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
CESDewar
GorillAstronomer
   
Reged: 01/16/05
Posts: 1811
Loc: Morganton, GA, USA
|
|
I had purchased these binoculars some time ago, but not really had a good opportunity to test them out for observing. These binoculars run around $150 and are distinguished by an enormously wide field of view. The specifications for these binoculars indicate a FOV of 578' at 1,000 yards. This translates to a TFOV of 11° FOV which at 8.5x amounts to an almost Ethos-wide 95° AFOV (!). Of course, the specifications also specify "extra long eye relief" which is utter nonsense as the eye relief is tight and catching the entire FOV really requires jamming your eyes into the eyecups. The FOV though seems pretty close to that. I was just able to catch the entire lower half of Orion - all three belt stars and Saiph and Rigel. Mintaka to Saiph is over 10° so this seems close. Even wearing glasses, I could still catch Orion's belt and sword together.
Center sharpness is quite acceptable and out to 50% it's still reasonable, but then starts to fall off with substantial fall-off at the extreme edge. However, I compared these with the significantly more expensive Miyauchi Binon 5x30's ($400) and have to say that the FOV looked very comparable. I have commented elsewhere that the 13° FOV quoted for the Binons is definitely wrong (or more accurately wrong at least for my pair of Binons). And while the Binon's have better center sharpness, the edges in the Binons are not much sharper than the Carons - although the AFOV on the Binons is a far more digestible 57-60° or so with much better eye relief. I looked at the same bottom half of Orion and have to say I could only see a tiny bit more than in the Carson's, so I estimate the TFOV to be at best around 11.5°. And with the Binons having a lot of edge falloff too, the edges in the Carson's did not seem that unreasonable.
Of course, you are not going to get pinpoint stars over a field of view like this(!). But the super wide field does make it much easier to catch objects with more context available. I was looking for R Leporis (Hind's Crimson Star) in my 18x50's but having a lot of difficulty making sure I was looking at the right place with the 3.5° FOV. In the Carson's, Arneb and mu Leporis and R Leporis were all visible at once making it much easier to confirm the correct location.
Anyone looking for eye relief and sharp edges will be disappointed in the Carson's, but if you don't wear glasses and accept the inevitable edge distortions, the ultra-wide field of view has its merits. With my current plethora of binoculars, I will probably let the Carsons go rather than the Miyauchi's as I dislike tight eye relief, but the larger objectives and higher magnfication of the Carson's may mean I'll be holding on to them a bit longer!
--------------------
|
DJB
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1267
|
|
Hi CSED,
I had one of the very same Carsons. The relief is a bit disturbing. I gave it to a kid up the street who helps do yard work for us.
He seems quite pleased with it. So, therefore, I'm happy with my decision.
Best regards, Dave.
|
Wes James
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 2457
|
|
One thing that I noticed when I looked these binocs up on Google- nowhere did I see any mention of coatings! Didn't even acknowledge that they had any! Any comments on coatings, guys?
-------------------- 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
|
hallelujah
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 07/14/06
Posts: 1660
Loc: Colorado Rocky Mt. High
|
|
Quote:
nowhere did I see any mention of coatings! Didn't even acknowledge that they had any! Any comments on coatings, guys?
If you open this file it mentions FMC:
http://www.carsonoptical.com/assets/pdf/pressrelease/CO%20PROVES%20HD%20TECHNOLOGY.doc
For this one just click on "normal view" in the bottom left hand corner:
http://www.carsonoptical.com/assets/pdf/pressrelease/CARSON_10x50XMHD.doc
http://www.carsonoptical.com/Binoculars/XM_Series/249/XM%20Series™
-------------------- 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
Edited by hallelujah (02/07/08 04:08 PM)
|
Wes James
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 2457
|
|
Thanks for the info... didn't find those this morning. Wes
|
DJB
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1267
|
|
Hi Wes,
As I recall, there was some FMC involved on the external lenses' surfaces. I would not have gotten them in the first place had this not been the case.
I also recall that the coatings were adequate but certainly not exceptional in any way!
Best regards, Dave.
|
Bob A (SD)
sage
   
