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
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Bill, my prospecting partner keeps his uncased 8x30 Bushnell under the front seat of his jeep, and they are so badly out, that I can't stand to use them!
When I pointed out to him that they were badly out of allignment, and had him look through my 8x30 Swarovski for comparison, he remarked that he couldn't see any difference between the two! 
Since I know him to be a very honest man, I can only conclude that there actually are folks out there who have eyes that will adjust to any amount of mis collimation!
In 1971, I took my 1943, Mark 28, model O, USN,Bausch and Lomb 7x50 to a collimation shop in San Diego that employed Navy Optical men. I complained that they were a bit out of collimation.
He took them into the collimation lab, and upon returning he remarked that he was amazed that I could detect such a small degree of mis collimation!
Cheers and Beers!
Bob
Edited by EdZ (09/15/06 04:52 PM)
|
btschumy
Think Astronomy
Reged: 04/13/04
Posts: 1110
Loc: Austin, TX, USA
|
|
Perhaps your partner has one eye with vision so bad that the brain ignores its input. He effectively will only be using the one good eye and thus not have true binocular vision. My mother's eyes are like this and she can use mis-collimated binoculars without noticeable problems.
--------------------
Bill Tschumy
Where is M13? Freeware -- Add a new dimension to your observing.
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
" There are some people out there who can tie their eyes in a knot and not be bothered by misallignment"
Tschumy, above is a quote by Bill Cook that I replied to on the "Oberwerk Ultra 15x70" thread.
As a direct reply to Bill Cook, it was in context and made sense when it was posted on the thread it was ment to be on!
However, Edz choose, for reasons known only to him,to move my comments, to Bill Cook's post, to another thread...this one, which I did not create'
Go figure?
Bob
Edited by Bob W6PU (09/15/06 08:16 PM)
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Well, that would be because I saw this post in reply to my last post. I looked back thru about a dozen posts and scratched my head and said what is this? it looks like this is completely off topic for this thread content, so I moved it.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
My post was clearly addressed to Bill, not to Edz!
If you had read Bill Cook's post on page 2, nine posts down from the top, you would have seen his remark regarding people who can not recognize out of collimation binoculars.
My reply to Bill, supported his observations!
An apology, and moving my comments back to the thread to which it was intended is due!
Thank you!
Bob
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
My post was clearly addressed to Bill, not to Edz!
If you had read Bill Cook's post on page 2, nine posts down from the top, you would have seen his remark regarding people who can not recognize out of collimation binoculars.
My reply to Bill, supported his observations!
An apology, and moving my comments back to the thread to which it was intended is due!
Thank you!
Bob
Well once again, your post was posted in reply to my last post, regardless of who you addressed it to. Now that you have identified the post to which you intended to reply, it cannot be moved as it is stuck in the middle of the thread. You can trust in the future that I will not go searching every post in a thread to find that a post is off topic post to another off topic post.
As a regular funtion of this forum, I cut out off topic posts, when they can be cut, and post them as stand alone. I will continue as I have always.
Posts cannot be moved back into threads.
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
|
|
Before this gets too far along, I was being somewhat facetious about the eyes. Yes, some people can accommodate more misalignment than others. However, I believe that some folks just have a self-inflicted “lazy eye.” Through a lack of ability—or desire—they just don’t “get it.” This goes a long way toward explaining why some folks will go to their graves bragging about certain binoculars that others wouldn’t take home on a bet.
Have I tested this in a scientific manner. Not enough to suit the dictates of the “scientific method.” However, when, over a period of many years, I can show customers that the binoculars they thought were: “spot on,” “couldn’t be better,” “aligned to a tee,” or “perfectly collimated,” are in fact out of maximum allowable collimation error for old JTII standards (by a factor of 3 or 4), I have enough evidence to convince me that some people just do not have the acuity of PERCEPTION—not vision—to be qualified to pass judgment on an instrument’s collimation. Some birders can see a Cedar Waxwing at 30 feet and note that the yellow is about a quarter-inch further up on the tail feathers than expected, that the left third toe has been broken, and that, based on the conditions noted around the eye and beak, the bird has some cold-like symptoms, while a hunter might see a deer a 30 yards and notice little more than “yep, that’s a deer.”
