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

Removing 'Ruby' coatings possible ?

This topic has been archived.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

#1 chris charen

chris charen

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1782
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2014

Posted 21 June 2006 - 06:10 PM

Has anyone removed or know if the 'Ruby' [Rubicon] coatings can be removed from binos ? does this ruin the lens totally and presumably they have to be recoated if successful ?
I can get a pair of Chinese Barska type 20x80s very inexpensively but they have the dreaded ruby coatings.
Thanks for any advice.

#2 KennyJ

KennyJ

    The British Flash

  • *****
  • Posts: 36343
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2003

Posted 21 June 2006 - 06:18 PM

Charen ,

I don't know if I was just " lucky " , but the " ruby coatings " on the only binoculars I ever owned which had the feature flaked off on their own accord after leaving them behind a glass windscreen of a hire car in very hot sunshine in Gran Canaria .

Alas this automatic " self - cleaning " did nothing to improve the binoculars -- in fact , if anything , I think it made them even WORSE !

I've found that for REALLY BAD binoculars , a few coats of matte black paint over the objectives spares the user many a splitting headache .

Kenny

#3 btschumy

btschumy

    Vendor - Simulation Curriculum

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 3416
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2004

Posted 21 June 2006 - 07:13 PM

Unless the coatings are just painted on, as it sound like Kenny's were, there is no feasible, inexpensive way to remove them. You should just pass on these. They will probably be nothing but trouble.

#4 Stephonon

Stephonon

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1873
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2005

Posted 21 June 2006 - 08:22 PM

I've found that for REALLY BAD binoculars , a few coats of matte black paint over the objectives spares the user many a splitting headache .

:roflmao:

#5 Joad

Joad

    Wordsmith

  • *****
  • Posts: 18192
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2005

Posted 21 June 2006 - 08:45 PM

I seem to recall reading somewhere that ruby coatings are popular with manufacturers because they help conceal optical problems. So not only is it unlikely that you could remove them without destroying the binoculars, but even if you could remove them easily, you'd probably find the optics even worse than with the coatings.

#6 BillC

BillC

    on a new path

  • *****
  • Posts: 4391
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2004

Posted 21 June 2006 - 09:16 PM

Let's say you have the coatings off!

First, it will cost you MUCH, MUCH more to have the lenses recoated.

Secondly, the instrument will have to be re-collimated. If you actually find someone who really knows how to do that, it will be considerably more expensive than you think.

As an aside: I just received a shipment of four large aperture binoculars last week. All four were out of collimation according to JTII specs and much worse compared to the standards I accept for high end instruments. I returned only one. Why? Because that is the way of the future. If I retured everything from some of these importers because they did not meet the standards of 30 years ago, they would stop doing business with me, while my competitors would keep selling them and their customers would keep singing their praises. When you cater to the lowest common denominator, the lowest common denominator has no reason to stop going lower.

Such is life.

Cheers,

Bill

#7 Swedpat

Swedpat

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1416
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2005

Posted 22 June 2006 - 08:25 AM

Charen,

According to the information above I think it's better you purchase some Oberwerks or Celestron Skymasters.

MAYBE you can make use of the Barskas, IF the image quality is decent: I have experienced ruby coating provides quite comfortable viewing during very strong light conditions as sunny days at snowy mountains and over the sea. I think that was the original meaning with the ruby-coating.

Patric

#8 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • Posts: 18849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 22 June 2006 - 09:22 AM

Properly applied anti-reflection coatings are molecularly bonded to the glass. they cannot be removed without altering the figure of the glass.

See Kenny's post for removing improperly applied coatings.

edz

#9 photonovore

photonovore

    Moonatic

  • *****
  • Posts: 2879
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2004

Posted 22 June 2006 - 11:06 AM

I don't know how 'inexpensive' these binos are (70-80$?), but for a mere 100$, a pair of actual Barska 20x80's-- sans any ruby coating issues to deal with--are available.

#10 BluewaterObserva

BluewaterObserva

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • ***--
  • Posts: 5809
  • Joined: 18 May 2004

Posted 22 June 2006 - 11:14 AM

Do you really hate the coatings? Ruby coatings are better than no coatings hands down. :)

I'd bet the binos perform decent as is.

#11 btschumy

btschumy

    Vendor - Simulation Curriculum

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 3416
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2004

Posted 22 June 2006 - 12:32 PM

Ruby coatings are better than no coatings hands down.

Possibly for daytime use, but not for nighttime use.

#12 Glassthrower

Glassthrower

    Vendor - Galactic Stone & Ironworks

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 18455
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2005

Posted 22 June 2006 - 01:18 PM

What exactly is a ruby coating made out of? What is it's formula? (if there is a standard) ...

