Will Night Vision eyepieces make glass obsolete?

[JoeBlow]

I've noticed an increasing and cult-like adoption of night vision tubes by our brethren in the US in place of traditional glass eyepieces. Some compare it to the Dobsonian revolution in the extent that changed amateur astronomy forever, others further predict glass eyepieces will become obsolete for DSO observing in about 20 years, in the same way digital has replaced film astrophotography.

I first heard of these newer gen 3 NV devices a few years ago, but was initially dismissive of them because I thought it would be similar to looking at a screen like other forms of EAA (Electronically Assisted Astronomy) and because of the comparatively high cost of NV. However users of NV insist the experience is nothing like other EAA, instead it's almost exactly the same as regular visual observing but much much better.

Currently NV devices are mainly produced for military and recreational hunting use, they are neither manufactured or marketed for astronomical use. So some small modifications and experimentation needs to be made to adapt them for use in your telescope. Also it appears there are restrictions in importing units into Australia from the US, but units from other countries may possibly be available.

Questions... has anyone here in Australia tried one of these devices? Are any available for the Australian market? And are they truly the next revolution in amateur Astronomy that will one day make traditional observing obsolete?

[Hemi]

Hi JB,

I’ve been following the cloudy EAA forum for a few years and the NV has got me intrigued as well. I can understand how it is much more like visual than video astronomy/live stacking. I’ve tried getting hold of a device a few times, but unsuccessfully. Enquired with a firm who sells to the ADF but it was all too hard. I was in the USA over Christmas and enquired there, easy enough to buy, but almost certainly will get confiscated at customs on departure. In my research I did come across a couple of people who had managed to sneak one through US customs. Not worth the risk IMO given the cost of the devices.

Like most other industries, we are just very slow adopters in Australia, mainly through governmental restrictions (look at the TGA!!!). Will definitely try it out when I can get my hands on a device.

Hemi

[JoeBlow]

Yeah it's frustrating with import restrictions, especially knowing that eventually they will be allowed here anyway like everything else. What I don't fully understand too is why no astronomy manufactures have jumped on the opportunity to produce a NV product specifically designed for astronomy? What amateurs would like to see are NV devices that are designed to be plug & play with a telescope straight out of the box, larger FOV, NV that works with planets and maybe displays that more closely replicate the natural colour and look of DSOs in regular observing. Once that happens, plus lower prices, I can really see NV taking off and maybe rivaling glass observing.

[bojan]

I doubt very much eyepiece will be obsolete... Nothing compares to a view of a real object.
However, if you really want NV device, I am sure you can purchase tubes from military surplus (Surplusshed was selling them, sometimes even ebay).

It is not hard to add power supply and suitable enclosure.

[LewisM]

http://www.televue.com/engine/TV3b_page.asp?id=36

http://www.televue.com/engine/TV3b_p...id=36&Tab=_rev

[Oddity (Andrew)]

I know someone who uses one.

It's quite amazing, eg. globulars. Nebulae spectacular with a Ha filter.

a) Glass won't become obsolete as it still requires an eyepiece for magnification.
b) it's very expensive for high quality.... prohibitively (like, the cost of a top-tier telescope). And yuo still need the scope (and the eyepieces)
c) also, you don't get colour in NV

[skysurfer]

Originally Posted by Oddity

I know someone who uses one.

It's quite amazing, eg. globulars. Nebulae spectacular with a Ha filter.

a) Glass won't become obsolete as it still requires an eyepiece for magnification.
b) it's very expensive for high quality.... prohibitively (like, the cost of a top-tier telescope). And yuo still need the scope (and the eyepieces)
c) also, you don't get colour in NV

Well, when we are able to make color astrophotos, why not color in an NV device ?

[bojan]

Current NV devices operate similar to photo-multiplier tube.. or rather a multitude of very thin tubes.

So in principle it is possible to do color. It will be very expensive...

[JoeBlow]

Originally Posted by bojan

I doubt very much eyepiece will be obsolete... Nothing compares to a view of a real object.
However, if you really want NV device, I am sure you can purchase tubes from military surplus (Surplusshed was selling them, sometimes even ebay).

It is not hard to add power supply and suitable enclosure.

Though there are different NV devices that can be found amongst military surplus, but for NV to work well for astronomy the best units are required, which means $$$.

The way things stand at the moment, I don't see glass eyepieces becoming obsolete... for now... However give it a couple more decades, or maybe less, of adopting the technology for astronomical use plus a few more years to improve on the products, the end result could be something that may really threaten to shelve glass eyepieces to a bygone era. Like I mentioned before, for this to occur prices will need to come down significantly, the FOV will need to increase, the image will need to appear more natural and be simple enough for anyone to plug in and observe away.

Originally Posted by LewisM

http://www.televue.com/engine/TV3b_page.asp?id=36

http://www.televue.com/engine/TV3b_p...id=36&Tab=_rev

Televue makes adapters to attach NV devices to their eyepieces, but NV works just as well with cheap eyepieces or no eyepiece at all, no need for expensive eyepieces or expensive telescopes with NV.

Originally Posted by Oddity

I know someone who uses one.

