Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
This series of posts was cut out from under the Kunming thread title and reposted with a new title. this thread is exclusively testing of the Oberwerk Ultra 15x70.
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70
Eye Relief
Tripod Adapter
Prism Light Cutoff
Exit Pupil Illumination
Some of the first few things you notice about this new binocular.
Well, it's heavy, about 5 1/2 pounds.
The eye lens is deeply recessed. I measured the recess at 8mm. With the eyecups folded down for use with eye-glasses, I measured the exit pupil distance at 11-12mm behind the eyecups. So exit pupil distance is about 19mm, but useable eye relief is 11-12mm. I was just barely able to see all the edges of the field of view with my glasses on.
The screw slot for the tripod adapter is recessed about 3-4mm in from the body of the prism housing. That means that you cannot use a typical wide flat binocular adapter with these binoculars, it would rub on the housing, marring the rubber coating, or it may not even screw in. A very nice sturdy narrow (Pentax shaped) metal adapter is provided in the case with the binocular. It works very well.
Both prisms completely span the entire prism shelf. There are no edges of prisms exposed. However, the backside of the front prism protrudes slightly into the light path. I could see it in both barrlels. This causes what we refer to as prism light cutoff. It was barely perceptible in the exit pupil. Without measurement, I would estimate the cutoff at 1-2%. Keep in mind this is blocking light only from the outer few mm of the objective lens. Considered inconsequential.
Now here's a real nice piece of information. This is definitely NOT one of the first things you notice, but it is one of the first things I wanted to measure. A profile of the exit pupil illumination.
The illumination of the exit pupil is what Roland Christen talked about in some of his comments. This binocular has a very well illuminated exit pupil. I include a graphic attachment here showing a comparison of the Ultra 15x70, Fujinon FMT-SX 16x70 and the Oberwerk 2003 15x70. The Ultra lies in between them, but it is far closer to the Fujinon.
The Fujinon comes out on top for all light entering at any point on the objective within the central 50% of the lens. Exit pupil illumination drops consistently as the source light enters further out on the objective lens. Light entering the objective at 50% out from center illuminates the entire Fujinon exit pupil. In the Ultra, it illums about 85% of the exit pupil. Shortly after a point 70% out from center the Ultra overtakes the Fujinon.
Light entering at the very edges of the objective leaves the central 20% of the Fujinon completely dark. 40% of the 2003 Obie 15x70 is left dark. Only the central 4% of the 15x70 Ultra is dark. The Ultra is clearly the winner here.
For those who like to interpolate, you can find the point where they cross. Some of you may remember my laser tests from a few years ago. This is the laser test repeated. Some day I'll plot all this stuff.
Fujinon FMT-SX 16x70
exit pupil is 100% illuminated by light at 50% out from center
exit pupil is 50% illuminated by light at 90% out from center
exit pupil is 40% illum (20% dark) by light from the very edge of the objective
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70
exit pupil is 100% illuminated by light at 45% out from center
exit pupil is 50% illuminated by light at 96% out from center
exit pupil is 48% illum (4% dark) by light from the very edge of the objective
Oberwerk 2003 15x70
exit pupil is 100% illuminated by light at 40% out from center
exit pupil is 50% illuminated by light at 83% out from center
exit pupil is 30% illum (40% dark) by light from the very edge of the objective
For comparison I include here one of the best performances I have measured, the BT100 with 14mm Radians. I also include the Fujinon FMT-SX 10x70, not the worst binocular measured, but I found the comparison to the Ultra intersting.
Fujinon FMT-SX 10x70
exit pupil is 100% illuminated by light at 35% out from center
exit pupil is 50% illuminated by light at 85% out from center
exit pupil is 35% illum (30% dark) by light from the very edge of the objective
Oberwerk BT100 with 14mm Radians
exit pupil is 100% illuminated by light at 65% out from center
exit pupil is always more than 50% illuminated
exit pupil is 55% illum (0% dark) by light from the very edge of the objective
Since I sometimes have trouble accessing attachments through a firewall, I also include here a link to the same graphic posted as a jpg in my gallery.
