Posts Made By: Ed Zarenski

To get M5, use the stars in the constellation Serpens. Sight on the easy star 24 aSer, then move down two jumps to the star 34 Ser. Once you are centered on 34Ser turn your Right Assencion dial 32' RA west. You will be right on top of M5. If you have even roughly north polar alligned, and by this I mean pointing your scope by sighting over the top of the tube, M5 should end up in the fov of any low power eyepiece.

edz

Thank you Kenny,

Greg,

Kenny mentions Monthly Sky Guide and Erik mentions Binoculoar Astronomy. Both are excellent choices.

M S G lays out the sky by month and shows at least a portion of a sky chart showing a significant constellation or area for the month. Includes some detail charts. Excellent choice for a beginner.

B A would be the best choice for binocular viewing, it's geared towards that user. It has many excellent detail charts and a full set of sky charts, much more written work, more detailed descriptions of objects. He'll enjoy owning it for a lifetime.

These two gentlemen have steered you in the right direction. These are two very different books. Buy both.

Crossen's book might go for $25+/-. Monthly Sky Guide can be bought for $5+3$shp used on Amazon.

edz

Try screwing the insert sleeve off of one of your less used eyepieces and screwing that sleeve onto the body of the 15mm. take the ill fitting (filter threads) sleeve off of the 15mm and put it on your less used eyepiece. First check that the filters fit in the sleeve you intend to use.

edz

The older model (1yr.old) Konig II has the lettering around the side of the top of the eyepiece, not on the top or not on the angled portion of the top. Lettering is white, except for the words Multi-Coated which is green. The focuser tube insert sleeve has a very nice field stop held in place by a retainer ring. The field stop measures 18.9mm.

The newest versions (2003) are said to have upgraded coatings.

edz

Mt. Katahdin Maine trip July 2003

As another indicator of naked eye limiting magnitude, I was able to see the straight line of the stars in Cr399, Brocchi’s cluster, the Coat Hanger. The stars in the line are labeled in the 6.3 to 6.9mag range except one mag7.1, which I doubt I saw. I can't be sure of which ones I saw, I didn't count, but I was probably seeing at least to mag 6.7.

With great ease I observed many of my favorite objects. I took only a few copies of charts with me, but did not need them. I was glad to know my way around the sky. Some objects that are difficult at home were readily found and observed.

M51 had a dark black space in the NW, between the spirals of the two galaxies.
M101 shining as a ghostly glow, easily stood out from the background sky.
M81-M82 with distinct shape and orientation both grew larger as it got darker.
M12 although fainter, was larger than M10, which had a brighter core.
M11 and the surrounding star cloud was so bright, I noted with the surrounding cloud it looked like a large version of M42.
M13 seemed slightly resolved at the edges.
M71 was clearly identifiable.
M27, the Dumbell nebula was exceptionally bright.

Very many clusters were observed, but not recorded.
Clusters like 6940 stood out with so many more faint stars visible.

Doubles in the range of 32” (Albierio) down to 13” were easy pickings, however I do remember noting that I could only identify yDel (9.8”) as elongated.

NGC6992-95, the eastern peanut shaped portion of the Veil Nebula was easily seen for the first time.
M16-M17-M18 clusters/nebula were all seen with so much Milky Way starshine that it was difficult to see the nebula apart from the faint star glow.
M24 became a vast area of dense star points.

Besides the sheer beauty of the naked eye Milky Way, I think the best of the trip was NGC7000, the North America nebula. This outstanding deep sky feature stood out like I have never seen it before in any optics. The entire Florida / Gulf of Mexico / Central America region was the brightest and most obvious. Although my sketch does not show a northern boundary, I sketched an area up the east coast well into Canada and up the west cost at least to Canada.

I debated which binoculars to take on this trip and eventually decided to take the new 2003 Oberwerk 15x70s. The improvements in the coatings over the older model in my opinion make these binoculars a much better tool for observing. At 3#2 for the Oberwerks, versus 2#0 for either my 10x50 Ultraviews or my 12x50 Pentax PCFIII, I decided the extra 1#2 was worth the weight for the added views and I was truly rewarded for the effort.

