Unlike capturing images with a camera, here the photons that left the astronomical object themselves are entering your eye and making contact with the retina! Really fascinating! Keep it up! Looking forward to more videos from you!
I love your concept of trying to faithfully represent the image your incredible scope provides. Those last planet images show that you have taken the time to make sure each scope is individually collimated so the combination can act to its peak. The planet images also look they were nights of pretty good seeing.
Thank you very much, Marc. 😊 Collimation of the binoscope isn't that difficult, as you can see in my other video, and the view with two eyes is actually impossible to render in an image, but I do my best. Strangely enough, seeing is a (very) little bit less of an issue with a binoscope because your brain gets to choose the best off 2 images, or at least that's my personal theory anyway. Cheers and clear skies to you!
thanks a lot! Can you let us know the Bortle value as well? Where I live, I have access to some 21 MPSAS skies, that vary between good to mediocre Bortle 4... I like your drawings! With my 12" Binoscope I see less, off course, but a few drawings come close... whilst I still have very limited amount of sessions with it... having 21 MPSAS out of the door would be wonderful... I have to drive 10 miles, with all the complex scope hassle...
My sky is about SQM 20.8 to 21, so not too bad but not great either. At the beginning I had a big enough trailer to carry my bino around, but transporting it was damaging the scope so now I just observe from home. It's always a compromise... Thank you very much for your wonderful comments!!!
Super thanks for this amazing realistic sketches . I have a 25 inch but the sky is lesser than yours about 20.30 . I see similar views trough my eyepiece thanks for sharing Greets from Beluim
Thank you so much for the lovely comment. Wow, a 25" is a serious beast, my compliments! If you ever get to Italy, please feel free to drop by, preferably with your scope because that would be an interesting confrontation with my bino. Cheers!
To be honest, whatever are the improvements made in astro-photo, nothing beats the feeling of welcoming remote photons directly in our own eyes. Demonstration with your drawings ! By the way, I know right now, how major planets look like thru the beast :)
Surprisingly not. Most of the time, when I roll it back out of its shelter, it just needs a little tweak here or there. Alignment of the two tubes, on the other hand, needs almost constant adjusting when you hop from one object to the next, especially when you're moving to a different part of the sky. Fortunately this is easy with the alignment rods.
Thanks for video. That's a very nice binoscope and your sketches are excellent. For those with smaller scopes (or bigger scopes), dark skies at high elevation will make any telescope bigger. My best observing spot, by far, is New Mexico Skies. It's at 7400' elevation with dark & transparent skies. The views of the bright Messier Objects thru my 16" dob looked like the B&W photos in Stephen James O'Meara's book, "The Messier Objects". There are better observing sites but I haven't been to them yet.
You're absolutely right. Good sky conditions count almost just as much as the size of your scope. Let alone the New Mexico skies you mentioned and which make me green with envy. 😆 My observing spot was a compromise between dark skies and my wife's commuting distance, so far from perfect but I can live with it. Well, I have no choice because big telescopes are very difficult, if not impossible to transport on your own... 🥴
@@astronomydrawings If you ever get over here to see the Grand Canyon, schedule it for June, during the Grand Canyon Star Party. You don't need to bring any equipment. Telescopes are set up by the local astronomy clubs. It's at 8000' elevation with very dark skies. Stars are visible horizon to horizon. And of course, the Grand Canyon is, well you know, grand.
I'm in southern New Mexico as well. I belong to the local astronomy club founded back in the 1950s by Clyde Tombaugh and others. University of NM gifted the club a 16" Meade LX-200 they built an observatory for in a local park north of town in Bortle 3-4 skies. In town at the back of my apartment it is Bortle 6, but most light sources are blocked by my building and trees so it isn't as bad, but I can only view the sky from West by Southwest to the Northeast and Zenith. I'll set my 6" FF5 reflector up on my porch and just stargaze for a couple of hours. To say I know the Northwest skies fairly well would be an understatement. I'm only 10 minutes from B-4 skies and 30 minutes from /Bortle 2 next to one in White Sands Missile Range. The whole area is 4000 feet or higher, but if I want to camp out it is 90 miles to Bortle one NOT in the mountains, but in flat rolling hills at 5400 feet. Now if you're acclimated to high altitude I've been to the Ruidoso Ski Area at 10,000 feet and the stars are magnificent.
Refreshing to hear honest opinions from a guy who has clearly evaluated the rest and went for “the best”. I’d been considering bino viewing but now want APM 100 or 120 APO binoculars. I do lot of terrestrial observations and love plane spotting. I’ll buy the dual wielding dobs when I win the lotto ….
"The best" is very subjective. My bino is e.g. very difficult to transport and impossible to assemble on your own, whereas you can easily take those 100/120mm binoculars you're talking about to a mountaintop. I'll never dispose of my 100mm binoculars either. 😊 Anyway, you don't have to win the lottery... a ticket to Northern Italy will do. 😆
Just came across your channel. Wish I knew of it a long time ago. Your drawings are incredible!!! Curious, if you've had the chance to compare views of celestial objects (particularly Jupiter) from your 18" binoscope, side by side with a traditional 18" Dobsonian with similar quality optics. Would the 18" traditional Dobsonian's view be very similar? Or put another way - if you were to close one eye when using the binoscope, do you lose much - as it would be portrayed in your drawings? I guess one more way to ask this is - how big of a traditional Dobsonian would you speculate would have somewhat equal views (as expressed via your drawings) with the 18" binoscope, assuming all the optic qualities were similar? Many thanks for the information you shared via your channel! Excellent public service to humanity!
Thank you very much for the wonderful comments and the compliments about my drawings. In one of my other videos (about binocular summation) I've answered more or less all of your questions, but I'll summarise here. There's a significant difference between looking with one or with both eyes and it's an experience I have every time I put my eyepieces in focus because you have to do it one eyepiece at a time. Objects seem bigger, clearer and brighter. Details are much easier to see and the feeling of total immersion is beyond compare. Of course, an 18" binoscope retains the resolution of an 18" mono, but at 25arcsec this is 99,99% of the time limited by the atmosphere anyway. After years of comparisons, also with similar monocular scopes, I state that a binoscope yields the performance of a monocular scope twice the aperture, so an 18" bino is more or less equal to a 25" mono. Actually, possibly higher still because it's less likely that a false signal is accepted as true by both eyes simultaneously and... an 18" bino has the exit pupil of an 18" mono. Therefore it allows lower power with more light and you can see objects with a lower surface brightness than any monocular scope. I hope that this answers everything, if not please don't hesitate to write. Cheers and thanks again!