Exit Pupil Illumination Profile of the Ultra 15x70
much more to come.
edit 8-31 9pm revised attachment
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
Edited by EdZ (09/15/06 06:50 AM)
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
I'm trying to cook stir fry and read this at the same time!
so, I'll be short for now...
I was hoping you'd get your hands on a pair of these and review them.....
Clear dark skies...
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
Mark9473
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 2699
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
Great work Ed! Looking forward to the "much more to come".
--------------------
Mark
Leica 8x20; Vixen 8x42; Swift 8.5x44, 10x50 and 20x80; TS 7x50; Orion 15x63
WO Megrez II 80 FD + Baader 90° T2 Amici
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Ed ,
With much more added to this , it will start to look like a MINI - REVIEW !
I hope Joad sees fit to include in the relevent section :-)
Seriously , very interesting information here .
Regards , Kenny
--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton
Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera
|
Joad
Wordsmith
Reged: 03/22/05
Posts: 11919
|
|
Joad is never touching the mini-review section again, not after what happened last time.  (Please don't ask  ). When EdZ has completed his work, he'll put his review in the proper place.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Ultra 15x70 - Some first observations.
Close Focus Distance
Field of View
Collimation
Eye Relief/FOV
Field Sharpness
Limiting Magnitude
Chromatic Aberration
Viewing / Contrast
I did manage to get a few minutes of daylight tests in, but not enough time. Incomplete results so far on USAF resolution tests, will be reported later. However, one noticable difference in actual vs specified became apparent. The specified close focus of this binocular is 10 meters. That's 33 feet. With eyeglasses correct vision, my sample has an actual measured close focus of 120 feet or 36 meters!
Full field of view spans from Gamma (Y)Del to Eta (n)Del, almost exact. This is 4.35°. Close to the specified 4.4°, this is wider than the 4.0° Fujinon and about the same as the Oberwerk 2003 15x70.
Collimation was dead on. Checking numerous times on a 1 arcminute double, I could not even see any degree of minor mis-adjustment. Using a 1 arcmin double at 15x, I would easily be able to see even if it were off by 20-30 arcseconds. These aren't even off by 15 arcseconds. Images merged completely. The field of view in the barrels overlaps nearly perfectly.
I wish the eye relief could be a little longer for us eyeglass wearers. I cannot see the outer right edge with my R eye and I cannot see the outer left edge with my L eye, but together with both eyes I can see to both edges. The L eye can see the far right edge of field and the R eye can see the far left edge of filed. It seems as though I can see the entire fov, but the field stop is somewhat blurred. When I took my glasses off to have a quick look, I noticed the field stops more distinct. These are similar to how I use and see with the Fujinons.
Stars begin to show minor but acceptable elongation (elongation parallel to field edge) at 55% to 60% out from center. It begins to get unacceptable about 70-75% out. Significant radial elongation and coma really distort stars at 80-85% out. This may be a combination of astigmatism and coma. I did not identify any spherical aberration. No bloated circular stars seen.
Under a mag 5.4 sky that was intermitently cloudy and then very clear, stars of mag 10.1 to 10.4 were seen readily. Fainter stars at first seen with averted vision could later be seen directly. Five faintest stars seen were all between mag 10.7 and 10.83. No attempts at mag 10.9 or mag 11.0 were seen. This puts faintest stars right in line with the other Oberwerk 15x70.
I could see some minor CA on Vega, some blue with Vega on-axis. A hint of false blue color was seen on Altair. No color was seen on Deneb. No off-axis color was seen on any of the three. All three of these very bright stars showed the distinct spiking often seen on bright stars. No other objects viewed throughout the remainder of the night showed any of these affects.
As far as true color, Mu Cephei showed up as a distinct orange color.
I viewed about 20 deep sky objects. Several that were nice to see were M71, a prominet but small hazy patch; M57, still very small but obviously not a star, no dark center; the North America nebula, not distinct, but some areas noticed, an indicator of good contrast; the Double Cluster, the Owl 457 and Stock 2 all pretty sights; NGC 7789, a few suspected resolved, also an indicator of good contrast.
An enjoyable first night out!
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
starramus
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/01/04
Posts: 1124
|
|
Quote:
Ultra 15x70 - Some first observations.
