Nick Lloyd
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 10/24/06
Posts: 1565
Loc: cincinnati
|
|
I've enjoyed using my set of Oberwerk 15x70. Lightweight, affordable, comfortable AFOV. (I don't wear glasses.)
Which would be a step up in image quality and contrast? The 15x70 Ultra or the 20x80 Standards? Do both of these have the same AFOV as my current binos?
-------------------- "The best scope is the one you use." -rcg
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10029
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Hello Nick ,
Speaking strictly from what I've read and from what people have told me , I would have thought the 15 x 70 ULTRA would be more representative of a " step - up " in image quality than the 20 x 80 Standard ( formerly De - Luxe ).
Considering the 70mm costs around 30% more than the 80mm. there could be a clue there .
With regard to published specs. of field of view , it would appear to be level pegging at around 66*AFOV .
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
|
Nick Lloyd
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 10/24/06
Posts: 1565
Loc: cincinnati
|
|
The 15x70 format is nice, too. High enough power to determine a glob from a galaxy, but low enough power to get a "walking around the neighborhood" feeling. (neighborhood meaning constellations, not my actual neighbors )
On the topic of AFOV... how do you convert published bino field of view specs to AFOV?
-------------------- "The best scope is the one you use." -rcg
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10029
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
< On the topic of AFOV... how do you convert published bino field of view specs to AFOV ? >
Well , it's not a precise method , but if the TFOV isn't already stated in degrees ( which in the case of the BigBinoculars.com site for the Oberwerks in question , it is ) then simply convert the feet / 1000 yards or metres / 1000 metres to DEGREES ( a conversion chart was posted quite recently for that ) then multiply the TFOV in degrees by the magnification .
e.g 1: Oberwerk 15 x 70 Ultra with 4.4*TFOV
AFOV = 15 x 4.4 = 66* AFOV
e.g 2 : Oberwerk 20 x 80 standard with 3.2*TFOV
AFOV = 20 x 3.2 = 66* AFOV
As mentioned , these are rarely precise , but near enough in most cases for us laymen to know !
Regards 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
|
Nick Lloyd
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 10/24/06
Posts: 1565
Loc: cincinnati
|
|
My binocular mount/setup is a ball head mount on a extending center column tripod. It's what I have, and with the exception of viewing at the zenith, I find it easy to use. Just unlock, move, and lock. No counterweights needed.
However, the 5+ lb binocular might be too much?
-------------------- "The best scope is the one you use." -rcg
|
edwincjones
Post Laureate
   
Reged: 04/10/04
Posts: 4209
|
|
go for 100mm binocs-then you will see a real difference
edj
--------------------
n w arkansas
Binocular, Solar, General Amateur Astronomy
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10029
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Nick ,
Check what the recommended maximum load bearing weight is for that particular head .
The temporarily absent EdZ and others have cautioned that a good rule of thumb is never to exceed around 50% of that stated maximum rating for binoculars intended to be used at sharply inclined angles .
Obviously , the maximum recommended load bearing for the tripod is an important factor also .
Regards 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
|
Nick Lloyd
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 10/24/06
Posts: 1565
Loc: cincinnati
|
|
I'm not so much interested in a difference of magnification (20x100) as I am image quality with this current mount.
Can't find any specs for this ball mount and tripod. Since I live within driving distance of Oberwerk in Beavercreek, Ohio, it would be time well spent to go up there and try out different binos.
-------------------- "The best scope is the one you use." -rcg
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 915
Loc: Country road
|
|
Post deleted by BobinKy
-------------------- Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
danm
sage
   