Both birder and hunter can have the same visual acuity without being able to see things equally clear because of differences in acuity of perception.
The sad part is that as long as there are those who base their opinions regarding a binocular’s performance on a low-level of perceptive acuity, a high-level of believing what they hear from the 19 year-old optical expert working the sporting goods department at the local discount store, the rest of the buying public is going to have to refuse to believe anything they hear and only half of what they see.
As one low-end importer is purported to have said to his national sales staff; “Binoculars are not made to look through; they're made to sell.”
Just a thought.
Bill
--------------------
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 . . .
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Right on Bill!
I'm constantly amazed by how so many people have gotten so use to mediocre binoculars, that they just accept that binoculars are supposed to be a little blurry, or mis alligned.
My own younger sister, who is a surgeon, and an avid photographer, will buy a thousand dollar camera lens, but will settle for a pair of cheap Walmart binoculars!
Once again, these were Bushnels, and she thought that they were wonderful. I guess after all, that is what matters!
At least these were in collimation, and of course, I told her that they were very nice.
Don't we sometimes see the same sort of thing in our astronomy hobby?
A newcomer will buy a department store telescope, and think that the views that they see are fine. That is untill they look through a friend's good instrument, and are "educated" to what really good views are like!
Except for the wealthy, or those who really know what good is, I'm surprised that you can even sell quality binoculars, Bill!
As long as the Walmarts of the world continue to offer plastic hard wrapped wonders, hanging from a hook, things will just get worse, I'm afraid!
Take care!
Bob
|
ChrisR
professor emeritus
Reged: 02/11/05
Posts: 518
Loc: Washington
|
|
Just a thought, (I get one a week), but I have noticed this summer that objects, (ie double stars, Saturns rings, craters on the moon) that I had trouble seeing in the begining of the summer, I am able to see much better now. I am wondering if maybe my eyes needed some training, and because I got out and looked up, two to three times a week it seemed like I was able to get more details looking at the moon or looking at Saturn or Jupiter. Now could the seeing conditions have improved, I don't know, but something seemed different. Looking back at my logs I can definently see that I was describing more and more details on certain objects, especially the moon, than I was at the begining of the summer. I'm just saying could it also be that the people who, "can't see a difference," just haven't had enough exposure/practice seeing the difference?
Just my weekly thought.
Peace,
Chris
--------------------
Journeyman Optical Technician
Amateur Astronomer.
All around good guy
Orion, StarMax 127
Canon, 12x36 IS
Minolta, 8x25 WR
Halco, 7x50
Nippon Kogaku, Micron 7x35
|
btschumy
Think Astronomy
Reged: 04/13/04
Posts: 1110
Loc: Austin, TX, USA
|
|
Quote:
Well once again, your post was posted in reply to my last post, regardless of who you addressed it to.
edz
This is what happens when someone uses the "Quick Reply" at the bottom of the thread. The post appears as a response to the last posting on the thread. If you really want to reply to a previous posting, it's best to take the time to scroll back up and hit the "Reply" link on that posting. That way everyone can know to whom the reply is directed.
--------------------
Bill Tschumy
Where is M13? Freeware -- Add a new dimension to your observing.
|
photonovore
Moonatic
Reged: 12/24/04
Posts: 2472
Loc: tacoma wa
|
|
Chris the seeing *is* better this time of year, generally speaking. For example, the September waning Moon, this September and last, has consistently offered the best resolution opportunities of any other month. The difference is dramatic compared to winter and summer and even a bit superior to spring averages. I think this is related to the fact that there is minimal furnace useage this time of year coupled with a lower differential between daytime and nightime temps. Together this makes for less localized temp differential generally, thus the steadier air. There could be some sort of seasonal weather pattern factoring into this too, i don't know. But September seeing seems to be the best of the year nonetheless.