I did manage to get a few minutes of daylight tests in, but not enough time. Incomplete results so far on USAF resolution tests, will be reported later. However, one noticable difference in actual vs specified became apparent. The specified close focus of this binocular is 10 meters. That's 33 feet. With eyeglasses correct vision, my sample has an actual measured close focus of 120 feet or 36 meters!
Full field of view spans from Gamma (Y)Del to Eta (n)Del, almost exact. This is 4.35°. Close to the specified 4.4°, this is wider than the 4.0° Fujinon and about the same as the Oberwerk 2003 15x70.
Collimation was dead on. Checking numerous times on a 1 arcminute double, I could not even see any degree of minor mis-adjustment. Using a 1 arcmin double at 15x, I would easily be able to see even if it were off by 20-30 arcseconds. These aren't even off by 15 arcseconds. Images merged completely. The field of view in the barrels overlaps nearly perfectly.
I wish the eye relief could be a little longer for us eyeglass wearers. I cannot see the outer right edge with my R eye and I cannot see the outer left edge with my L eye, but together with both eyes I can see to both edges. The L eye can see the far right edge of field and the R eye can see the far left edge of filed. It seems as though I can see the entire fov, but the field stop is somewhat blurred. When I took my glasses off to have a quick look, I noticed the field stops more distinct. These are similar to how I use and see with the Fujinons.
Stars begin to show minor but acceptable radial elongation (elongation parallel to field edge) at 55% to 60% out from center. It begins to get unacceptable about 70-75% out. Significant radial elongation and coma really distort stars at 80-85% out. This may be a combination of astigmatism and coma. I did not identify any spherical aberration. No bloated circular stars seen.
Under a mag 5.4 sky that was intermitently cloudy and then very clear, stars of mag 10.1 to 10.4 were seen readily. Fainter stars at first seen with averted vision could later be seen directly. Five faintest stars seen were all between mag 10.7 and 10.83. No attempts at mag 10.9 or mag 11.0 were seen. This puts faintest stars right in line with the other Oberwerk 15x70.
I could see some minor CA on Vega, some blue with Vega on-axis. A hint of false blue color was seen on Altair. No color was seen on Deneb. No off-axis color was seen on any of the three. All three of these very bright stars showed the distinct spiking often seen on bright stars. No other objects viewed throughout the remainder of the night showed any of these affects.
As far as true color, Mu Cephei showed up as a distinct orange color.
I viewed about 20 deep sky objects. Several that were nice to see were M71, a prominet but small hazy patch; M57, still very small but obviously not a star, no dark center; the North America nebula, not distinct, but some areas noticed, an indicator of good contrast; the Double Cluster, the Owl 457 and Stock 2 all pretty sights; NGC 7789, a few suspected resolved, also an indicator of good contrast.
An enjoyable first night out!
edz
edz,
I am trying to get a handle on the consistency of quality of this binocular. I don't mean to pry, but how did you obtain this pair? Was it an outright straight away purchase from Oberwerk or did Kevin hand select this pair for your testing. I am wondering what I can expect from an off the shelf model.
Regards and clear skies,
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Well, I can't imagine there is a vendor out there that could hand pick a binocular with the intention of having it score higher in the battery of tests that I put it through. Frankly, I have no idea if this binocular was hand picked, but I would guess about the only thing the vendor could ensure is that collimation is correct and make sure it passes their normal QC. There are some tests I do that I know no one else is doing, so I can't imagine they could test for all the other stuff that I test for, nor could they hand pick one that they could ensure would do better.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
more notes and observations with Ultra 15x70
Coatings
Exit Pupil Diameter / magnification
USAF Resolution Chart Tests
Double Star Resolution / Field Sharpness
Outer Field Aberrations
I checked the coatings by comparing to several other models I own.
The coatings on the Obewerk Ultra are:
Less reflective than the 2003 Oberwerk 15x70 and Pentax PCF 10x50 WP.
About equally reflective as the Oberwerk Mariner 10x60, BT100 and the William Optics 7x50 ED.
Equally or slightly more reflective than the Fujinon FMT-SX 16x70.