Did I mention on the third day that we crossed over the saddle of the mountain at 4900' in 60 mph wind driven horizontal rain. We carried a pair of 8x42 Swift Ultralites for use to observe wildlife. Didn't need them, we had three face-to-face encounters with moose. A trip I will never forget!

edz

Kevin at Oberwerk states the 20x80 standard would be a better performer than the 20x80 LW since it has a longer focal length. It should have less false color. I have No first hand experience with either one of these.

I've done accurate measurements of the true field of view in the 15x70s (4.3°) and the 20x80 Deluxe (3.2°).

edz

Erik mentions, "The Oberwerk may have better broadband multi-coating (than the Burgess) but I am not sure if is a detectable difference at the eyepiece."

I have not used the Burgess, but the new Oberwerk 15x70 have better (fully FMC) coatings than the older Oberwerk 15x70s. I have tested both new and old Oberwerks side by side. The improved coatings make a substantial difference that can readily be detected between the two binoculars. the newer (truely fully FMC) coatings are better.

edz

While researching answers to questions on resolution, I came across this dated request.

here you go.

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/resolution.html

edz

Continuing efforts - limiting magnitude
Fujinon 16x70s and Oberwerk 15x70/03

Wed. 8-20-03 11:00PM to 12:45AM
Skies slightly better tonight.
NELM UMi 5.2 direct, 5.5 averted
NELM CR399 5.2 direct 5.6 averted
Transparency and Seeing vg to ex.
Cygnus Milky Way faintly visible.

Last night efforts resulted in verified 10.2 and 10.3 mag stars. Started over again tonight to verify these. Some persistance required to see mag 10.2 and 10.3, but found without question.

There is a 10.4 mag star identified on the chart and I went after it tonight. I was getting lost in the area so I started plotting the found stars in a sketch. Took about 30-45 minutes, but I finally found the 10.4 star and verified several times.

Again noted that bumping the binoculars and causing any minor shake eliminated all stars over mag 9.0 from view. As soon as binocs settled quite after 5 or 10 seconds, 9.3 and 9.5 mag stars were readily seen.

There is a 9.8 star identified on the chart. I plotted every star in the vicinity. That 9.8 star is not seen. Maybe it's an error on the chart, or maybe its a variable, but it is definitely not seen.

There is a 10.5 star charted. Spent the next 45 minutes sighting and plotting every star around this vicinity attempting to capture this one. Plotted 6 nearby stars, all fainter than nearby mag 9.5 and 9.7, but did not get the 10.5 mag.

Plotted and verified everything seen last night. So results now tally a 10.2, 10.3 and a 10.4. But significant efforts did not capture 10.5.

Skies don't get much better than this in the summer around here. Winter skies will be darker, but this is a pretty good indication of results that can be achieved with these binoculars.

edz

I can compare the standard UO ortho 7mm and 9mm to Meade 4000 9.7mm to a 10mm Radian. I assume the new UOs are better than the older UOs Refer to the article on CloudyNights for review of UO HDs.

The 9.7 is not a great eyepiece, it has some lack of contrast and similar eye relief to the 9mm ortho. The 9mm UO is IMO one of the best moderate to high power eyepieces in the UO line. It is crisp and tack sharp to the edge. When conditions won't permit use of the 7mm UO, I back down to the 9mm and generally see nearly the same view, just a bit smaller. I'm always replacing the 9.7mm with something, trying to get a better view. I would characterize the 9.7mm as a dark eyepiece. Seems like it just doesn't pass enough light for the view to be enjoyed as much as it could be. I have two meade 9.7mm lenses, one came with a used package deal. One has an Afov of 49°, the other has an Afov of 46°. The UO 9mm ortho has an Afov of 43°, the radians are 60°. The 10mm Radian is similar in contrast and sharpness to the 9mm ortho, but it puts up 20% wider 33% wider fov and does so with long eye relief. When I have kids out for a viewing session, many find it difficult to acquire the view in the Radian. I guess that's why they provide that pupil guide, but I don't use it.

My scopes, my eyes. edz