Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Monday 19th December 2016, 02:41   #51
etudiant
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
You very well know I'll be needing an optic "fix" soon!!
Now at $1079.95 on Amazon, batteries included, with delivery before Christmas.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 22nd December 2016, 14:21   #52
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,284
This morning I looked at Orion.
The star images are really good over nearly the whole quite flat field.
At the edge there is vignetting, but depending on position angle. At some positions quite a lot more than at others.
In addition some edge stars are elongated but this seems to depend on the offset of the variprisms. At some positions stars are very good at the edge.

I was pleased and surprised to see 4 Trapezium stars. Tiny points of light. This is fairly easy in 18x50, but it was just above 5 bulkhead light fittings each full moon brightness.
In addition a new building 22 metres away has had a Rottweiler light on all night for a week. This is 20 to 40 times full moon, i.e. magnitude minus 16.5.
I have stopped complaining as I consider planet Earth a lost cause. My friend thinks there will be no humans here in 150 years, and I don't disagree with him.
However, someone did complain as this morning the light was angled 45 degrees downwards.

The Canon 10x42 L is very good but heavy and bulky. The IS worked well.

Last edited by Binastro : Thursday 22nd December 2016 at 14:25.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 22nd December 2016, 17:54   #53
ailevin
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Southern California
Posts: 180
Binastro,

I mean no disrespect, but separating all four Trapezeum stars at 10x seems quite exceptional, given that the four stars range in magnitude from 5 to 8ish and the AB separation is around 9". I've seen a rare report of elongation of the third component with a 15x70 binocular tripod mounted, but never a clean separation. More typical is a split at 20x-25x with good conditions. I have seen a clean split reported at just below 20x, so I guess an 18x50 IS is possible, but I would not expect it to be easy.

There has been much discussion of this over the years at cloudynights. See for instance this thread, especially post #34 by Ed Zarenski.

OTH there is much to see at 10x in and around Orion's belt and sword.

Good Observing,
Alan
ailevin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 22nd December 2016, 21:02   #54
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,284
Hi Alan,
I was surprised also, but I think that the extreme light pollution was stopping my eyes well down.
The stars were small points.

I have noted that some observers using ball bearings and the Sun for glitter artificial stars in the daytime see separations well below what I thought possible.
This is because I am thinking large nightime pupils, but the eyes were stopping down to 2.5mm or less, giving much closer results.

I have separated Mizar many times with 10x30 IS older version but they are 14.4 arcseconds apart, but quite bright and very different magnitudes.

One or more Trapezium stars are variable.

The 4 Trapezium stars are seen well routinely by some users of the 15x45 IS.

P.S.
The 15x70 gives much too bright Trapezium stars for easy separation. Also the common 15x70s have very large stars. The Canon 10x42 L stars are very small points.

P.P.S.
The 18x50 IS has an exit pupil of 2.75mm. That is the reason it separates doubles well. The stars in this are also small points.

A good Pentax 8x-20x24 UCF zoom binocular was great for double stars, but the best of 3 tested, which had great star images. This was particularly good at the higher magnifications. It also was excellent on the Moon at higher powers.

Last edited by Binastro : Thursday 22nd December 2016 at 22:45.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 23rd December 2016, 09:45   #55
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,284
This morning I tried to repeat the Trapezium observation but it was cloudy.

The observation that I recorded in my observing book was 2016 Dec 22 02.14 UT.
There is a small sketch showing 4 Trapezium stars, which surprised me. The sketch was made at the time of the observation, i.e. immediately after the observation.

The circumstances were unusual.
I had rested for 2 hours in a dark room with faint illumination from the hall.
My eyes were very rested as was I generally.
The Canon 10x42 L was on the table and I saw that Orion looked good despite extreme light pollution..

The whole star test was done in about 3 minutes.
The belt stars were very fine.
The small cluster stars well above the trapezium were beautiful point like stars.
The Trapezium looked like a miniature version of the Trapezium I see with larger scopes.
I think my eyes were stopped to about 2.5mm and I was effectively using a top quality 10x25 f/7 binocular.
The binocular was tripod steady.
I don't wear glasses with binoculars.
I have little astigmatism.
I do see stars considerably fainter than many observers.
When completely rested my eyes are probably 20/15 or slightly better.

I do see the 7.6 mag star between Mizar and Alcor with old 10x25 non phase coated binocular in severe light pollution. Hand held, braced but not stabilised or tripod mounted.
I have seen Titan, mag 8.4 with bright Saturn in the field with a telescope stopped to less than 20mm, magnification about 30x.

