Harry Siebert Binoviewer

Ratings:Top:Astronomy:Equipment Reviews:Misc Accessories:Harry Siebert Binoviewer

 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Vote
Page 1 of 1

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
On Feb 3, 2001, I used my Harry Siebert Binoviewer for the first time on my 17.5" 'fast' f = 4.1 Dobsonian. This BinoViewer was seen on EBAY for only $399 including a matched pair of 21mm SWA eyepieces. I understand that this BinoViewer recently has been greatly improved. Considering the $399 price for the Binoviewer including the matched pair of 21mm SWA eyepieces, I was very impressed, to say the least!

The included Siebert SWA 21mm eyepieces must have been improved also because they were fantastic for the money (I was astonished when looking at the moon and Jupiter) -- on the whole, IMO, the Siebert 21mm SWAs were as good as using a pair of TeleVue Panoptic 19mm eyepieces when compared in the in Siebert BinoViewer (I experienced annoying 'black-out' problem with the TV Panoptic 19mm EPs).

The Siebert BinoViewer evidently offers viewing quality, freedom from vignetting, light transmission, etc., comparable to the expensive teleview -- & has adjustable inter-pupilary distance too.

To sum up: I did not see a difference in image quality from when I looked through a TeleVue BinoVue.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 9 (Veritable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=44182

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
I bought this binoviewer and returned it. It's view may 'be comparable' but it has too much of a home-made quality to it. And the construction quality is not all that good.

Also, too much is made of the Todd Gross site on BVs. It's helpful but Siebert thinks he can virtually run the business on Todd Gross's review. My advice is 'try before you buy.' His may be cheaper but you always get what you pay for.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=44185 

>I bought this binoviewer and returned it.  It's view may 'be comparable' but it has too much of a home-made quality to it. And the construction quality is not all that good.  
>
>Also, too much is made of the Todd Gross site on BVs.  It's helpful but Siebert thinks he can virtually run the business on Todd Gross's review.  My advice is 'try before you buy.'  His may be cheaper but you always get what you pay for.


  I see you go for that impressive look, to just say, hay look what I got, it looks good but works when it wants to.
Harry Siebert Binoviewer
I have purchased a Siebert Binoviewer about a month ago. Mostly tested on the moon and Saturn, with my MEADE 10" SCT. Really impressive. I can´t see any diference in perfomance relative to binovues.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 9 (Veritable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=44186

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
I purchased a Siebert binoviewer and found the optics to be very bright and crisp and the support from Harry to be outstanding. The included integral barlow was very innovative and allowed comfortable use at lower magnifications than are possible with most other binoviewers in newtonians and refractors. The fit and finish of the housing, however, is quite home-made in appearance and seems to be made from plumbing parts painted flat black. That may turn off some people who like the sleek appearance of high end astro accessories by companies like TeleVue. It just depends what's important to you. In any case, Harry offers a money-back guarantee and is good as his word. You have nothing to lose from trying them.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=44188

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
This binoviewer worked perfectly in my 15in F5 truss dob. It came to focus easily and delivered bright high contrast images.Observing Jupiter and Saturn at 300x was very satisfying and M42 at 80x was stunning. This product is highly recomended.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 9 (Veritable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=44190

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
Although the binoviewer is good in some scopes, it simply would not fit in my focuser (there was some slop). If the mechanical difficulties of the binoviewer are fixed, then this could be a good binoviewer. Also has a "cheapy" feel to it since it is made from copper tubing. Most people aren't going to notice this, but some people who like stuff that "looks good" will. Still, Harry is a nice guy and is willing to work with you to fix any particular needs that you have. The views through his particular telescope with the binoviewer were nice. A good value, but also be sure to read the review of it on cloudy nights.

Overall Rating: 7
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=44191

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
The last comment above reflects a very old pair of binoviewers from almost 1 1/2 years ago. If I am not mistaken, his particular scope also had a helical focuser. He was sent a modified version of the binos to accomodate his scopes extremely limited focus travel and did not have the standard focuser shaft. These binos have been redesigned completely since his checking them 1 1/2 years ago. The review he mentions on cloudy nights is also under review and should be revised soon. The unit that was examined on cloudy nights was another old unit (over 1 year old). These binos have only been in development and production for roughly 2 years so needless to say that a pair made 1 year ago will be vastly different from those made 6 months ago to present.

