Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Nikon 18x70 measures

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
167 replies to this topic

#51 Andresin150

Andresin150

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,511
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2007

Posted 19 October 2010 - 12:41 PM

Talking about Nikon Glass, does anybody knows what kind is used in the big 20x120's? IIRC in the specs they talk about SP glass as special performance glass, like trying to infer the use of ED glass or similar. From the few reviews on these, it's also noted that no secondary color at all can be seen (apos?) and something like 95% of "total" sharpness...
Now I wish I have sent my Fujis first to EDZ for testing, He certainly is the one that can help demystify our optics..

#52 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 19 October 2010 - 12:55 PM

I also suspect the 10x70SP is as good as the Prostar - these are the only labeled "SP" (someone said it means "special performance") and are the only recommended instruments for Astronomy by Nikon.



Yes, there have been several references over the years that SP means "Special Performance". BUT that really means absolutely nothing. I already pointed this out. One reference suggest the SP means ' this glass has our premium coatings'. I could agree with that, as that would be a primary aspect needed to recommend for astronomy.

I've already stated this above in this thread, but I'll say it again, there are no references anywhere to indicate that SP means anything special about the glass itself.

The three binoculars I have in hand, not all red ring, all appear to have the same coatings.

edz

#53 Littlegreenman

Littlegreenman

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,987
  • Joined: 08 May 2005

Posted 19 October 2010 - 01:05 PM

....weighs 1930g (inaccurate kitchen scale)
...edz


I've got one of those...

Question: Are 100mm binoculars still a 'class' above the higher quality 70-80mm sized binoculars reveiwed/compared in this thread?

I've looked through 3 Orion branded older Japanese 100mm binoculars (the ones with the nice flat mounting plate underneath), and a Pro Optic of the same manufacture. There were probably variations in coatings.

I've also looked through Miyauchi 45 degree 100mm, non-fluorite, two different (sets of) eyepieces.

I've only look at Meade/Celestron/Orion 70-80mms from several years back in the pre-China era. The 100mm's were in a different class.

So, I guess my question is do the higher quality 70-80mm approach the 100mm binocs.

And yes, the 100mm will need a larger mount, so on that level it is comparing apples to oranges.

LGM

#54 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 19 October 2010 - 01:20 PM

From the links provided above by Richard McC

the 10x70 IF SP WP (also called the Astroluxe)
Eye relief (mm) 16.3
Close focusing distance (m) 25.0
Weight (g) 2,100
Length (mm) 304


10x70 IF HP WP
Eye relief (mm) 15.0
Close focusing distance (m) 50.0
Weight (g) 1,985
Length (mm) 304

well, the 10x70s I have in hand come much closer to the specs of the 10x70 IF SP WP (also called the Astroluxe) .

As I said, my kitchen scale is inaccurate. I put two 1# boxes of spagetti on the scale and it showed the weight as 1#14oz. so my scale could be showing weights considerably light. But I measured the close focus at 23meters, and eye relief at 19mm.

On another note, a discussion with a Nikon rep provided some comments. However, Nikon specifically prohibits posting any comments made by any rep to any internet forum and I will honor that. So while the rep's comments cannot be shared, I can say this; the rep could not confirm that these 10x70s were not Astrolux.

edz

#55 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 19 October 2010 - 01:24 PM

So, I guess my question is do the higher quality 70-80mm approach the 100mm binocs.



From the perspective of what can be seen, No
However, in regards to quality, these surpass.

read my CN Report or visit the Best Of threads and read
What can be seen in 100mm binoculars
or What can be seen in various sizes binoculars.

edz

#56 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,743
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005

Posted 19 October 2010 - 01:42 PM

The Nikon Multicoating is the best multicoating I have found in any comparable bino. You look into these lenses and you dont see them, it's like looking through air.



I've pointed this out before. Looking thru the lens tells you very little information about the coatings. You can do this with almost any multi-coated lens.


EdZ, I think the meaning of "looking into" is at rather than through. The point is that when looking at the lens and finding yourself looking through them as if there were only air and no glass, surely that is a superior coating.

#57 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 19 October 2010 - 01:43 PM

The Nikon Multicoating is the best multicoating I have found in any comparable bino. You look into these lenses and you dont see them, it's like looking through air.



I've pointed this out before. Looking thru the lens tells you very little information about the coatings. You can do this with almost any multi-coated lens.


EdZ, I think the meaning of "looking into" is at rather than through. The point is that when looking at the lens and finding yourself looking through them as if there were only air and no glass, surely that is a superior coating.


yeh, I'll buy that.

edz

#58 Rick

Rick

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,291
  • Joined: 12 Apr 2005

Posted 19 October 2010 - 05:10 PM

On another note, a discussion with a Nikon rep provided some comments. However, Nikon specifically prohibits posting any comments made by any rep to any internet forum and I will honor that. So while the rep's comments cannot be shared, I can say this; the rep could not confirm that these 10x70s were not Astrolux.

edz


He, he! Perhaps you stumbled upon a marketing "secret" in that the ONLY significant differences between the 10x70SP and the 10x70HP is the red stripe allowing them 2x more $$$!