It's quite amazing, eg. globulars. Nebulae spectacular with a Ha filter.

a) Glass won't become obsolete as it still requires an eyepiece for magnification.
b) it's very expensive for high quality.... prohibitively (like, the cost of a top-tier telescope). And yuo still need the scope (and the eyepieces)
c) also, you don't get colour in NV

I'm far from being that knowledgeable about NV, but from what I understand you don't necessarily need eyepieces at all for NV, even for magnification. People with NV state that focal length of the telescope is what's most important for image scale with a NV device. Usually barlows and focal reducers are then used to change the image scale for a given telescope.

[Oddity (Andrew)]

Interesting read

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/3...-night-vision/

Seems I was wrong. The eyepiece is to simultanously focal reduce and reach focus in a dob (big light bucket with fast focal ratio = win).

I agree eyepieces are going to stick around for decades. NV price is the big kicker and the point remains the very best NV you can purchase (imports/exports are classified as military equipment) still don’t do colour.

[Rainmaker (Matt)]

Until the NV gear can reproduce the beautiful subtle star colours that my scopes/eyepieces show I have no interest in going NV.

[N1 (Mirko)]

Interesting thread. Had a read of some of the various links on the subject. So basically you have an electronic device that converts the image into a brighter but monochrome artificial image, which can then be viewed eyepiece style. People then plug this into their scopes (or hold it up to the sky for 1x, simplistically speaking) and call this "observing". They even "upgrade" by buying "better" devices of the same style. What gives?? The only thing that will become obsolete (for astro anyway) is NV as discussed here. When? Just as soon as a regular AP/EAA train, whose IQ is colossally superior, becomes small enough to fit into a visual back. Some of the tech is already happening in the form of digital viewfinders on mirrorless cameras and VR goggles. The question is valid though what exactly the point is of viewing a synthetic image through a peephole in the first place. To me that's just combining the negatives of EAA with those of visual.

[Oddity (Andrew)]

Except unlike those it’s not looking at a screen in the peephole. It doesn’t feel like looking at a screen.

Anyway I am a natural cynic and know well what its like to disbelieve and argue against before actually trying it, so I won’t labor the point with similar cynics who haven’t.

[N1 (Mirko)]

Originally Posted by Oddity

It doesn’t feel like looking at a screen.

Precisely. So anything that maintains this aspect, and form factor, but puts up a better image (colour, more detail) should be superior to NV tech of today, no?

[JoeBlow]

I was very skeptical of NV and still am... however with more and more people having experienced it, mostly over on the other side of the pond, very few are giving negative feedback. Most insist it's similar to regular observing but being able to see more. They also agree that NV can't replicate the subtle beauty of glass observing, but for many DSOs the increase in detail seen compensates for that.

[Oddity (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by JoeBlow

I was very skeptical of NV and still am... however with more and more people having experienced it, mostly over on the other side of the pond, very few are giving negative feedback. Most insist it's similar to regular observing but being able to see more. They also agree that NV can't replicate the subtle beauty of glass observing, but for many DSOs the increase in detail seen compensates for that.

Precisely, as a good friend says, it’s just another tool in the arsenal.

For me it’s the fact you get instant light amplification and immediate vision that makes it more like an eyepiece.

No exposure time, no waiting, no stacking, no guiding, no tracking...

You can just pan around the sky and what you see is live and instant. Want to check out the true extent of Carina? Push your scope a little, and there you go. Push a little more and you’re instantly seeing the Keyhole and gem cluster. Push the other way and spot another batch of nebulosity and thrink “what’s that?... that’s running chicken!”.

Panning around Sagittarius/milky way core is fun. You randomly come across bits of nebulosity you never knew existed. Push a little more and you instantly come across old favorites like M8. Push a little more and hey, there’s Trifid. Instantly there in front of you, and because you can just pan around you have complete context of their surroundings as you would with just an eyepiece.

Just casually and visually panning across the milky way with instant gratification.

Try and do that with AP/VAA.

But as I’ve been very clearly making the point early on in the thread, it will never make glass eyepieces obsolete as the technology has its cons. No colour... bright star “flare”... scintillation at higher gain and sometimes randomly at lower gain.

resolution etc. don’t expect refractor-like tiny pinpoints with colour. It’s certainly not for splitting doubles. Also works best at super fast focal ratios so it’s not for med-high magnification.

It’s also both completely useless and pointless on planets. There’s a big reason!

[Ukastronomer (Jeremy)]

People said digital photography would never take over from film

I remember way back when I wanted to enter photos I had taken with the first Fuji digital at my club the naive secretary said "Digital images will never be allowed as long as I am a member of the club"

[Oddity (Andrew)]

I was talking about photon intensifiers (specifically that technology) not making glass obsolete - in particular for planet observation. For planets they just create an intense searing white blob (talking from experience). Light intensity is hardly the problem with most planet observing.

Other technology, maybe. Light intensification - no. That won’t be the one technology that ends glass eyepieces.

[N1 (Mirko)]

Originally Posted by Oddity

Try and do that with AP/VAA.

You watch this space (no pun intended)!
Agree on everything else though

[N1 (Mirko)]

https://www.dpreview.com/news/986990...vision-for-399
only a matter of time