Talk:Binoculars

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Binoculars article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 120 days

Software: Computing Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Astronomical Use: Binoculars vs. Telescopes

For astronomical use binoculars have one rather obvious advantage, over telescopes, that is not discussed but probably should be for the sake of complete clarity. It is simply that a pair of binoculars, with two objectives, collects twice as much light as a telescope of the same aperture. So for example, if I had a pair of binoculars and a refracting telescope of the same aperture, and both instruments were of otherwise identical construction, with the same magnification, same diameter of exit pupil, and same percentage light loss through the instrument, then the binoculars would collect twice as much light as the telescope, and a star would appear to be twice as bright with the binoculars as with the telescope. Also, the binoculars would allow me to detect stars that were only half as bright as the faintest stars that I could detect with the telescope. I believe this is the reason why Patrick Moore always recommends good binoculars over small refracting telescopes. The only reason I haven't put this discussion straight into the main article is that I'm not absolutely certain that my rationale is valid. If there is anyone out there that can definitely verify that my rationale is valid, then perhaps they'd be good enough to put a section in the main article.Snookerrobot (talk) 15:36, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I see there is binocular telescopes do not collect twice as much light as a single telescope because it falls on two eyeballs, your brain does not add up light. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 02:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too many images

Per WP:IUP I am moving images to talk for possible restoration to the article.

I would note these images have some problems encyclopedia wise re: the Galilean image has a useful optical diagram but adds 4 extra redundant images to the article, needs cropping. The Schmidt-Pechan is hard to read, low rez, and, as a bitmap, not the preferred format for diagrams. Maybe it would be better to create a page or category combining all of them at Wikimedia Commons per WP:LAYOUT. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No history

The article is really only an empirical description of various systems of making and using binoculars, and thus lacks depth. Some material on the origin and development would be good. 24.81.25.127 (talk) 23:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]