Reged: 07/16/05
Posts: 331
Loc: Black Hills of South Dakota
|
|
I'm very fond of wide field of view (e.g. Jason Statesman and Binolux UW 7x35 bins) and have been playing with the notion of picking up these Carsons. But the 9mm eye relief is giving me cause for pause. None of my existing bins are this tight (the lowest being in the 13mm range which is doable for me). No glasses are worn when using bins BTW.
The only thing I have with such tight eye relief are my University Optics Abbe Orthos, which frankly don't get very much use specifically because of their eye relief. Are comparisons between ep eye relief and bins apt? If so I suspect the 9mm eye relief of the Carsons would be close to a deal killer for me.
Thoughts anyone?
-------------------- Bob
N44°0'19" W-103°18'8"
-Intes-Micro MN56/Moonlite CR2/Antares 8x50RACI
-SkyWatcher EQ6 SynScan v3.21/Hanna saddle head/Casady saddle/Losmandy dovetail
-StellaCam II/10" RS monitor/Hauppauge WinTV-USB2/Mogg 0.6X
-Speers-Waler SWA 5-8/10/24.7mm; Russell SWA 13/19mm; Kunming SWA 32mm; UO Abbe 5/7/9mm; TV PowerMate 2.5x
-Criterion RV-6 Dynascope
-Bins: 7x42B SLC; 8x32DCF-WP/9x21UCF; BD6.5x32IF; 9x35IF GoldRing/8x30Yosemite; Orion 9x63;
8.5x42 11°; 7x35s 11.5°, 11° & 10.5°; 6x30 12.5°
|
CESDewar
GorillAstronomer
   
Reged: 01/16/05
Posts: 1811
Loc: Morganton, GA, USA
|
|
Eye relief is very tight, so if this is an issue, then yes, I would steer away from these. I definitely have to jam my eyes into the eyecups to take in the whole FOV, but it is a pretty wonderful feeling looking around Cygnus with an almost Ethos-sized FOV (and I've done that with a pair of Ethos8's in a binoviewer as well, so I do know what that looks like as well!).
If anything I think the 9mm ER is possibly a bit optimistic - my 2-4 Nagler zoom lists the ER at 10mm, but the Carsons feel a lot closer than just 1mm.
And it's a problem in high humidity as getting the eyes that close to the eyepiece tends to fog them up.
But still, as wide-field binoculars go, they are a pretty good value! These binoculars take in about the same FOV as my much more expensive 5x30 Binons, but at 8.5x instead of 5x.
--------------------
|
Bob A (SD)
sage
   
Reged: 07/16/05
Posts: 331
Loc: Black Hills of South Dakota
|
|
I appreciate the counsel, advice, and wisdom here. And I've decided to throw caution to the wind given their availability to me for $125 shipped. Time will tell if I errored. Guess I'm just a sucker for ultra wide FOVs !
-------------------- Bob
N44°0'19" W-103°18'8"
-Intes-Micro MN56/Moonlite CR2/Antares 8x50RACI
-SkyWatcher EQ6 SynScan v3.21/Hanna saddle head/Casady saddle/Losmandy dovetail
-StellaCam II/10" RS monitor/Hauppauge WinTV-USB2/Mogg 0.6X
-Speers-Waler SWA 5-8/10/24.7mm; Russell SWA 13/19mm; Kunming SWA 32mm; UO Abbe 5/7/9mm; TV PowerMate 2.5x
-Criterion RV-6 Dynascope
-Bins: 7x42B SLC; 8x32DCF-WP/9x21UCF; BD6.5x32IF; 9x35IF GoldRing/8x30Yosemite; Orion 9x63;
8.5x42 11°; 7x35s 11.5°, 11° & 10.5°; 6x30 12.5°
|
GlennLeDrew
professor emeritus
Reged: 06/18/08
Posts: 620
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
If you have trouble getting your eyes close enough, you could remove the rubber eyecups. Assuming the manufacure is identical to the Bushnell Xtra Wides I've owned (and I really think they are), the eyecups are held in place with one or two dabs of rubber cement. So pull firmly and they should come away. If you want to put them back on, they do fit well and won't fall off, even without re-cementing.
About optics and coatings (and this applies to the Bushnell Xtra-Wides as available in 2000)...
The prism assembly is not your typical Porro. It's a version of the Porro type 2, but instead of 2 RA prisms cemented to the larger "Porro", it uses a pair of first-surface mirrors. I've measured the reflectance of these mirrors with a crude, home-made laser-based light meter. They do vary a bit (as found from dissecting 3 differnt binos), from 88% to 94% per mirror.
The system uses a fairly fast f/ratio objective in order to get those huge fields. As a result, there's lots of field curvature across the eyepiece's large 24.5mm diameter field stop. To largely correct for this, a single element, weakly positive meniscus field flattener is placed a short distance in front of the field stop.
The measured apparent field is 85 degrees. Differences from that calculated from magnification and true field are due to scale distortion--a common affair with wide field oculars.
And again with respect to the Bushnell's, the coatings were the usual single-layer MgFl. Total light throughput was a bit on the low side, with a very subtle yellowish tinge to the view (but nowhere near that found in many Russian binos).
For $125, it's actually a pretty good deal for a uniquely and monstrously wide field binocular.
-------------------- Home-made 11X50 right angle bino, 8.1 deg. FOV
Modified 26X100 bino, 3.5 deg. FOV
Mediocre minds discuss people. Good minds discuss events. Great minds discuss ideas.
|
CESDewar
GorillAstronomer
   