Some of changes that have been made is as follows: 1) Eyepiece holders have been replaced with self-centering holders rather than the older eyepiece socket with thumbscrew. Similar to Lumicon and Televue. 2)Lower focuser barrels have been resized to fit snuggly in all but the sloppiest focusers. In addition virtually every aspect has been improved. 3) There is no longer a slide tube adjustment on the right for separate right eyepiece focusing. This has been replaced with sliding the eyepieces in and out of the self centering holder similar to Lumicon and Televue. Although my holder can accomodate eyepieces that have a thinner diameter barrel than Lumicon's, which tend to bottom out before the eyepiece is tight on some of the thinner eyepieces. 4) Baffling and collimation have been perfected in virtually all respects. And 5) The binos are about 3-4 ozs lighter than all of the above mentioned binos at roughly 1 1/2 lbs.

I felt the need to clarify the binos design since as of late a couple of bad reviews have been posted on some rather old pairs of binos. So clarifications on changes need to be made known. All changes made were due to feedback from customers. And even though the comment above was not overly critical it reflected one of the older pairs mentioned. No one has ever been dissatisfied with the binos that have not be refunded their purchase price. If I am not mistaken the one who commented above was refunded and if not mistaken he only kept them 1 day. These do come with a 30 day money back guarantee and 2 year repair warrantee. The vast majority have been extremely happy with their binos. As long as the binos work great for them the fact that some metal plumbing fittings are used does not seem to be an issue. Hopefully anyone dissatisfied with a past pair of binos for any reason will take advantage of their 2 year repair warrantee, especially if they have a older pair that may not be working perfectly for them.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=44192 

Yeah, I suspect it was more my fault than Harry's that the
deal didn't go through.  And he did give me a refund.  The
main reasons for returning were for the slop and the 
balance  problems (I couldn't find a suitable counterweight
to my telescope for the binoviewers).  The fact that he
gave a refund and was also willing to customize for my scope
says a whole lot about his service than other retailers
that I've dealt with.
Harry Siebert Binoviewer
Last Saturday I got the first time to test Siebert's binoviewer under dark skies. Unfortunately, Mother Nature restriced the power to less than 150X, which was produced with his 21mm's in my 12.5 f/6 dobsonian. I'm going to be using them again tomorrow, so I might have another post soon. The most telling aspect of Harry's quality of the unit: I used my 24.5 Meade Superwide with Televue's Big Barlow, which produced roughly the same power, and found the quality of image identical to Harry's 21mm's in the binoviewer. I wanted to test the optics to see if it was the weather or their construction, and it turned out to be the weather. Some positive points: the planets with two eyes; the quality of construction (both of the eyepieces and the binoviewer); and cost. Harry might want to consider for future models to work on the spacing of the adjustment. To make the images merge I have to bring each side together beyond a point that is really comfortable. If there was a way to make the images merge with more space in between, it would make them more comfortable. As is, they are fine, but having used the Televue I find that the Televue was more comfortable to look through.

I can't fault Harry on his eyepieces. The 21mm's truly were more than I expected. I have a small secondary (1.83) which produces a very sharp center while losing a fraction of the edge brightness. I rarely watch things till they go beyond the center and nearby area, so why quibble? The images were bright and sharp. I even combined his binoviewer with my 2X TV BigB. and the size of Jupiter in the binoviewer at ~300X was, despite kinda fuzzy due-I believe-to the weather, amazing. I've not seen such an incredibe view of Jupiter in all the eyepiece combinations I've owned. And I've owned alot of Plossels, Superwides and Naglers. I will be purchasing another set soon. For the price I can't complain one bit.

I bought some years ago some Rini eyepieces from a very nice gentleman, who worked out of his home. The images were not great and I refrained from ordering any others, feeling burned from my experience. Harry's product has shown me that independant products can stand up to the big guys.

I'm a graduate student, who can't afford a great many toys..yet. Unless you have money to spare, don't buy the TeleVue and buy Harry's. TeleVue's is nicely machined and is a bit easier to use, but I ain't ready to fork over another 550.00 bucks for a bit of convenience. Yes, they are plumbing parts, but in the dark you can't tell. The leather cover works well when it's cold out too.

My conclusion: That will be determined when I have a night that will take X150. From what I've seen, the quality of construction and the brightness and sharpness of the images I saw make the purchase well worth it.

Feel free to email me for further questions.

