
Is this real or just my imagnation
#1
Posted 11 August 2005 - 02:47 PM
#2
Posted 11 August 2005 - 03:31 PM
#3
Posted 11 August 2005 - 03:50 PM
It's possible it is his imagination and they are the same as before cleaning. However, I would give then a good looking at from the front with a bright light reflected off them. As Joad says, look for any smearing. However, I would think that smearing would cause light scatter, not noticeable reflections.
#4
Posted 11 August 2005 - 03:52 PM
#5
Posted 11 August 2005 - 03:56 PM

#6
Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:14 PM
#7
Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:15 PM
Distilled water/ethyl alcohol as Joad suggested is a good alternative. Of course the best cleaning is no cleaning at all...even if it aggravates the heck out of others, I am very anal (can I say that in here?) about my optics. Keeping dirt/grime off in the first place is the best defense.
MikeG
#8
Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:38 PM
#9
Posted 11 August 2005 - 09:26 PM
How comes they are fogging? Are you keeping them inside an air conditioned room and taking them out in humid weather? Or are you living in a cold place?
Best,
Holger
#10
Posted 11 August 2005 - 09:52 PM


#11
Posted 11 August 2005 - 10:25 PM
Just keep in mind: The Nikon Action is no great glass just because there is 'Nikon' printed on them. These are fairly simple Chinese binoculars and from time to time there may be a problem with quality control.
Best,
Holger
#12
Posted 11 August 2005 - 11:13 PM
Just keep in mind: The Nikon Action is no great glass just because there is 'Nikon' printed on them. These are fairly simple Chinese binoculars and from time to time there may be a problem with quality control.
Best,
Holger
A little comment: I just don't either believe that binoculars couldn't be great just because they are made in China. The country of origin is hardly the main factor of the quality level. What prevent that the japanese or german manufacturer use their knowledge and science in another country? I really protest against the prejudice that it would be a nature law or destiny that the quality of optics would be dependence of the country of origin...
Regards, Patric
#13
Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
Posted 12 August 2005 - 12:36 AM
Unless you do something horribly bad, you probably can't damage coatings with the proper use of lens brush, cleaner and micro-fiber cloths.
When you're looking at these bright lights at night, the view you're getting is different than from what you used to see under the exact same conditions? I find that relatively hard to believe.
Humidity might be more of an issue, seeing how these bins are not waterproof, and taking them from cold to heat and back may indeed cause some internal moisture to form on the prisms or other surfaces and help cause all these reflections.
Perhaps it could be that you're noticing these defects (because you're actually checking for them now) for the first time now that you've properly cleaned them.
#14
Posted 12 August 2005 - 12:53 AM
#15
Posted 12 August 2005 - 01:21 AM
I tried the microfibre cloths and a number of other lens cleaners. However, I always drop back to my favourites: 1) Kodak Lens Cleaner solution/CAT 146 3728, and 2) Kodak Lens Cleaning Paper/CAT EK 154 6027. (B&H availability.)
If I MUST clean a lens, I generally make three-to-four passes. First, as mentioned already, I dab. Then, I use a gentle, circular motion from outside to inside. Finally, I breath on the lens and use two sheets of the paper. This removes all residue that the other cleaning cycles may have produced, as well as any remaining lint. Never had a problem.
In every case I've noticed a residual "haze" on the lens(es) except for the Kodak process. I've tested these on older, torn-down, coated optics.
At work we have to clean very large (~50"-164") mirrors, which are not yet coated. Acetone works the best prior to coating. I am not endorsing using acetone on any optics.
Just my three-cents.
Regards,
Dave.
#16
Posted 12 August 2005 - 01:30 AM
-------------------------------------------------------
Hi Patric,
it is the consumer who prevents them from applying that knowledge. The consumer who wants a cheap binocular. In fact, the Nikon Action was a nice binocular a few years back, when still made in Japan, optics and coating were all right, and especially the mechanical features were fine. Now it is slightly different. It is still a usable binocular, no doubt, but one has to keep an eye on its performance to make sure one hasn't got a dog. As this particular thread proves, even a rather inexperienced binocular user was surprised to find problems and blamed his cleaning as being the cause of that. He did so because he couldn't believe that a new binocular could pass the quality control with such a performance. He will return it back and most likely have got a better sample some days later. No problem.
I didn't claim that binoculars made in China are necessarily bad, I just claimed that the Nikon Action is among the rather simple binoculars coming from China, not among the best they can do (for example, the Oberwerk Mariner seems to belong to the better glasses made in China). In fact, I am recently trying to figure out which of the glasses made in China are actually rather good. I hope within a year or so to have a kind of small collection of China's 'high-end'. I will report on that whenever I got new information.
Best,
Holger
#17
Posted 12 August 2005 - 02:14 AM
#18
Posted 12 August 2005 - 03:01 AM
The cleaner depends on the kind of dirt.
- Cleaners with water + a tad of tensioactive (read detergent) remove dirts that strong solvents like Acetone hardly clean. Examples: calcium residuals of drops of rain, salt spray, marmalades …
They don’t evaporate off very cleanly.
The Kodak lens cleaner is (was?) a cleaner of this category.
- Cleaners purely made with solvents and without water attack better greases (also fingers grease), oils, resins, adhesives and evaporate off very cleanly. Examples: hexane (doesn’t damage plastics) , methyl alcohol (could damages some plastics) methyl ethyl ketone, which positive and negative effects are very similar to that ones of the more common pure acetone (care, it damages almost all the plastics). As in binoculars there are many plastic parts, I suggest to use Hexane.
All these solvents are dangerous for your health, some of them are carcinogenic and teratogenic.
The process of cleaning with dirty lenses should be:
- Blow off dust particles (not with highly compressed air, if there is sand it will damage the lens)
- Only when dust particles have been removed, damp a Kodak tissue or a similar tissue (and NOT the tissues you find by the optician, very often they contain chemicals). Also Kleenex tissues are good, make narrow (about 3 cm) strips of them, wrap one strip around the rounded tips of a tweezer, damp it (don’t soak it) and clean with circular motion starting from the centre of the lens.
- First use a cleaner with water + a tad of tensioactive.
Some dirt is probably still there, moreover there will be some traces left by the cleaner
- Damp now another tissue with a solvent, breathe a bit on the lens (this produces a protective film that works like a cushion between lens and solvent) and clean the lens again.
Repeat this last step if the lens shows still traces of cleaner
Leave a window open when use the solvent and avoid to breath close to it.
In my opinion, cleaners that are a mixture of water and alcohol are a compromise in order to avoid the two mentioned steps (i.e. before water + a tad of tensioactive and then a pure solvent). They can be used but the last cleaning step should be a pure solvent.
Some metropolitan legends (at least in my not short experience):
“white, soft, unscented toilet tissues or facial tissues are dangerous for lenses”
“don’t breathe on the lens”
“cleaning often the lenses will damage coatings”. (if you do it “cum grano salis” there is no danger for your lenses)
About the Patric’s comment:
<The country of origin is hardly the main factor of the quality level>
EVERYBODY in the forum agrees this comment!
NOBODY in the forum could eat a Chinese (but could be Swedish

