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
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12601
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
I have tested a few models for Garrett Optical and provided feedback as to the quality of various of the models I tested. While some here have expressed concern that no one has yet provided any information about these binoculars, since the beginning it would have provided no service to the community to report on samples, as it is only the final selection of models that eventually reach the market. That is what is now being announced. I am not surprised at all that no information was made available until now.
I have two of the currently advertised models of Garrett binoculars in my hands, the 10x50 Genesis and the 20x80 Gemini. I can say this, both models are FMC and are pretty decent binoculars.
The 10x50 Genesis
This seems like a decent waterproof moderate priced 10x50 binocular.
This 10x50 has nice coatings. Coatings are on a par with the Pentax PCF WP 10x50 and the Oberwerk Mariner 10x60. Coatings are much less reflective than the Nikon Action Extreme 10x50.
The 10x50 genesis weighs 2#2oz.
Eye relief appears to measure about 14-15mm. For me it's fine with the cups folded down with my glasses on. With the cups fully extended and without glasses, depth to the lens is 16mm and I needed to push the eyecups tight to my socket to see the entire fov. When the eyecups are folded down completely, the lens recess is 3.2mm.
The fov is advertised as 114m at 1000m (6.5°). It measures 6.4° preliminary, this needs further confirmation.
[edit 10-27-05] Confirmed that the maximum extent of the true field of view in the 10x50 is just a hair more than 6.1°. Confirmed the field of view is almost identical between the Genesis and the Nikon AE 10x50. Just a hair wider in the Genesis. My notes and previous review of the Nikon AE 10x50 list "Both the Orion Ultraview 10x50 and the Nikon AE 10x50 measured almost exactly the same field of view, just a hair less than 6.1°."
The objective lens has an aperture stop just behind the lens that reduces the usable aperture to (as close as I can measure) an effective 46mm. Since this aperture stop seems to raise some concern, I took more measures today on the exit pupil. In 5 measures I got a high of 4.8mm and a low of 4.6mm and I got an average of 4.7mm. It would be conservative to say this aperture stop is reducing the binocular to an effective 46mm. It may be 47-48mm. I'm using a dial caliper with divisions to 0.02mm and it's still difficult to measure.
This issue caused me to take a much closer look at some other binoculars. I found that the Oberwerk Mariner 10x60 also has an aperture stop ring behind the objective lens. Several measurements seems to indicate the Oberwerk Mariner 10x60 is operating at an effective aperture of about 56mm.
The right diopter sounds like a click stop, but it is not a positive stop at each click position so it is more or less a twist diopter adjustment. After more use I find this is just stickiness of lubricant that I heard crackling.
[edit 10-27-05] confirmed it is not click-stop diopter. The 10x50 Genesis is center focus with right diopter twist adjustment. the right diopter moves smoothly, no more sticky lubricant sound.
No adjustments were loose. No hinges stick. Nothing wobbles excessively.
I did some sharpness tests today on the 10x50. I compared to other binoculars on the same target. Generally I found that resolution in the range 50%-70% out from center is not quite as good as Nikon AE 10x50, but only by maybe 5% less.
The same target that is lost from view at 60-70% out from center in The Garrett Genesis 10x50 can still be seen clearly resolved at the extreme edge of the field stop in both the Oberwerk 10x60 Mariner and the Pentax PCF WP 10x50. Both of these have a 5° fov.
The 10x50 has an IPD range of 59.8 to 73.5mm.
There are no externally accessable prism adjustment screws on the Genesis. You can't just push back the rubber coating to get at screws.
The 20x80 Gemini Giant
The Genesis and the Gemini Giant are two very different binoculars. The 20x80 Gemini has the exact same prism housing as the very robust Oberwerk Mariner line. The Oberwerk Mariner 10x60, the Oberwerk 25x100 IF and the Garrett Gemini 20x80 have the exact same prism housing construction. Remove the barrels and cover the nameplate and you would not be able to tell one from the other. The Genesis 10x50 is completely different.
You can get at the back prism screws under the rubber coating on the Gemini Giant 20x80.
The 20x80 Gemini is individual focus eyepieces. Mine are a little sticky. Could it be the lubricant needs to be loosened up and spread around?
The coatings of the Gemini 20x80 are on a par with the coatings on the Oberwerk 25x100 IF.