Reged: 04/27/08
Posts: 228
Loc: Northern California
|
|
Nick, Nice tripod, what is it?
Dan
-------------------- TV Ethos 13mm
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70
Celestron C6 f/10 & AT Voyager Alt/Az mount
8" f/6.3 Newtonian (Dad's ATM) & AT66 red tube
12.5" f/4.1 Telekit (Dad's ATM Mirror)
|
Nick Lloyd
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 10/24/06
Posts: 1565
Loc: cincinnati
|
|
Bob- why did you delete your post? It was informative...
danm- the tripod is a Promaster 1N. It is affordable, easy to transport, and stable for magnifications under 50x. The center column can be completely removed and used as a fixed monopod.
-------------------- "The best scope is the one you use." -rcg
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 915
Loc: Country road
|
|
Nick--
I am sorry about deleting the post. I read back over the thread and thought you may not want to hear about my bad experience with a ball head mount. The one in your photo looks to be in great shape. You probably will not have the wear and tear problems I experienced as long as you keep the binocular weight under 2 lbs.
-------------------- Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
|
Nick Lloyd
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 10/24/06
Posts: 1565
Loc: cincinnati
|
|
Actually, I want to hear about anyone's experience with this setup. Healthy criticism (and respect) is what makes CN valuable.
Thanks for the input, and reposting!
-------------------- "The best scope is the one you use." -rcg
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12341
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
The Ultra 15x70 is a step up from the Obie LER 15x70. You'll notice finer star points, a bit better contrast and it will go just a little deeper. BUT, it's still a 15x70.
The 20x80, even though it is not a true 20x80, is going to give you a little more punch than either 15x70.
Build quality is better in the Ultra line.
Your current 15x70 is about 15x63 the Ultra is 15x70. Not sure exactly, but I suspect the 20x80 is clsoer to 19x72.
What this market needs is a 20x80 binocular in the Ultra series model line that will give users a real significant step up from 15x70 to a TRUE 20x80. Right now, it doesn't exist, not in that price range. I have never used a 20x80 that delivers a full 20x80.
edz
-------------------- Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
pcad
Pooh-Bah
   
Reged: 01/17/05
Posts: 1464
Loc: Connecticut
|
|
Hi Ed,
Would the 15x85 or the 22x85 fit the bill? They are from the same series as the Ultra 15x70 etc.
Peter
-------------------- Peter
Telescopes 25 - 318 mm
Binoculars 15 - 88 mm
Microscope 50x - 1000x
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12341
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
I thought about the 22x85, and yes (as of right now) that would be the next logical big step up, but that is so much larger in size. Going from a 3# 15x70 to this massive 22x85 at 10# means the need is present to jump from a light weight $100 tripod up to a substantial $300 tripod.
the 15x85 certainly would also fit the bill. But it is the same 10# body as above and has the same tripod requirements, as the only difference is the eyepieces.
This particular series (at least tests on the 7x50 and 15x70 from this series, I haven't tested any of the 85mm) indicate that it is operating at very near 100% of full aperture and magnification.
Also worth mention is field of view starts getting smaller. Stated 3.5° for the 15x85 and 3.0° for the 22x85. Your older 15x70s have a 4.3° fov. The 15x70 Ultras have a 4.3° fov. the 20x80 Standard (the original Standard very long binoc) has a 3.2° fov.
edz
-------------------- Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Tad S.
super member
   
