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
hallelujah
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 07/14/06
Posts: 1660
Loc: Colorado Rocky Mt. High
|
|
BillC,
Why is it that we rarely, if ever, hear about roof prism binoculars being out of collimation?
Thank you
-------------------- Pentax 12x50mm PCF WP II FMC/WP/FP
Pentax 16x60mm PCF WP FMC/WP/FP
Pentax 20x60mm PCF WP II FMC/WP/FP
Orion 12x63mm Mini Giant FMC/JAPAN
Orion 15x70mm Little Giant II FMC/JAPAN
Orion 16x80mm Giant FMC/JAPAN
Orion 20x70mm Little Giant II FMC/JAPAN
Orion 30x80mm MEGAView FMC/JAPAN
Barska 30x80mm X-Trail LW FC
Burgess Optical Series II 20x90mm FMC/WP/FP
Handel's Messiah**Hallelujah! For the LORD God Omnipotent Reigneth
|
Claudio
sage
   
Reged: 07/26/04
Posts: 226
|
|
BillC,
Why is it that frequently, if not always, it is believed that roof prism binoculars don’t get out of collimation?
Claudio
|
pcad
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 01/17/05
Posts: 1501
Loc: Connecticut
|
|
Quote:
BillC,
Why is it that we rarely, if ever, hear about roof prism binoculars being out of collimation?
Thank you
Bill mentioned a couple of very good points. Good roof prism binoculars are expensive and people who buy expensive roof prism binoculars tend to treat their investments nicely.
Roof prism binoculars don't only inhabit the top end of the market but are available at all price points including the cheapest binoculars. I think it's still true that we hear fewer collimation complaints about roof prism designs than porro prism designs.
I may be wrong, but I can't remember the last roof prism design where the prisms had any external adjustments. Most roof prism binoculars I've seen have a "prism cell" that holds the prisms very securely. Some cells are adjustable but many aren't. When installed in the binocular housing there are no adjustments to "tilt" the prisms since most cells are round in cross-section and are fit into what amounts to a tube. The most adjustment I've seen is that the cell can be rotated a bit.
Although there are many different designs for roof prisms the two predominent ones are the Schmidt-Pechem (SP) and the Abbe-Konig (AK) designs. Both result in binoculars without the familiar "dog leg" prism housing of the porro design. The SP design is a straight-thru design and the AK has a slight offset of the visual axis. This means that the "prism cell" of an AK bino has to be in the correct rotational position to align the objectives visual axis to that of the eye piece. This isn't true with the SP design. The SP has no offset and the "prism cell" works well no matter how it's rotated.
In order to throw a prism cell out of alignment that is designed with no adjustments, that is insensitive to rotational position, that is a tube within a tube, you would have to hit it so hard that the tube would buckle/deform or the hinge would be damaged. In either case prism adjustment is the least of the problems.
If there are no prism adjustments on SP binos and effectively none on AK binos how is collimation adjusted? The good old fashioned way, at the objective with eccentric rings or set screws. One of the strong points of an eccentric ring design is that they are difficult to knock out of collimation. Yet another reason we don't hear complaints very often about roof prism collimation.
Did this help?
Peter
-------------------- Peter
Telescopes 25 - 318 mm
Binoculars 15 - 88 mm
Microscope 50x - 1000x
Edited by pcad (09/04/07 06:58 PM)
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Good post , Peter !
Another thing I've noticed , is that regardless of whether a binocular is of roof or Porro prism design , one seldom reads of tales of woe with regard to collimation problems in binoculars with 7x , 8x and 10x magnification !
I think I may know why -- but just to be naughty , and in hope of it proving more educational and beneficial in the long run , I'll say I WONDER why ? :-)
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
|
BillC
on a new path
   
Reged: 06/04/04
Posts: 2110
Loc: Washington, USA
|
|
Most of the 7, 8 and 10 power binos will fit on the traditional UBMM (collimator); larger units won't.
There are more, but any one reason is fine.
Cheers,
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 . . .
|
camvan
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 05/02/05
Posts: 2086
Loc: British Columbia
|
|
Quote:
Most of the 7, 8 and 10 power binos will fit on the traditional UBMM (collimator); larger units won't.
There are more, but any one reason is fine.
Cheers,
Bill
but I want more then one reason! then I can show off and explain why my binoculars are better collimated then others
-------------------- Cameron
"Aperture can only be replaced by even more aperture. Dark transparent skies cannot be replaced by anything else." - Stathis Kafalis
|
BillC
on a new path
   