Thank you very much! About money, binoscopes are expensive but I paid less than if I had bought a high-quality 25" full option, including shipping and import taxes, which would comparable in performance. Unfortunately it's getting hard nowadays to find a company that still builds binoscopes now that even JMI have stopped. Binoscopes are so tricky to make that for a commercial producer there isn't any money in it.
Breath-taking images! I am curious about your method. Do you begin with a black piece of paper? Do you draw with anything resembling a "normal" pencil? I guess my question boils down to, "what exactly is the medium, here?" Also, approximately what size are your rendered images? Thank you for posting this excellent video!
Thank you very much for your kind words, Robert. My sketches are originally normal pencil on white paper and then processed on the PC. I've got a whole tutorial about astronomy sketching on my channel: ruclips.net/video/vkviY1b9Pko/видео.html I hope that it answers all of your questions, though I never got down to making the 7th and final video. About the size of the oiginal images, they're usually 2300x2300 px. Many thanks again!
Thanks a lor for this. Most people have no idea that you cannot see Hubble like images soon as you put your eyes on a telescope eyepiece. If your images are accurate then I'm quite impressed with the details you can visually see from your telescope. I would've thought even that may not have been possible. Btw, I love your bino scope.
Thank you very much, Tamur! This is exactly the reason why I made this video and I hope that it may be useful to a lot of people. Clear skies to you! 😊
So true. After being both fascinated and disappointed in the views from my8", and reading that aperture is everything, I thought I would get the biggest scope I could find and see colorful nebulae. Then I read that exit pupil is everything, and thought i'd get a big telescope and long eyepieces to get a huge exit pupil. Then I read that exit pupils larger than your eye pupil don't make the image any brighter and the image never gets brighter than you can see naked-eye. I was very disappointed but also glad I found out before I bought something huge that I couldn't handle.
@@louisxiiii Lots of variables and information to learn. But yeah, in short, if you want those colorful majestic pictures of the cosmos then sticking a camera top the telescope and collecting all those precious photons is the way to go. That’s what Hubble does as well :)
Uranus and Neptune look like tiny little disks, Uranus more turquoise whereas Neptune appears smaller and more bluish. I believe to have seen a hint of a darker band on Uranus, but it's hard to tell: www.astronomydrawings.com/Planetary/index.html Uranus shows 4 or 5 of moons whereas Neptune's big moon Triton's clearly visible, also in small scopes. Pluto (mag. 14), on the other hand, is just a tiny star which is indistinguishable from the other smallest stars in the field of view. You may get lucky when Pluto happens to pass near a distinct asterism, making identification possible, or you need to look again the next day and see which of those tiny stars has moved. 😊
@@JohnSmith-zw8vp It does! 😊 The sketch on my site, which you're probably referring to, represents a magnification of 507x, which is a lot and which will bring you very close to the lunar surface. Of course, this isn't exceptional and you can do just that with much smaller monocular scopes, albeit with a more limited resolution. The Moon actually isn't the right object to compare telescope size as it is so bright and telescope power and resolution are in this case more limited by the atmosphere than by telescope size.
I have had 6-10” dobsonians for 40 of my 50 years and love seeking faint fuzzies. Recently I purchased an Obsession 20 for $3500 US It BLOWS away anything I’ve owned. Subtle but apparent colors in M42 (pink/red/violet) pink Spirograph nebula the Eskimo nebula looks like a picture! M51 is a spiral! I have it in my garage and can wheel it out and be at the eyepiece in under 5 minutes. B4-5 skies Transport to B2 one or two nights a month..if you are able get one., it’s. close to pictures blows your mind. I see so many galaxies I have no clue what 1/2 of them are.
Amazing. Thanks for this video, there are not really that much of them, who really show what you can expect in visual astronomy in the best possible scenario. I am slightly jaleous of your telescope and your drawing skills.
Well, my sky isn't perfect and there's no way I'm going to haul my beast to a dark site again, so everything's a tradeoff. But you'd be more than welcome to drop by for a visit. 😉 Cheers and clear skies to you!
With the exception of planets, is there anything bright enough in the sky to trigger a colour vision response? Or are the light levels still squarely in scotopic region? Judging by the blue/green sketches it seems like the latter.. except for potentially some real green in M42
Hello Dwindeyer! No, apart from a clear blue-greenish hue on the brighter nebulae, it's impossible to see any colour on those objects because their surface brightness is too low. That being said, I think that I saw a hint of orange on the brightest edge of the Orion Nebula once (without filters obviously). Clear skies to you!
100"??? Oh my! That must have been quite an experience! Though I suppose a bit difficult to fit the entire Orion Nebula in the FOV... 😆 Cheers and clear skies to you!
@@astronomydrawings It was a private event at Mount Wilson, CA. We didn’t look at the Orion Nebula but did look at several smaller targets, planetary nebulae, Saturn, M13, etc.
Yes, though nebulae with a high surface brightness do show a very vivid blue-green colour. Once I though I saw a hint of yellow as well on the brightest rim of the Orion Nebula.
The focuses are ordinary, see here: ruclips.net/video/aweaNO2S9zk/видео.html For the rest, the eyepieces are 22mm and 12 cm Naglers and 8mm and 4.5mm Delos for high power. For the nebulae, Baader OIII or Lumicon UHC filters were used just for the fainter details on the nebulae themselves, but without filters for the stars.
Well, I saw my first galaxy M51 through a 20 inch F5 in Dorset U.K. many years ago, I think it was a tiny bit brighter than your image. But I must say, you do give an honest representation, the truth is that even with a large telescope most objects are rather disappointing, at least visually. I suspect that even M31 in a 10 meter telescope if it was possible to observe visually is a sobering experience. Our eyes are just not up to the job. One last thing, I came across an astronomy magazine many years ago where an amateur used a 16inch scope and breathing oxygen to observe visually as deep as possible..... He did see a magnitude or two deeper than standard observers....