--------------------
Mardi
4" achromat, ETX-70.
Whitepeak Lunar Observatory Website
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Hi Bill T, thank's for your input!
I thought that Bill Cook's remarks regarding peoples awareness ( or lack of awareness)to binocular collimation, was both amusing and very true. My response to his post was both in context, and very much to the point!
Quite often I've noticed that some participants in these forums apparently do not bother to read other people views, but seem to be only interested in what they themselves have to say!
An example of this would be when, for instance, a member answers a question regarding a specific eyepiece, and does so in great detail and clarity.
Six posts down from this,( and 20 minutes later) you find that another poster will ask the same question, as if he had never bothered to read the previous replies, which answer his question in great detail!
Another remark that Bill Cook made, indicates that he did not find it difficult to admitt when he had made a mistake, and to apologize!
He goes on to amplify this with his remark(which I paraphrase) "heck, I even will apologize for things that I didn't do"
I have great respect for Bill Cook, and indeed, any man who has both the humility and honesty to admitt an error, and the humor to joke about himself!
Addressing Chris' remarks regarding the improvment in seeing conditions with the advent of Fall, and cooler weather, I have also found this to be true here in New Mexico Chris!
Due to six weeks of rain which has soaked into the ground, we still have enough moisture in the evening sky to cut back on the transparancy, but the atmospheric turbulence seems to have abated!
One of my ongoing goals is to try and observe the faint central star within the Ring Nebula, with my 10" Newt.
As you know, this take both high power and exceptionaly steady and transparent seeing conditions. It has been done with a 10" scope, but generally is a target for at least a 14.5" or greater, aperture!
Cheers!
Bob
10" Coast Inst. Dob. Mtd. Treckerscope
35mm B&L WF, 32mm GSO Plossl,
21mm and 13mm Stratus, 17mm Baader Hyperion
10mm Speers Waler
11x80 Vixen, 15x70 Oberwerk, 7x50 Zeiss/Hensoldt
7x50 USN/Bausch and Lomb, 8x30W Swarovski
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Bill C, in your position as the owner of a binocular and optics establishment, you are in a unique position to observe the appreciation( or lack of), of customers to expensive binoculars, and telescopes.
Have you ever tried showing a customer, who was not familiar with brand names, a fine old Carl Zeiss binocular, and perhaps, an inexpensive import, without mentioning any prices?
Sort of like, "here, try these two, or three, and see which one you like best".
I have tried this test with some of my friends and relatives, and usually they will unknowingly pick the expensive model and offer comments such as,
" this one is much clearer," or, "that one is much brighter!"
I have one old miscollimated one, and I will often get the resonse of "this one hurts my eyes," or "this one make me dizzy", when I present them, after first having had them look through fine binoculars!
Back in the 70s, in San Diego, there was an excellent binocular sales and repair establishment, that I often visited! I believe that it may have been on Shelter Island, but the name eludes me right now.
It was here that I had my USN/B&L, 7x50s collimated.
I was, and still am, very proud of this excellent binocular, and during one visit, I proceeded to regale this old Navy Chief, Optical Man, on the merits of my old Mark 28, and it's inability to be surpassed by any other 7x50.
The man was very friendly, and listened to me patiently, and then he
removed a new 7x50 import from his stock, and had me try them out, and asked what my opinion of them was.
Well, I was flabbergasted! These new 7x50s were so obviously superior in edge of field sharpness to my B&Ls, that I couldn't believe it, and told him so!
He told me that they were a Japanese inport,and his top of the line model, and sold for $175, which was a lot of money, back then!
I think that they may have been called Sea King, or something like that, but I can't remember who the manufacturer was! Perhaps Nikon or Fuji, I just don't recall!
This tought me that some folks can be educated, and really do appreciate better optics, if they are exposed to them, and perhaps shown what to look for in a optical instrument!
If the seller is "easy going" and has a friendly attitude, the buyer will often come around, unless of course they have a closed mind and are complete block heads!
