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
Charles Laird
member
Reged: 08/24/07
Posts: 93
Loc: Kerrville, Texas
|
|
Sometime in the future I will purchase a bino more capable than my current 8 x 42s. This will not be done without a lot of research. That will provide information about the performance of different models of binoculars. However, once I am holding a brand new quality model in my hands, that binocular might not be quite up to par. How good are my 8 x 42s? Well I don't have enough experience to really know. They are certainly better than my old 6 x 30s which make all stars look like comets and my eyeballs feel like someone has been trying to rip them out of their sockets. Something is obviously wrong there. But what if a new pair of binos was just moderately out of whack; something undetectable in the daylight but would compromise astronomical use. Something that would not be obvious unless one knew what to look for. What should someone look for at night that would indicate things are not quite up to par and this pair should be sent back to the vendor?
Charles
--------------------
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true."
Michael Faraday
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5176
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Hi Charles,
Take your 8x42 to a store, or stores, that sell the top of the line Leica Ultravid, Swarovski EL, and Zeiss T FL binoculars. If you can, also try to find a Nikon 10x42SE or 12x50SE. Maybe the Nikon Prostars if the store has them. You could add the Canon 10x42IS and 15x50IS to your list of fine binoculars to have a look through. Compare them to the view through your 8x42. This is easy and inexpensive.
Looking through these high end binoculars will give you points of reference to use when looking through other binoculars. look for things like resolution, contrast, color saturation, brightness, edge sharpness, and width of field (AFOV & FOV). Also, see how the binocular feels in your hands and how comfortable binocular is to look through. A good binocular feels like you are looking out a very clear picture window that happens to magnify the view by 8x or 10x.
I'll let other folks handle the question of "out of whackness".
Good luck,
Rich
|
rookie
super member
Reged: 01/14/06
Posts: 178
Loc: St Petersburg, FL
|
|
Hi Charles,
You can simply see how well your binoculars focus. If you are not sure how to do that properly, there is a thread for achieving correct focus in the under the subject heading: "Best of Binocular forum"
Use a bright star as a target. Go out tonight soon after it gets dark and look a little more than half way up from the eastern horizon. You should see a bright star (Arcturus). In your binculars it should look yellow or amber and focus to a single point of light. Then go south to another bright star (Spica). It should look pure white. Look at the moon. Study the terminator line that separates the sun's reflection from the shadow to see if you can see any details of mountains and craters.
The ablity to focus and discern star color are good starting points.
There are so many levels of optical quality, but with just about any binocular, you'll see much more in the sky than you can with your own eyes. Enjoy! 
--------------------
Shirley
Celestron CPC 800XLT
Garrett 0ptical BT80~45degree
Celestron Ultima 9x63 & Regal LX 10x42
|
RussL
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 03/18/08
Posts: 1166
Loc: Cayce, SC
|
|
Hi Charles,
My advice is to read ALL the articles in the Stickies on this forum (it will take a while, but will surely meet your requirements for thorough investigation). Don't move on to the next sentence until you fully understand the previous one. Have no doubt that after you do this you will have a good technical education in binocular performance, testing, cleaning/care, and model comparison. If you want to know the scoop, it's all right here. 
--------------------
--Russell
"Akita mani yo." Observe everything as you walk. (--Lakota)
Celestron Celestar 8 Standard SCT, f10
Celestron 80mm Wide View ref., f5
Criterion RV-6 Dynascope, Newt., f8, (c. 1962)
Sears Discoverer 60mm ref., f7, (c. 1973)
Celestron Ultima DX 10x50, 6.5 TFOV
Tasco 7x35 wide
Several mediocre eyepieces
|
ronharper
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 02/14/06
Posts: 889
|
|
Charles,
You didn't tell us what model your 8x42 is, or how much better, or what size, you plan to move up to. I'm not as experienced as some here, but I have, in my cabinet, binos ranging from a bought-misaligned Meade ruby-coated 8x25, to a Swaro EL. There's a story there, which I will summarize.
You must be an eagle-eyed optics expert, without emotion, with access to, and and willingness to scrutinize at least a hundred units, to buy a "reasonably"-priced, yet excellent binocular, if in fact, it can be done at all, which I doubt.
You pretty much get what you pay for. If you are willing to spend at least $400 on a Porro or $1200 on a roof, you can relax about quality. It will be sharp, bright, well-adjusted, and rugged. Buy the one whose view appeals most to you for any reason. Buy the one that has the best-feeling focuser, the neatest eyecup adjustment, or the one whose appearance appeals most to your aesthetic sense of manhood, refinement, whatever. At that level, fear disappears, and it becomes just fun, see? Sure, you can identify a horrible binocular in the store with simple tests. But those tests aren't very sensitive, in my opinion. If you truly care, you must trust the reputation of the maker, and throw some money at it.
Ron
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5176
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Sorry, I just don't agree that you have to be an eagle eyed optics expert and willing to look through a hundered units to get a good, modestly priced binocular. Even some high end models are sometimes out of alignment right out of the box.