Pure oxygen dilates the pupils and gives a feeling of a "high", but I wouldn't recommend it to others. Yes, our eyes have been poorly made and even with a 10m telescope it wouldn't be all that impressive as such a scope would have a minimum power of 1429x for a 7mm exit pupil. Atmosphere and all... My binos are comparable to a 25" mono, but of course there's the factor of sky quality and the human eye. My sky certainly isn't perfect with an SQM of 20.9, but I don't complain. For most people telescope images are "disappointing" because all they know is the incredible, high-definition, million colour photographs. Of course, no visual telescope can ever compete to that. But when you explain that the photons that hit your retina really come from those far away places and have really travelled even for millions of light years to end up in your eye, people are generally astounded. Besides, I have yet to see a photo of the Orion Nebula, for instance, that's just as impressive as the sight through a big telescope under a dark sky. Or through a binoscope such as mine with its bewildering 3D effect and seemingly infinite FOV. 😊
The other important thing to rememebr is that big telescopes are generally not for big objects. A 15" telescope, even at f4.5, is not going to give a great view of the Pleiades, for example, because it will be zoomed in too close.
You're absolutely right. It's actually another advantage of a binoscope, i.e. the light gathering power of a much bigger scope whilst retaining the exit pupil of a smaller scope. 😊
I guess everybody has a definition of what is a REALLY BIG telescope, but I would say for most people 18inch is middle size, not really big. Big would be like 24-30 inch and REALLY BIG (with uppercase characters) would be above one meter. This being said, nice drawings. You should try M33 with a UHC filter.
Well, that's a matter of opinion. If you have a 25", an 18" would indeed seem "middle-sized", but for most astronomy enthusiasts I know 18" or more is still a dream and they often wonder how such a scope would compare to their 10"-14". Besides, mine's an 18" BINOscope so definitely not middle-sized! 😁 I was actually referring to amateur telescopes so you'll agree that there aren't many who have 30" or more. In fact, I have already observed M33 with filters, though I prefer without so you can clearly see the cluster within NGC604... 😆
I've always thought that my 16" dob was the perfect size for viewing and portability. However, 25 years and 2 hernias later, I think a 14.5 is probably the perfect size. I observed with a group that included 25", 30" and 32" dobs and those things are just too big to transport.
@@lowellmccormick6991 You're absolutely right and sometimes I wonder if I've made the right choice. I used to have a 14.5" carbon fibre Dob that was so easy to carry around. I've stopped carrying my bino because it's just too much of a hassle. The choice was rather based on my desire to be able to observe with both eyes without compromise (such as with a binoviewer). Fortunately my sky isn't all that bad... 😊
@@lowellmccormick6991 That's the thing. an 18inch which one has to move is really big. But that was not said, I just saw "REALLY BIG", and believed it was going to be about a much larger scope. Face it, 18inch is a good diameter for a secondary mirror (just kidding...). But in the absolute it's not that big. I have observed through really really big telescopes (above 2m diameter) and in fact for visual use they are in a way too much. You can see very nice colors, but the field of view is so small that you miss a lot (i.e. at 1000 times, M42 is just the small region around the trapezium), plus the images are blurry because of the seeing. Same for planets. A big telescope will always give more contrast and color than a small one, but when the seeing is 3 arc second, it's 3 arc second for everybody. But when it gets good, it gets really crazy. I'm lucky enough to be in a good site where I don't have to move my scopes and that's indeed a luxury most people can't afford.
25" Obsession, wow, so in the neighborhood of 8k-12k. Well, I was blown away by the views of the Nebulas, star cluster, and galaxies, just exquisite! Planetary views of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars were great, too! Great job! Thank you for sharing it with us. These views make up for the cost, IMHO.
@@jesseJames6892 It was actually a bit more than that, but you have to consider full option (I also have ServoCat and ArgoNavis) plus shipping and import duties for Europe. 😉
I like them. I am watching through a 12 centimeter Refraktor semi apo without goto or rektascension motor, no fotos, my eyes and my scills in finding, that's it. So I like it very much seeing your objects like this, I can compare. It is inspiring.
For me doing astrophotography is like googling for some images. If your not seeing the object with your eyes whats the point? I have to say i was a bit disappointed and misslead when I first bought my 12" because of all the images you can get with a camera, that has nothing to do with what you can actually see with your own eyes. Starting astronomy alone can be a real challenge. Thanks for staying true to what we can actually see!
Well, astrophotography is an art in itself and I can understand that many people find great satisfaction from capturing these beautiful images. But, just like you, I prefer to see things with my own eyes, even if it's merely a glimpse of what a photo can show me. Thank you very much for your lovely comment! 😊
Like a kid? Well, at least you can easily carry your binos up a mountaintop. 🤣 Observing with binos like yours is a completely different experience, like cruising the Milky Way at low power... That's why I'll never sell my 100mm binos either and I'm sure that yours give you a lot of satisfaction too, especially because you built it yourself. 😊
amazing, imagine how it would look in an astrophotography. My dream is, someday, to have a large telescope to look at the faraway universe and our neighboring planets.
Be careful what you wish for! If your scope's too big, forget about hauling it to a dark site and that's just as important as telescope size. Start with a decent pair of binoculars... you'd be amazed what you can already see with those! Clear skies to you!
Yes of course, it's always best to observe the planets when they're closest to us and the biggest limitation is not the scope but our atmosphere. On most nights the planets suffer from bad seeing, but on a very clear night...
Each to their own. So long as you enjoy what you're doing, who cares! The disappointing drawing for me was M42, the Great Orion Nebula. This is a naked eye object, literally the brightest nebula in the northern hemisphere. I thought you would have seen more? Bigger is not always better. As an imager I can get beater results with small telescopes due to the longer integration time of the ccd camera. However, their is nothing more visceral than looking through a telescope and seeing the planets, especially Jupiter and Saturn , so I can see the appeal.
Of course, not even the biggest telescope in the World could compete against photos with hours of exposure time. The joy of visual observation, compared to photos, is that you've seen it yourself with your own eyes, rather than on a computer screen after many hours of fiddling to get the image right. Then again, I wonder, how much does my impression of the Orion Nebula differ from a photo, apart from the absence of colours other than blue/green? 😆 But, as I said, I didn't want to exaggerate either and my sky is only SQM 21.00. Perhaps if you'd look at my drawing with averted vision... 😉
@@astronomydrawings Yep, I'm not exactly blessed with great skies myself here in the Netherlands!!! I have only just been able to start imaging after another damp, grey wet winter...:-(
@@neilhankey2514 Well, The Netherlands aren't all that far from Northern Italy, so you'd be more than welcome to pay us a visit at our observatory www.osservatoriodicanossa.eu and I'd be delighted to show you a thing or two. 😊 Good luck with the imaging!