Cheers!
Bob
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14686
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
Chris -
It may be improved seeing conditions or perhaps you are more experienced now as an astronomical observer. I too am noticing more detail in clusters and nebulae now than I did my first two seasons in the hobby. And I hear a term thrown about every now and then in the Deep Sky forum - "Galaxy Eyes" ... it's a term for experienced galaxy observers who know how to trick subtle visual details out of the eyepiece when viewing galaxies. And "galaxy eyes" makes it easier to find faint elusive galaxies in the field. Perhaps you are now in possession of fully-developed BINO EYES!
Clear dark skies...
MikeG
PS, BTW, Bill Cook is right on spot again, as usual. When I read about Bill's experiences, I thank my lucky stars that I no longer work in retail! 
--------------------
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!
|
Rich V.
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 985
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada USA
|
|
Quote:
Well, I was flabbergasted! These new 7x50s were so obviously superior in edge of field sharpness to my B&Ls, that I couldn't believe it, and told him so!
He told me that they were a Japanese inport,and his top of the line model, and sold for $175, which was a lot of money, back then!
I think that they may have been called Sea King, or something like that, but I can't remember who the manufacturer was! Perhaps Nikon or Fuji, I just don't recall!
IIRC, Bob, those early '70s Sea King bins were a Swift model. I was shopping for my first 7x50 "astro" binocular at the time and picked up a pair of Swift's "Skipper" instead. These weren't waterproof but I think the Sea Kings were. They seemed ahead of their time though, as they had the first "screw out" adjustable hard plastic eyecups I'd ever seen!
These Swift 7x50s seemed really great to me compared other offerings I'd looked through at the time. The were really heavy though; they nearly killed me carrying them to the bottom of the Grand Canyon (and back!) on my honeymoon in '71.  That was the time I made the realization that compact bins were made for a reason!
You brought back a "deja vu" moment for me!
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33-150x100 Saturn III, 16x70FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Rich, a lot of 60s and 70s binoculars, and telescopes had some unlikely names that might put you off, but were manufactured by some of the premier companies such as Nippon Kagaku, later to market Micron binoculars, and then the Nikon line!
The Japanese manufactured "Unitron", quickly made a name for itself with high quality refracting telescopes in those early years!
There were others, whos names have changed over the years.
Like, who would expect anything but junk from a Sears and Roebuck, or Montgomery Ward astronomy refractor, or binocular, right? Wrong!
Once again, companies such as Nippon Kagaku had their hand in such unlikely products called "Mayflower", or other "funky" sounding names, and were sold by big Dept. stores!
I make a habit of checking out the Cloudy Nights, "Classic Telescopes" forum, where I've learned to ID lots of those oldies but goldies, so I can watch the various swap and buy sites for them.
One overseas CN member posted a photo of a 60s or 70s binocular, that he had paid some ridiculously low price for, and that had some odd ball sounding name.
Just from that photo alone, I could see the quality and "heft" of this binocular, and posted that it looked "expensive" and might be an old pre Micron/Nikon, or maybe Fuji or similar design! This was indeed the case, as it turned out!
While I'm at this, let me toss in a piece of interesting information.
Did you know that our U.S Military buys it's binoculars from those people who make color film? That's right, Fuji heavy Industries!
What a disgrace it is, that the once mighty optical industry of the United States, has fallen into ruin, and optical instrument manufacturing companies, such as Bausch and Lomb, of Rochester N.Y. are but a memory.
Oh, the name lives on, but to my knowledge, there are no longer any U.S. companies who produce their own optics, and manufacture their own binoculars!
Bob...waxing nostalgic, in New Mexico
Edited by Bob W6PU (09/16/06 11:30 PM)
|
Pinewood
professor emeritus
Reged: 12/07/04
Posts: 664
Loc: 40.77638º N 73.982652 W
|
|
Quote:
Have you ever tried showing a customer, who was not familiar with brand names, a fine old Carl Zeiss binocular, and perhaps, an inexpensive import, without mentioning any prices?