To see the closest separation double stars it is essential to be able to vary the exit pupil to the optimum size.
In addition a variable density filter is needed for the optimum illumination level observation.
These conditions sometimes occur randomly.
I frequently use variable thin cloud as the variable density filter.

I think that the daytime double artificial star test was measured at something like 65 arcseconds with better eyes than I have. At least better resolution, but maybe not as light sensitive eyes as mine.

Last edited by Binastro : Friday 23rd December 2016 at 13:28. Reason: Correction to 1980s Titan observation.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 23rd December 2016, 13:15   #56
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,284
The only other possibility I can think of regarding the 4 Trapezium stars is that I picked up a flaring geosynchronous satellite in the Trapezium.
I have seen two of these near the Trapezium. Firstly with 18x50 IS then with Russian 12x45.
These satellites are normally around magnitude 13, maybe 14, well beyond binocular detection, but the flares I saw were bright enough to be certainly seen.
But these are rare and I think it more likely I saw the 4 stars, especially in view of the careful observations reported with artificial stars in daylight, where the separations were half of what I thought possible, I think because of the optimum pupil size and illumination.

During the Dec 22 observation the Orion nebula was rather faint in the extreme light pollution.

The smallest star images that I have seen in binoculars are those with the Canon 18x50 IS and the 10x42 L IS.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 24th December 2016, 18:09   #57
ailevin
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Southern California
Posts: 180
Binastro,

I appreciate the additional information, and you have inspired me to try the trapezium in my 15x45 IS as soon as the sky clears. I started astronomical observing only as an adult when one of my sons became interested in astronomy. Early on, hunting double stars with my 7x50 binoculars was one of my favorite activities when not under dark skies. In those days the limiting factor was holding the binocular steady and I was lucky to glimpse a 25"-30" split of stars with relatively similar magnitudes.

I doubt I have the necessary acuity as I normally think of around 2 arc minutes as the lower limit of apparent resolution, but perhaps I am selling myself short. I have certainly seen a great range in variation in the ability to detect faint stars in the same field of the same telescope by different observers. We had a very gifted comet observer in our club years ago, and he literally taught me to see things in my own telescope that I had no idea were there.

Alan

P.S. The smallest binocular star images I have seen are in Fujinon Meibo 7x50.
ailevin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 24th December 2016, 21:53   #58
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,284
Hi Alan,
If you are in dark skies maybe try 2x neutral density filters, or maybe variable polarisers.
Some of the Canon IS binoculars have filter threads. Not sure about the 15x45.

Unfortunately sky conditions have not been good but I suspect the Trapezium stars may be easy in severe light pollution but good transparency with the 18x50 IS. It was awful this morning, poor transparency and Orion too low, but I glimpsed the 4th in the 18x50 even though my eyes were not rested. I only saw 3 with the 10x42 L.

There is no point using overkill, too large telescopes or binoculars, as the stars are too bright and too large and fill the small space separating them. It also is no use using binoculars with inherently large star images.
That is the reason I think for the lack of success in the link you posted.
Additionally, some of the observers do not have very good results with faint stars or close stars. Even though my eyes are old I still do better than some of them.

I recently pointed out to a S and T article writer that he was being too conservative re. the Pleiades and he confirmed that he had found observers after he wrote it who did much better, going much fainter.
There is a wide range of vision amongst people who are just considered to have normal good sight. Maybe 2 magnitudes and 3x resolution spread.

I have been amazed by some people I have met or know well who either have incredible eyesight or some who cannot see faint stars at all well.

P.S.
36mm masks might help with a 15x45 IS to stop ones eyes to 2.4mm, so they work near the optimum for best resolution maybe together with 2x neutral density filters. 1.5x neutral density filters may be better, but may not exist, although coloured 1.5x filters do exist, but this might look odd.
Although some see 4 stars in the trapezium with say a 15x45 or similar tripod mounted or IS binocular, many don't.

I realise that some observers with superb eyesight see fully 1 magnitude fainter than I did even when my eyes were young, and some halve my resolution ability, and some do both.

What I object to in the linked posted is the firm statements that because they did not see the 4 trapezium stars below 18x, nobody can.
George Alcock gave up on planetary observation, particularly on Mars, because his peers did not believe the observations that he made with the 4inch f/12 Ross triplet refractor, as they could hardly equal it with 16 inch Newtonians.
He proceeded to learn the positions of 30,000 stars and discovered 5 Novae and 5 comets near sea level from Peterborough with at least one through his window from indoors using a specially made 20x60 Soviet binocular. He normally used the Schneider? 25x105 triplet objective binocular for his discoveries. He saw 7.2 mag stars with unaided eyes, but I think maybe he saw fainter also.