Usable eye relief with the eyecups folded down is 13.5mm. I could see the filed stop all the way around with my glasses on. Depth to the eye lens with cups down is 4.2mm. With the cups fully extended, and without my glasses, I needed to scrunch in tight to see the entire filed of view.
IPD measures 61mm to 71mm.
Weight is about 7.5#.
The 20x80, by outward appearances is a duplicate of the Oberwerk 20x80 IF. However the Oberwerk is advertised as 3.2° fov. I have not tested the Oberwerk 20x80. The Gemini is advertised as 55m at 1000m (3.15°). I measured the field of view accurately at 2.9° Tfov. The prism housing and prism shelf are identical to the Oberwerk.
edz
|
Mark9473
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 2703
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
Ed, do you think you will be able to add information on performance parameters such as sharpness, glare, internal reflections etc.?
-------------------- Mark
Leica 8x20; Vixen 8x42; Swift 8.5x44, 10x50 and 20x80; TS 7x50; Orion 15x63
WO Megrez II 80 FD + Baader 90° T2 Amici
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Thanks for sharing your findings EdZ. I would be curious to hear about the 25x100WP model when someone can get a hold of one.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12601
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
do you think you will be able to add information on performance parameters such as sharpness, glare, internal reflections etc.?
yes, eventually.
-------------------- Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Glassthrower
Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks
   
Reged: 04/07/05
Posts: 14703
Loc: Hurricane Alley
|
|
I too would be interested in learning more about the performance of the 100mm model. At $299, it appears to be priced on par with the Celestron Skymaster. But from what I gleaned from EdZ comments on the model line, I am assuming that the coatings are superior to the Celestron.
MikeG
-------------------- Michael Gilmer - Member of the Meteoritical Society & Collector of Falling Stars.
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - Buy/Sell/Trade Meteorites, Moon Rocks, Mars Rocks, & 35 different falls and types!
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12601
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
More notes on the Garrett Optical Genesis 10x50
Confirmed that the maximum extent of the true field of view in the 10x50 is just a hair more than 6.1°. Confirmed the field of view is almost identical between the Genesis and the Nikon AE 10x50. Just a hair wider in the Genesis. My notes and previous review of the Nikon AE 10x50 list both the Orion Ultraview 10x50 and the Nikon AE 10x50 measured almost exactly the same field of view, just a hair less than 6.1°."
Confirmed it is not click-stop diopter. The 10x50 Genesis is center focus with right diopter twist adjustment. the right diopter moves smoothly, no more sticky lubricant sound.
From a previous review I wrote these notes. the image in the genesis 10x50 has the same appearance described here. "In the 10x50 Nikon AE model, 50% out from center the image is good, stars are slightly enlarged, a 22" double can still be seen as double. By 60% out from center the distortion begins. Further out, stars don't turn into slightly unfocused enlarged blobs, they elongate into curved streaks as if you were seeing a long time exposure photo pointed at the north star."
At 60% out in the Genesis 10x50, the image is fair, OK for wide-field background, but not clear enough to see a 22" double split, it's now a short elongated line. At 70% out from center, the image is poor. Even a 39" double is elongated. All stars have a radial elongation. The further out from center the longer the streaks get. Between 70% to 80% out from center, the curved streaks that are supposed to be stars are really distracting. Stars near the edge of the FOV are extended lines several arcminutes long.
Testing sharpness with double stars, apparent separation is measured by the magnification times the separation of the double. In this way binoculars of any size can be compared.
I could easily see elongation in 100Herc, suspecting very good on-axis resolution of 142 arcseconds apparent. I could not confirm it split, but that was not expected as the best split I have ever confirmed with any binocular was 150 .
I reached a limit of 390 arcseconds apparent resolution at various positions around the lens all at between 55% and 65% out from center. That is on par with the Nikon AE 10x50 and ther Orion Ultraview 10x50, but it is less than the Pentax PCF WP 10x50 (360 at 75%), the Oberwerk Mariner 10x60 (360 at 85%) and the Oberwerk 8x56 (290 at 65%). Some other of the better binoculars can see 300 arcseconds of resolution out to 75-80% from center.
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: 10163
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Thanks for the update Ed.