I suppose if we want to solve the mysteries of the 18x70 Peter could let Ed take it apart. Then just send back to Nikon USA for repair under their $25 no-fault warranty. :grin:

#59 pcad

pcad

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,453
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2005

Posted 19 October 2010 - 05:54 PM

Don't think I haven't thought of that! If we're just looking for a field flattener, it should be visible if the eyepiece or the prism housing is removed. I'm just not at that point yet.

#60 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 20 October 2010 - 05:55 AM

I won't do that.

edz

#61 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 20 October 2010 - 06:06 AM

little research on past Astromart classifieds of the 10x70

Saw two sales of the model without the red ring for approx $400 to $550
Saw one sale of a model with the red ring for $600

saw one offered for sale with the red ring for $1000

only one of the above was claimed to be NOT astrolux.

edz

#62 Les

Les

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 888
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2006

Posted 20 October 2010 - 09:10 AM

only one of the above was claimed to be NOT astrolux.


The Brooklyn bridge has been sold many times over too. It is unfortunate that over time the Nikon Japan website has differed from the Nikon USA website on descriptions of this product line which has been perpetuated by US dealers in their literature. EdZs evaluation of the 18x70 seem in line with what I remember of my pair - obvious CA when viewing the Moon, not sharp to edge, etc. Never noticed any distortion as I never did a fast pan with these. Also noticed the same effect of the uncanny transparency of the objective lens with virtually no color when looking into them. Whether this is good or bad, I don't know but it seems to be a feature I see in my high end telescope objectives as well but not seen in my cheaper binos.

#63 smart

smart

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2007

Posted 20 October 2010 - 02:43 PM

EdZ, et.al: Henry Link or GatorEngineer has previously posted a picture of the inside construction of the Nikon 7x50 Prostar (which is in some of the Nikon brochures from the 1990s). It clearly shows an additional miniscus lens between the eyepiece and nearest prism. Both the 10x70 & 7x50 Prostars have this extra lens which accounts for the small weight difference between the other Nikon 7x50 & 10x70 IF models. This lens helps correct for chromatic abberation and also reduces the close focusing distance considerbly. The 18x70 Nikon does not use this extra miniscus lens and the images & your tests reflect this difference. As far as ED glass goes: It has been a catch word for some time now. Logic should tell you that Nikon will use their best glass (and it is in house) on their high end binoculars, and I beleive they have access to the best in the world. The Nikon 20x120III has superior glass throughout, including their complex prisms, and eyepieces and produce as fine an image as you could hope for using air spaced doublets. I will be posting a comparison test soon between the Takahashi 22x60 Astronomer and the 1961 Nikon 15x50 f/8.0 binocular that used an air spaced doublet.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 4129927-IMG_1078.JPG


#64 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 20 October 2010 - 03:12 PM

Henry Link posted the cut-away view of the 7x50 Prostar in a Birdforum post. I've seen it.

Unfortunately that does not help us solve the confusion that seems to exist around the black barrel 10x70 and the red ring 10x70. There may not be a clear definition that one or the other is or is not exclusively what is referred to as the Astroluxe.

The 18x70 seems to be a different animal altogether. Although it is not definite as to whether it simply has no field flattener or it is not optimized to use the flattener that may have been developed for use in the smaller 7x50, it is quite obvious from the tests performed the 18x70 field is not nearly as well corrected as its smaller brethern.

Seems quite obvious to me the amount of false color seen in both the 10x70 and the 18x70 precludes the use of any ED glass. I consider to be incorrect all comments I've read (posted over the past 10 years) that state these Nikons use ED glass.

BTW, after taking into account the limit of resolution of the eye in low powered binoculars, the color blur image put up by a 7x50 achromat binocular will be nearly apochromatic in appearance. Apochromatic color blur is defined as 1.0x. Color blur in a normal f/4 7x50 is 1.3x. The color blur in a f/4.2 10x70 is 1.8x, and the color blur in an 18x70 is 3.2x, nearly double that of the 10x70 and approaching three times worse than a 7x50, all of the same design. As magnification increases, color blur increases rapidly. A 22x70 of the same design would have a color blur of 3.9x.