His peers could not argue with new discoveries.

Last edited by Binastro : Sunday 25th December 2016 at 21:39. Reason: Spelling
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 25th December 2016, 13:28   #59
kabsetz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,409
Thanks for a very interesting discussion, Binastro and Alan.

The 36mm mask will have the additional advantage of reducing aberrations, as in most binoculars the edges of the objective lens contribute to aberrations proportionately more than the central area.

Kimmo
kabsetz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th December 2016, 19:44   #60
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
 
Theo98's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: SE La
Posts: 723
Talking

NOW 50% off MSRP today @ B&H and Adorama!

Suspicions of a Mark II version around the corner stronger than ever?!!

Happy New Year,

Ted
__________________
Seeing is Believing ...Believing without Seeing is...FAITH!
Theo98 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th December 2016, 20:15   #61
maico
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Somerset UK
Posts: 203
Sold out at this big Tokyo binocular dealer too...
http://www.kyoei-tokyo.jp/shopdetail...ge1/brandname/
Never mind buy these instead...
http://www.kyoei-tokyo.jp/shopdetail/000000007113/
maico is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 27th December 2016, 19:40   #62
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theo98 View Post
NOW 50% off MSRP today @ B&H and Adorama!

Suspicions of a Mark II version around the corner stronger than ever?!!

Happy New Year,

Ted
"Suspicions of a Mark II version around the corner stronger than ever?!!"

I would be first in line for a Mark II Canon 10x42 IS-L. That will be the best binocular EVER!
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 29th December 2016, 05:47   #63
ailevin
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Southern California
Posts: 180
Hi Binastro,

Last night I was able to spend a little time with Orion using my 15x45 Canon IS binocular. Of course M42 is visible, but not particularly bright or extended given the urban light pollution viewing here from Los Angeles. Although I am looking out toward the ocean, there is very extensive light pollution surrounding me including street lamps that don't point down and that cannot be shielded from my view except by the eye cups of the binoculars. I was sitting in a lounge chair so with the IS the view was very steady.

Within the nebula, Theta2 Ori is an easy and pretty double (actually a triple, but I'm referring to the two closer and brighter components) with a separation of just less than 60 arc sec. A few arc minutes away, still within the nebula is Theta1 Ori, which I know to be the trapezium, but I am unable to make out four stars even after some effort. In fact, I could not reliably separate A and D components of Theta1 from the C component let alone view the B component. D would "blink" into resolution now and again as separated, but A and B were just an extension of C. I could call it three based on the shape, but even this may be called "averted imagination," since I know the trapezium from telescopic experience. The trapezium mostly gave the appearance of an L-shaped hard to focus star, though I checked my focus carefully with other stars in the field.

The could be a statement about my skies, my binoculars, my eyes or all of the above. I will see what it looks like in my 10x30 IS tonight and also check it with my small refractor. I think that the lowest power I will be able to get with the refractor and current eyepieces is around 18x. If the weather holds I may also try it with tripod mounted 15x70 binoculars.

The other approach I may take is to find some simple doubles in the range of 15-20 arc sec and see if I can split them or not with the 15x45. Since I was able to split Albireo (34 arc sec) at 7x hand held this seems like a reasonable place to start with a 15x binocular for me.

BTW, just to put this in perspective, the 15x45 IS has a 4.5 degree field of view, which is about 16,000 arc seconds, so we are talking about staring at 1 part of the field in 800 or 1600 depending on whether I can resolve 20 arc sec or 10 arc sec. But I suppose I shouldn't complain as the 10x42 has a 6.5 degree field of view.

Good Observing,
Alan
ailevin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 29th December 2016, 14:03   #64
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,284
Hi Alan,
Thanks for the report.

My skies have not been good and my eyes not rested, so not much luck here.
The batteries also needed changing.

I was interested to read that there are 170 million plus pieces of space junk in orbit.

What about Mizar, is that visible at 14.4 arcseconds?
If necessary make 25mm masks for the 15x45 IS as Mizar is bright.

Happy New Year and clear skies.

Last edited by Binastro : Thursday 29th December 2016 at 14:32.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 29th December 2016, 15:41   #65
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 2,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n View Post
"Suspicions of a Mark II version around the corner stronger than ever?!!"