I will ask Joad to consider adding this to the binocular mini -reviews section :-)
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
|
Joad
Wordsmith
   
Reged: 03/22/05
Posts: 11923
|
|
Quote:
Thanks for the update Ed.
I will ask Joad to consider adding this to the binocular mini -reviews section :-)
Kenny
Er, can't tell if this is a gag or not. That is, I'm sure EdZ will gladly add his review to the mini reviews section, unless, as the author of the review, he is not allowed to do that. If that is the case, I will be happy to do the job, once I can figure out how to do it.
|
Erik D
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 04/28/03
Posts: 2573
Loc: Central New Jersey, USA
|
|
Quote:
Er, can't tell if this is a gag or not.....
It IS. I've known Kenny a while...
Erik D
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12601
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
unless, as the author of the review, he is not allowed to do that
uh, now that would kinda defeat the purpose
you'll notice the count is growing. several new reviews have been added lately.
thanks to all those that take the time to write them.
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: 10163
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
< Er, can't tell if this is a gag or not..... > - said Joad
Well , the " old wave " sideways smiley face was a CLUE !
Erik is correct of course !
Joad is correct too !
And so is Ed !
I don't know if I'm becoming paranoid -- but there seemed a time when I felt I didn't FEEL the need to explain every nuance of my diversities .
That is to say , I'm not suggesting that I NEVER needed to , nor EVER needed to , or even NEED to do so now , any more than I ever have , but that , for some reason , I am feeling more OBLIGED to do so , lest someone may take unintended offence .
Maybe I'm just becoming more aware of the fact that although " Political Correctness " may be " going mad " , it still has some catching up to do before it catches up with own madness :-)
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
|
Joad
Wordsmith
   
Reged: 03/22/05
Posts: 11923
|
|
Well, that's a relief, Kenny. I'm sure that if i tried to move something to the reviews section that it would probably end up in Philadelphia. Now as to those drawn in faces of yours (:>)): animated graemlins are MUCH more expressive. Had you posted with that whistling graemlin, especially with rboe's hat on it, I'd have known for certain that someone was pulling my leg. 
As for my question in re the mini files, I wondered whether good housekeeping rules might have been so constituted so as to make sure that not just any review--as, for example, my mini-mini-mini-mini-review of a Steiner autofocus binocular (see above) that I wasn't even focusing correctly over twenty years ago--goes into the review list. Doesn't worry me: I just didn't know the protocol.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12601
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
My protocol for adding links in the minireviews has always been
if a post provides some useful info about a binocular, I add it.
if a post is cluttered with comments like, it's the best, it's the worst, i can't belive how great this is, you won't be sorry, these are absolutely great to look thru.. and it doesn't provide any technical information at all, even some lowtech info, then it doesn't get linked. The minireviews need a little subsatance.
Your questions above got me wondering yesterday, so when I added this review with a link I counted that I've written 24 minireviews linked thru the reviews links file. I could not tell you how many other people have written minireviews.
edz
-------------------- Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Quote:
if a post is cluttered with comments like, it's the best, it's the worst, i can't belive how great this is, you won't be sorry, these are absolutely great to look thru
Those kinds of statements sould like an advertisement. And I'm glad you filter those out. I think most people know around here that reviews, lengthy or otherwise, with comments like that are not true "review" material.
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10163
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
< I could not tell you how many other people have written minireviews. >
But I'm sure it's beyond the capability of most members to click on the section and COUNT them :-)
NW -- I just CANNOT get used to your avator !
It's not that I dislike it in any way -- it's just that I can't seem to associate it with YOU :-)
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
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
I might look around for another avatar just for you Kenny. Is it my radiatant CN personally that clashes with the gloom and doom avatar?
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12601
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
More notes on the Garrett 20x80 Gemini
This binocular was the instrument used for my recent deep sky object tour.
For the grand tour see A Prolific Night of Viewing with the Garrett Optical 20x80
that viewing experience continued across the sky at A Prolific Night of Viewing part 2
The contrast and light transmission of this binocular make it a great choice for deep sky viewing as that report shows. Also as you can see from the double star observations the on-axis resolution is very good. On another night, I observed the Trapezium split to four components indicating a closest resolution of 8.7" and another night the 7.1" double star Struve 974, just south of the Christmas Tree cluster was seen as expected not split, but it was clearly elongated.
