Two eyes better than one!

Last night was clear, so I pulled my 4" APO out to see the comet. Looked OK,
faint smudge. Than I pulled out my 4" bino 100x25 Apogee, wow, it showed
much more details, larger, more extended.
It was nice to stare it the comet with two eyes, looked impressive in the 4"
binocular.
Julius

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:34:11 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

Last night was clear, so I pulled my 4" APO out to see the comet. Looked OK,
faint smudge. Than I pulled out my 4" bino 100x25 Apogee, wow, it showed
much more details, larger, more extended.
It was nice to stare it the comet with two eyes, looked impressive in the 4"
binocular.

Yep, at the *same power* I prefer the big 90mm and 100mm binos out
there for wide field astro views over my APO. I have the 20x90mm
Series II from Burgess and love them. Big, bright, and sharp images.

[Flame suit on.]

---
Michael McCulloch

"Michael McCulloch" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:34:11 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

Last night was clear, so I pulled my 4" APO out to see the comet. Looked
OK,
faint smudge. Than I pulled out my 4" bino 100x25 Apogee, wow, it showed
much more details, larger, more extended.
It was nice to stare it the comet with two eyes, looked impressive in the
4"
binocular.

Yep, at the *same power* I prefer the big 90mm and 100mm binos out
there for wide field astro views over my APO. I have the 20x90mm
Series II from Burgess and love them. Big, bright, and sharp images.

[Flame suit on.]

---
Michael McCulloch

Would a bino double the light gathering? Seems my 4" APO showed the comet
like my 50 mm bino or may be the 70 mm did.
I had my 4" bino up in the mountains at a very dark sight, dropped my jaw
all the DSO object I was able to see with it.
With the 3 deg field, was easy to find them too.
M108 and the Owl in one field, I was impressed. TV Pronto was dim compare to
the 4" bino.
Also, the bino is very portable.

Julius

M108 and the Owl in one field, I was impressed. TV Pronto was dim compare
to
the 4" bino.
Also, the bino is very portable.

We too have had a great view of the Owl and M108 in our 20x80 Burgess binos.
In fact, my sons and I have been very pleasantly surprised by how good the
views in general are in these. A guy in our club recently got a pair of
25x100s from Oberwerk, and we plan on comparing them to ours this weekend.
We are hopeful that these 25x100s will deliver much better views, but we
will see.

We won our binos in a Burgess Optical raffle at last year's NEAF, and we
weren't shopping for a pair. In fact, my older son's immediate reaction was
to recommend that we sell them. However, after we tried them out we became
sold on them. I think everybody should have a pair of big binos, and a good
parallelogram mount.

Dennis

I'll hopefully get to use my 25X100 tonight to view the comet. I've had them
for one day and am impressed by the clarity and brightness. The field of
view with folding down rubber eyecups makes them a joy with glasses. I'm
hand holding these also. A bit tough I'll admit but can be done. I use to
hold a pair of 30X80's all the time, these will be a new challenge. By
these glasses were purchased from Orion and I assume they're all being
built by the same manufacturer in China. Nice glasses for the money. A real
bargain I'd say.

Rich

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:04:40 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

Would a bino double the light gathering?

Don't know exactly. Many people have different opinions. Obviously by
having 2 four-inch objectives in a 100mm bino, you do have double the
aperture. But many argue that the brain doesn't add the images from
each eye in a linear fashion.

My own opinion is that the brain adds the two images in an exponential
fashion. ;-)

---
Michael McCulloch

"Michael McCulloch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:04:40 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

Would a bino double the light gathering?

Don't know exactly. Many people have different opinions. Obviously by
having 2 four-inch objectives in a 100mm bino, you do have double the
aperture. But many argue that the brain doesn't add the images from
each eye in a linear fashion.

My own opinion is that the brain adds the two images in an exponential
fashion. ;-)

---
Michael McCulloch

Last night used my C-11 to take a look at the comet, also had a peak with
the 4" bino. Only difference the 11" showed is a sharp core, like a dot of
the comet. Otherwise both showed the same.
JS

Hi Everyone !