Guy

Overall Rating: 9
Value:9
Weight: 11 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=57665

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
In December I ordered one of Harry's latest Bino viewers. He called and talk to me personally to explain what to expect about his product. He explained about the older models and some of the "bad" reviews and then explained what he has done to improve his Bino's. I found this very refreshing considering that I was going to buy anyway. We also had some basic "chat" about optics in general and over all it was a very good experience. I cant remember the last time I had a seller or vendor spend so much time with me to make a sale. Harry also explained that his "supplied" 21mm EP were his lower quality and I should considering paying a little extra for his "glass" 21's as his cheaper models cannot be cleaned without possible damage to them. I agreed to the EP upgrade. I also ordered a 7mm EP.

Delivery took some time due to the holidays and Harry's backlog. I finally got the viewer in early February. Harry remained in contact with me and I mailed him every 2 weeks or so to check status. I had never done business with him before which is why I kept bugging him with Email.

Just like any new scope equipment I have purchased the weather kept me from using them. Here in Southern Ca. out marine layer is a big problem this time of year. 3 weeks later I was able to test them out. In my opinion and after Harry's explanation, I got MORE than I expected!

They work out of the shoot and were perfectly collimated. I enjoyed looking at the moon, Jupiter, Saturn, and Orion. Weeks later (due to weather) I went to the Orange County Astronomers star party out in Anza. A guy two spots down had a pair of Televue binos. I went over and talked to him and asked a look see. Well, they were nice and in MHO my Sieberts were just as good. I told the guy I had Harry's latest binos and asked him to take a look and give an opinion. All he could say was that he felt the "overall" quality was better on the Televue's. I asked him what he meant by that and he said that the Televue's just felt better in his hands and "looked" better. I said to him, what does it matter in the dark when you are looking through them? Was that worth an extra $500? He said... yea because Televue stands behind them. I said... well I bet Harry would stand behind his with even more vigor as this is what he is competing with! In fact I bet I would get better service from Harry than BIG AL! Well... this was debated for a few minutes and finally I said.... "to me it was not worth another $500 as I could have almost bought a 31mm nagler"!!! The argument ended with that and some head scratching. GOD I loved it :-)

What I am unhappy with:
I have to tell you something that I don't like. As part of my order I paid extra for the "glass" 21mm EPs. Well I have to say that these EP have such a BAD eye relief (ER) that to me the FOV is unusable. Sorry I just don't like these EPs. I have a Panoptic 22 and have compared the FOV and YES.... Harry's 21 EPs are there in FOV but in order to get the FOV I have to burry my eye into the EP so much that it is VERY uncomfortable. The 7mm I bought did not have this problem and I think this 7mm is a very nice EP for the price. A Nagler 7 it is NOT! but for the price the 7mm is a quality EP.

Other items:
While you cant see the "plumbing parts" inside the binoviewer (and I am not sure there are), you can see this on his Barlow. It is of copper pipe construction. BUT! It works and works well. Fits in my scope just fine and works well with the Binoviewer. I have not tried it as a Barlow for other EPs. Since it is copper plumbing parts you do tend to wonder.... and it does NOT look as pretty next to your "chrome" scope parts. Well except this and if looking at things that look "home brew" vs "pro" bother you then buy a Barlow.

Needless to say, plumbing parts or not optically this product does what Harry said and does it well. Personally "home brew looks" don't bother me as long as it functions to my expectations which this product does. I am very happy with my Binos and would never sell them!

Bob White, Huntington Beach, Ca.
See my web page for information about my scopes and hobby.
Legal stuff: I am in NO WAY associated with this product or manufacturer.

Overall Rating: 9
Performance:10 Value:10
Weight: 13 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=83662

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
After testing Harry Sieberts binoviewer for the first time I sent an email directly to him at 3.04am on Thurs 5/12/02 after coming in from the cold... I felt the letter I sent him would indicate best how my wife and I felt about the binoviewer at the time. I fully reproduce the letter sent to Harry with no reservations.....

Dear Harry,
At last the clouds cleared away from our part of the UK and my wife Janet and I had our first views of Saturn & Jupiter.
The "seeing" was not good tonight, plenty of air convection going on but still we it out and also removed the binoviewer and tried with standard Meade eyepieces to compare the two views - with / without binoviewer.
On such bright objects we could notice no discernable difference in brightness or contrast on either object with my 10" LX200 f10 scope. The images were as sharp as you could get under the seeing conditions. I then repeated the same test with M42 and although it is a relatively bright object the nebula took on a better quality with the binoviewer, better definition and form and lack of eye "floaters" which I get on a single eyepiece.