Excellent examples of semi-apo ED design and Apochromatic fluorite design are respectively, the William Optic 22x70 and the Takahashi Astronomer 22x60. The WO22x70 is estimated to have a color blur of 1.3x and the Tak22x60 has an astonishing color blur of only 0.7x.

edz

#65 smart

smart

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2007

Posted 20 October 2010 - 03:33 PM

EdZ, The red ring on the 7x50 and 10x70 Nikons coincide with the use of an extra positive miniscus lens. Nikon has used various names for the 7x50 and 10x70 models we are discussing:(Astroluxe, Prostar, SP, HP, etc.) and they have not consistently used these names to reflect what is inside of them. But the red ring, in my experience with them, coincide with the use of this extra miniscus lens in the 7x50 and 10x70 that have this red ring. There is roughly three ounces additional weight on the Nikons that have this extra lens vs the equivalent models that do not have it. The 7x50 Prostar was the first to use this extra lens. Early 10x70 Astroluxes did not use it. And in the last 10 years Nikon has offered their 10x70 with & without this extra lens in various markets. Hope this clarifies the topic a bit more.

#66 Gordon Rayner

Gordon Rayner

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,303
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007

Posted 21 October 2010 - 02:21 AM

I have a Nikon 20 x 120 III partially disassembled, as well as several 20 x 120 I and II , and have worked on them for fishing boats since about 1973.

What is "superior" about the 20 x 120 III prisms? Or their glass, in general? Just ordinary Porro prisms. The I and II used a glued 3-prism Porro II cluster.

I have no experience with the ED Fuji 25 x 150 or 40 x 150. I do have lots of experience with the straight view 25 x 150, both I and II, inside and out. I suspect that the ED 25 x 150 gives better images than the 20 x 120 III.

I recall hyperbole by Markus Luddes in his ad for a Nikon 20 x 120 III: Something like " near apo..." (?).

The 20 x 120 III has longer optical eyerelief than the I or II, but the mechanical designers wasted much of it , such that the eye-nose relief is little better than the I or II. I have improved many I and II in this respect by substituting smaller Delrin pushrings ( o.5 mm thread pitch) for the brass originals . Those Delrin rings also give much more nose relief, with or without the WW II Navy rubber 2-hole "Lone Ranger/Zorro " facemasks . ( Want some of those? A reasonable minimum order for me to make for those to my molder is about 25 pieces. They block sidelight and wind from many handhelds also).

#67 gatorengineer

gatorengineer

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,933
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2005

Posted 21 October 2010 - 06:15 AM

WO apparently has started making world class optics, this would be great news for the hobby, as competition is a great thing....

I will comment that while have not seen the 22x70, I have seen their 10x50 ED's which were some of the most painful to look through ""high end"" binos I have ever seen, these were at NEAF 2007 or 2008..... forget which....

I am wondering if the 22x70's do clock in at a 3 degree AFOV as advertised.

Whats missing in the above review is that the real field difference between the two binos is 3 degrees versus 4....... Thats a large difference in scanning the skies at least to me.....

Nikon does need to refresh their line, which is 20+ years odl, and get to ED Glass, and a flatner in their 18x binos.... They could also benefit for their price to get state of the art eyepieces, and get to a 5 degree field for a 90 AFOV... But the market for quality in binos for astronomy is GONE, and these binos will never be produced.

As mediocre at a good price is now accepted as the norm.....

#68 Fomalhaut

Fomalhaut

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,763
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2008

Posted 21 October 2010 - 07:26 AM

But the market for quality in binos for astronomy is GONE, and these binos will never be produced.
.....
As mediocre at a good price is now accepted as the norm.....


Well, not by me, as I refuse to accept those new norms, therefore stick with my Nikon 18x70 with its excellent ~2.5 deg central FOV, paramount coatings, nose-friendly eye relief and high mechanical as well as optical quality. And after having had compared it against Fuji's 16x70 myself, and this before buying (!), I would also still not go for that other one. The only other binocular which could cause me to go for a change would be an excellent Zeiss 15x60 B/GAT!
After 50 years of (again and again) being in that hobby, I don't need anybody to tell me what to do (e.g. buy), after all... :grin:

And for smaller fields, I stick to my telescopes!

Chris

#69 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 21 October 2010 - 08:23 AM

Mark,
I've already thoroughly reviewed the WO22x70. For confirmation of it's performance see the CN Reports. (yes they are 3.0°).

Harold said

EdZ, The red ring on the 7x50 and 10x70 Nikons coincide with the use of an extra positive miniscus lens. Nikon has used various names for the 7x50 and 10x70 models we are discussing:(Astroluxe, Prostar, SP, HP, etc.) and they have not consistently used these names to reflect what is inside of them. ..... Early 10x70 Astroluxes did not use it.



Interesting comments. This would seem to agree with other information I have.

In other words, the simple fact that the 10x70 I have in hand doesn't have a red ring does not mean it is not an Astroluxe. Also, from what you indicated above, some Astroluxe 10x70s do have a field flattener (presumeably only those with a red ring) and some 10x70 Astroluxe do not have a field flattener.