Just a joke
Claudio
#19
Posted 12 August 2005 - 03:06 AM
--------------------------------------------------
Oops, a misunderstanding - I assumed you got them just yesterday. If you were happy with them until now and you are not any more than it is of course not the quality control to be blamed. Pointing a torch to the ocular lens and looking through the objectives may help to identify haze or dust inside or smear on the eye-lens, possible causes for your problem.
Yes, many binoculars are coming from China. As long as you know what they can perform and where their limits are it is fine. I am also using Chinese binoculars, among others.
Best,
Holger
#20
Posted 12 August 2005 - 04:34 AM
Just to avoid an un-intended fire............I believe Holger is refering to a FLASHLIGHT and NOT a propane torch ! !
Yes its just semantics ....but just think of the ramifications ! !
#21
Posted 12 August 2005 - 07:57 AM
"Pointing a torch to the ocular lens"........
Just to avoid an un-intended fire............I believe Holger is refering to a FLASHLIGHT and NOT a propane torch ! !
Yes its just semantics ....but just think of the ramifications ! !
Good call, later old chap. In British English a torch is what we Yanks call a flashlight. A torch, American style, is something to be used for welding.
#22
Posted 12 August 2005 - 08:13 AM
YOU know what you are talking about and my comment was of course fairly "wrong adressed". We have also discussed this matter earlier.
It's just that I still react every time I hear someone speaks something negative about chinese optics. There are junk optics from China, and there are fairly good optics, and there are a few optics approaching the high-end level.
Several times I have heard dealers and birders (in Sweden) claim that "They are surely worse, they are chinese", "it can not be good because it's chinese" and such statements.
Some of them have never seen the chinese models who are highly respected and constantly discussed in this forum, just looked at some hobby catalog ruby-coating models and compared them to Swift and Swarovski. On the basis of that they then disqualify all chinese optics.
Therefore I easy become angry about negative judgements about chinese optics...
Regards, Patric
#23
Posted 12 August 2005 - 08:15 AM
#24
Posted 12 August 2005 - 09:13 AM
#25
Posted 12 August 2005 - 06:03 PM