It depends. In terms of light gathering power, certainly not. In terms of observing comfort, you'd beat my binoscope hands down, especially when observing near zenith which is all but impossible for me. 😆
The video was more in general and would give a pretty good idea about what you can see through any big telescope, but mine's an 18" binoscope, which is comparable to a 25" monocular scope, or much bigger still on large but faint objects.
My telescope, a Newton with a nearly 200 mm. mirror, and 1250 mm. focal length, compared to this beast, it is one big joke.😄 I would like to see live what this double miracle can do. 🤩 I wish you clear nights 🌌🪐☄🌒
Well, whenever you're in Italy you'd be more than welcome to drop by. 😊 Mind you, for you it would be peanuts to carry your scope to the darkest mountaintop and enjoy the perfect sky. With my beast I'm compelled to stay at home... 😁
Can you imagine the Apollo lander approaching the surface? 😂 Seriously though, the sight is breathtaking and feels almost 3D but at lower power (less than 300x) you need sunglasses. 😁
@@astronomydrawings Its got to see better than bruce swartz' 14" scope. His you can see what appear to be buildings, and objects flying around near the surface. Post some pictures/videos if you have them.
@@bogey19018 Oh dear... please don't believe this. There are a lot of scammers out there trying to get lots of followers and views by showing things that are absolutely fake. Nobody has ever seen any artificial structures and certainly not UFOs on the Moon. It's all a hoax and I bet that Bruce is very happy when he gets all that money from RUclips because so many people want to believe his videos are true.
I amexculusivly astrophotograpgher and was expecting way less that this to be honest. That being said this is why I like photograpghy because our eyes are pathetic sensors and do not save the photons to make the object more clear and apperent. Just for fun it would be cool to have 16 inch dobsodian to mass around with a beer.
The eternal photographer-visual observer debate. 🤣 Few as those photons may be that I manage to capture with my inadequate eyes, the emotion of having captured the very same photons that travelled for millions of years to reach me is priceless to me.
It was the same for me when I visited Mr. Otte's website and even more so when he eventually delivered it. It was also the feeling I got when I wanted to move it to a nearby star party and realised that I needed an extra large trailer... 😅
go ahead then, get a run off the mill 6 or 8 inch dob and then compare to 25 inch dob or this 18 inch bino. Now, no aperture on this planet can change your mind if you dont understand how light works and how your eyes work. One thing is for sure tho: You HEAVILY underestimate 18 inches of light collecting aperture, let alone 18 inch bino's. What he saw visually and showed us through his sketches is more nebulosity in higher detail than 99% of all other amateur astronomers/telescope owners have ever seen visually. For many people, a 16 inch dob is considered the largest aperture that is still relatively easy to use. Having gotten the opportunities to use 16, 24 and 32 inchers, the views i get in my own 8 inch dob are comparable to finderscope views tbh. I can attest for the accuracy of some of drawings (couldnt use the 24 incher long enough).
There is hardly anything more idiotic that a large binocular telescope unless they are part of an interferometer. And here, they aren't. You can always get exactly the same effect with a binoviewer and a single telescope 1/2 again the aperture. They don't even look cool, they just say "This owner knows nothing whatsoever about telescopes or astronomy". It's sort of like driving an extreme chopper motorcycle around on weekends trying to look cool. Nothing to see here, moving along.
Perhaps you should come and visit one day and then you can see for yourself? And about binoviewers vs. binoscopes, I've actually made a video about the subject which you may find interesting... ruclips.net/video/AQiUyo6Vrug/видео.html
Unlike capturing images with a camera, here the photons that left the astronomical object themselves are entering your eye and making contact with the retina! Really fascinating! Keep it up! Looking forward to more videos from you!
That's so kind of you, thank you! 🤩 Well, I've started work on another one so... just a little bit of patience. 😊
Exactly! a true otherworldly experience.
These are NOT long exposure or stacked images, but single photos! Amazing!
Er... not really... they're sketches. 😆 Thank you for the wonderful compliment!
@@astronomydrawings Shame on me for not watching the entire video 🤣
This is a breath of fresh air
Most ppl show stacked edited photos and give ppl false hope of what people’s eye will actually see
Nice work
Thank you very much, I'm glad you appreciate it. 😊
I love your concept of trying to faithfully represent the image your incredible scope provides. Those last planet images show that you have taken the time to make sure each scope is individually collimated so the combination can act to its peak. The planet images also look they were nights of pretty good seeing.
Thank you very much, Marc. 😊 Collimation of the binoscope isn't that difficult, as you can see in my other video, and the view with two eyes is actually impossible to render in an image, but I do my best. Strangely enough, seeing is a (very) little bit less of an issue with a binoscope because your brain gets to choose the best off 2 images, or at least that's my personal theory anyway. Cheers and clear skies to you!
This is amazing! The views of the plants were breathtaking.
Thank you!!! 😆😆😆
That’s the biggest set of binoculars I‘ve ever seen 😮.
Also incredible sketches! I thought they were pictures at first
Thank you so much! 😊
Awesome drawings.
Thank you! 😊
thanks a lot! Can you let us know the Bortle value as well? Where I live, I have access to some 21 MPSAS skies, that vary between good to mediocre Bortle 4... I like your drawings! With my 12" Binoscope I see less, off course, but a few drawings come close... whilst I still have very limited amount of sessions with it... having 21 MPSAS out of the door would be wonderful... I have to drive 10 miles, with all the complex scope hassle...
My sky is about SQM 20.8 to 21, so not too bad but not great either. At the beginning I had a big enough trailer to carry my bino around, but transporting it was damaging the scope so now I just observe from home. It's always a compromise... Thank you very much for your wonderful comments!!!
@@astronomydrawings thanks, good to share experience in this wonderful field of the visual passion!
Fantastic video and fantastic music 👍
Thank you very much!
Awesome images. My little 60mm and 80mm refractors can't compete but I am happy with their portability. Did you teach yourself how to draw?
Thank you very much! 😊 Yes, I taught myself, though I've had almost 40 years of practice...
Super thanks for this amazing realistic sketches . I have a 25 inch but the sky is lesser than yours about 20.30 . I see similar views trough my eyepiece thanks for sharing Greets from Beluim
Thank you so much for the lovely comment. Wow, a 25" is a serious beast, my compliments! If you ever get to Italy, please feel free to drop by, preferably with your scope because that would be an interesting confrontation with my bino. Cheers!
To be honest, whatever are the improvements made in astro-photo, nothing beats the feeling of welcoming remote photons directly in our own eyes. Demonstration with your drawings !
