Rod Mollise review of binoviewers

Rod Mollise has a valuable review of binoviewers in the current issue
of Amateur Astronomy (#40, Winter 2003). I feel I understand the pros
and cons of these devices a lot better after having read his review.
Bill Meyers

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Rod Mollise has a valuable review of binoviewers in the current issue
of Amateur Astronomy (#40, Winter 2003). I feel I understand the pros
and cons of these devices a lot better after having read his review.
Bill Meyers


Is this review available online?

Thanks,

Tom

I don't know it this is the same review but Rod published his bino review in
the Mar-Apr issue of Skywatch. There is an Adobe .pdf file of it at
http://skywatch.brainiac.com/sw030403.pdf

Bob

"Tom Hole earthlink.net" tomhole@NOSPAM wrote in message
...

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Rod Mollise has a valuable review of binoviewers in the current issue
of Amateur Astronomy (#40, Winter 2003). I feel I understand the pros
and cons of these devices a lot better after having read his review.
Bill Meyers


Is this review available online?

Thanks,

Tom

"Tom Hole earthlink.net" tomhole@NOSPAM wrote in message
...

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Rod Mollise has a valuable review of binoviewers in the current issue
of Amateur Astronomy (#40, Winter 2003). I feel I understand the pros
and cons of these devices a lot better after having read his review.
Bill Meyers


Which binoviewers did he review?

Thanks,
Rich

Hello, Rich,
Rod comments in some detail on binoviewers in general, and on how he had
difficulties with them, and then gives an extensive positive review of the
Denkmeier Standard Binoviewer and the Starsweeper focal reducer for SCTs and
the OCS Optical Corrector System for Dobs.
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

"Rich N." wrote:

"Tom Hole earthlink.net" tomhole@NOSPAM wrote in message
...

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Rod Mollise has a valuable review of binoviewers in the current issue
of Amateur Astronomy (#40, Winter 2003). I feel I understand the pros
and cons of these devices a lot better after having read his review.
Bill Meyers

Which binoviewers did he review?

Thanks,
Rich

Thanks, Bill!

The biggest problem I've seen with binoviewers is a
lack of collimation. Some people have a difficult time
merging the images if the binoviewer is even just a little out
of collimation.

Among the other good things about Baader (AP) binoviewers,
they are easy to adjust for collimation. Once adjusted they hold
collimation very well.

I find binoviewers at their best when viewing the moon, planets and
double stars. Even with a big Dob, most of the time I prefer the image
of DSOs with as much brightness as I can get. To me the extra brightness
of a DSO more than offsets using both eyes with a binoviewer. JMHO ;-)

Rich


Hello, Rich,
Rod comments in some detail on binoviewers in general, and on how he had
difficulties with them, and then gives an extensive positive review of the
Denkmeier Standard Binoviewer and the Starsweeper focal reducer for SCTs and
the OCS Optical Corrector System for Dobs.
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

"Rich N." wrote:

"Tom Hole earthlink.net" tomhole@NOSPAM wrote in message
...

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Rod Mollise has a valuable review of binoviewers in the current issue
of Amateur Astronomy (#40, Winter 2003). I feel I understand the pros
and cons of these devices a lot better after having read his review.
Bill Meyers

Which binoviewers did he review?

Thanks,
Rich

Hello, Rich,
Interesting post. So binoviewers are not as good on DSOs as on the moon and
planets.
Yes, Rod reported that merging images was a major problem for him with
binoviewers, - including Tele Vue and AP units, even after adjusting the
inter-ocular distance but to his surprise he found it to be not a problem at all
with the Denkmeier unit. I haven't used binoviewers so I can't comment on this.
Rod Mollise posts here often, so perhaps he will be able tell SAA posters how
to obtain his review on-line. (The link to it that Bob Weber posted in this
thread didn't work for me, I think because my Windows 98 has trouble with JPEG
files. But the link might work for you, being a sophisticated Californian and
all.:-)
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

"Rich N." wrote:

Thanks, Bill!

The biggest problem I've seen with binoviewers is a
lack of collimation. Some people have a difficult time
merging the images if the binoviewer is even just a little out
of collimation.

Among the other good things about Baader (AP) binoviewers,
they are easy to adjust for collimation. Once adjusted they hold
collimation very well.

