Harry Siebert Binoviewer


 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Switch to Subject View
Post Message



Page 1 of 2 Next


Subject: Moved Message
By: Siebert
Date: 01/21/2002 07:30:58 pm PDT
Excelsis has reversed the listing order. Some comments refering previous comments my be out of the proper order.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.231.76
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.169.27)
Date: 09/17/2002 03:40:18 pm PDT
>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.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.158.251
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.144.53)
Date: 11/05/2002 08:04:51 am PDT
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.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Siebert Optics - Binoviewer
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.112.3)
Date: 12/05/2002 03:52:16 pm PDT
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.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: Siebert Optics - Binoviewer
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.119.133)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.112.3) (Original Message)
Date: 12/10/2002 12:18:48 am PDT
Date 10/12/02
When I got home from work on the 9th Dec the sky was clear and the Moon was out so shot outside to try the binoviewer.
The Moon was a bit low in the sky but views were very good indeed. I had no decernable light scatter within the Seibert binoviewer which was a concern with such a bright object as the Moon. Working with the unit is easy and swapping eye positions with my wife Janet was easy as I mentioned before. - Images are crisp and clearer than a single eyepiece and I can honestly say this bit of kit is a nice addition to my astronomical assessory box and will be well used. There is no doubt in my mind that this binoviewer works very well indeed and because my wife also agree images look so much better with two eyes makes me wonder why all I read before on the web and Sky & Telescope seemed rather conflicting in many ways - some said great, others said o.k......
In my view they are not only good value for money but they will open up a new seeing dimension with two eyes.
Regards
PETER BRUCE.
Croydon UK.
peterbruce@blueyonder.co.uk
>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.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by TelescopeFan
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.1.181)
Date: 11/26/2003 12:46:31 pm PDT
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.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by TelescopeFan
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.60.3)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.1.181) (Original Message)
Date: 12/04/2003 12:33:37 pm PDT
I agree with the review. These are the most slipshod things that I have ever seen. They look like they were made in someone's basesment, and don't even work at a semi-acceptable level.

I got mine used on Astromart - thank God I didn't pay full price for these junkers!


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.228.79
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.1.98)
Date: 12/27/2003 06:13:54 pm PDT
>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


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.228.79
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.1.98)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.1.98) (Original Message)
Date: 12/27/2003 06:35:59 pm PDT
>>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

See Todd gross' review at http/www.weatherman.com/siebert.html


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.228.79
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.253.195)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.1.98) (Original Message)
Date: 02/09/2004 11:06:39 pm PDT
Harry Siebert, not only do you not know how to spell (L-I-A-R, not "LIER"..........DUH!!!!), but you really come off like a jerk, calling people liars and such. You should really learn to be the bigger person.

I have one of your first run eyepieces, and have enjoyed it....but after seeing all the negative things you post here, I will never buy anything from you again, simply on a matter of principle.




>>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


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Page 1 of 2 Next

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