I don't think it's linear or exponential. One thing that seems to be a good
general rule is that you see 40% fainter with binoculars than with a
telescope of the same magnification and objective size. Certainly some sort
of processing occurs between the eyes and the brain to extract more
information from the different views through the two eyes.

I'd like to add for the benefit of novices that it's an old practice to keep
both eyes open when viewing through a monocular telescope or microscope.
It's less of a strain on the face and brain to not keep on eye force closed,
and you soon learn to ignore what's seen in the other eye. This is helped
in both cases by the fact that with the microscope your eyes are focused at
infinity so anything you see is going to be fuzzed out, and with the
telescope your further aided by blackness. I even learned to flip between
the two eyes when using a straight through finder, to compare the two views
and home in on an object. In this case, the eye not looking through the
finder is a telrad. ^_^
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Michael McCulloch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:04:40 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

Would a bino double the light gathering?

Don't know exactly. Many people have different opinions. Obviously by
having 2 four-inch objectives in a 100mm bino, you do have double the
aperture. But many argue that the brain doesn't add the images from
each eye in a linear fashion.

My own opinion is that the brain adds the two images in an exponential
fashion. ;-)

---
Michael McCulloch

Ez erdekes, nem fogom elfelejteni, akarhanyszor kulcslukon fogok leselkedni.
JS

"David Nakamoto" wrote in message
news:hZCFd.16793$F97.9754@trnddc06...
Hi Everyone !

I don't think it's linear or exponential. One thing that seems to be a
good general rule is that you see 40% fainter with binoculars than with a
telescope of the same magnification and objective size. Certainly some
sort of processing occurs between the eyes and the brain to extract more
information from the different views through the two eyes.

I'd like to add for the benefit of novices that it's an old practice to
keep both eyes open when viewing through a monocular telescope or
microscope. It's less of a strain on the face and brain to not keep on eye
force closed, and you soon learn to ignore what's seen in the other eye.
This is helped in both cases by the fact that with the microscope your
eyes are focused at infinity so anything you see is going to be fuzzed
out, and with the telescope your further aided by blackness. I even
learned to flip between the two eyes when using a straight through finder,
to compare the two views and home in on an object. In this case, the eye
not looking through the finder is a telrad. ^_^
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Michael McCulloch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:04:40 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

Would a bino double the light gathering?

Don't know exactly. Many people have different opinions. Obviously by
having 2 four-inch objectives in a 100mm bino, you do have double the
aperture. But many argue that the brain doesn't add the images from
each eye in a linear fashion.

My own opinion is that the brain adds the two images in an exponential
fashion. ;-)

---
Michael McCulloch

Intresting, won't forget it, every time I peak through a key hole.
JS

"David Nakamoto" wrote in message
news:hZCFd.16793$F97.9754@trnddc06...
Hi Everyone !

I don't think it's linear or exponential. One thing that seems to be a
good general rule is that you see 40% fainter with binoculars than with a
telescope of the same magnification and objective size. Certainly some
sort of processing occurs between the eyes and the brain to extract more
information from the different views through the two eyes.

I'd like to add for the benefit of novices that it's an old practice to
keep both eyes open when viewing through a monocular telescope or
microscope. It's less of a strain on the face and brain to not keep on eye
force closed, and you soon learn to ignore what's seen in the other eye.
This is helped in both cases by the fact that with the microscope your
eyes are focused at infinity so anything you see is going to be fuzzed
out, and with the telescope your further aided by blackness. I even
learned to flip between the two eyes when using a straight through finder,
to compare the two views and home in on an object. In this case, the eye
not looking through the finder is a telrad. ^_^
--
Sincerely,
--- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It don't mean a thing
unless it has that certain "je ne sais quoi"
Duke Ellington
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Michael McCulloch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:04:40 -0800, "Szaki"
wrote:

Would a bino double the light gathering?

Don't know exactly. Many people have different opinions. Obviously by
having 2 four-inch objectives in a 100mm bino, you do have double the
aperture. But many argue that the brain doesn't add the images from
each eye in a linear fashion.

My own opinion is that the brain adds the two images in an exponential
fashion. ;-)

---
Michael McCulloch