By the way, I know right now, how major planets look like thru the beast :)
Thank you! I'm doing my best but no image can truly render the feeling you're getting when looking through a telescope. 😊
A giant set of binoculars? Wow. Is it hard to keep all colimated?
Surprisingly not. Most of the time, when I roll it back out of its shelter, it just needs a little tweak here or there. Alignment of the two tubes, on the other hand, needs almost constant adjusting when you hop from one object to the next, especially when you're moving to a different part of the sky. Fortunately this is easy with the alignment rods.
Thanks for video. That's a very nice binoscope and your sketches are excellent. For those with smaller scopes (or bigger scopes), dark skies at high elevation will make any telescope bigger. My best observing spot, by far, is New Mexico Skies. It's at 7400' elevation with dark & transparent skies. The views of the bright Messier Objects thru my 16" dob looked like the B&W photos in Stephen James O'Meara's book, "The Messier Objects". There are better observing sites but I haven't been to them yet.
You're absolutely right. Good sky conditions count almost just as much as the size of your scope. Let alone the New Mexico skies you mentioned and which make me green with envy. 😆 My observing spot was a compromise between dark skies and my wife's commuting distance, so far from perfect but I can live with it. Well, I have no choice because big telescopes are very difficult, if not impossible to transport on your own... 🥴
@@astronomydrawings If you ever get over here to see the Grand Canyon, schedule it for June, during the Grand Canyon Star Party. You don't need to bring any equipment. Telescopes are set up by the local astronomy clubs. It's at 8000' elevation with very dark skies. Stars are visible horizon to horizon. And of course, the Grand Canyon is, well you know, grand.
@@lowellmccormick6991 I'd love to do that some day... it must be an unforgettable experience. Thanks for the tip! 😊
I'm in southern New Mexico as well. I belong to the local astronomy club founded back in the 1950s by Clyde Tombaugh and others. University of NM gifted the club a 16" Meade LX-200 they built an observatory for in a local park north of town in Bortle 3-4 skies. In town at the back of my apartment it is Bortle 6, but most light sources are blocked by my building and trees so it isn't as bad, but I can only view the sky from West by Southwest to the Northeast and Zenith. I'll set my 6" FF5 reflector up on my porch and just stargaze for a couple of hours. To say I know the Northwest skies fairly well would be an understatement.
I'm only 10 minutes from B-4 skies and 30 minutes from /Bortle 2 next to one in White Sands Missile Range. The whole area is 4000 feet or higher, but if I want to camp out it is 90 miles to Bortle one NOT in the mountains, but in flat rolling hills at 5400 feet. Now if you're acclimated to high altitude I've been to the Ruidoso Ski Area at 10,000 feet and the stars are magnificent.
Refreshing to hear honest opinions from a guy who has clearly evaluated the rest and went for “the best”. I’d been considering bino viewing but now want APM 100 or 120 APO binoculars. I do lot of terrestrial observations and love plane spotting. I’ll buy the dual wielding dobs when I win the lotto ….
"The best" is very subjective. My bino is e.g. very difficult to transport and impossible to assemble on your own, whereas you can easily take those 100/120mm binoculars you're talking about to a mountaintop. I'll never dispose of my 100mm binoculars either. 😊 Anyway, you don't have to win the lottery... a ticket to Northern Italy will do. 😆
Just came across your channel. Wish I knew of it a long time ago. Your drawings are incredible!!!
Curious, if you've had the chance to compare views of celestial objects (particularly Jupiter) from your 18" binoscope, side by side with a traditional 18" Dobsonian with similar quality optics. Would the 18" traditional Dobsonian's view be very similar? Or put another way - if you were to close one eye when using the binoscope, do you lose much - as it would be portrayed in your drawings? I guess one more way to ask this is - how big of a traditional Dobsonian would you speculate would have somewhat equal views (as expressed via your drawings) with the 18" binoscope, assuming all the optic qualities were similar?
Many thanks for the information you shared via your channel! Excellent public service to humanity!
Thank you very much for the wonderful comments and the compliments about my drawings. In one of my other videos (about binocular summation) I've answered more or less all of your questions, but I'll summarise here. There's a significant difference between looking with one or with both eyes and it's an experience I have every time I put my eyepieces in focus because you have to do it one eyepiece at a time. Objects seem bigger, clearer and brighter. Details are much easier to see and the feeling of total immersion is beyond compare. Of course, an 18" binoscope retains the resolution of an 18" mono, but at 25arcsec this is 99,99% of the time limited by the atmosphere anyway. After years of comparisons, also with similar monocular scopes, I state that a binoscope yields the performance of a monocular scope twice the aperture, so an 18" bino is more or less equal to a 25" mono. Actually, possibly higher still because it's less likely that a false signal is accepted as true by both eyes simultaneously and... an 18" bino has the exit pupil of an 18" mono. Therefore it allows lower power with more light and you can see objects with a lower surface brightness than any monocular scope.
I hope that this answers everything, if not please don't hesitate to write.
Cheers and thanks again!
@@astronomydrawings Great response!!! Super helpful!!
I've got an 18" Teeter with a Zambuto mirror on the way. Can't wait to see what I can view with that.
Woohooo! Congratulations!!! 😆
Great drawings!!! Saturn first rate!!!
Thank you! 😆
That's outstanding, I have to say those images are more than I expected. Can you please tell me how much money I need to buy one like you have
Thank you very much! About money, binoscopes are expensive but I paid less than if I had bought a high-quality 25" full option, including shipping and import taxes, which would comparable in performance. Unfortunately it's getting hard nowadays to find a company that still builds binoscopes now that even JMI have stopped. Binoscopes are so tricky to make that for a commercial producer there isn't any money in it.
@@astronomydrawings Thank for the information mate 👍🏻👍🏻
Breath-taking images! I am curious about your method. Do you begin with a black piece of paper? Do you draw with anything resembling a "normal" pencil? I guess my question boils down to, "what exactly is the medium, here?" Also, approximately what size are your rendered images? Thank you for posting this excellent video!
Thank you very much for your kind words, Robert. My sketches are originally normal pencil on white paper and then processed on the PC. I've got a whole tutorial about astronomy sketching on my channel: ruclips.net/video/vkviY1b9Pko/видео.html I hope that it answers all of your questions, though I never got down to making the 7th and final video. About the size of the oiginal images, they're usually 2300x2300 px. Many thanks again!