I find binoviewers at their best when viewing the moon, planets and
double stars. Even with a big Dob, most of the time I prefer the image
of DSOs with as much brightness as I can get. To me the extra brightness
of a DSO more than offsets using both eyes with a binoviewer. JMHO ;-)

Rich

Hello, Rich,
Rod comments in some detail on binoviewers in general, and on how he had
difficulties with them, and then gives an extensive positive review of the
Denkmeier Standard Binoviewer and the Starsweeper focal reducer for SCTs and
the OCS Optical Corrector System for Dobs.
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

"Rich N." wrote:

"Tom Hole earthlink.net" tomhole@NOSPAM wrote in message
...

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Rod Mollise has a valuable review of binoviewers in the current issue
of Amateur Astronomy (#40, Winter 2003). I feel I understand the pros
and cons of these devices a lot better after having read his review.
Bill Meyers

Which binoviewers did he review?

Thanks,
Rich

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Hello, Rich,
Interesting post. So binoviewers are not as good on DSOs as on the
moon and
planets.

Hi Bill,

Depends on who you ask, I guess. I use binoviewers for everything. I know
I'm losing .2 mag, but I get a 3d effect that is mesmerizing and see more
subtle detail more easily. Nothing in the cyclops world can give me the
view I had of M42 on Tues morning with the binoviewers at 69x and a 1 deg
TFOV. BUT (and this is a big but that is strictly me. Others might say
the same thing, still others will say that this is bunk. That's ok. I
won't even begin to argue about what they see. But, I cannot make a blanket
statement that binoviewers are not as good on deep sky. For me, they hold
the same benefits for deep sky as they do for the other stuff. I would
sooner buy a bigger telescope (or move to a darker location) to make up for
the light loss than switch back to cyclops mode.

I am not argueing, just adding to the database. I may be biased

Clear skies,

TOm

Hello, Tom,
I know people's experience differs on this, I had meant to quote Rich's
experience rather than state it as an unimpeachable fact. This shows once more
how difficult it is to write clearly. Thanks for the eloquent clarification and
sharing your experience here.
Clear skies,
Bill Meyers
..
"Tom Hole

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Hello, Rich,
Interesting post. So binoviewers are not as good on DSOs as on the
moon and
planets.

Hi Bill,

Depends on who you ask, I guess. I use binoviewers for everything. I know
I'm losing .2 mag, but I get a 3d effect that is mesmerizing and see more
subtle detail more easily. Nothing in the cyclops world can give me the
view I had of M42 on Tues morning with the binoviewers at 69x and a 1 deg
TFOV. BUT (and this is a big but that is strictly me. Others might say
the same thing, still others will say that this is bunk. That's ok. I
won't even begin to argue about what they see. But, I cannot make a blanket
statement that binoviewers are not as good on deep sky. For me, they hold
the same benefits for deep sky as they do for the other stuff. I would
sooner buy a bigger telescope (or move to a darker location) to make up for
the light loss than switch back to cyclops mode.

I am not argueing, just adding to the database. I may be biased

Clear skies,

TOm

I think the real test is going to be on DSOs that are visible but you can
barely make out structure in with your aperture. Will two eyes bring out at
least as much structure with a more pleasing view, or give up some of the
fainter details for a more pleasing view of the brighter ones ... Of course
more aperture will fix this too ...

"Tom Hole earthlink.net" tomhole@NOSPAM wrote in message
...

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message
...
Hello, Rich,
Interesting post. So binoviewers are not as good on DSOs as on the
moon and
planets.

Hi Bill,

Depends on who you ask, I guess. I use binoviewers for everything. I
know
I'm losing .2 mag, but I get a 3d effect that is mesmerizing and see more
subtle detail more easily. Nothing in the cyclops world can give me the
view I had of M42 on Tues morning with the binoviewers at 69x and a 1 deg
TFOV. BUT (and this is a big but that is strictly me. Others might
say
the same thing, still others will say that this is bunk. That's ok. I
won't even begin to argue about what they see. But, I cannot make a
blanket
statement that binoviewers are not as good on deep sky. For me, they hold
the same benefits for deep sky as they do for the other stuff. I would
sooner buy a bigger telescope (or move to a darker location) to make up
for
the light loss than switch back to cyclops mode.

I am not argueing, just adding to the database. I may be biased

Clear skies,

TOm