Neither me or my wife Jan had any problems with the lateral positioning of each eyepiece, in fact we found it as easy to use as a standard pair of binoculars.

On the supplied paperwork you make a point of saying you may take some time to get used to them but neither of us had any problem. It was as simple as 123 for us.

I am sure a good reason for this is because the unit is so well aligned - all praise to you.

We are both very pleased and we are truly looking forward to seeing the Moon. I can honestly say I have got bored with the Moon over the years (a sin I know) however I am sure it will take on a more significant importance with the binoviewer. I cannot offer any constructive criticism against the unit or the eyepieces as they are solid and well made and also because it's just so easy to use - the eyepieces were also very comfortable compared to the standard Meade type and the eye relief was very noticeable.

One problem I have found - which is none of your doing - is the Meade diagonal is not man enough to take the extra weight. It flexes and also has only one locking screw. The modest weight and leverage of the binoviewer can cause it to turn even when I do up the screw as tight as I can.

The latter is a worry. Watching that new binoviewer drop to the floor is almost giving me nightmares and also its all your efforts that would be wasted if such an event took place.

Could recommend a strong 1.25" to SCT threaded diagonal which would solve this situation and lock up securely and take the weight?

Perhaps a strong diagonal would be a good bit of new kit to add to your range! I cannot be alone in this matter so it must have come up with others with binoviewers.

I hate to think how other binoviewer units which weigh more than yours would fair....

I would be grateful of any help in this direction.

THE REPLY WAS THE NEXT DAY>
Harry has promptly replied to the above diagonal question with a cure idea which should solve the problem. It is simple and effective.

ADDITIONAL NOTE ON SERVICE AND ATTITUDE>
I would also like to add that because I waited a long time for the binoviewer to be made Harry gave my the leather finish for the same price and without me even asking. This kind of extra service was his way of thanking me for the time I had to wait for the unit.

Also I must mention that before I went ahead with the order I phoned Harry from the UK with questions relating to binoviewers. Having read as much as I could I was still a bit unsure and the cost cannot be taken lightly. Harry put my mind at rest and I placed my order and do not regret it. After recieving the unit I found it to be very professionally made indeed. - One article I read mentioned "Plumbing bits" - I would recommend most strongly that the article now be rewritten.....

Please feel free to contact me regarding any of my above comments. They are given to help anyone contemplating buying this unit. Buy it. It works and it's very good value.

Yours sincerly,
PETER BRUCE. Croydon. UK.
peterbruce@blueyonder.co.uk.

Overall Rating: 10
Performance:10 Value:10
Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=161331

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
After reading all the good reviews on these binoviewers, I decided to get one. Much to my suprise, they were horrible! The bino is very poorly made, and feels like it could fall apart at any minute. The diopter constantly slipped around, making it very hard to focus the two together. It also made objects seem very dark - this suprised me because I had previously borrowed my friend's Televue Binovues, and they kept things quite bright.

I would take all of these great reviews with a grain of salt, they are probably planted by Harry Siebert himself (he is well known for "stuffing the ballot box" with positive reviews of his products.)

After using the siebert binoviewer, I am convinced that these positive reviews are fake. These binoviewers are of cheap quality, are frustrating to use, and are made out of cheapo copper tubes!

Not recommended!

Overall Rating: 2
Performance:2 Value:1
Weight: 5 (Veritable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=183874

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
I bought this back in 2002. It was the up greaded version and is called binoviewer II. I like its planetary views and it does very good on bright deep sky objects

Overall Rating: 9
Performance:9 Value:9
Weight: 7 (Veritable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=242468

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
I recently got to try out a pair of these that a friend owns. We compared them to a set of Televue Binovues, and to the BW Binoviewer. For testing, we used a 8" f/4 newtonian, and a 10" SCT.

First off, the Siebert binoviewers were very frustrating to use. It was almost impossible to set the ocular distance, they kept sliding around and would not stay put. We also had to fiddle quite a bit to get the two eyepieces to focus together correctly. We finally were able to get the Siebert model working correctly, and then we proceeded to the comparison.