Truly amazing! Thanks for uploading these great images
You're very welcome! 😊
Thanks a lor for this. Most people have no idea that you cannot see Hubble like images soon as you put your eyes on a telescope eyepiece. If your images are accurate then I'm quite impressed with the details you can visually see from your telescope. I would've thought even that may not have been possible. Btw, I love your bino scope.
Thank you very much, Tamur! This is exactly the reason why I made this video and I hope that it may be useful to a lot of people. Clear skies to you! 😊
So true. After being both fascinated and disappointed in the views from my8", and reading that aperture is everything, I thought I would get the biggest scope I could find and see colorful nebulae. Then I read that exit pupil is everything, and thought i'd get a big telescope and long eyepieces to get a huge exit pupil. Then I read that exit pupils larger than your eye pupil don't make the image any brighter and the image never gets brighter than you can see naked-eye. I was very disappointed but also glad I found out before I bought something huge that I couldn't handle.
@@louisxiiii Lots of variables and information to learn. But yeah, in short, if you want those colorful majestic pictures of the cosmos then sticking a camera top the telescope and collecting all those precious photons is the way to go.
That’s what Hubble does as well :)
Those drawings are beautiful
Thank you very much! 😆
Bro that’s awesome!! Saturn was sick!! 😮
Thank you very much!
a youtube channel about sketching! what this is amazing
How does Uranus, Neptune, Pluto look with these super mega binoculars?
Uranus and Neptune look like tiny little disks, Uranus more turquoise whereas Neptune appears smaller and more bluish. I believe to have seen a hint of a darker band on Uranus, but it's hard to tell: www.astronomydrawings.com/Planetary/index.html
Uranus shows 4 or 5 of moons whereas Neptune's big moon Triton's clearly visible, also in small scopes.
Pluto (mag. 14), on the other hand, is just a tiny star which is indistinguishable from the other smallest stars in the field of view. You may get lucky when Pluto happens to pass near a distinct asterism, making identification possible, or you need to look again the next day and see which of those tiny stars has moved. 😊
@@astronomydrawings I would've thought the moon would've looked super giant on that size of mega binoculars...
@@JohnSmith-zw8vp It does! 😊 The sketch on my site, which you're probably referring to, represents a magnification of 507x, which is a lot and which will bring you very close to the lunar surface. Of course, this isn't exceptional and you can do just that with much smaller monocular scopes, albeit with a more limited resolution.
The Moon actually isn't the right object to compare telescope size as it is so bright and telescope power and resolution are in this case more limited by the atmosphere than by telescope size.
were these live views or exposures ? if they are live thats truely amazing
They're live views. I've spent hours at the eyepieces trying to sketch them... 😊
Absolutely insane 🤣🤣, well done! Awesome ! You are my hero 🤤😁😁
A hero? I don't think so, 😆 but I'm so happy that you liked my video. Thank you very much!
I have had 6-10” dobsonians for 40 of my 50 years and love seeking faint fuzzies. Recently I purchased an Obsession 20 for $3500 US It BLOWS away anything I’ve owned. Subtle but apparent colors in M42 (pink/red/violet) pink Spirograph nebula the Eskimo nebula looks like a picture! M51 is a spiral!
I have it in my garage and can wheel it out and be at the eyepiece in under 5 minutes. B4-5 skies
Transport to B2 one or two nights a month..if you are able get one., it’s. close to pictures blows your mind. I see so many galaxies I have no clue what 1/2 of them are.
Amazing. Thanks for this video, there are not really that much of them, who really show what you can expect in visual astronomy in the best possible scenario. I am slightly jaleous of your telescope and your drawing skills.
Well, my sky isn't perfect and there's no way I'm going to haul my beast to a dark site again, so everything's a tradeoff. But you'd be more than welcome to drop by for a visit. 😉 Cheers and clear skies to you!
@@astronomydrawings That's very nice of you, thanks a lot! I am a bit far away, but you never know, I'll keep that in mind! Cheers.
0:45 you are literally a king
Thank you! 😆
With the exception of planets, is there anything bright enough in the sky to trigger a colour vision response? Or are the light levels still squarely in scotopic region? Judging by the blue/green sketches it seems like the latter.. except for potentially some real green in M42
Hello Dwindeyer! No, apart from a clear blue-greenish hue on the brighter nebulae, it's impossible to see any colour on those objects because their surface brightness is too low. That being said, I think that I saw a hint of orange on the brightest edge of the Orion Nebula once (without filters obviously). Clear skies to you!
That looks more like really big binoculars!
That's what they are, in a certain sense... 😊
Optical astronomy is great! I have looked through a 100” telescope. Very nice experience.
100"??? Oh my! That must have been quite an experience! Though I suppose a bit difficult to fit the entire Orion Nebula in the FOV... 😆 Cheers and clear skies to you!
@@astronomydrawings It was a private event at Mount Wilson, CA. We didn’t look at the Orion Nebula but did look at several smaller targets, planetary nebulae, Saturn, M13, etc.
So you see mostly black n white of deep sky object and not much color of them, right?
Yes, though nebulae with a high surface brightness do show a very vivid blue-green colour. Once I though I saw a hint of yellow as well on the brightest rim of the Orion Nebula.
I like so much to see your nice big one and two in one telescope🔭🔭 👍👍👍👍👍👍🌹🤩
Whenever you are in Italy, you'd be most welcome to drop by. 😊
@@astronomydrawings thanks for you sir👍 I am in India in delhi and i have no passport but i like so much like your big telescope🔭🔭 again 🌹
This is fantastic! Thank you for sharing, gonna get a bigger telescope then :D
Oh dear, aperture fever... 😆
Amazing. THX
Thank you! 😊
What type of focusers, EP's, filters, barlows were used?
The focuses are ordinary, see here: ruclips.net/video/aweaNO2S9zk/видео.html
For the rest, the eyepieces are 22mm and 12 cm Naglers and 8mm and 4.5mm Delos for high power. For the nebulae, Baader OIII or Lumicon UHC filters were used just for the fainter details on the nebulae themselves, but without filters for the stars.
Excellent choice, which relates to the excellent views, breathtaking, BTW! THANK YOU!!!
Well, I saw my first galaxy M51 through a 20 inch F5 in Dorset U.K. many years ago, I think it was a tiny bit brighter than your image. But I must say, you do give an honest representation, the truth is that even with a large telescope most objects are rather disappointing, at least visually. I suspect that even M31 in a 10 meter telescope if it was possible to observe visually is a sobering experience. Our eyes are just not up to the job. One last thing, I came across an astronomy magazine many years ago where an amateur used a 16inch scope and breathing oxygen to observe visually as deep as possible..... He did see a magnitude or two deeper than standard observers....