About two month ago I bought an Orion 8x42 Ultraview as a gift for a friend. It works fine. Does it have exactly the same image quality as my Zeiss 8x42 FL? No. But, it gives nice images and it cost about $150.
My friend isn't a hard core binocular user. But, he likes to use a binocular now and then when he and his wife go on vacation or just to look at a bird in his yard. His old binocular was ok but couldn't focus closer than about 25 feet. His new Orion 8x42 Ultraview focuses down to about 12 feet.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12158
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Read this series. It should help you find your way thru some of the simple things you can measure and how to do it. If that's what you want to do, there's lots of things you can check for quality that are easy to do. Some things are a bit more difficult to check.
Small Binocular Tests and Reviews
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
ronharper
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 02/14/06
Posts: 889
|
|
Rich,
For a top end user to speak up for $150 binos says a lot good about them. It happens a lot here actually. CESDewar, also, recently got and enjoyed a $100 11x56. EdZ finds many good things to say about them. Of course cheaper binos are useful and fun, and with modern technology, more is being achieved cheaply today than ever before.
Much of the appeal of this forum lies in the dream of not trusting the reputation of the binocular companies, but rather becoming educated and trusting in yourself, beating the system, and getting great binos for cheap. But, that attitude is a tad too prevalent here--look at all the moaning about binos that cost as much as the Orion that you found quite good. Don't you feel sort of lucky? It's a gamble. I have wasted time and money, and strained my eyes, trying making that philosophy work. I chalked it up to my lacking the acumen required to make such critical judgements under pressure. Yes friends, I am too stupid and silly to get a great bino cheap.
I guess it's very relative to taste, usage, and finances. I don't have a TV, but nevertheless I like looking at stuff. Life is short. What to spend my money on? I live in a small town amid very wild surroundings, with dark skies, wonderful views, and interesting animals. The outdoor world just knocks me out. Seeing it easily and clearly is very important to me, and worth a lot. There isn't actually even a whole lot else to do here! It seems to me (after years of denial, mind you) that the price of top quality binoculars is not high on an absolute scale, but only in comparison with the hordes of volume leaders.
Until recently, my wife was satisfied birding with her old Celestron 10x50. It's reasonably collimated, the focuser works, and woah!--it magnifies! That makes it a great binocular, in a way. But she is a sharp-eyed gal, just doen't know beans about optics, and had no idea what she was missing. She is now deleriously happy with her Swaro. Call me hard core, but I like deleriously happy.
Ron
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5176
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Hi Ron,
In many ways I agree with you. That's why I lean toward high end binoculars. This is also why I suggested that Charles look through
several different high end binoculars so that he would have points of reference when looking through other binoculars.
The difference in resolution and contrast between the a $150 binocular and a $1500 binocular is relatively subtle. The more
noticeable differences are the apparent fields and true fields of view. The mechanical differences are also relatively easy to
notice.
When it comes to alignment I would tend trust the mid to more expensive binocular to come better aligned. But, I've not done a
careful survey of alignment. Also, my eyes are relatively insensitive to small miss-alignment problems in a binocular.
Rich
|
Charles Laird
member
Reged: 08/24/07
Posts: 93
Loc: Kerrville, Texas
|
|
I think I should try to clarify my question here. I am fairly well acquainted with the use of binoculars and other optics. In general it is very much you get what you get what you pay for. The most bang for the buck will probably be in the midrange price and that will be where I put my money. I am simply not interested in the high or very low priced groups. I follow what Edz reports very closely and those reports are a source of one aspect of my question: "How good are my 8x42s". This part is really just curiosity and a desire to know more about general binocular evaluation. I am always wondering what an expert like Edz looks for when he evaluates individual aspects of a binocular. I don't expect an answer for this, its way to involved, but it makes me realize how little I really know about evaluating things and wonder what I might need to know to grow a little.
The real thrust of my question is more in line with knowing when an individual binocular is not up to its own model standards. Lets narrow it down to collimation. I drilled a 1/16 inch hole in the eyepiece cap of my telescope. I look through that peephole whenever I am going to use the scope and sometimes I see its "moderately" out of whack and needs some screws turned. With binoculars I have no peephole as a reference to correlate resulting star views nor wide experience with different binoculars. So lets say I buy a brand new "Edz Official 4 out of 5 possible stars model". Now I have an old and really bad pair, my $100 8x42s that have taken me about 2/3 of the way through a bino Messier, and my brand new $200 "4 Edz Stars". My Edzstars are 10x so that makes a comparison with the 8x42s a little confusing. But lets say I have some doubts bout my new Edzstar. I would expect them to be better than my $100 binos, especially if Ed says so...but they just don't seem to be. Maybe my 8x42s are as good as it gets in the mid price range. Maybe my particular Edstar collimation is a little out of whack. Not really bad mind you, but bad enough to make that very good Ezstar no better than a generic $100 model. Of course if Ed lived next door there would be no problem. I could dangle them over the back fence and make supplications to the Great One to evaluate them. He would then in great kindness put them to his eyes and after a 3 second observation exclaim: "Whoa here, send these babies back, these are not up to model standards!!!"