I would be first in line for a Mark II Canon 10x42 IS-L. That will be the best binocular EVER!
What's wrong with the one you already have? This ''heaven'' of yours sounds more like purgatory.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 29th December 2016, 16:34   #66
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,284
James,
At least purgatory for me reading #62.

Happy New Year.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 29th December 2016, 17:10   #67
ailevin
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Southern California
Posts: 180
Binastro,

Just a quick follow up. I used my 10x30 IS last night, and was able to see no distinct separation of Theta1 (Trapezeum). I thought I saw some elongation and noted it's position angle (PA) relative to the PA of of Theta2, which once again was relatively easy at 10x. Checking later, the direction of observed elongation was from C in the direction of A&B. No chance to pull out refractor last night.

Alan

P.S. Apologies for going off on an astro tangent to the main topic. However, Canon IS binoculars are in my experience wonderful tools for astronomy, so I guess that is a pro.
ailevin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 1st January 2017, 23:08   #68
etudiant
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theo98 View Post
NOW 50% off MSRP today @ B&H and Adorama!

Suspicions of a Mark II version around the corner stronger than ever?!!

Happy New Year,

Ted
Now listed as 'Out of Stock' on the Canon USA web site.
Refurbished units still available, but at a premium price.

Think either discontinued or new model coming.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 2nd January 2017, 09:48   #69
kabsetz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,409
To my understanding, heavily discounting a product that essentially has no rivals and is going to be discontinued without a replacement model coming makes no sense from a marketing perspective. Why discount something that will become rare and irreplaceable?

But maybe this is only wishful thinking on my part.

Kimmo
kabsetz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd January 2017, 13:24   #70
etudiant
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by kabsetz View Post
To my understanding, heavily discounting a product that essentially has no rivals and is going to be discontinued without a replacement model coming makes no sense from a marketing perspective. Why discount something that will become rare and irreplaceable?

But maybe this is only wishful thinking on my part.

Kimmo
Exactly true, it would seem irrational, but there was somewhat similar behavior by Nikon when they halted their ED82. Maybe Gijs understands the drivers behind optics marketing decisions, but I don't.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 2nd January 2017, 15:12   #71
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 2,937
I have no idea, only what I see in the field, but do they actually sell enough units to justify a ''Mark II''?
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd January 2017, 16:57   #72
PhilR.
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: TX
Posts: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by james holdsworth View Post
I have no idea, only what I see in the field, but do they actually sell enough units to justify a ''Mark II''?
Given how often I have seen them in the relatively short time we have been going to birding "hot-spots" here in TX, along with the fact that soldiers take them to places like Afghanistan and the like, I believe they do sell enough units to justify model improvement.

And if Canon could slim them down a bit without increasing the price, they would sell like my daughter's favorite breakfast item........
PhilR. is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd January 2017, 18:07   #73
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 2,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilR. View Post
Given how often I have seen them in the relatively short time we have been going to birding "hot-spots" here in TX, along with the fact that soldiers take them to places like Afghanistan and the like, I believe they do sell enough units to justify model improvement.

And if Canon could slim them down a bit without increasing the price, they would sell like my daughter's favorite breakfast item........
That's a very different picture than Ontario - places like Pelee or Niagara, with hundreds or even thousands of birders, and I have only ever seen a few in the field. Swaro's would outnumber them 100 to 1.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 3rd January 2017, 11:52   #74
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,187
I have never seen a Canon IS bino in the field, ever.

Lee
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 3rd January 2017, 15:52   #75
dipped
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: suffolk
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
I have never seen a Canon IS bino in the field, ever.

Lee
I've seen quite a few at Minsmere, and a Suffolk based tour leader uses the 10x42's (as does of course Chris Packham).
dipped is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Autumn Olive...something I may consider planting...pros and cons cadillactaste Trees, Flowers, Plants and Shrubs 10 Thursday 9th May 2013 00:59
8x32 pros and cons Matri-Juve Binoculars 36 Wednesday 25th April 2012 13:22
Pros and cons to Nyjer feeder styles Backyard Sanctuary Garden Birds, Bird Feeding & Nestboxes 9 Sunday 6th March 2011 17:51
The pros and cons of Gin Traps! Peewit Other Wildlife 9 Wednesday 6th May 2009 08:22
Pros and cons for digital photography/new equipment? MBP Cameras And Photography 11 Sunday 14th November 2004 05:27

{googleads}
£100 Cashback on Opticron DBA VHD Binoculars. Click to find out more.

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.19734812 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:37.