Binocular talk

My interests keep moving since I discovered astronomy a few weeks
ago. I was set on getting a setup for astrophotography, but I found some
binoculars at my mothers house, and now I'm hooked on bino's. I think it
would
be best to just observe and learn the sky. These bino's are Tasco 9x50.
Judging
by the view of the moon, I would say they are equivalent to a 4.5 inch Newt
with a 22mm eyepiece (perhaps a tad less). Admittedly, I haven't been out
of
the city with these bino's, but I plan to drive up to some peak around
Flagstaff. I
am currently in downtown Phoenix. Assuming I want to upgrade to a better
bino's,
would a larger aperture be in order? I looked at reviews for large bino's
and it
seems that many have optical problems. I would like to spend a few hundred,
but that seems to be where the problems are. The Fujinon 16x70 (600-700 $)
has
good reviews, but at www.bigbinoculars.com, they are backorded, and other
sites don't even carry them. I think many people are rushing to Fuginon
since the
comet discovery using them (a $40,000 pair I would assume). Any comments or
suggestions?
Thanks,
-Tom

"Tom" wrote in message
...
My interests keep moving since I discovered astronomy a few weeks
ago. I was set on getting a setup for astrophotography, but I found some
binoculars at my mothers house, and now I'm hooked on bino's. I think it
would
be best to just observe and learn the sky. These bino's are Tasco 9x50.
Judging
by the view of the moon, I would say they are equivalent to a 4.5 inch
Newt
with a 22mm eyepiece (perhaps a tad less). Admittedly, I haven't been out
of
the city with these bino's, but I plan to drive up to some peak around
Flagstaff. I
am currently in downtown Phoenix. Assuming I want to upgrade to a better
bino's,
would a larger aperture be in order? I looked at reviews for large bino's
and it
seems that many have optical problems. I would like to spend a few
hundred,
but that seems to be where the problems are. The Fujinon 16x70 (600-700
$)
has
good reviews, but at www.bigbinoculars.com, they are backorded, and other
sites don't even carry them. I think many people are rushing to Fuginon
since the
comet discovery using them (a $40,000 pair I would assume). Any comments
or
suggestions?

Canon IS 15x50.

"Paul Lawler" wrote in message
link.net...
"Tom" wrote in message
...
My interests keep moving since I discovered astronomy a few weeks
ago. I was set on getting a setup for astrophotography, but I found
some
binoculars at my mothers house, and now I'm hooked on bino's. I think
it
would
be best to just observe and learn the sky. These bino's are Tasco 9x50.
Judging
by the view of the moon, I would say they are equivalent to a 4.5 inch
Newt
with a 22mm eyepiece (perhaps a tad less). Admittedly, I haven't been
out
of
the city with these bino's, but I plan to drive up to some peak around
Flagstaff. I
am currently in downtown Phoenix. Assuming I want to upgrade to a
better
bino's,
would a larger aperture be in order? I looked at reviews for large
bino's
and it
seems that many have optical problems. I would like to spend a few
hundred,
but that seems to be where the problems are. The Fujinon 16x70 (600-700
$)
has
good reviews, but at www.bigbinoculars.com, they are backorded, and
other
sites don't even carry them. I think many people are rushing to Fuginon
since the
comet discovery using them (a $40,000 pair I would assume). Any
comments
or
suggestions?

Canon IS 15x50.

I already have a usable 50. I thought I'd go with 70-100 with a
tripod...but I have to ask, does that I.S. really hold steady on stars while
holding with the hands? That could really be useful for gazing while
reclining, or lying down. Sometimes I wish I could have it all:-)
-Tom

"Tom" wrote in message
...

"Paul Lawler" wrote in message
link.net...
"Tom" wrote in message
...
I am currently in downtown Phoenix. Assuming I want to upgrade to a
better bino's,
would a larger aperture be in order? I looked at reviews for large
bino's and it
seems that many have optical problems. I would like to spend a few
hundred,
but that seems to be where the problems are. The Fujinon 16x70
(600-700
$) has
good reviews, but at www.bigbinoculars.com, they are backorded, and
other
sites don't even carry them. I think many people are rushing to
Fuginon
since the
comet discovery using them (a $40,000 pair I would assume). Any
comments or suggestions?