Definitely more reflective than the Nikon SE 12x50.
No binocular I own has matched the non-reflective character of the Nikon SE coatings. This is my top-of-the-line. Held at the same angle you can look into the Ultra or the Fujinon or the Mariner and you can just see your face with variations in light and dark areas. Pick up a Nikon Action Extreme or some moderate quality binocular and you can see detail such as eyes or rims on glasses. Looking into the Nikon SE, you have a hard time even seeing the outline of your head and you cannot see any features on your face at all. The Ultra coatings are definitely towards the high end in the scheme of things. Out of the 35 or so binoculars that I've tested, among a few lesser than best, I've selected 4 of maybe the top 5-6 to compare them to and they seem to fall right in the middle of that group.
At close focus exit pupil measures approx 4.9mm = magnification 14.2x
focused on stars exit pupil measures approx 4.68 = magnification 14.95x
For my eyeglasses corrected vision, the eyepieces are both at +1 diopter for focus at infinity. For close focus they are both at +6 dipoters, with no room left to turn when focused at a distance of 125 feet.
USAF resolution tests
15x70 Oberwerk Ultra actual and apparent readings (revised)
easily see 6.82", seen clear 6.08", horz seen, vert suspect 5.4"
easily see 102", seen clear 91", horz seen, vert suspect 81"
For comparison, see some values from other binoculars:
actual
16x70 Fujinon FMT SX clearly see 6.08", suspect 5.4", no see 4.83"
15x70 Oberwerk 2003 clearly see 6.82", horz only 6.08", suspect 5.4"
12x50 Nikon SE clearly see 8.61", see both 7.65", no see 6.82"
apparent
16x70 Fujinon FMT SX clearly see 97", suspect 86", no see 77"
15x70 Oberwerk 2003 clearly see 102", horz only 91", suspect 81"
12x50 Nikon SE clearly see 103", see both 92", no see 82"
double star resolution
(compare to sharpness rating table posted in my gallery )
100 Herc 14.2" seen clear out to 55% = 213 arcsec at 55% out
Theta Ser 22" seen cleaar out to 65% = 330 arcsec at 65% out
resolution appears even all the way around, no off center sharpness
Still I do not have enough readings to get a complete sharpness profile, but out to 65%, this is a bit less sharp than the Fujinon 16x70 and the Mariner 10x60. However it is not equal to the sharpness of the Nikon SE 12x50. I need more readings for the outer fov. However, so far, what I see is this binocular seems to have a fov sharpness not to dissimilar than some others. It is not pin-point sharp all across the field or as some people might say, sharp edge-to-edge.
As I posted yesterday, stars begin to show minor distortion at 55% to 60% out from center. At 70-75% out I could not see a 22 arcsec double as a double star. By 85% out that same 22" double is distorted to a size of approx 1 arcmin and cannot be recognized as stars. I am not sure which aberrations are responsible for the appearance, but is was not simply a circular bloated appearance, so I ruled out spherical aberration. And I don't see the classic point towards the middle with wings towards the outer edge, so I think coma is not dominant. I think it just a pretty normal combination of slight coma and slight astigmatism. A 22" double at 65% out is a pretty stringent test. I would put the usable field at about 75-80%, not as good as the best, but better than many.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Mark9473
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 2699
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
so the bubble is bursting...
--------------------
Mark
Leica 8x20; Vixen 8x42; Swift 8.5x44, 10x50 and 20x80; TS 7x50; Orion 15x63
WO Megrez II 80 FD + Baader 90° T2 Amici
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
so the bubble is bursting...
based on?
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Mark9473
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 2699
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
Well it seems to me these are not the next level of sharpness and edge sharpness. Some initial reports hinted at spectacular off-axis performance, but that appears not to be the case.