In reality of course, Ed isn't next door to hold my hand and a new pair of Edzstars will probably be just fine. But I was just wondering, so I might grow a little, what would the Great One (or someone similar) see to make them say: "Whoa, the collimation is moderately out of whack here. These are not up to Edzstandards!!"
Charles
--------------------
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true."
Michael Faraday
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5176
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
After you find a binocular that is in whack, what are you looking for in a binocular?
Thanks,
Rich
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 884
Loc: Country road
|
|
Everyone--
This is a very interesting thread. Many binocular preferences (i.e., standards for individual users) have surfaced. I am taking notes with both hands.
Charles--
In your last post you said, "The real thrust of my question is more in line with knowing when an individual binocular is not up to its own model standards." Charles, I am not trying to be picky or critical. However, I do not understand how the average binocular consumer can find out this answer. It seems to me that only people who are involved in a model's design--or people who open up many boxes of the same model and try them out in the field--will come close to answering your question. Those of us examining what came in the box--the only box of a specific model--probably will never know if we got a good sample of that model. Yes, we can return the first box and try out another sample of the same model. However, those of us who are average consumers probably will never have the volume of samples pass through our hands to become quality control professionals of that model.
I guess if your question is a burning passion, then you can always open up a binocular store. 
--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12158
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
You know a funny thing. As I look back on my Small Binoc Series of reviews, in over 30 binoculars, I can recall only few instances of collimation being an issue. Some of the binoculars included in that study were several years old, and I can recall adjusting some of them over that time. But not one of the binoculars I bought new for that study, and that would include about 15 different models, had any need for collimation. If you look thru all the things I tested for those reviews, testing for collimation is not listed. That doesn't mean i didn't test it, but it was pretty much a non-issue. I found all the things listed in my link above to have greater influence. Aperture, FOV, illumination, vignette, transmission, mechanical construction.
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: 9980
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Charles ,
If miscollimation is your main worry , then it may not be a bad idea to find out in more detail what EdZ uses to boost the magnification by a factor of 6x. and check your 8x binoculars for accurate alignment at 48x magnification with sub 1mm exit - pupils .
Of course you will absolutely need to mount the binoculars for such tests .
You may struggle to find a truly satisfying result , but at least if and when you find one that appears " perfectly aligned " at the BOOSTED magnification ( perhaps using the CESDewar suggested method of deliberate de - focus and superimposition ) you can pretty well rest assured that you will not be troubled by miscollimation at 8x. !
At least you have narrowed down your specific concerns to NIGHT - TIME , ASTRO USE -- perhaps even using the binoculars MOUNTED , as EdZ invariably does during his tests .
Hand - held binoculars for DAYIME use present a wholly different set of desirables -- which is why you are unlikely to find any apparant cohesion between the models EdZ rates so highly , and those models rated so highly by afficionados who frequent , for example , the binocular forums on birdforum.net .
Kenny
--------------------
Two eyes and a preference to use both
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
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12158
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
If miscollimation is your main worry , then it may not be a bad idea to find out in more detail what EdZ uses to boost the magnification by a factor of 6x. and check your 8x binoculars for accurate alignment at 48x magnification with sub 1mm exit - pupils .
Of course you will absolutely need to mount the binoculars for such tests .
Well the boosted magnification test is done by placing a monoscope behind one eyepiece, so it wouldn't be possible to use that to test collimation.
If your concerned about mis-collimation, follow all that's been written and posted in the Best Of on how to test for that. I simply observe a star, if they come together quickly it's acceptable. if it's not acceptable, I then go a little further and observe a double star and determine by how much. This is all written in the best of as a reference for those who like to test for themselves.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Charles Laird
member
Reged: 08/24/07
Posts: 93
Loc: Kerrville, Texas
|
|
I have been under the mistaken impression the collimation issue was much larger than it actually is, thanks everyone for your replies.
Charles
--------------------
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true."
Michael Faraday
|
BillC
on a new path
Reged: 06/04/04
Posts: 2082
Loc: Washington, USA
|
|
Quote:
I have been under the mistaken impression the collimation issue was much larger than it actually is, thanks everyone for your replies.
Charles
You have not mistaken anything. Collimatiuon is NOT hard at all. Unfortunately, most of the folks on this list who would act like it is a piece of cake have NEVER performed a collimation job. They have performed a conditional alignment which, at a GIVEN IPD is as good as collimation. However, true collimation requires the instrument to be aligned at ALL IPDs. THAT separates the experienced from the talkers and patters of backs.
That was NOT to frighten, but rather to make aware. If your bino is JUST for you, conditional alignment is JUST fine.
Cheers,
Bill, Your friendly neighborhood curmudgeon.
--------------------
William J. Cook, Chief Opticalman, USNR-Ret.
Founding Editor, Amateur Telescope Making Journal
|
|
10 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: 548
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 