Pure oxygen dilates the pupils and gives a feeling of a "high", but I wouldn't recommend it to others. Yes, our eyes have been poorly made and even with a 10m telescope it wouldn't be all that impressive as such a scope would have a minimum power of 1429x for a 7mm exit pupil. Atmosphere and all... My binos are comparable to a 25" mono, but of course there's the factor of sky quality and the human eye. My sky certainly isn't perfect with an SQM of 20.9, but I don't complain. For most people telescope images are "disappointing" because all they know is the incredible, high-definition, million colour photographs. Of course, no visual telescope can ever compete to that. But when you explain that the photons that hit your retina really come from those far away places and have really travelled even for millions of light years to end up in your eye, people are generally astounded. Besides, I have yet to see a photo of the Orion Nebula, for instance, that's just as impressive as the sight through a big telescope under a dark sky. Or through a binoscope such as mine with its bewildering 3D effect and seemingly infinite FOV. 😊
The other important thing to rememebr is that big telescopes are generally not for big objects. A 15" telescope, even at f4.5, is not going to give a great view of the Pleiades, for example, because it will be zoomed in too close.
You're absolutely right. It's actually another advantage of a binoscope, i.e. the light gathering power of a much bigger scope whilst retaining the exit pupil of a smaller scope. 😊
I guess everybody has a definition of what is a REALLY BIG telescope, but I would say for most people 18inch is middle size, not really big. Big would be like 24-30 inch and REALLY BIG (with uppercase characters) would be above one meter. This being said, nice drawings. You should try M33 with a UHC filter.
Well, that's a matter of opinion. If you have a 25", an 18" would indeed seem "middle-sized", but for most astronomy enthusiasts I know 18" or more is still a dream and they often wonder how such a scope would compare to their 10"-14". Besides, mine's an 18" BINOscope so definitely not middle-sized! 😁 I was actually referring to amateur telescopes so you'll agree that there aren't many who have 30" or more. In fact, I have already observed M33 with filters, though I prefer without so you can clearly see the cluster within NGC604... 😆
I've always thought that my 16" dob was the perfect size for viewing and portability. However, 25 years and 2 hernias later, I think a 14.5 is probably the perfect size. I observed with a group that included 25", 30" and 32" dobs and those things are just too big to transport.
@@lowellmccormick6991 You're absolutely right and sometimes I wonder if I've made the right choice. I used to have a 14.5" carbon fibre Dob that was so easy to carry around. I've stopped carrying my bino because it's just too much of a hassle. The choice was rather based on my desire to be able to observe with both eyes without compromise (such as with a binoviewer). Fortunately my sky isn't all that bad... 😊
@@lowellmccormick6991 That's the thing. an 18inch which one has to move is really big. But that was not said, I just saw "REALLY BIG", and believed it was going to be about a much larger scope. Face it, 18inch is a good diameter for a secondary mirror (just kidding...). But in the absolute it's not that big. I have observed through really really big telescopes (above 2m diameter) and in fact for visual use they are in a way too much. You can see very nice colors, but the field of view is so small that you miss a lot (i.e. at 1000 times, M42 is just the small region around the trapezium), plus the images are blurry because of the seeing. Same for planets. A big telescope will always give more contrast and color than a small one, but when the seeing is 3 arc second, it's 3 arc second for everybody. But when it gets good, it gets really crazy. I'm lucky enough to be in a good site where I don't have to move my scopes and that's indeed a luxury most people can't afford.
In this game you quickly learn why Hubble was built. With any luck our pollution will destroy the atmosphere and eliminate distortion finally! 🤣
What was the cost of making or buying this 18" Binoscope?
Er... substantial, but perhaps surprisingly less than if I had bought a 25" Obsession, which has about the same light gathering power. 😉
25" Obsession, wow, so in the neighborhood of 8k-12k. Well, I was blown away by the views of the Nebulas, star cluster, and galaxies, just exquisite! Planetary views of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars were great, too! Great job! Thank you for sharing it with us. These views make up for the cost, IMHO.
@@jesseJames6892 It was actually a bit more than that, but you have to consider full option (I also have ServoCat and ArgoNavis) plus shipping and import duties for Europe. 😉
those planets really pop. but before I go spending thousands on a really big scope I think I will get better with my little one first.
😆 Thank you very much, Terry! And there are plenty of objects out there that look better in a small scope. Ackers skies to you!
I like them. I am watching through a 12 centimeter Refraktor semi apo without goto or rektascension motor, no fotos, my eyes and my scills in finding, that's it. So I like it very much seeing your objects like this, I can compare. It is inspiring.
That's a wonderful compliment! Thank you very much and... clear skies to you! 😊
All pictures are live view ?
Yes, sort of. They're sketches I made when observing these objects, so they're my impression of what I saw.
For me doing astrophotography is like googling for some images. If your not seeing the object with your eyes whats the point? I have to say i was a bit disappointed and misslead when I first bought my 12" because of all the images you can get with a camera, that has nothing to do with what you can actually see with your own eyes. Starting astronomy alone can be a real challenge. Thanks for staying true to what we can actually see!
Well, astrophotography is an art in itself and I can understand that many people find great satisfaction from capturing these beautiful images. But, just like you, I prefer to see things with my own eyes, even if it's merely a glimpse of what a photo can show me. Thank you very much for your lovely comment! 😊
apologies, I didn't hear what the scope you are using is--can you give us the name?
It's an 18" binoscope by Arie Otte arieotte-binoscopes.nl/ 😊
What's the exposure time on the pictures?
Er... One to two hours... with my eyes. They're sketches... 😆
The planet images are remarkable
Thank you!
would be fascinating to see the ISS through this setup
I'd have to do some serious tuning of the ServoCat to pull that off! 🤣
Your bino is really amazing. I have a DYI 45x130mm bino, still like a kid compared with this 18" bino loll😄
Like a kid? Well, at least you can easily carry your binos up a mountaintop. 🤣 Observing with binos like yours is a completely different experience, like cruising the Milky Way at low power... That's why I'll never sell my 100mm binos either and I'm sure that yours give you a lot of satisfaction too, especially because you built it yourself. 😊
Niesamowicie piękne obrazy ,najlepsze na żywo .
Thank you very much! 😊
amazing, imagine how it would look in an astrophotography. My dream is, someday, to have a large telescope to look at the faraway universe and our neighboring planets.
