Re: Eye damage? Re: Zenith SCM-200


"mc" <look@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:lG8hi.9481$Qz4.5768@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<RossClement@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1182870165.792489.150810@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I had a look through groups searching on "Cunningham" "monocular"
"damage". It seems that extended use of a monocular, particularly if
someone is not used to it, may cause eye-strain.

I'd like to hear more about the alleged eye damage. I'm an amateur
astronomer, and telescopes generally don't have binocular eyepieces. (We
can't afford to sacrifice the light level. With a binocular head, each
eye gets somewhat less than half as much light as a monocular would
deliver.)

Eyestrain is not damage, merely fatigue. At least that's how I understand
it.

Admittedly, astronomers have 2 advantages. (1) It's dark, and you can
keep the unused eye open (though not all of us do). (2) The total amount
of time spent looking into the eyepiece is much less than with a
microscope. The astronomer spends a lot of time reading charts, looking
for objects, etc., and does not observe every night (because it's
weather-dependent).


At present a heavy microscope user like a pathologis or a cytotechnician
will use a micrscope constantly for 6.5 hours or more. This is why
monoculars are unsalable and mostly useless. Now in astronomy, and I'm no
astronomer, there is little use of eyepieces. In the big leagues with the
really big units there aren't any eyepieces, with the smaller ones the
eyepieces are used infrequently just as you were kind enough to point out.
Digital cameras have mostly taken over.

By the way, astronomy is one cool science! I have a friend that build
extremly high end digital cameras and that is just sooooo cool. He talks, I
listen, intently.

Kevin Cunningham
SMS


.