-uhc-filters

Yep, I have the SkyRover version and they are delightful!

[CBert504]

I was never able to make myself use mine, though they certainly seemed like they worked as designed. That said, I have a set of the Omegon 2.1x 42 available in the classifieds, if anyone here might be interested.

 

Clear Skies!

 

https://www.cloudyni...idefield-binos/

[sunrag]

Almost 2 years in the Classifieds! Ad is too old for anyone to notice. You should delete the ad and re-list it.

[CBert504]

Re-Listed in case anyone may be interested: https://www.cloudynights.com/classifieds/item/385647-omegon-21-x-42-widefield-binoculars/

 

I was never able to make myself use mine, though they certainly seemed like they worked as designed. That said, I have a set of the Omegon 2.1x 42 available in the classifieds, if anyone here might be interested.

 

Clear Skies!

 

https://www.cloudynights.com/classifieds/item/317603-omegon-21-x-42-widefield-binos/

[RossSackett]

I have the Orion unit and I agree with all the comments in the review.  I hope they are still available in the post-Orion world.

 

I will add something, though.  I didn't think they would be of value for non-astronomical use, but I was wrong!  Last summer I brought them along on a cave art tour in Europe, and they were PERFECT for amplifying the brightness and details of the cave paintings.  Any more power would have been a distinct disadvantage. I now bring them along when I visit art (or other) museums--I can stand five feet off and it feels like my nose is on the canvas, sharper than if I stand guard-alarmingly close to the picture.