In the 8" newt, we could not get the Siebert binos to reach focus at all, so I cannot even comment on how they performed in this telescope. Both the Televue and BW units worked fine in the newtonian.

In the SCT, we were able to use the Siebert model. Our first test object was Saturn. At any magnification over 200x, the Sieberts produced a very blurry image. Conversely, both the other units produced a sharp image at over 300x magnification.

We then proceeded to test the deepsky capabilities of the Siebert. We pointed the telescope on M1. With the Siebert model, this dim nebula completely dissapeared! In the BW binoviewer it could be seen, but not as bright as in the Televue unit. We again put the Siebert in and once again the nebula dissapeared.

So we decided to test deepsky performance on a brighter subject, the Orion nebula. Once again, the other models showed more detail than the Siebert, which lost out the fainter details. Also, it becomes apparent on a bright DSO such as this that the Siebert model suffers from poor contrast.

As for the build quality, I am dissapointed to see that Harry is still using cheap copper plumbing parts to build these units. I see that he has switched to nice aluminum construction on his 2" units, but for some reason he still is using plumbing for these units. The leather cover, of course, hides most of this, but it is still evident when using these units that they are not well made - especially when comparing them back to back with well-made units such as the BW and Televue units.

If you are looking for a binoviewer and are on a budget, you might find these useful, but I think one would very quickly outgrow them. If you cannot afford the more expensive and better brands, you might be happier to save your money for awhile. I really hope that Harry revisits his design problems with this model, as there is much room for improvement.

Overall Rating: 6
Performance:5 Value:6
Weight: 11 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=314865 

dude, i think you were looking in the wrong end or you head is stuck between your legs


>I recently got to try out a pair of these that a friend owns.  We compared them to a set of Televue Binovues, and to the BW Binoviewer.  For testing, we used a 8" f/4 newtonian, and a 10" SCT.
>
>First off, the Siebert binoviewers were very frustrating to use.  It was almost impossible to set the ocular distance, they kept sliding around and would not stay put.  We also had to fiddle quite a bit to get the two eyepieces to focus together correctly.   We finally were able to get the Siebert model working correctly, and then we proceeded to the comparison.
>
>In the 8" newt, we could not get the Siebert binos to reach focus at all, so I cannot even comment on how they performed in this telescope.  Both the Televue and BW units worked fine in the newtonian.
>
>In the SCT, we were able to use the Siebert model.  Our first test object was Saturn.  At any magnification over 200x, the Sieberts produced a very blurry image.  Conversely, both the other units produced a sharp image at over 300x magnification.  
>
>We then proceeded to test the deepsky capabilities of the Siebert.  We pointed the telescope on M1.  With the Siebert model, this dim nebula completely dissapeared!  In the BW binoviewer it could be seen, but not as bright as in the Televue unit.  We again put the Siebert in and once again the nebula dissapeared.
>
>So we decided to test deepsky performance on a brighter subject, the Orion nebula.  Once again, the other models showed more detail than the Siebert, which lost out the fainter details.  Also, it becomes apparent on a bright DSO such as this that the Siebert model suffers from poor contrast.
>
>As for the build quality, I am dissapointed to see that Harry is still using cheap copper plumbing parts to build these units.  I see that he has switched to nice aluminum construction on his 2" units, but for some reason he still is using plumbing for these units.  The leather cover, of course, hides most of this, but it is still evident when using these units that they are not well made - especially when comparing them back to back with well-made units such as the BW and Televue units.  
>
>If you are looking for a binoviewer and are on a budget, you might find these useful, but I think one would very quickly outgrow them.  If you cannot afford the more expensive and better brands, you might be happier to save your money for awhile.  I really hope that Harry revisits his design problems with this model, as there is much room for improvement.
Harry Siebert Binoviewer
To demonstrate the fair way my friends and I deal with competitor products I have given a fair rating to the Denkmeier Binoviewers. See my review. We will never resort to underhanded methods to hurt our competitors' company.

The person in the review next to these comments has never seen the units he is criticizing as is the case of his comments on my 2" binos

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: 10 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=184745 

>TWe will never resort to underhanded methods to hurt our competitors' company. 

Even though you got caught red-handed using fake aliases on the Binoviewers forum.   I consider that to be "underhanded",  maybe you don't....