Reged: 01/16/05
Posts: 1811
Loc: Morganton, GA, USA
|
|
Well $125 is an excellent price on these binos (they are usually around $150). It would be very helpful to everyone here if you would post a first-light report and your opinion of these binoculars. Personally, I find them very compelling, but that may just be me - having others express their opinions is what makes this forum so useful!
--------------------
|
Bob A (SD)
sage
   
Reged: 07/16/05
Posts: 331
Loc: Black Hills of South Dakota
|
|
CESDewar,
Will do. I intend to compare it to my three UW FOV 7x35s as well as my 9x35 with its 7.3 degree FOV.
Folks might be able to improve on the price too as this was a "best offer" I made that was accepted on "that" auction site by a Carson optics dealer.
Glenn,
Interesting description of the optics design. Thanks!
-------------------- Bob
N44°0'19" W-103°18'8"
-Intes-Micro MN56/Moonlite CR2/Antares 8x50RACI
-SkyWatcher EQ6 SynScan v3.21/Hanna saddle head/Casady saddle/Losmandy dovetail
-StellaCam II/10" RS monitor/Hauppauge WinTV-USB2/Mogg 0.6X
-Speers-Waler SWA 5-8/10/24.7mm; Russell SWA 13/19mm; Kunming SWA 32mm; UO Abbe 5/7/9mm; TV PowerMate 2.5x
-Criterion RV-6 Dynascope
-Bins: 7x42B SLC; 8x32DCF-WP/9x21UCF; BD6.5x32IF; 9x35IF GoldRing/8x30Yosemite; Orion 9x63;
8.5x42 11°; 7x35s 11.5°, 11° & 10.5°; 6x30 12.5°
|
DJB
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1267
|
|
Hi all,
Interesting discussion. The Carson optical design is very similar to, if not identical in concept, to the no-longer-available Orion 7x32 Expanse, also an UWF binocular.
I would presume that both are/were made in the same optical house in China.
I have never had a problem with the shorter eye relief. I do not wear my specs for observing. Yes, it is true, that you really must stick your face into them. I have one of each, and they are unusual, to say the least. For the cost, I went for them.
Yes, the relative transmission is a bit less than quality prisms, but the ultra wide field more than compensates for this in my opinion.
Best regards, Dave.
|
Joe Ogiba
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/14/02
Posts: 3358
Loc: NJ USA
|
|
Bresser SWA 10x50 (super wide angle) is another version.
-------------------- Pentax PF-80ED
Meade 102ED APO
Orion EON 72
120ST
Apex 127
C6 XLT
CR150
C9.25
XT10
Zeiss 7x42 FL
Canon 10x42L IS WP
15x50 IS
12x36 IS II
Garrett Optical 28x110 HD-WP Signature Series
Oberwerk BT-80 45
Apogee RA-88-SA
Denk II Power x Switch binoviewer w/13mm Ethos, 20mm Pentax XW's, 20mm Widescan III's.
|
CESDewar
GorillAstronomer
   
