|
I think calling them a 'gimmick' is a bit harsh. Binoviewers are no more a gimmick than binoculars are, or remote viewing or manual tracking or any other way of viewing that may have some drawbacks compared to other methods.
The 3D effect is basically the same with astro stuff using binoculars or binoviewers. In theory the binoculars should be 3D and the Binoviewers 2D because the binoviewers share a single optic and the binoculars one per eye. However at astronomical distances the stereo separation is effectively zero, so the '3D effect' is created by the brain and not via stereoscopy in either case. The human brain relies on far more than just ocular separation to process an image into 3D, and with subjects like the moon there are plenty of depth cues for the brain to build up a 3D map.
Just because certain experienced viewers do not use them doesn't make them a gimmick either, they have their pros and cons like any piece of equipment.
They let you use both eyes at once which is a distinct processing advantage in the visual system of the brain. They allow you to view with more comfort and for longer. They allow the brain's 3D processing systems to kick in, separating data by depth based on visual cues. You lose some light due to the splitting of the optical path, but you gain quite a lot back by having two eyes gathering light.
It is a different viewing experience, one that has worthwhile advantages for many. If we only ever viewed the absolute highest resolution methods, we wouldn't even venture outside without traveling to the highest peaks on only the clearest of nights. Like anything, there are compromises, but they are far more than just a gimmick.
The view through my binos out here under inky skies would yield more resolution than anyone in the city will get in cyclops mode.
|