Sort of like, "here, try these two, or three, and see which one you like best".
I have tried this test with some of my friends and relatives, and usually they will unknowingly pick the expensive model and offer comments such as,
" this one is much clearer," or, "that one is much brighter!"
Bob,
About eighteen months, ago, I let a colleague look through my Leica 8x32 BN and then the next day, she looked through my Nikon EII. This was in anticipation of an Alaska cruise. She most definitely preferred the EII. I presume that the relaxed, bright, wide field view suited her. Of course, the EII is not a cheap binocular, even if it costs a fraction of the Leica's price.
Edit: I should write that I was not trying to sell my colleague a binocular, I was just showing her two possible choices for her trip. I have sold a few binoculars surplus to my needs. The last was in response to an Astromart ad seeking a Nikon 8x32 SE.
Clear skies,
Arthur
Edited by Pinewood (09/17/06 11:49 AM)
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Arthur, sometimes an individuals preference can be a blessing!
Years ago, while still living in San Diego, I met a chap on a chartered fishing boat. The fishing was over, and we were headed back in.
We both happened to be standing near each other, and were looking through our binoculars.
Mine was a brand new Nikon zoom, if I remember correctly, something like a 7x to 15x by 40 or 45mm? I had paid all of $130 for it at a big CA. discount store, and it actually gave very good views for a zoom binocular, for terrestrial use.
This young chap was fascinated by the high power capability of my Nikon,and let me look through his old 8x30s.
Turns out that his dad happened to be one of the movers and shakers in the San Diego ship building industry, and had bought them for him while on a trip to Tahoe, or some such gathering place of other millionairs like him...LOL!
Long story short, he just had to have my Nikons, and I offered to trade them for his old 8x30s, because they were more compact, and easier for me to carry around, or so I said!
And that Arthur, is how I acquired my Swarovski 8x30W !
We both got off the boat happy with our trade.
The fact that he didn't know a Swarovski from a Polaski, but he did recognized that Nikon was a big name, and that mine were brand new, no doubt made him think that he had gotten the best of the trade!
Bob
Edited by Bob W6PU (09/16/06 11:39 PM)
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
Long story short, he just had to have my Nikons, and I offered to trade them for his old 8x30s, because they were more compact, and easier for me to carry around, or so I said!
And that Arthur, is how I acquired my Swarovski 8x30W !
Not something you should brag about!
edZ
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
mooreorless
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/05/05
Posts: 1543
Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Long story short, he just had to have my Nikons, and I offered to trade them for his old 8x30s, because they were more compact, and easier for me to carry around, or so I said!
And that Arthur, is how I acquired my Swarovski 8x30W !
Not something you should brag about!
edZ
I agree with Edz post,this is a family site.What message does this send out.Just a thought.
Steve
--------------------
Regards,Steve M
"the eights are better" Jim Carmichel of Outdoor Life magazine
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Steve, the story was ment to be humorous, but apparently, some here lack any sense of humor!
Richard and I became friends after this first meeting on the charter boat, and he and his wife visited Jeanie and I often. We also became deep sea fishing chums!
The fact is that Richard drove around in a new Mercedes sports car, and had the where with all to buy any binoculars that he wanted, without asking the price!
He could see that I was drooling over his Swarovski binoculars, and made the trade as a friendly gesture.
It would be helpfull to hear from other members as to how many got a chuckle out of the "origional" story, and recognized the "tounge its cheek" humor!
Cheers!
Bob
Now all of the above information is unecessary, and adds nothing to a funny story, but apparently was necessary to provide!
|
btschumy
Think Astronomy
Reged: 04/13/04
Posts: 1110
Loc: Austin, TX, USA
|
|
Well, to be honest, my original feelings were the same as Edz. It didn't seem to be so much a humorous story as a story about how you put one over on him. Your further details do help to clarify it.
--------------------
Bill Tschumy
Where is M13? Freeware -- Add a new dimension to your observing.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
It is not a funny story.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Gneiss
Vendor (SVO Astro Shop)
Reged: 01/21/05
Posts: 762
Loc: Cambridgeshire, UK
|
|
Quote:
Once again, these were Bushnels, and she thought that they were wonderful. I guess after all, that is what matters!
There are Bushnells and there are Bushnells; certainly they make some budget stuff, but they also make some pretty decent ones...
I found the Trophy range, despite being roof prism binoculars, pretty good for astronomy.
OT. I'm one of those people that simply can't use them with even the slightest hint of mis-collimation, particularly for astronomy. Someone once said "I didn't know there were that many double stars until I used binoculars"
It was this that for many years prevented me from even considering binoculars for astronomy unless I kept one of the lens caps on and used them as a monocular!
Only later in life when I had access to pretty much any set I wished to try did I start to see any real value in them. Ironically since then one of the best sets I've used actually cost next to nothing...
--------------------
See View Observatory (SVO) AstroShop
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
|
Hi Gneiss, and thank's for your input, I hope you got a kick out of my "Swarovski" story!
My wife thought the origional version was very funny, but said that the readers, being smart folks, would pick up on the fact of Richard's dad being a millionaire, and realize that Richard must also be very wealthy, and well able to buy his choice of binoculars!
Apparently some did not, so I wrote..."the rest of the story"...LOL!
I enjoy adding humor to my posts, and making people smile!
I just picked out Bushnell as a well known name of the less expensive binocular. Actually my sister's 8x30W Bushnell is pretty decent, but of course, soft at the wide field edges!
Perhaps Bushnell, like Nikon, has three different price ranges, inexpensive , moderate, and their best, which are expensive. I know that I was very surprised to see my Nikons going for only $135, and when I got home and looked up Nikon Binoculars, I saw that it was their "cheap" line!
Still, even the least expensive of the Nikon line was a very good binocular, even when pushed to 15x !
Take care!
Bob
|
devond
super member
Reged: 08/21/06
Posts: 122
Loc: Northern CA, USA
|
|
Just wanted to chime in with a well timed experience of my own related to this thread.
This weekend I was observing out on the Pacific coast (that would be the "left coast" for you hipsters). I had most of my modest lineup of gear out and was passing binoculars around like a mad man. One fellow camper pulled out his pair of self described "fantastic" mini-binocs and was raving about them. Upon giving them a try I had to surpress the urge to scream as not only were they way, way out of collimation (I think I saw my own rear end with one eye) but the lenses were so dirty that everything looked like Andromeda.
Being the polite fellow I am I passed them back with no mention of how un-impressive the view was. This worked great until someone noticed all the tape holding the rubber armor together on my own "under the seat" Bushnells (16x50). This forced me into explaining what little I know of collimation; since the armor was sacrifised in order to find the prism screws on the Bushnells (which are now decently alligned - yipee).
Well, the poor chap that had loaned me his binos was now asking why he could see two of everything and if this was a collimation issue. I felt bad telling him so as sometimes ignorance truly is bliss, and if you don't perceive a problem is there really a problem at all. He's had years of "fun" with his binocs and now he was upset because there appears to be no way to collimate them and he was now well aware of the misalignment.
Perhaps there's a way to undo the sudden understanding that what you thought was great is in fact a problem, but I didn't have enough Tequila on hand to do the job. 
--------------------
Clear skies,
-DevonD
Bincos: 7x35,10x25,11x56,15x50,15x70,25x100
Scopes: AT66, ST80, 90mm Apex Mak, 100mm Skyview, 8" C8
EPs: Hyps(5,8,21),Pans(22,35),Nagl(3-6),Pentax 10 XW, Orion 3.7 ED-2,Vixen 15 LV, Misc Junk
Mounts: CG-5GT, Orion XHD+PGram, Bogen 501 HDV
Toys: Power-X-Switch S2, BV3 Binoviewer
Money: zilch
---sleep deprivation indicator---
|
Bob W6PU
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 2191
Loc: Springer-N.E.NM
|
Re: Bush | | | |
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: