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
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 948
Loc: Country road
|
|
I have been reading the discussion in the thread Is there much difference between 16x and 20x?. I thought I would offer a mini-test somewhat related to that thread. I conducted the mini-test over the last few days. This is not an objective technical test—but a subjective outline of my opinions.
EquipmentFujinon Polaris FMT-SX 16x70
Exit pupil: 4.4
Advertised FOV: 4.0
Apparent FOV: 63.4
Close focus: 36.0 ft.
Weight: 76.1 oz
Height: 10.7 inches
Width: 9.8 inches
Waterproof: Yes
Eye relief: 15.5
Price: $685.00
Warranty: Lifetime
**This binocular is new in my collection (5 days).
Garrett Signature 22x85
Exit pupil: 3.9
Advertised FOV: 3.0
Apparent FOV: 66.0
Close focus: 275.0 ft.
Weight: 160.0 oz
Height: 15.5 inches
Width: 9.5 inches
Waterproof: No
Eye relief: 18.0
Price: $499.95
Warranty: 2 years
**This binocular has been in my collection for some time (9 months). This mini-test is not a side by side comparison with two tripods, but a quick switch of binoculars at a single tripod within each viewing round. The driveway setup consists of a Manfrotto 3246 tripod/501 head/two panning arms, separate plate for each binocular, and observing table. The switch time between binoculars averages 13.5 seconds and I pull down red goggles to cover my eyes during the switch to preserve night vision against neighbor porch lights.
Observing ConditionsRounds 1-4
Location: My driveway, central Kentucky, USA
Date: Sunday, May 04, 2008
Time: 4:30—5:30 a.m.
Round 5
Location: Hillside overlooking the Kentucky River.
Date: Thursday, May 01, 2008
Time: 5:30—6:00 p.m.
Clear Sky Clock
Cloud cover: Clear
Transparency: Average
Seeing: Poor 2/5
Darkness: 5.8
Quality Sky Meter
Reading not taken
National Weather Service
Wind: Calm
Visibility: 10.0 miles
Temperature: 40° F
Dewpoint: 37° F
Air pressure: 30.08 rising Round 1: Antares, Alpha ScoFujinon 16x70 brilliantly displays Antares, the class M supergiant that is the heart of the scorpion (Alpha Sco, 21 Sco, HR 6134, HD 148478, SAO 184415) in the Scorpius constellation. Antares is a perfect bright orange or peach hanging low in the southern sky. The Fujinon 16x70 presents the heart in perfect form, without spikes.
Garrett 22x85, despite the higher magnification, fails to impress as much in the view of Antares. There is spiking and the star is not a perfect round sphere. Round 2: Open Cluster, Messier 7Fujinon 16x70 displays the colorful open cluster M7 (NGC 6475, Melotte 183, Collinder 354, and OCL 1028) in the Scorpius constellation. The Fujinon 16x70 does an excellent job at capturing the various star colors in this open cluster. However, the lower magnification and larger 4.0° FOV do not impress as much as the view observed in the Garrett 22x85.
Garrett 22x85 wins this round. In fact, according to Zach Garrett, viewing open clusters is the forte of the Garrett 22x85. And this jewel, described by Ptolemy in 136 A.D. as the "nebula following the sting of Scorpius," certainly delivers the WOW in the Garrett 22x85. Last summer I solved many of the world’s problems as I spent untold hours gazing at this open cluster with the Garrett 22x85. Round 3: Trifid Nebula, Messier 20Fujinon 16x70 displays the Trifid Nebula (M20, NGC 6514) in the Sagittarius constellation. The star forming nebula has detail, but is smaller in the eye cups due to lower magnification and the larger and sharp to the edge 4.0° FOV, which also displays Collinder 367 and the Lagoon diffuse nebula.
Garrett 22x85 displays a larger Trifid Nebula (M20). Since nebula do not spike or require as much precision in sharp focusing, the 22x85 presents a better view than the Fujinon 16x70. However, Collinder 367 and the Lagoon nebula lie outside the fuzzy perimeter of the 3.0° FOV of the Garret 22x85. Round 4: JupiterFujinon 16x70 displays Jupiter passing through the Sagittarius constellation with three moons on the western side of the planet: Io (5.3 mag), Ganymede (4.9 mag), and Callisto (5.9 mag). The Fujinon 16x70 presents a smaller, but aesthetically perfect view of the planet—bright, round, bands barely perceptible, and without spikes.
Garrett 22x85 displays the same three moons, only larger in size, and Jupiter himself marches across the early morning sky showing the obvious bands of a larger sphere. However, while the planet is bright, he fails to display all of his grandeur in the Garrett 22x85 because of spiking and a lop-sided sphere with an optical protrusion on the western side. Round 5: Pair of Red Tail HawksFujinon 16x70 displays a pair of Red Tail Hawks Buteo jamaicensis perched on a limb high in a dead tree, possibly a Chinkapin Oak, Quercus muehlenbergii Engelm, located on a rolling hillside overlooking the Kentucky River. The hawks are 1075 yards (3225 ft, 0.6 miles, 983 meters, or 0.98 kilometers) to the South of my observing position. One hawk faces me displaying the dark brown belly band across the tan front, while the other hawk faces 180° in the opposite direction, looking into the edge of some woods. Thus one hawk is facing North while the other is facing South, while sitting less than a foot apart on the same limb. The Fujinon 16x70 presents an abundance of detail demonstrating its superiority at terrestrial observing.
Garrett 22x85 fails at being a terrestrial instrument due to the poor quality of view during the daytime and the excessive weight (10 lbs) for mobility. ConclusionPurchase logic (or lack of)
The Fujinon Polaris FMT-SX 16x70 has been on my purchase list for over a year. (Yes, I listen to our forum moderator EdZ, and usually follow his recommendations!) I almost purchased this binocular nine months ago, but was swayed by all of the “bigger is better” talk taking place. Therefore, I purchased the Garrett Signature 22x85. I am not disappointed with the Garrett 22x85. What it does well, it does very well. However, the Garrett is heavy and useless when it comes to terrestrial observing, particularly walking any length with the complete setup (binoculars and tripod). I purchased the Fujinon 16x70 a few days after purchasing the Fujinon FMT-SX 7x50, which I believe every binocular observer should own. Therefore, the Fujinon 16x70 purchase logic had as much to do with terrestrial as night sky observing.
Fujinon Polaris FMT-SX 16x70
This is an excellent binocular for night sky observing. EdZ and the others are right. The quality of the view is quite impressive—color rendering is close to natural and sharpness close to the edge. It outperforms the Garrett 22x85 when viewing individual stars (Round 1: Antares, Alpha Sco), the planet Jupiter (Round 4), and distance terrestrial viewing (Round 5: Pair of Red Tail Hawks). The Fujinon 16x70 also delivers an excellent view of open clusters (Round 2: Messier 7) and nebula (Round 3: Trifid Nebula, Messier 20), although the larger magnification of the Garrett 22x85 presents these objects as larger in the eye cups. Furthermore, the 4.0° FOV of the Fujinon 16x70 makes for quicker moving around the night sky. I am quite pleased with my purchase of the Fujinon 16x70.
Garrett Signature 22x85
As I said earlier, the forte of the Garrett Signature 22x85 is open clusters, particularly those that are 30' or larger. Beyond that, the only advantage of the Garrett 22x85 over the Fujinon 16x70 is magnification and perhaps the 85mm objectives—you see more stars and the deep space objects are larger. However, the quality of what you see is not as impressive as with the Fujinon 16x70. Owning both allows me to specialize
Now that I own them both, I find that I am able to specialize in my observing in a way that I never could before. Binocular observing is fun, addictive, and can be expensive. However, I find that I never tire of the quest for a better view with both eyes.
--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
Wes James
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 2457
|
|
Bob-
Very nice report to read. Technical specifications only takes one so far, then it becomes a matter of "Where The Rubber Meets The Road". Your report was more meaningful than all the technical specs could convey.
Thanks!
--------------------
Wes
Atlantic Beach, FL
Some bino’s from Miyauchi 5x32 Binon's up through Garrett 20x110 Signature's,
Some telescopes from a Stellarvue 80mm NHNG up through a couple of 8” reflectors…
And a wonderful 4.25" Delmarva Shiefspiegler!
Some good friends, made here on C/N.
Oh- several cats and a wonderful wife!
Anyone want a cat???? :-O
"When your work speaks for itself- Don't Interrupt" -Gamble Rogers
|
starramus
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/01/04
Posts: 1124
|
|
Bob, You could have done much better on price with the Fujinons. Anacortes has them for $599.00. I have both the 7X50 and 16X70s. I would like to go larger in aperture, but will not sacrifice quality for quantity. If i were to go to just 15X80mm Fujinons i would pay an alarming $3500. I guess i can't get what i refuse to pay for. 
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Thank You Bob .
Everyone who takes the time and care to prepare and produce reports as clear to read as you do , deserves special credit .