I've have always wondered but never bothered to find out.

MikeG

#13 Joad

Joad

    Wordsmith

  • *****
  • Posts: 18192
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2005

Posted 22 June 2006 - 01:34 PM

What exactly is a ruby coating made out of? What is it's formula? (if there is a standard) ...

I've have always wondered but never bothered to find out.

MikeG


Dorothy's slippers?








Sorry, couldn't help myself. :step:

#14 EdZ

EdZ

    Professor EdZ

  • *****
  • Posts: 18849
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2002

Posted 22 June 2006 - 01:36 PM

Ruby coatings are better than no coatings hands down.

Possibly for daytime use, but not for nighttime use.


I would agree.

Ruby coatings are not anti-relection coatings that allow the passage of greater amounts of light and reduce reflected light. They are actually reflective coatings or light blocking coatings that block out entire wavelengths of light. Rather than allow more light thru, they allow less light thru.

edz

#15 chris charen

chris charen

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1782
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2014

Posted 22 June 2006 - 03:49 PM

Thx for the replies. I brought a pair of 2nd hand Japanese 15x80 binos instead. Have posted a photo with brief write up.

#16 BillC

BillC

    on a new path

  • *****
  • Posts: 4391
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2004

Posted 22 June 2006 - 04:16 PM

Dorothy's slippers?


Now why didn't I think of that? Consider it stolen.

Cheers,

Bill

#17 BillC

BillC

    on a new path

  • *****
  • Posts: 4391
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2004

Posted 22 June 2006 - 04:20 PM

Do you really hate the coatings? Ruby coatings are better than no coatings hands down. :)

I'd bet the binos perform decent as is.


Yes, ruby coatings ARE better than no coatings. However, while that is true, it is a NON-issue.

The "coated optics" verbiage on the side of the boxes for cheap instruments notwithstanding, all binos have had coated optics since the 40's.

Cheers,

Bill

#18 DJB

DJB

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1742
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2005

Posted 23 June 2006 - 04:44 AM

I do not believe that one would find the formula(e) for ruby coatings, nor do I actually feel that anyone would need to know! Just my thoughts.

Best regards,
Dave.

#19 Les

Les

    Viking 1

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

Posted 23 June 2006 - 02:59 PM

As an aside: I just received a shipment of four large aperture binoculars last week. All four were out of collimation according to JTII specs and much worse compared to the standards I accept for high end instruments. I returned only one. Why? Because that is the way of the future. If I retured everything from some of these importers because they did not meet the standards of 30 years ago, they would stop doing business with me, while my competitors would keep selling them and their customers would keep singing their praises.


Well, that's depressing. Glad I'm not considering any future purchases of new binos. Bill, it wasn't clear to me whether you were expecting these to be high end quality (on the basis of cost or brand) or not. In other words, are you still seeing new binos that meet your high end quality standards.

Les

#20 BluewaterObserva

BluewaterObserva

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • ***--
  • Posts: 5809
  • Joined: 18 May 2004

Posted 23 June 2006 - 03:56 PM

Ruby coatings are better than no coatings hands down.

Possibly for daytime use, but not for nighttime use.


I'll qualify and say for overall use. Daytime use without any coatings at all is rough. To much light for the uncoated optics.

#21 BillC

BillC

    on a new path

  • *****
  • Posts: 4391
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2004

Posted 23 June 2006 - 07:14 PM

Well, that's depressing. Glad I'm not considering any future purchases of new binos. Bill, it wasn't clear to me whether you were expecting these to be high end quality (on the basis of cost or brand) or not. In other words, are you still seeing new binos that meet your high end quality standards.

Les


Oh, absolutely! I have no problem with what I am seeing from most of the high-end manufacturers. What I find in some of their repair departments scares the heck outta me. Oh course, since I was trying to get some of the repair business, years ago, I will occasionally get a raised eyebrow, with some stuffed shirt, who knows almost nothing about optics, thinking I am still trolling for the business. They actually think I think I would WANT work at the price they would be willing to pay.

But, again, they don’t have to be great. They just have to convince a few vocal people on lists such as this that the work they do is top notch (AND SOMETIMES IT IS!!!).

As long as folks think conditional alignment is collimation, as long as folks think a $69 binocular can be disassembled, cleaned, reassembled, and collimated by qualified personnel cost effectively, as long as folks refuse to understand that often binos A, B, and C are the same on the inside, as long as people with no background in optics can convince others that a bino at twice the max collimation error, and field curvature out the ears, provides “tack sharp images,” as long as folks can put the words “zoom” and “great” in the same sentence, things will not get better. There is nothing to MAKE things get better.

But, that’s just the rambling of an old fool. :tonofbricks:

Cheers,

Bill


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