Binoculars and the eye?

[ollypenrice]

Like Brian I don't get on with binoviewers because I find too much of my effort goes into getting both eyes in the right place to avoid flitting in and out of perceived binocular vision. A tilt of the head and it all falls apart. However, I have a very dominant eye and one that is really poor so I daresay that's why I like monocular observing. I do like binoculars though. But I'd take some persuading that there was any real parallax at work in generating the 3D effect at near infinity. Since some people report this effect in binoviews which are really monocular at source I suspect the cause to be psychological or neurological. I don't doubt that it does exist for those who say they feel it.

To combine the two threads that have emerged, we would presumably need a 'monoviewer' in order to benefit from the doubled lightgrasp of bins over scopes!

Hang on a minute though, might that not be quite a good idea??

Olly

[yesyes]

To combine the two threads that have emerged, we would presumably need a 'monoviewer' in order to benefit from the doubled lightgrasp of bins over scopes!

Hang on a minute though, might that not be quite a good idea??

Olly

It would probably be more efficient to make a monocular with twice the aperture.

Hang on, someone already thought of that .. ;-)

[Andrew*]

[Peter Drew]

My experiences with binoviewers place me firmly in the Jamie "camp". Apart from the obvious comfort I find it far easier to discern fine detail on planets and the Sun and the brain certainly prefers two signals rather than one signal and one noise, I thought the Imagers would have appreciated that one. As for 3D, does it matter if it's real or an illusion, if you percieve it, that's good enough. I wouldn't recommend binoviewers to DSO enthusiasts though.

[ollypenrice]

It would probably be more efficient to make a monocular with twice the aperture.

Hang on, someone already thought of that .. ;-)

Not so fast! You are thinking visual and aperture. With my imaging head on I think f-ratio. I'm going to start a new thread called Monocular binocular, seriously!

Olly

[yesyes]

Would that change the f-ratio?

Just when I thought I was beginning to understand all this ......

[Jamie]

To use one of your own statements Olly. "not so fast"!

When talking about binoculars, surely you didn't think anyone would look on this from an imagers point of view?

Binoculars are made for visual use only.... If you wish to use them for anything else then you would have to customize them for the purpose of imaging.

I know you have started a new thread for the purpose of discussing this (and rightly so) I just thought the "not so fast" bit was a little off considering what was being discussed on THIS thread...

[ollypenrice]

To use one of your own statements Olly. "not so fast"!

When talking about binoculars, surely you didn't think anyone would look on this from an imagers point of view?

Binoculars are made for visual use only.... If you wish to use them for anything else then you would have to customize them for the purpose of imaging.

I know you have started a new thread for the purpose of discussing this (and rightly so) I just thought the "not so fast" bit was a little off considering what was being discussed on THIS thread...

Ouch, I think my remark was meant to be humorous, Jamie. Said with a smile. Sorry if that wasn't clear. The discussion had set off into two directions and I just had an amusing thought which I thought I'd share. I don't make much use of smileys being of the age that I am and tend to rely on tone, which in this case seems to have miscarried.

Olly

[ollypenrice]

Would that change the f-ratio?

Just when I thought I was beginning to understand all this ......

Good question. Yes and no. Yes in the sense that the collective aperture would be doubled without the focal length being extended. But the individual f ratios would be unchanged.

Alas BrianB, that erudite fellow, has put a bit of a bomb under my brilliant scheme in the new thread... Curses!

Olly