Be careful what you wish for! If your scope's too big, forget about hauling it to a dark site and that's just as important as telescope size. Start with a decent pair of binoculars... you'd be amazed what you can already see with those! Clear skies to you!
I suppose the planets where in opposition and Mars was in the closest position to earth. Also very good night and place for observation.
Yes of course, it's always best to observe the planets when they're closest to us and the biggest limitation is not the scope but our atmosphere. On most nights the planets suffer from bad seeing, but on a very clear night...
Saturn and Mars were the best such natural details 👍
Your sky is where?
In the hills of Reggio Emilia, Italy, SQM 20.9.
Each to their own. So long as you enjoy what you're doing, who cares! The disappointing drawing for me was M42, the Great Orion Nebula. This is a naked eye object, literally the brightest nebula in the northern hemisphere. I thought you would have seen more? Bigger is not always better. As an imager I can get beater results with small telescopes due to the longer integration time of the ccd camera. However, their is nothing more visceral than looking through a telescope and seeing the planets, especially Jupiter and Saturn , so I can see the appeal.
Of course, not even the biggest telescope in the World could compete against photos with hours of exposure time. The joy of visual observation, compared to photos, is that you've seen it yourself with your own eyes, rather than on a computer screen after many hours of fiddling to get the image right. Then again, I wonder, how much does my impression of the Orion Nebula differ from a photo, apart from the absence of colours other than blue/green? 😆 But, as I said, I didn't want to exaggerate either and my sky is only SQM 21.00. Perhaps if you'd look at my drawing with averted vision... 😉
@@astronomydrawings Yep, I'm not exactly blessed with great skies myself here in the Netherlands!!! I have only just been able to start imaging after another damp, grey wet winter...:-(
@@neilhankey2514 Well, The Netherlands aren't all that far from Northern Italy, so you'd be more than welcome to pay us a visit at our observatory www.osservatoriodicanossa.eu and I'd be delighted to show you a thing or two. 😊 Good luck with the imaging!
My C14 have no chance against this...
It depends. In terms of light gathering power, certainly not. In terms of observing comfort, you'd beat my binoscope hands down, especially when observing near zenith which is all but impossible for me. 😆
2 eyes are much better then one. That's why the good Lord gave us two. One could be a spare if we lose one. Better then none I always say!
.....so how big is the telescope??...I thought that was kinda the whole point to the video
The video was more in general and would give a pretty good idea about what you can see through any big telescope, but mine's an 18" binoscope, which is comparable to a 25" monocular scope, or much bigger still on large but faint objects.
It would be shame for me to waste those photons with my pathetic eye to be honest.
My telescope, a Newton with a nearly 200 mm. mirror, and 1250 mm. focal length, compared to this beast, it is one big joke.😄 I would like to see live what this double miracle can do. 🤩 I wish you clear nights 🌌🪐☄🌒
Well, whenever you're in Italy you'd be more than welcome to drop by. 😊 Mind you, for you it would be peanuts to carry your scope to the darkest mountaintop and enjoy the perfect sky. With my beast I'm compelled to stay at home... 😁
@@astronomydrawings 🙂👍
I want to see what this thing can see on the moon.
Can you imagine the Apollo lander approaching the surface? 😂 Seriously though, the sight is breathtaking and feels almost 3D but at lower power (less than 300x) you need sunglasses. 😁
@@astronomydrawings Its got to see better than bruce swartz' 14" scope. His you can see what appear to be buildings, and objects flying around near the surface. Post some pictures/videos if you have them.
@@bogey19018 Buildings? Objects flying around? On our Moon? Are you sure that this Bruce chap doesn't like his booze too much?
@@astronomydrawings Here is one of his videos. The pentagon has contacted him due to his videos. ruclips.net/video/dnbgA5bvNrI/видео.html
@@bogey19018 Oh dear... please don't believe this. There are a lot of scammers out there trying to get lots of followers and views by showing things that are absolutely fake. Nobody has ever seen any artificial structures and certainly not UFOs on the Moon. It's all a hoax and I bet that Bruce is very happy when he gets all that money from RUclips because so many people want to believe his videos are true.
thats a binocular
Two eyes see more than one! 😊
I amexculusivly astrophotograpgher and was expecting way less that this to be honest. That being said this is why I like photograpghy because our eyes are pathetic sensors and do not save the photons to make the object more clear and apperent. Just for fun it would be cool to have 16 inch dobsodian to mass around with a beer.
The eternal photographer-visual observer debate. 🤣 Few as those photons may be that I manage to capture with my inadequate eyes, the emotion of having captured the very same photons that travelled for millions of years to reach me is priceless to me.
My 6" Dob can do that 🤪
🤣🤣🤣
When I brought up this video, the first words that came out of my mouth when I saw the binoc dob was "Oh wow".
It was the same for me when I visited Mr. Otte's website and even more so when he eventually delivered it. It was also the feeling I got when I wanted to move it to a nearby star party and realised that I needed an extra large trailer... 😅
Even with such big telescope one cannot see much 🙄🙄🙄
go ahead then, get a run off the mill 6 or 8 inch dob and then compare to 25 inch dob or this 18 inch bino. Now, no aperture on this planet can change your mind if you dont understand how light works and how your eyes work. One thing is for sure tho: You HEAVILY underestimate 18 inches of light collecting aperture, let alone 18 inch bino's. What he saw visually and showed us through his sketches is more nebulosity in higher detail than 99% of all other amateur astronomers/telescope owners have ever seen visually.
For many people, a 16 inch dob is considered the largest aperture that is still relatively easy to use. Having gotten the opportunities to use 16, 24 and 32 inchers, the views i get in my own 8 inch dob are comparable to finderscope views tbh. I can attest for the accuracy of some of drawings (couldnt use the 24 incher long enough).
There is hardly anything more idiotic that a large binocular telescope unless they are part of an interferometer. And here, they aren't. You can always get exactly the same effect with a binoviewer and a single telescope 1/2 again the aperture. They don't even look cool, they just say "This owner knows nothing whatsoever about telescopes or astronomy". It's sort of like driving an extreme chopper motorcycle around on weekends trying to look cool. Nothing to see here, moving along.
Perhaps you should come and visit one day and then you can see for yourself? And about binoviewers vs. binoscopes, I've actually made a video about the subject which you may find interesting... ruclips.net/video/AQiUyo6Vrug/видео.html
someone here seems jealous and doesnt seem to understand how 3D vision and depth of field work. Nothing to see here but an idiot, moving along.