Reged: 01/16/05
Posts: 1811
Loc: Morganton, GA, USA
|
|
Quote:
Bresser SWA 10x50 (super wide angle) is another version.
Well that's interesting - these look like an identical design in 10x50's. The 166m @1km works out to similar AFOV = 96° and a 9.6° TFOV - certainly a bit amazing for 10x50's. If they match the Carsons, these would be interesting. Sure the edge is soft (ok, very soft) but for my peripheral vision, that's fine with handhelds.
Nosing around, they only seem to be advertised by some UK Dealers - all of whom are out of stock - didn't see any USA dealers. They are definitely interesting....
--------------------
|
GlennLeDrew
professor emeritus
Reged: 06/18/08
Posts: 620
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
The 10x50's were also offered by Bushnell, back in 2000 (here in Canada, at least). The bodies/eyepieces in the 7x32 and 10x50 were identical, and the Carson 8.5x42 looks to be the same, too, with perhaps some minor cosmetic differences. I'd say they all come from the same factory.
For those who are interested, the eyepiece/focuser assemblies make perfect individual focus eyepieces to adapt to other binos. This is what I did for my erstwhile Celescton 25x100's, which transformed them from a ~2.3 deg. AFoV at 25X to a 26X100 with 3.5 deg. AFoV. And the off-axis view in these eyepieces is somewhat better with the longer f/ratio 100's than in the original Bushnell, even with its field flattener lens.
Just open up the Carson/Bushnell, pull out the eyepiece assemblies (which have a most unique focusing mechanism, where each lens barrel has a protruding lug that slides up/down on an internal brass rod in each half of the instrument.) When you cut off the lug, as well as a bit of the lower barrel to get a lower profile, and remove a plastic tab which is used to constrain rotation of the eyepiece, you get a nice pair of UWA eyepieces with helical focusing barrels, for a darn low price.
-------------------- Home-made 11X50 right angle bino, 8.1 deg. FOV
Modified 26X100 bino, 3.5 deg. FOV
Mediocre minds discuss people. Good minds discuss events. Great minds discuss ideas.
|
Bob A (SD)
sage
   
Reged: 07/16/05
Posts: 331
Loc: Black Hills of South Dakota
|
|
They've arrived.
Took them outside this afternoon along with my Binolux 7x35 11* and Leupold 9x35IF bins. The FOV is, at 11* and 578', identical between the Binolux and Carsons, although you really do need to snug them to your face to get a view of the full field. Very addicting and immersive. I suspect anyone with a big nose would be unable to use them given the bridge design. They don't feel like 30 ounces when swapping back and forth with the boat anchor Binolux bins. Edge distortion is comparable to the vintage ultra-wides but focus is much touchier. Collimation appears to be good.
You really need to dial the focus in perfectly to get the depth of field the Carsons are capable of providing. After less than an hour I developed eye strain which is NOT a good sign. Absolutely no question that the UW 7x35s are much more relaxing to use. As are the IF Leupolds, with their standard 7.3* 382' FOV, in a higher power bin comparison.
Obviously I need more time with them before drawing firm conclusions.
ADDENDUM: Well I spent some more time early this evening and think I've broken the code. When first using these I looked to compare edge performance with my vintage UWs and then got caught up with the focus wheel which is a design with too quick a change for these bins. What I missed was (1) my habit of looking around the great views of ultra wide FOV bins rather than move my head keeping my eyes focused in the center of the field, and (2) distracted with focus issues not picking up on what CES has correctly already noted and that is the softness of the outer 50% of the field. My constantly straining to see sharp detail outside the smallish sweet spot is what gave me the eye strain. What all this does for me is to reaffirm my initial impressions that the 7x35s UWs are so much more relaxing to use.
-------------------- Bob
N44°0'19" W-103°18'8"
-Intes-Micro MN56/Moonlite CR2/Antares 8x50RACI
-SkyWatcher EQ6 SynScan v3.21/Hanna saddle head/Casady saddle/Losmandy dovetail
-StellaCam II/10" RS monitor/Hauppauge WinTV-USB2/Mogg 0.6X
-Speers-Waler SWA 5-8/10/24.7mm; Russell SWA 13/19mm; Kunming SWA 32mm; UO Abbe 5/7/9mm; TV PowerMate 2.5x
-Criterion RV-6 Dynascope
-Bins: 7x42B SLC; 8x32DCF-WP/9x21UCF; BD6.5x32IF; 9x35IF GoldRing/8x30Yosemite; Orion 9x63;
8.5x42 11°; 7x35s 11.5°, 11° & 10.5°; 6x30 12.5°
Edited by Bob A (SD) (08/13/08 09:21 PM)
|
|
11 registered and 26 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: 899
|
|
|
|
|
|
|