Reged: 06/04/04
Posts: 2110
Loc: Washington, USA
|
|
Okay, The bigger they come, the harder they fall and the less mechanical strength there is to hold the thing in spec, even at rest.
Most of the BIG units are lower-end units that are not being aimed at the big dollar market, so most don't really have to care.
Finally, it is hard to find a shop these days that is staffed with fully qualified and caring people. They cost more money than most want to spend. And they don't have to. When the average consumer gets his or her big name binocular back from the "manufacturer" they just KNOW it has to be collimated, even when . . .
That's four.
Cheers,
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 . . .
|
mooreorless
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 07/05/05
Posts: 1543
Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa
|
|
Hi Bill,So you are saying a big reason my Leupold 6x30 Yosemite was ok when it fell about 2 1/2 ft. off a table onto concrete was that it was light weight? :-) Thanks for all you do.
-------------------- Regards,Steve M
"the eights are better" Jim Carmichel of Outdoor Life magazine
|
BillC
on a new path
   
Reged: 06/04/04
Posts: 2110
Loc: Washington, USA
|
|
No, you were lucky. You may be lucky 3 or four more times in a row, or never again. How lucky do you feel? Glass obeys no man.
Cheers,
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 . . .
|
billbob
member
Reged: 08/07/07
Posts: 74
Loc: Kimberling City, MO
|
|
Quote:
Glass obeys no man.
You know you've been reading too long when:
I kept reading that as "obies" (as in Oberwerk) and it just didn't make sense. I finally get it.
Bill
-------------------- Orion XT8 w/intelliscope
GO 10x50 HD-WP ss
|
pcad
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 01/17/05
Posts: 1501
Loc: Connecticut
|
|
Maybe I took this thread too seriously? Naahhh!
Peter
-------------------- Peter
Telescopes 25 - 318 mm
Binoculars 15 - 88 mm
Microscope 50x - 1000x
|
edcannon
professor emeritus
Reged: 11/19/03
Posts: 679
Loc: Austin, Texas
|
|
Quote:
... Another thing I've noticed , is that regardless of whether a binocular is of roof or Porro prism design , one seldom reads of tales of woe with regard to collimation problems in binoculars with 7x , 8x and 10x magnification !
I do have two of them that I've told here before -- the family trying to see Comet Ikeya-Zhang with a terribly miscollimated small binocular, and one I found in a store one day. (For what it might have been worth, I told the store clerk that they should not sell that one to anyone.)
Quote:
I think I may know why -- but just to be naughty , and in hope of it proving more educational and beneficial in the long run , I'll say I WONDER why ? :-)
Regards , Kenny
Kenny, Now that people have replied, what was your thought as to why? Or at least, was your thought about it confirmed or not?
One thing that comes to my mind is, of all things, the way that views through binoculars are presented in movies and on TV. They (almost?) never show a single circle, one field of view. Given that exposure, people might buy horizontally miscollimated binoculars and think that they are supposed to be that way, because that's what they see in the movies.
-------------------- Ed Cannon - Austin, Texas, USA
As of 23 August 2008 - Celestron Skymaster 12x60
|
pcad
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 01/17/05
Posts: 1501
Loc: Connecticut
|
|
Kenny,
See if I'm heading in the correct direction?
Fewer 7x's seem miscollimated than 8x's and more 10x's seem to be miscollimated than 8x's.
I think EdZ, and others, could answer this one.
Peter
-------------------- Peter
Telescopes 25 - 318 mm
Binoculars 15 - 88 mm
Microscope 50x - 1000x
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
I would refer the reader to the best of collimation. Read the tollerance levels. The acceptable error can be much wider at low magnification, so there is a lot more room for slight misalignment that the eye would never see because it is not magnified large enough to see. The same error in a 16x binocular needs to be cut in half from that of an 8x. Simple.
A 2 arcmin error in an 8x binocular won't even be detected. A 2 arcmin error in a 16x binocular will drive you crossed. A 2 arcmin error in a 20-25x binocular will look like your eyes are in two different countries.
edz
-------------------- Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Well , it appears all of my thoughts have been presented by others !
Like EdZ says -- it's very simple stuff really - but it's surprising how people can't wait to dive in for low cost , higher magnification binoculars , even if the likelihood of them being satisfactory , and pleasurable to use , with minimal or no maintenance required , is relatively low when compared with lower magnification binoculars .
Add in the cost of a sturdy tripod and adequate mount , and sometimes the inconvenience of re - packaging and returning faulty units , the narrow TFOVs , and often very average optical quality anyway , with aberrations magnified proportionally , I sometimes think that many would be happier just buying a decent lower magnification binocular specifically for hand - held use , in the first place .
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
|
johnno
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 05/03/04
Posts: 807
|
|
Quote:
Well , it appears all of my thoughts have been presented by others !
Like EdZ says -- it's very simple stuff really - but it's surprising how people can't wait to dive in for low cost , higher magnification binoculars , even if the likelihood of them being satisfactory , and pleasurable to use , with minimal or no maintenance required , is relatively low when compared with lower magnification binoculars .
Add in the cost of a sturdy tripod and adequate mount , and sometimes the inconvenience of re - packaging and returning faulty units , the narrow TFOVs , and often very average optical quality anyway , with aberrations magnified proportionally , I sometimes think that many would be happier just buying a decent lower magnification binocular specifically for hand - held use , in the first place .
Regards , Kenny
Hi All,
That sums it up nicely Kenny.
Regards. John
|
mooreorless
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 07/05/05
Posts: 1543
Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa
|
|
I sometimes think that many would be happier just buying a decent lower magnification binocular specifically for hand - held use , in the first place .
Regards , Kenny
So Kenny does this mean the eights are better? Sorry it seems to be a long week for me. :-)
-------------------- Regards,Steve M
"the eights are better" Jim Carmichel of Outdoor Life magazine
Edited by mooreorless (09/05/07 05:06 PM)
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
< So Kenny does this mean the eights are better? >
In my case , Steve , I think the SEVENS are better !
For hand - held use , I really believe that to be true .
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
|
Claudio
sage
   