Reged: 08/28/06
Posts: 139
Loc: SW Virginia
|
|
Quote:
I've enjoyed using my set of Oberwerk 15x70. Lightweight, affordable, comfortable AFOV. (I don't wear glasses.)
Which would be a step up in image quality and contrast? The 15x70 Ultra or the 20x80 Standards? Do both of these have the same AFOV as my current binos?
I am not sure whether this will help Nick, the OP, as this thread is a few months old by now, but I just received a pair of GO signature 15x70s (same as Ultras), and have had the Obie 20x80 Standards for quite a while now. So, this post is sort of a first impression of the 15x70s but also bit of comparison to the 20x80 as it relates to Nick's original question.
I got the 15x70s to fill the gap between my 12x50 Nikon AE's and the 20x80s. I wanted something with more reach than the Nikons, but more field of view and overall sharper optics than the Obie Standards. I wanted something with good contrast for cruising the MW and pulling out faint galaxies and nebulae. My BT-80/45s are the king of my driveway for this, but they are not the tool for quick looks or grab&go portability. So, I am hoping the 15x70s will deliver the contrast and quality of the BT80, at the lighter weight of the 20x80 standards.
I want to emphasize that this is a first impression 15x70s. These were just delivered yesterday. It has been mostly cloudy if not raining since they arrived. I was able to catch some terrestrial targets yesterday, and last night I got glimpses of the 1st Qtr moon, but I have yet to use the 15x70s on their intended targets (starfields and faint targets).
Concerning the fit and finish, the GO Sigs are excellent. Their weight is in the same ballpark as the Obie Stds, but GOs are waterproof and seem much more robust. The GO independent focusers are smooth but tight, compared with the center-focus Standards. Both have fold down eyecups; "up" or "down" on the GO Sigs, three positions on the Ob. Stds. The mounting bracket included with the GO Sigs is nice.
I set the two binoculars on tripods in the driveway and aimed them at a roof top a couple hundred yards away. Through the GO's, most of the shingles came through in very fine focus, and could discern several details of paint drips and such. The focus was only a little soft on edge. In the Ob Stds, the image scale seemed much bigger and was more comfortable. The field of view for me was only SLIGHTLY less in the 20x80s, due to the fact that I wear glasses and could not take in the whole view with the GO Sigs. This was the most disappointing aspect of the comparison. While the GO Sigs did have a wider field with sharp focus reaching closer to the edge, I had to take off my glasses to appreciate it. Neither of these binos is comparable in TFOV to the 12x50 AEs, as you would expect. For terrestrial use, I much preferred the Obies or Nikons. On the moon, the increased scale of the Obies also won out over the GO Sigs. Although there was a bit less CA in the GO Sigs, I did not find it irksome in either instrument. Again, the Ob Stds were much more comfortable to use.
I will update this impression as I get to use them under better nighttime conditions. But initially, I would say that the GO 15x70s are a better-built, sharper instrument, and the Obie Stds have a bigger scale and are much more comfortable to use with glasses. I know the OP mentioned he uses no glasses, but while wearing mine, the benefit of the somewhat larger and flatter TFOV was negated. My initial bias toward the Obies may be premature, but if the the 15x70s don't really show better contrast under dark skies, I will be hard pressed to keep them. That is a hard statement for me to make considering the overall high quality of these binos. Time will tell,
--Tad
-------------------- Orion XT8i, Vixen ED80Sf, Oberwerk BT-80/45
20x80 Oberwerk Std., 12x50 Nikon AE,
10x42 Celestron Regal LX, 8x40 Pentax PCF WP
|
drshivas
member
Reged: 10/30/07
Posts: 40
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Tad S., does your GO Sigs have the filter threads? I ask b/c I wear glasses too and had a bad experience with the such threads on another GO model. I also noticed their current 15x70 Sigs are only available with the threads.
-------------------- Oberwerk 11x56
Oberwerk 11x70
GO 15x70 LW
Oberwerk 20x80 Deluxe II
GO 25x100 IF
Bogen 501HDV Head / 475B Tripod
|
Tad S.
super member
   
Reged: 08/28/06
Posts: 139
Loc: SW Virginia
|
|
Yes, they have the filter threads. I was tempted to pull off the rubber eyecup to gain another millimeter (if that) of relief, but that would leave only the metal housing to clank my glasses upon. I really hope I can find a solution as I otherwise really like these. --Tad
|
drshivas
member
Reged: 10/30/07
Posts: 40
Loc: Maryland, USA
|
|
Perhaps look into an exchange if GO has any threadless versions left in stock. Or, you could sell those and get the Oberwerk 15x70 Ultras, which are threadless. I had to return my GO 30x100s b/c the threaded eyepieces hit my glasses and reduced already tight eye relief way too much. I suspect I'd be in the same boat with other threaded models, like you are with your 15x70s.
-------------------- Oberwerk 11x56
Oberwerk 11x70
GO 15x70 LW
Oberwerk 20x80 Deluxe II
GO 25x100 IF
Bogen 501HDV Head / 475B Tripod
Edited by drshivas (07/09/08 10:53 PM)
|