Faintest stars seen with this 20x80 are about mag 11.3 to 11.5. For comparison on the M44 cluster chart I could see 103 stars using Fujinon 16x70 in a mag5.5 sky. With the Garrett 20x80 in mag 5.4 skies I counted 126 stars. The Oberwerk 25x100 saw 127 stars in mag 5.2 skies. The Obie 25x100 saw over 160 stars under the best conditions and full dark adaptation.
I mentioned it breifly in my observing report, but I will provide a little more detail here. This particular sample has an off center lens sharpness problem. It obviously had no ill effect on my night of observing. I beleive I captured over 60 deep sky objects in that one night and some very close double stars are separated or elongated. Also some of those objects would be difficult for a 16x70. So the binocular does very well. But most lenses have the sharp field of view centered and may provide a clear sharp field out to 60-70 or occasionally even 80% of the field. This one is off center, sharper towards the 9 o'clock position and deteriorating rapidly towards the 3 o'clock position.
I've now recorded sharpness tests on 5 different targets and the results are all similar. Depending on the spread in the double pair I use for the test, some allow seeing a little further out than others. A 13.3" double can be seen 65% out towards the left but only 35% out towards the right. A 18" double can be seen 70% out towards the left but only 40% out towards the right. A 36" double can be seen 90% out towards the left but only 50% out towards the right. Several times during the night of deep sky viewing, I would move a faint diffuse object towards the right and it would become exceedingly more difficult to see as I moved it further out in the view.
I will say though, the views of M71, M11, M42-M43, NGC 2194, M38 M37, NGC 1907, M78 and M1 were all fine although all viewed best just slightly left of center. I spoke to Zach Garrett about this anomoly. I may test another sample, but I'm not really expecting to find the same thing. And this really hasn't diminished the on-axis 9or near on-axis) views.
On two nights I checked chromatic aberration on the moon. On a crescent moon, I saw no CA at all. A few nights ago on a 3/4 moon, I saw virtually the same band of CA in the Garrett 20x80 as I saw in the Oberwerk 25x100. Right of center the outer edge was yellow green. Left of center the edge was reddish purple. Neither showed CA when on axis. BOTH showed considerably LESS CA than the Fujinon 16x70.
One night I used this 7#12oz binocular mounted to a UA Microstar on a Manfrotto 028B tripod. This was an excellent setup. Any bumps to the tripod from my arms or legs or any bumps to the binocular eyepieces from my eyebrow settled in 2-3 seconds. The Microstar was smooth to move and objects were easily acquired. I was able to view zenith with this setup, but I was quite close to the tripod. The Microstar held the binocular straight up with no slip, and still with smooth movement.
Another night I mounted the ~8# binocular to a newer model Unimount Light on a medium surveyor tripod. I had 12.5# of counterweights extended about 6-8 inches to balance the binocular. Motions were effortless, and veiwing zenith was easy (although not for everybody's neck muscles). The difference was noticed in the settling time. Any bumps to the eyepieces took about 6 seconds to settle. It was annoying when I was trying to capture extremely faint stars and I would bump several times. But in general, the ease of movement outweighed that extra few seconds of settling time.
Other nights I used a Bogen 3246 with 501 head or a Bogen 3011 with 3130 head. The 3246/501 was as solid as a rock. The fully extended center column was stable. The 3011/3130 with fully extended center column was the least capable of all these mounts. Settling times took the longest and movement of the head was difficult. I consider this ~8# binocular too much for the 3011/3130 tripod/head setup.
This binocular needs a sturdy mount. Don't skimp. The magnification is too much to be dealing with long settling periods. Mount it properly and under good skies you can see many deep sky objects.
edz
-------------------- Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
I am surprised at the CA results. Very impressive. Although for me, CA is the least of my issues with any bins, but of course it is nice not to see it at ALL. And they even beat out your Fujinon's CA? Impressive.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
   
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12601
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
the Fujinons have never been known for suppressing CA. The Garrett 20x80 I believe is the same as your Obie 20x80.
edz
-------------------- Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Quote:
The Garrett 20x80 I believe is the same as your Obie 20x80.
I suspected that it might be, however, my DII does show some amount CA...a bit more than you described in your report.
|
|
10 registered and 23 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: 2690
|
|
|
|
|
|
|