Reged: 07/26/04
Posts: 226
|
|
At Cloudy Nights most of the threads on alignment problems concern big binoculars with more than 12x. These big instruments are almost all Porro glasses. As well pointed out by EdZ, collimation is more critical when the magnification is higher. Consequently, if we want to comprehend if roof binoculars are less prone to get out of alignment than Porro glasses, we should compare instruments with the same magnification.
More on big binoculars:
- As already commented by BillC, due to the weight of the binocular a fall means almost surely its de-collimation.
- Sometimes its weight is sufficient to bend slightly the barrels or to stress the hinge when the binocular is on the tripod, with some transitory loss of alignment as a result.
- The big binoculars with collimation by tilting individually their prisms are more prone to get out of alignment than the glasses with better collimation systems ( for instance well designed tilting prism cluster, or eccentric rings + eccentric lens cups). However, this failure is not peculiar of the Porro binoculars, it is just a bad solution preferred by too many manufacturers because is easier and cheaper.
- In big binoculars with CF the focus system is often floppy. As a result both the focus action and the stress exercised by changes of IPD can introduce some fleeting loss of alignment. However, if designed properly, a good external CF system is as precise as good internal CF systems (did you know it? There are also very bad internal CF systems). The only problem is that good mechanics are expensive, and since a high magnification instrument has to cost less than a pair of spectacles…
Some thoughts on hand held binoculars:
- Let me say that many users are sensitive only to marked misalignments. People not used to check the alignment in binoculars are able to notice only very obvious misalignments and tend to compensate instinctively a smaller (though still not acceptable) loss of alignment. De-collimation in a Porro binocular with individually tilted prisms can be very severe (due to the wide range of that system of collimation), while in roof glasses the de-collimation generally doesn’t arrives to be similarly marked. In fact I have seen very often birders using joyfully roof (and Porro…) binoculars with a misalignment exceeding the tolerance levels. I would like to add that people who are accustomed to use cheap roof binoculars and don’t give too much importance to the low quality of almost all these instruments, certainly won’t be concerned with misalignment until it doesn’t produce at least headache! - Collectors know that many good quality Porro binoculars produced in the last century have arrived to our days maybe worn outside and dirty inside, maybe with scratches on the outer lenses and with fungus, but very frequently still properly collimated.
Once again, talking on collimation, the question is not roof vs. Porro, but quality binoculars vs. lower end glasses or, if you prefer it, precision instruments vs. toys.
More thoughts when I can get more spare time. Claudio
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Claudio ,
As always , a very thoughtful , interesting and informative post from you , good sir !
I wish you COULD find more spare , believe me :-)
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
|
|
6 registered and 9 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: EdZ
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 3340
|
|
|
|
|
|
|