--------------------
Mark
Leica 8x20; Vixen 8x42; Swift 8.5x44, 10x50 and 20x80; TS 7x50; Orion 15x63
WO Megrez II 80 FD + Baader 90° T2 Amici
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
From the minimal marketing speak, which is limited to the descriptions on vendor websites, and from the reviews, the supposed strengths of these new binoculars is supposed to be :
1) Sharpness. UO Kunming website claims "sharp to edge" which is surely optimistic. The question in my mind, is not how sharp are they compared to Nikon or Fujinon, but how sharp are they compared to the usual Chinese giants - Oberwerk, Garrett, Stellarvue, that are pre-Series 8. Even if they are not as sharp as the good Japanese glass, if sharpness noticeably exceeds the best pre-Series 8 Chinese glass (like the SV 20x85), then I would not consider the bubble to be bursting. I really didn't expect these new binos to be "Fuji killers", but I did expect a noticeable improvement is overall field sharpness against the typical Chinese giant.
2) Build. These are supposed to be heavier and more robust mechanically than the typical Chinese giant. Here they are again reviewed to be similar to the Fujinon.
3) Contrast. From what I have read, including EdZ latest posts about the Ultra, contrast appears to be very good. Again, in my mind, the question is not comparing the Series-8 to the Fujinon, but in comparing it to other Chinese giants. I would not expect the Ultra (or any permutation of the Series 8) to beat the Fujinon because it is not manufactured by Fujinon.
Perhaps a bubble is being deflated a little though, and that bubble is the hope that these new Series-8 binos would represent a major step up in quality for the Chinese - perhaps instead of major, we have gotten a moderate step up. Still not too bad, and I am still drooling to get my hands on a 22x85 version.
(Although, I'll be perfectly honest, I was HOPING EdZ would come out proclaiming it the new FUJI-KILLER. But, the rational part of my brain knew that was not going to happen.)
Clear dark skies...
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
I think what may be the most significant strength of these binoculars so far is mechanically the apparent ruggedness and optically the apparent contrast. But it's still to early to tell. I have no where near completed the sharpness of field measurments (as I indicated above) so it's premature to judge. I have done very little yet to compare contrast, but the USAF test and some first views M71 and NA neb) gives an indication that it seems good. I've done no side-by-side viewing yet!
As far as sharpness tests go, there are few people out there that are measuring and placing sharpness at position in the field. In fact, I'm not sure I can think of any. Many people are simply commenting on view without precision of measure. Geezz, I've read comments that the Burgess 20x80 LW is sharp edge to edge and I've found that binocular to have outer field performance that I would consider deplorable. Take what I say and put it in perspective with everything else I've published. refer to chart link above.
There will be plenty of time for me to comment on view, once I get a few weeks of viewing time. For now we have partial measures to go by, and I have never been one to make comments like superior, outstanding or spectacular unless it just proves to be the best. It's just not my nature. I'm far from being able to make any comments like that. I don't know enough about this binocular yet.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
Edited by EdZ (09/01/06 09:26 AM)
|
Stephonon
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/28/05
Posts: 1873
Loc: Melbourne, Australia
|
|
In Australia Aquila Optical (AOE) sell what would appear to be the same binos as "MX Ultra", there is 10x50, 10.5x70 and 15x70 models. See http://www.aoe.com.au/binoculars.html
The sound very promising.
--------------------
Steve H --- Dobs: Saxon/SW 10" f/4.7, GSO 8" f/6, custom truss 8" f/4 | Intes MK-65 (6" Mak) + EQ | binos: Pentax PCF 8x40, AOE 10x50MX Ultra, AOE 12x60.
|
Rick
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/12/05
Posts: 2574
Loc: Tokyo, Japan
|
|
Quote:
I think what may be the most significant strength of these binoculars so far is mechanically the apparent ruggedness
Perhaps a "tripod tip over" test is needed  Interesting you metioned the Nikon SE coatings. I noticed my 10x42 SE's put up brighter images and I saw more stars than I did in the Vixen 10x44ED. And in my brief time I had the Fujinons up against the Nikon 18x70, I sensed it put up brighter daytime images as well.
clear skies,
Rick
--------------------
www.japanastro.com
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
Perhaps a "tripod tip over" test is needed
I actually thought about it. decided against it.
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Ultra 15x70 -
Off-Axis Resolution Using USAF Tests
Field Sharpness Point Sources vs USAF Charts
From previous testing on numerous binoculars I have found the correllation of photopic (daylight) USAF resolution : scotopic (night) point source resolution is between 90:155 arcsec and 95:160 arcsec, or approx 1:1.7.
previously reported above
15x70 Oberwerk Ultra actual and apparent USAF readings
clearly see 6.82", horz clear, vert suspect 6.08", see orientation 5.4"
clearly see 102", horz clear, vert suspect 91", see orientation only 81"
from on-axis observation, I could clearly see gamma delphinus as elongated and could tell the primary from the secondary, but would stop just short of calling it split. That's 144 arcseconds apparent elongated. From these actual readings it falls right about where I would expect. Therefore I will use these USAF off-axis values to estimate sharpness and I will use a factor of 1:1.7.
I did measure some off-axis resolution using the charts.
USAF off-axis resolution measured
at 50% out from center, see 8.61", for an apparent res of 129 arcsec
at 75-80% out from center, see 13.65", for an apparent res of 204 arcsec
These would give predicted apparent point source resolution of 219 arcsec res at 50% out and 347 arcsec at 75-80% out.
Compared to some actual off-axis resolution measured and posted above
100 Herc 14.2" seen clear out to 55% = 213 arcsec at 55% out
Theta Ser 22" seen clear out to 65% = 330 arcsec at 65% out
the estimated point source resolution based on USAF are not to far off from the few actual readings that I have.
So, compare those estimated results to field sharpness of other binoculars on my charts. 219 arcsec res at 50% out and 347 arcsec at 75-80% out is only met or exceeded by a handful of binoculars; the Obie BT100 (entirely dependant on choice of eyepieces), the Fujinon 16x70, the Pentax 16x60, Nikon SE 12x50, Obie Mariner 10x60 and the WO 7x50 ED. Those are the top of the class on my charts. Where the Ultra ends up fitting in this groups remains to be seen, but this seems to place them in the top group for sharpness.
for comparison purposes
16x70 Fujinon FMT SX clearly see 6.08", suspect 5.4", no see 4.83"
16x70 Fujinon FMT SX clearly see 97", suspect 86", no see 77"
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
BillC
on a new path
Reged: 06/04/04
Posts: 2109
Loc: Washington, USA
|
|
Some time back, a newcomer started bashing the Fujinon F-series—as if that would not raise the eyebrows of any knowledgeable observer—and then started the line of superlatives to support his choice of cheap Chinese binoculars. When this kind of thing starts, whether the person is pulling stuff off the top of his head or from the sales literature, it can cause problems for the unwary.
Thirty years ago, when you bought a Pentax, or Nikon, or Fujinon, or . . . you pretty much knew what you were getting. No, it didn’t mean that the product you were buying was actually manufactured by the company whose name was on the side. But, in those days, most folks didn’t have a clue about the mix & match of the binocular world. They didn’t know that even some of the BEST companies had most of their lower end stuff produced by the great unknown companies of Asia. Thus, a Pentax was a Pentax, and . . .
There were just not that many “manufacturers.” But, think about it. Probably three quarters of the binoculars NAMES discussed on this list didn’t even exist 10 years ago. Some didn’t exit 5 years ago. Competition is getting fierce. Take the AP bino, which is also the Oberwerk bino, which is also the Garrett bino, which is soon to be the Captain’s bino. Who can really make a living when they have to beat the prices of all the others?
Fortunately, with my clientele, I don’t have to play that game and sell stuff for two bucks more than it costs. But, with competition growing and Chinese companies seemingly having no compunction about selling to anyone with $5,000 and a couple of empty suitcases, there is always the potential for legends to start that have the technical accuracy of the Paul Bunyon story.
I will say that in speaking with the manufacturer, I did not pick up anything but a conservative representation of the product. I found this very refreshing, and the binocular itself far exceeding my expectations. And as far as collimation goes, there was 0 step (dipvergence) and only 2 minutes of convergence. Not only is that better than JTII standards, and better than MILSPEC, it even surpasses what Chief Stagg had Cory and me do onboard USS Grand Canyon.
The bino that is now being called the Series 8 is not a “Fuji Killer,” as some have postulated. However, FOR THE MONEY, I haven’t seen anything that will touch it. And as it becomes more popular, I think the “collimation” threads will become almost extinct—although I am hearing that about 20% are arriving in need of collimation.