>
>The person in the review next to these comments has never seen the units he is criticizing as is the case of his comments on my 2" binos

How do you know if he has never seen the units????  Are you psychic or something???
Harry Siebert Binoviewer
Impossible to get these things to focus. They put the image the wrong way compared to real binoviewers. I wouldn't mind that they are made out of plumbing parts if they actually worked! Cheap and cheesy!

Overall Rating: 1
Performance:1 Value:1
Weight: 3 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=316781 

>Impossible to get these things to focus.  They put the image the wrong way compared to real binoviewers.  I wouldn't mind that they are made out of plumbing parts if they actually worked! Cheap and cheesy!

If he can't get them to focus how does he know the image is wrong (What a LIER)

Harry Siebert
Harry Siebert Binoviewer
I purchased the enhanced dielectric version Black Knight bino and I'm absolutely thrilled with it. I have perfect vision and see no difference in sharpness between single ep viewing. The focusing and image merging is instant and perfect without any problems. To make things even better, it works great with my Chromacor enhancing the contrast and color even further. The whole unit is solid and extemely well made and I'll never part with it.
In addition to all this, I accidentally dropped it and broke one of the ep holders and Siebert Optics repaired it and checked it over for free. The performance seems even better now, although, it's hard to imagine improving on something that's perfect.

Overall Rating: 10
Performance:10 Value:10
Weight: 3 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=425746

Harry Siebert Binoviewer
These reviews seem to deal with the earlier unit and not the newer Black Night BN22 that is based on the very good BW Optik unit. Harry installs self centering eyepiece holders that negate the need to install diopter adjusters. You just loosen the collar and gently twist the eyepiece while moving it forward or backward a bit to find focus, then tighten the locking collar. The bigest complaint I have is the 22mm clear aperture which causes slight vignetting with a 23mm Axiom, 30mm Ultima EP, or 32mm Plossl EP. I can still see the field stop in the 23mm Axiom, but it is darkened a bit. With any Plossl shorter than 30mm, there should be no vignetting. A 19mm Pan or Axiom would be an excellent EP for this binoviewer, or one of Harry's Ultra EP's. The other issue is slight prism color as seen on bright objects like the limb of the moon. It will be violet fringing at the top of the image and yellow fringing at the bottom of the image. I also have this phenomenon in my Sky Master binoculars. It's just a problem with all achromat prisms. Also, if you have a very bright star in a certain position of the view, there will be a light streak across the field of view in a slanted orientation. Again, this is just a problem with most prism binoculars. You have to order one of Harry's expensive mirror based binoviewers if you want to get rid of these two prism defects. I had the cheap generic Chinese binoviewer that Burgess sells before getting my Siebert binoviewer, and the Siebert BN22 is definitely the better unit. The BN22 is lighter and more ruggedly constructed. The self centering EP holders work very well and I would never go back to the setscrew holders. I would rate the generic Chinese binoviewer at a 6 or 7 overall as they tend to get knocked out of collimation and are too heavy and have cheap construction methods. If you havethe generic Chinese unit, then that gives you a basis to go by.

I wish I had more clear aperture at the front end, but since I use an f/15 Mak-Cass and have the Siebert 1.8X OCA for use on my f/4 Newtonian, my light into the binoviewer is straight collimated and I get the max amount of fully illuminated field of view. I do not see the noticeable color shifts between left and right that owners of Denkmeier units often report. If used with Harry's aluminum barrelled EP's, you will have a binoviewer outfit much lighter than a Tele Vue or Denkmeier using brass barrelled eyepieces with optical quality in the same ballpark. Lumicon sells a version of the BW Optik unit for $800 with a helical focuser on the nose, and APM sold the BW Optik unit for around 475 Euros lasttime I looked. That makes Harry's BN22 the best buy by far in a good quality binoviewer. The Star Splitter eyepieces work very well in the BN22 and have the same optical quality as Ultima eyepieces, but much more eye relief and a bigger eye lens than Ultimas shorter than 12.5mm. The eye relief and eye lens is the same as a 12.5mm Ultima in all the Star Splitters. They are long barrelled and accept heater straps very well and heat up and clear out the dew much faster than brass barrelled EP's.

For the price, you will not beat the BN22 outfitted with Ultra and Star Splitter EP's.

Overall Rating: 9
Performance:8 Value:10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=559530

Page 1 of 1

[Click Here to Login]
Don't have a login? Register!

Starting out in Amateur Astronomy
 
How to use This Site
Why Register?
Voting Guide
Searching with Fact200