With no disrespect to the larger of the two instruments compared , and certainly not towards the people who seel them , I think that between the lines , your conclusion happens not to conflict with a summarising comment I made earlier today to the referenced thread .
When the differences between apertures and magnifications between two instruments and their respective ratios are as close as this , I think what USUALLY wins is QUALITY .
To add to Wes' closing shot , with which I totally agree , a great example of technical specs. being potentially misleading is when comparing spotting scopes to binoculars .
An example - typicallly in daytime use - no matter how well one part of my brain KNOWS that images seen through my Helios 15 x 70 binoculars are NO BIGGER than those seen through the incomparably superior TeleVue 76 ( with 32mm TV Plossl ) SOMETHING in another part of my brain persists in convincing me that they ARE !
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
|
Wes James
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 2457
|
|
Quote:
I would like to go larger in aperture, but will not sacrifice quality for quantity. If i were to go to just 15X80mm Fujinons i would pay an alarming $3500. I guess i can't get what i refuse to pay for.
Before I write off owning a larger pair of bino's, I would wholeheartedly recommend you consider a pair of the Garrett 20x110's. While I will not specifically state that the optical quality in detail is what it would be if Fujinon made them, I think you'd be extremely and pleasantly surprised if you looked through a pair of them. For $650.00, you'd be hard pressed to get a better binocular view. In fact, I think I could safely say you couldn't. With any combination. Takes more mount, that's a given. I started with an Oberwerk Surveyor tripod and a Bogen 400 geared head, which worked great- until I built a heavy duty parallelogram. The 20x have a flatter field and overall better view than the 28x if one is looking for the better optics of the two. I know- after comparing my 16x70 Fuji's against the Garrett 20x110's there's not even a ghost of a chance I'd say the Fuji's offer a better view. They're not even close.
Wes
|
JCB
super member
Reged: 10/04/04
Posts: 151
Loc: France
|
|
Thank you Bob for this side by side comparison.
Your comments are similar to my findings, when I quickly compared my Fujinon 16x70 FMT-SX2 to the Helios Apollo 22x85, which are in all probability the same binoculars as the Garrett Signature 22x85 : Helios Apollo 22x85 ( Kunming Series 8 binoculars)
Unfortunately in my case, I can't stand looking at stars that are something else than pinpoints, and furthermore one side of the 22x85 was so poor that it was obviously defective.
There are probably strong disparities in optical quality among this 22x85 series.
Jean-Charles
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 948
Loc: Country road
|
|
Wes--
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Hearing what binocular models others prefer is one of the things I really like about this forum.
I keep thinking about the Constellation View binoculars we discussed a few weeks ago. In fact, I still have them on my purchase consideration list. I agree that their specifications make them unique and one-of-a-kind. Who knows --I may purchase them at some point in the future.
Thanks again for your comments and suggestions.
--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 948
Loc: Country road
|
|
Kenny--
Once again, your vast array of experience and my quirky testing come to similar conclusions.
Now I understand why you and others are still in pursuit of the better view . . . . Maybe someone will start a thread "What makes up the better view?" I am sure everyone will come to total agreement. 
--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 948
Loc: Country road
|
|
Jean-Charles--
Thank you for sharing your experience with the 22x85 series. I read the thread you posted and am sorry you had such an unfortunate experience. As others have suggested, I am sure Zach Garrett of Garrett Optical would have done everything he could to supply you with an operational model.
I agree about the aesthetics of viewing pinpoint stars as opposed to stars resembling sea gulls, or worse. In my opinion, pinpoint stars are an important step in achieving the better view.
Thank you again for your comments.
--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 948
Loc: Country road
|
|
Starramus--
Thank you for the heads up on a cheap price for the Fujinons FMT-SX 16x70. Next time I will know to shop around for a better deal.
I went to the Fujinons website and saw the giant marine/military models in the 150mm aperture size. I can only imagine they come with a hefty price tag. It would be nice to talk with someone who has actually looked through one of those models. Talk about a head banger--is it a good idea to look through some model you know you will never purchase?
Thank you again for your comments.
--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
Wes James
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 2457
|
|
Quote:
"What makes up the better view?" I am sure everyone will come to total agreement.
Obvious..... the next pair of binoculars on our shopping list!
Wes
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
I went to the Fujinons website and saw the giant marine/military models in the 150mm aperture size. I can only imagine they come with a hefty price tag. It would be nice to talk with someone who has actually looked through one of those models. Talk about a head banger--is it a good idea to look through some model you know you will never purchase?
Bill Faatz (MrBill) and others have been posing here for several years about their 150mm Fujinons.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
|
7 registered and 24 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: 881
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 