Posts Made By: Todd Gross

I recently compared the two binoviewers in several sessions. I really enjoyed the individual eyepiece focusers, although it took awhile to get used to them. The views were very, very similar through the Denk 1 and Denk 2, but at times of steadiest seeing, I believe I saw a tad more resolution and/or intraplanetary contrast in the Denk 2, but it was minor. Also, I may have detected a tiny bit more resolution on M15 at various magnifications in the Denk 2.

Personally, I find this a tough question. If you really want the best, go with the Denk 2, the individual eyepiece focuser alone will assure you the sharpest views more regularly. If you are on a budget there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Denk 1, and it performs close enough to the Denk 2 that it is pushing my "fairly" experienced eyes to the limit.

Todd Gross
www.weatherman.com

When I last owned an SCT a couple of years ago after
reviewing many (see www.weatherman.com) I was pre-GPS, and felt that Meade had the better hardware, Celestron the
better optics. (super impressed by my Ultima 2000 and C9.25, not impressed with two 8" Meade LX200s, and a 10" OTA

Have things changed?

Opinions please and sorry for the newbie question from an olbie.


Todd

I truly appreciate your comment above , by the way, but just to be accurate, I've only studied binoviewers for 9 or 10 years now. (Got into astronomy at age 5 over 40 years ago, did mostly solar 1977-1994, back to deep sky and planets 1994, binoviewers 1995)

I'm going to do so some more work with them this summer, but at this point in time, there are many of you that have exceeded my expertise in rating them. I just can provide a keen eye, and a good additional "data point".

I do appreciate it though since at one point, I was one of the few people that really understood, or rather, publicized the stupid magnification problem that rendered 100% of the binoviewers nearly useless for many users.

I'm tickled silly at the recent advances of Denkmeier, Televue, Siebert, Markus, A/P and others have made in that regard. (focus travel and magnification) I also found it amusing that Celestron is still marketing their old-style binoviewer in this day and age of "the good stuff"

I really take my hats off to all of your binoviewer enthusiasts that picked up the ball and ran with it -

Let me ask you all a question.. I've never really had the opportunity to compare binotelescopes of slightly smaller aperture with a binoviewer in a slightly larger scope. I would think the views wouldn't differ all that much but binotelescope people claim otherwise. Sorry if this has been brought up recently. Anybody?

-Todd Gross
WHDH TV
Boston

Interesting.. I've tried them both and have come to the same conclusion. I liked the Ultimas "slightly" and I mean SLIGHTLY more, but ended up not using them very much in favor of 19 and 24 Pans.
Todd