Canon IS 15x50.

I already have a usable 50. I thought I'd go with 70-100 with a
tripod...but I have to ask, does that I.S. really hold steady on stars
while
holding with the hands? That could really be useful for gazing while
reclining, or lying down. Sometimes I wish I could have it all:-)
-Tom

Yes... they reall are usable while hand holding. That's why I love them so
much. I tried all of them and chose the 15x50 rather than the 18x50 because
of the wider field of view. In fact, the only things I don't like about them
are the position of the tripod mouting hole, and the lack of covers for the
objectives.

good reviews, but at www.bigbinoculars.com, they are backorded, and other
sites don't even carry them. I think many people are rushing to Fuginon
since the

I have the Oberwerk 11X70s and am very happy with them. They can be
hand held and give great views. If you have trouble getting them you
might try Burgess Optical. They have a line of binoculars quite
comparable to the Obeerwerks, they actually use the same housing, for
even less money. http://www.burgessoptical.com/

Phil Hughes

Hello Tom,

Tom wrote:

My interests keep moving since I discovered astronomy a few weeks
ago. I was set on getting a setup for astrophotography, but I found some
binoculars at my mothers house, and now I'm hooked on bino's. I think it
would
be best to just observe and learn the sky. These bino's are Tasco 9x50.
Judging
by the view of the moon, I would say they are equivalent to a 4.5 inch Newt
with a 22mm eyepiece (perhaps a tad less).
[ ... ]

Just a small comment here. When you say "equivalent to a 4.5 inch Newt"
I assume you mean giving similar magnification. Since you say that you
are novice in astronomy, I'd like to mention something that you maybe
already know: the magnification is not important, compared to light
gathering; for faint stuff most 4.5 inch scopes would outperform most
binoculars.

Regards,

- Alex

"Alexander Avtanski" wrote in message
...
Hello Tom,

Tom wrote:

My interests keep moving since I discovered astronomy a few weeks
ago. I was set on getting a setup for astrophotography, but I found
some
binoculars at my mothers house, and now I'm hooked on bino's. I think
it
would
be best to just observe and learn the sky. These bino's are Tasco 9x50.
Judging
by the view of the moon, I would say they are equivalent to a 4.5 inch
Newt
with a 22mm eyepiece (perhaps a tad less).
[ ... ]

Just a small comment here. When you say "equivalent to a 4.5 inch Newt"
I assume you mean giving similar magnification. Since you say that you
are novice in astronomy, I'd like to mention something that you maybe
already know: the magnification is not important, compared to light
gathering; for faint stuff most 4.5 inch scopes would outperform most
binoculars.

Regards,

- Alex

Oh, yes, I meant magnification. Anyhow, I was wrong there too. 900mm FL /
22mm eyepiece
is about 40x. I assume all of that is useful when looking at the moon. I
guess I could just say
that I enjoyed looking at the moon with binos too. I love binos because
both eyes come into
play. Very relaxing. I would get an 8 inch Schmidt-Cass before new binos if
I could find one of
those gadgets that mirror out for two-eye use. Are there affordable
versions of that? Heck, do
they even work? You don't see many people using them.
Tom
P.S. Nothing wrong with my eyes. I assume some people wear "pirate" patches
over one eye for
long viewing sessions. I haven't been to any star parties so I wouldn't
know.
-Tom

"Tom" wrote in message
...

P.S. Nothing wrong with my eyes. I assume some people wear "pirate"
patches
over one eye for
long viewing sessions. I haven't been to any star parties so I
wouldn't
know.

I have to admit that I tried it... but the "geek" factor in the pirate
patches (and the red goggles) was just too great. g

Paul Lawler wrote:
"Tom" wrote in message
...

P.S. Nothing wrong with my eyes. I assume some people wear "pirate"
patches
over one eye for
long viewing sessions. I haven't been to any star parties so I
wouldn't
know.


I have to admit that I tried it... but the "geek" factor in the pirate
patches (and the red goggles) was just too great. g

I try it from time to time - mostly to preserve the dark adaptation
of one eye, when looking at star charts. And only when I'm looking
for something really faint. I find it inconvenient for all-session
use. My 6 yr. daughter, though, enjoys it very much - she says I
look like Captain Hook in it. :-)

- Alex