Just a thought.
Bill
PS While there may be many things that COULD be done to change SLIGHTLY the configuration of any bino, it should be understood that the manufacturer is in the driver’s seat on this. They are not going to change ANYTHING without a rather hefty increase in price—they cannot do things onesy-twosey. Not wanting to deal with that kind of stuff is why the people who actually make binoculars don’t want the average consumer to even know their names. Mix that with the fact that MOST of the importers are very small and very new, and you have a great opportunity to have the instruments delivered as designed. Zach Garrett has a good thing going by having Cory Suddarth in his back pocket to see to it that everything that goes out, goes out collimated. I’ll be doing the same thing. However, as stated, I will not be selling them at going-out-of business prices.
Now, if I could just keep Suddarth from calling me up twice a week and asking me how to collimate binoculars, I could get some work done. 
--------------------
William J. Cook, Chief Opticalman, USNR-Ret.
Founding Editor, Amateur Telescope Making Journal
20-year vet. of Captain's Nautical Supplies, Optics Dept. Mgr.
Optics Machanic, WG11-3306, Ft. Lewis, Tacoma,WA
Yata, Yata, Yata . . .
|
Jeff Morgan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 1531
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
Quote:
UO Kunming website claims "sharp to edge" which is surely optimistic.
Perhaps on terrestrial targets ...
I too am still waiting on something comparable to a Fujinon or Canon.
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
These " series 8 " models certainly appear to be a step in the " right direction " but the name Ultra Series 8 Premium Grizzley could surely be improved upon , does anyone agree ? :-)
Clear skies ,
Kenny
--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton
Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
Quote:
but the name Ultra Series 8 Premium Grizzley could surely be improved upon
How about Mega Deluxe Wolverine?
MikeG
--------------------
Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
starramus
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/01/04
Posts: 1124
|
|
Quote:
Some time back, a newcomer started bashing the Fujinon F-series—as if that would not raise the eyebrows of any knowledgeable observer—and then started the line of superlatives to support his choice of cheap Chinese binoculars. When this kind of thing starts, whether the person is pulling stuff off the top of his head or from the sales literature, it can cause problems for the unwary.
Bill,
Actually what i did was compare the new version of the Fujinon to some of the "cheap Chinese binoculars" that i returned. Maybe the details of that exchange have been dulled by time. The Fujinons that I received did in fact exhibit many of the "qualities" of Celestron 15X70s that I had returned. You will have to admit yourself that the build quality of the new version is not near up to the standards of the old model. And I was not pulling stuff off of the top of my head or from sales literature. I was pulling directly from what i was receiving out of the eyepieces of the Fujinons. I was shocked at what I was seeing as was another report that i read here on CN. As i stated before I have an over 8 year old pair of the 7X50 Fujinon FMTSXs that i have owned since new. I will not give them up for anything. These I will keep until these eyes stop scooping starlight. And what is more i was originally against Chinese manufactured binoculars, but the last pair of Celestron 15X70s that i received are unbelievable. It may be that Amazon.com got tired of eating the shipping charges and ordered me a special pair. No matter how it happened i am elated that it did. I had these binos out all Tuesday night and was astounded at the quality in this cheap Chinese binocular. They put the returned Fujinons to shame. However I still long for the premium promise of the Fujinons and have considered buying a used pair of the older version. However things can happen in shipment and i have decided against that route as without a warranty you are up the creek. I will very soon purchase another new pair of the 16X70s from another dealer and hope for the best. If there is a Fuji killer out there it may be Fujinon themselves if their QC is getting this lax. I may be a new comer here, but have been in amateur astronomy for many years. I am not the binocular afficianado that many who frequent this forum are, but I can guarantee i know what I am supposed to see in the eyepiece. Binoculars are your life and career and i respect that, but even Fujinon can put out a bad binocular.
Regards and clear skies,
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70
APM calls them the Marine, SO
we could call them the Ultra Premium Series 8 Marine Grizzley. 
incidental measurements
eyeguard folde | | |
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 