Still the 10x70s total off-axis aberration is much better than the 18x70. And in fact when compared to numerous other binoculars the Nikon 10x70 is not to bad at all.
A measure of total aberration, arcseconds apparent, (the term distortion is used here to refer to the collective deterioration of all off-axis aberrations combined). "Total field measured" (not specified) or Tfov is given:

320 arcsec apparent is a 36 arcsec pairor stars x 10 power. It could also be a 20arcsec pair x 16 power. 600 arcsec apparent is what I have always considered acceptable image quality limit for usable field of view.

ALL measured at 75% out from center
Nikon 18x70 has 600 arcseconds distortion 4°
Nikon 10x70 has 360 arcseconds distortion 5.1°
Nikon Prostar 7x50 has 150 arcseconds distortion 7.5°

for comparison, at 75% out
Fujinon FMT-SX 16x70 has 340 arcseconds distortion 4°
Fujinon FMT-SX 10x70 has 620 arcsec distortion 5°
Fujinon FMT-SX 10x50 has 320 arcsec distortion 6.5°

GO Signature 22x85 has 750 arcsec distortion 3°
WO (semi)Apo 22x70 has 470 arcsec distortion 3°
Tak Astronomer 22x60 has 320 arcsec distortion 2.2°
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 has 520 arcsec distortion 4.4°
Nikon SE 12x50 has 260 arcsec distortion 5°
WO 7x50 ED has 600 arcsec distortion 7.4°

edz

#70 Fomalhaut

Fomalhaut

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,763
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2008

Posted 21 October 2010 - 10:33 AM

ALL measured at 75% out from center
Nikon 18x70 has 600 arcseconds distortion 4°
....
for comparison, at 75% out
Fujinon FMT-SX 16x70 has 340 arcseconds distortion 4°
edz


EdZ,

This does not take into consideration the fact that the 18x70's 75%-circle of a 4 deg FOV (due to ~18/16 times higher magnification) appears larger than the 16x70's one.
In order to compare the visual impression you should measure the 18x70's distortion 75%*16/18 = ~67% out... Only then you'd compare two apparently same large circles and not an apple to an orange...

Chris

#71 gatorengineer

gatorengineer

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,933
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2005

Posted 21 October 2010 - 11:26 AM

Well who ever wants to go dumpster diving stop on by..... You might find some goodies in the garbage..... I think I will line the can with my 10x50 Fuji's, 7x50 Prostars, put the 18x50 Astroluxes in the middle, and hold the lid down with 10x70 nikon 7 degree binos, and keep the balance with 10x70 nikon 6.5 degree binos....

If the raccoons come by to try and get in the can, I can throw the Mark 41's or 43's at em if I miss em the first time......

Need to go get some Chinese binoculars.....

The real pity here is that I do not believe that there is a single store in the US anymore, where you can pick up a 22x70 WO and compare it for yourself with an 18x70 Nikon astroluxe or a 16 x 70 Fuji......

But as long as theres cloudy nights, why do you need to?

#72 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 21 October 2010 - 11:49 AM

Chris,

here you see only the data I've recorded. This is not my review of these binoculars. In reviews, if you've read any of them over the several years availbale, you would see that I make the comparisons of effective area of view. At this point it would be far more confusing if i tried to post for you the position were all binoculars have equal error, so I simply selected a position where I had readings for every sample. It's not hard at all to interpret the data.

edz

edz

#73 Fomalhaut

Fomalhaut

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,763
  • Joined: 16 Aug 2008

Posted 21 October 2010 - 12:16 PM

EdZ,

No, it's not, but this latest comparison is also not very relevant...

Chris

#74 Joad

Joad

    Wordsmith

  • *****
  • Posts: 18,425
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2005

Posted 21 October 2010 - 12:34 PM

Let's stick to discussion of the binoculars (the Nikon 18X70 measures) and not each other's comments on the binoculars.

#75 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18,849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 21 October 2010 - 12:41 PM

In order to compare the visual impression you should measure the 18x70's distortion 75%*16/18 = ~67% out...


Sorry, I don't agree with this method. Seems to work fine if you have two binoculars that are relatively close in fov size, but try to apply that across all binoculars.

Let's say we compare a 7, 5, and 3° binocular. In your method, you would find you are comparing the image 2/3rds of the way out in the 3° binocular with what would essentially be nearly an on-axis image in the 7° binocular. The positions are not comparable, therefore the comparison will not give the intended result.

I prefer to do as I've outlined, compare apparent resolution as I've explained, which essentially incorporates the power into the image. I then use standardized values across all sizes of binoculars, such as 600 arcseconds apparent error, to determine the degree to which the binocular has optimized the fov. From that data I report the usable field of view. The method works just fine.

That's a topic which has been discussed here for perhaps as long back as 2002-2003. Refer to the history.

edz


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics