763 replies to this topic

[Fiske]

Jordan,

 

On the 100XL front, the 24mm eyepieces are about the only option that keeps it under 25x. After that it's another team. 

 

The Lasik thing could be a factor, but so is -5.50 sphere in both eyes and mild astigmatism, trust me. We have to play the hand we're dealt. And I've noticed spikiness here and there depending on the instrument. Definitely a factor with the APM 20x80 ED MS.

 

I love the 15x70 Ultra, but have you considered the Maven 15x56, available from your neighbors in Wyoming? Latest addition to my Team 15x-25x (though its even more powerful sibling is arriving today.) The 15x56 is remarkably sharp. Also well suited for maniacs who hand hold 15x binoculars...

 

 

Edited by Fiske, 08 June 2022 - 08:28 AM.

[MT4]

My 15-25x group photo:

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Fiske]

And a fine group photo it is! 

[jrazz]

I don't know. I'm not in a position to even consider it now given how much expenditures we've had lately. (the 100XL is small potatoes. We're sending two kids to college)

 

Fluorite is my favorite mineral and lens material at the same time so the Mavens are really attractive plus the EP is better for LASIK spikes but... Swaro... and honestly, Leica.... I like my expensive jewelry   

[Fiske]

I own the Swaro 10x56 SLC and the Maven b.5 10x56. The Swaro has its good points, but the Maven gets the nod from me between those two. Versus Swarovski and Leica, the Maven b.5 15.56 seems like a nice value-priced option for a gal on a budget. Just sayin'...

 

Edited by Fiske, 08 June 2022 - 09:19 AM.

[B 26354]

OK... only two entries... but I'll bite.   

 

Docter Nobilem 15x60 B/GA

 

Exit Pupil:   4mm
Eye Relief:  15mm
TFOV:         4.1°
AFOV:         61.5°
Weight:       3.8 lb

 

 

 

 

 

These will always be my favorites. I've had them for twenty-one years, and as far as I'm concerened, they're heirlooms. Whether I'm stepping outside for a thirty-minute sky-check, or spending the night doing AP, these are what I grab first. Nothing else in my little binocular arsenal comes close. Tack sharp edge to edge, wonderful wide TFOV and AFOV, and exactly enough eye-relief to allow me to see the entire FOV with my fairly mild eyeglass prescription. Using standard "bracing" techniques, I can hand-hold them completely effectively... but if I'm going to be out with them for longer than half an hour, I prefer to mount them on the Bosch tripod. And at 15X, daytime hand-held spotting and following of the local hawks and vultures enjoying the nearby late-morning thermals -- and the constant raven vs red-tail wars -- is a total thrill.

 

- - - - -

 

APM MS 25x100 ED

 

Exit pupil:  4mm
Eye relief: 16mm
TFOV:       2.7°
AFOV:       67.5°
Weight:     9.4 lb

 

 

 

 

 

I did have a pair of Oberwerk 20x80 Deluxe IIIs for a while, which I thought were pretty good... being reasonably sharp and moderately-well color-corrected, but only within in the central 40% or so of their FOV. As such, in looking to scale up to some 25x100s, I assumed that the Oberwerk 25x100 Deluxe model would be optically no different than the 20x80s, and I was hoping for a significant improvement in both of those areas, without having to spend $2,000+ to get there.

 

Happily -- due to their ED glass -- I found the APM MS 25x100 EDs to be far superior to the Oberwerks, both in sharpness and color-correction -- so much so, that I quickly stopped using the Oberwerks at all, and ultimatey sold them. M42, the Pleiades, the double cluster, and the like, are spectacular in the APMs' wide AFOV. M31 fills the FOV, and its dark lanes are apparent in my 20.0 MPSAS skies. And at 25X and a 2.7° FOV, the Moon is so much larger than it was through the 20x80s. For the first time ever, in a pair of binocuars, I was able to discern actual "fine" detail in the craters along the lunar terminator. And my eyes detect no chromatic aberation in the APMs at all; no yellow or purple fringe around the edge of the Moon whatsoever.

 

Observing with them mounted on the Farpoint parallelogram/Oberwerk TR3 combination is pure, effortless joy. And of course, having gotten them two years ago, at their 2020 price of $970, didn't hurt.  

 

I'd love to find a detailed one-on-one comparison between these and the Oby 25x100 Deluxes.

[DaveL]

Docter Nobilem 15x60 B/GA

 

Exit Pupil:   4mm
Eye Relief:  15mm
TFOV:         4.1°
AFOV:         61.5°
Weight:       3.8 lb

 

These will always be my favorites. I've had them for twenty-one years, and as far as I'm concerened, they're heirlooms. Whether I'm stepping outside for a thirty-minute sky-check, or spending the night doing AP, these are what I grab first. Nothing else in my little binocular arsenal comes close. Tack sharp edge to edge, wonderful wide TFOV and AFOV, and exactly enough eye-relief to allow me to see the entire FOV with my fairly mild eyeglass prescription. Using standard "bracing" techniques, I can hand-hold them completely effectively... but if I'm going to be out with them for longer than half an hour, I prefer to mount them on the Bosch tripod. And at 15X, daytime hand-held spotting and following of the local hawks and vultures enjoying the nearby late-morning thermals -- and the constant raven vs red-tail wars -- is a total thrill.

I have the Docter Nobilem 15x60 too, and they are the favorite of my binoculars too. They are super sharp on axis and contrast is excellent, but they are not sharp to the edge of the field. The aberrations at the edge are more than just field curvature so focus accommodation can't account for our discrepancy. Mine are a late version with the magnesium body from around 2010.

 

-Dave

[MT4]

OK... only two entries... but I'll bite.   

 

Docter Nobilem 15x60 B/GA

 

Exit Pupil:   4mm
Eye Relief:  15mm
TFOV:         4.1°
AFOV:         61.5°
Weight:       3.8 lb

 

 

Docter 15x60 CN.jpg

 

15x60s & Bosch Tripod 02 - C-N.jpg

 

 

These will always be my favorites. I've had them for twenty-one years, and as far as I'm concerened, they're heirlooms. Whether I'm stepping outside for a thirty-minute sky-check, or spending the night doing AP, these are what I grab first. Nothing else in my little binocular arsenal comes close. Tack sharp edge to edge, wonderful wide TFOV and AFOV, and exactly enough eye-relief to allow me to see the entire FOV with my fairly mild eyeglass prescription. Using standard "bracing" techniques, I can hand-hold them completely effectively... but if I'm going to be out with them for longer than half an hour, I prefer to mount them on the Bosch tripod. And at 15X, daytime hand-held spotting and following of the local hawks and vultures enjoying the nearby late-morning thermals -- and the constant raven vs red-tail wars -- is a total thrill.

 

- - - - -

 

APM MS 25x100 ED

 

Exit pupil:  4mm
Eye relief: 16mm
TFOV:       2.7°
AFOV:       67.5°
Weight:     9.4 lb

 

 

APM 25x100 on Oberwerk TR3 2.jpg

 

APM MS 25x100ED on Farpoint P-Gram 3.jpg

 

 

I did have a pair of Oberwerk 20x80 Deluxe IIIs for a while, which I thought were pretty good... being reasonably sharp and moderately-well color-corrected, but only within in the central 40% or so of their FOV. As such, in looking to scale up to some 25x100s, I assumed that the Oberwerk 25x100 Deluxe model would be optically no different than the 20x80s, and I was hoping for a significant improvement in both of those areas, without having to spend $2,000+ to get there.

 

Happily -- due to their ED glass -- I found the APM MS 25x100 EDs to be far superior to the Oberwerks, both in sharpness and color-correction -- so much so, that I quickly stopped using the Oberwerks at all, and ultimatey sold them. M42, the Pleiades, the double cluster, and the like, are spectacular in the APMs' wide AFOV. M31 fills the FOV, and its dark lanes are apparent in my 20.0 MPSAS skies. And at 25X and a 2.7° FOV, the Moon is so much larger than it was through the 20x80s. For the first time ever, in a pair of binocuars, I was able to discern actual "fine" detail in the craters along the lunar terminator. And my eyes detect no chromatic aberation in the APMs at all; no yellow or purple fringe around the edge of the Moon whatsoever.

 

Observing with them mounted on the Farpoint parallelogram/Oberwerk TR3 combination is pure, effortless joy. And of course, having gotten them two years ago, at their 2020 price of $970, didn't hurt.  

 

I'd love to find a detailed one-on-one comparison between these and the Oby 25x100 Deluxes.

 

Those are lovely pictures!   

 

I've read a bit on the APM MS ED 25x100 lately, not because I am actively seeking out info on it but because I just happen to see it discussed in a few threads.   For my Bortle-9 skies, binoculars in the 15-25x range happen to be my favorites, putting aside the big BTs which I tend to bring out only when the sky is clear.  The more I read this thread, the more I am cognizant of the fact that I don't have a 25x straight-thru bino.  Perhaps this is where the APM MS ED 25x100 comes in to fill the gap 

 

Needing to wear eyeglasses for astigmatism correction, one of my main concerns about buying new binoculars or eyepieces is effective eye relief.   Pinac has measured it to be 13.5mm, which is just a bit short for me as I usually need about 14mm to see the full FOV.

 

https://binocular.ch/apm-ms-25x100-ed/

 

Are you able to comfortably see the APM 25x100's full FOV with your glasses on?  How's the effective eye relief compared to the Doctor Nobilem 15x60's ?   Thank you.

[B 26354]

Needing to wear eyeglasses for astigmatism correction, one of my main concerns about buying new binoculars or eyepieces is effective eye relief.   Pinac has measured it to be 13.5mm, which is just a bit short for me as I usually need about 14mm to see the full FOV.

 

https://binocular.ch/apm-ms-25x100-ed/

 

Are you able to comfortably see the APM 25x100's full FOV with your glasses on?  How's the effective eye relief compared to the Doctor Nobilem 15x60's ?   Thank you.

Like you, I have (mild) astigmatism in both eyes, and for longer focal-length, low-power eyepieces, I need to wear my glasses, so I tend to look for eye-relief of at least 15mm... and in that regard, the Docters and these APMs work well for me. Pinac's measurement for the APMs is 13.5mm... but as he reports, he measured from the rim of eyecup. I personally keep the eyeups permanently folded down, on both the Docters and the APMs.

 

The FOV in the Docters has a very defined, hard edge... and I can see it clearly (and a tiny bit beyond it) with my glasses on. The edge of the FOV in the APMs is quite soft -- with or without glasses -- and I can just see its full circumference while wearing my glasses.

 

Hope that helps.   

 

Edit:

 

Interestingly, they're currently 915.97 Euros (~$980.93 USD) from TS Optics in Germany... but they're $1,249.00 from Lunt, in the USA.

Edited by B 26354, 09 June 2022 - 12:53 AM.

[MT4]

Like you, I have (mild) astigmatism in both eyes, and for longer focal-length, low-power eyepieces, I need to wear my glasses, so I tend to look for eye-relief of at least 15mm... and in that regard, the Docters and these APMs work well for me. Pinac's measurement for the APMs is 13.5mm... but as he reports, he measured from the rim of eyecup. I personally keep the eyeups permanently folded down, on both the Docters and the APMs.

 

The FOV in the Docters has a very defined, hard edge... and I can see it clearly (and a tiny bit beyond it) with my glasses on. The edge of the FOV in the APMs is quite soft -- with or without glasses -- and I can just see its full circumference while wearing my glasses.

 

Hope that helps.   

 

Edit:

 

Interestingly, they're currently 915.97 Euros (~$980.93 USD) from TS Optics in Germany... but they're $1,249.00 from Lunt, in the USA.

 

Yes that helps me spend more money 

 

The only thing causing me to pause is that the APM MS ED 25x100 is out of stock on both TS-Optics and APM websites.  The APM dealer in Japan doesn't have it either.  Since I gave up on the APM MS ED 16x70 in March after waiting a full 6 months, I am now very wary of ordering anything APM-related that is out of stock.  (I know it's not APM's fault, just supply chain issues due to covid-19 lockdowns and what's going on in the world at large.)

 

Perhaps it may be a good idea for me to sleep on the idea for a bit, especially considering that I already have the APM 100mm SD APO BT.

[Chuck2]

My 20x-25x team… with proper filters all white light Solar capable as well…

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 
• 

[ckwastro]

Like you, I have (mild) astigmatism in both eyes, and for longer focal-length, low-power eyepieces, I need to wear my glasses, so I tend to look for eye-relief of at least 15mm... and in that regard, the Docters and these APMs work well for me. Pinac's measurement for the APMs is 13.5mm... but as he reports, he measured from the rim of eyecup. I personally keep the eyeups permanently folded down, on both the Docters and the APMs.

 

The FOV in the Docters has a very defined, hard edge... and I can see it clearly (and a tiny bit beyond it) with my glasses on. The edge of the FOV in the APMs is quite soft -- with or without glasses -- and I can just see its full circumference while wearing my glasses.

 

Hope that helps.   

 

Edit:

 

Interestingly, they're currently 915.97 Euros (~$980.93 USD) from TS Optics in Germany... but they're $1,249.00 from Lunt, in the USA.

Pinac also measured the usable ER of the Docter 15x60 at 10.5mm, and I’d say that is pretty close. 
 

I had a chance to use a pair during the day and the optics are outstanding, but I wear glasses. I usually can deal with 15-16mm as a minimum for a 60-65* AFOV, but obviously prefer 17-20mm whenever possible. Even with the eyecups rolled down there was no way I could see the entire field with my glasses on. It wasn’t even close. I don’t have deep set eyes and my glasses are fairly thin, but the eye relief was far to short for me. Unfortunately that was the kicker that prevented me from buying them. Needless to say I was quite bummed as I loved the optical performance. 

[B 26354]

Pinac also measured the usable ER of the Docter 15x60 at 10.5mm, and I’d say that is pretty close. 
 

I had a chance to use a pair during the day and the optics are outstanding, but I wear glasses. I usually can deal with 15-16mm as a minimum for a 60-65* AFOV, but obviously prefer 17-20mm whenever possible. Even with the eyecups rolled down there was no way I could see the entire field with my glasses on. It wasn’t even close. I don’t have deep set eyes and my glasses are fairly thin, but the eye relief was far to short for me. Unfortunately that was the kicker that prevented me from buying them. Needless to say I was quite bummed as I loved the optical performance. 

Well... all I can do is report my own experience.

 

I don't have deep set eyes either, and my glasses are also fairly thin... and as I've stated, I can see the entire AFOV clearly (and a tiny bit beyond it) with my glasses on.

 

I was lucky enough to have been able to purchase my Docters from a Scope City store in Van Nuys CA, which I lived quite close to at the time (sadly, Scope City is now gone)... and I spent several hours over the course of several days, trying every "large" binocular in the store, before purchasing the Docters, which handily out-performed all of the competition. Among many reasons why I selected them, was the fact that with the eyecups rolled down, I could -- and still can -- see the entire AFOV while wearing my glasses.

 

Kind of a moot point, of course... since they've been out of production for years. And because of their excellence, they almost never come up for sale, used.

 

[ckwastro]

Well... all I can do is report my own experience.

 

 

All any of us can do. Didn’t mean for that to come off as not believing your findings. Our physiologies are all different so what works for some may not work for others, especially with binoculars. Agreed they are great glass!

[B 26354]

All any of us can do. Didn’t mean for that to come off as not believing your findings. Our physiologies are all different so what works for some may not work for others, especially with binoculars. Agreed they are great glass!

Actually, Kerry, this is a very useful and valuably-revealing exchange of information.

 

Considering the fact that our two facial structures seem to be somewhat similar... one would normally assume that the outcome of this comparison would likewise be similar. That the result is as profoundly different as it is, should alert all of us to take even the most "exacting" and detailed reviews and commentary about the optical characteristics of a given instrument with far more "grains of salt" than we might otherwise have applied. As ever... the venerable adage, "Question Authority", arises.

 

Out of further curiosity... I wonder how IPD affects this, if at all. I find that with all of my binoculars -- including these two "high magnification" ones -- that spot-on IPD adjustment is absolutely critical, for optimum performance. My IPD is 60mm. What's yours? 

 

[Fiske]

My take on this is similar to what any number of others in the Binocular forum have said. The only way to determine if a binocular suits you is first hand trial. And even with that, it can take some time to finally decide preferences. 

[B 26354]

The only way to determine if a binocular suits you is first hand trial. And even with that, it can take some time to finally decide preferences. 

True of anything... and precisely why my comments in the C-Nights fora  -- while sometimes a bit long-winded -- generally tend to not be overly detailed or analytical.

 

[ckwastro]

Actually, Kerry, this is a very useful and valuably-revealing exchange of information.

 

Considering the fact that our two facial structures seem to be somewhat similar... one would normally assume that the outcome of this comparison would likewise be similar. That the result is as profoundly different as it is, should alert all of us to take even the most "exacting" and detailed reviews and commentary about the optical characteristics of a given instrument with far more "grains of salt" than we might otherwise have applied. As ever... the venerable adage, "Question Authority", arises.

 

Out of further curiosity... I wonder how IPD affects this, if at all. I find that with all of my binoculars -- including these two "high magnification" ones -- that spot-on IPD adjustment is absolutely critical, for optimum performance. My IPD is 60mm. What's yours? 

 

 

My IPD is 63mm. My glasses are 2.9mm thick (thin?). However, I was also thinking the glasses frames and how they sit might play a role, as well as the curvature of the glasses lenses. My eyeglass lenses have a decent curve to them and near as I can tell (without poking out my eye with the caliper ) the distance from my cornea to the inside of my glasses is about another 6-7mm, so that kicks it up to 9-10mm lost from glass thickness and curvature. Those could be the culprits as to why the Docter didn't work for me.

 

So many aspects for us glasses-wearers that can affect how much eye relief is needed. 

[Fiske]

I have never tried a binocular now in production that has too little eye relief for me, wearing glasses. The problem is always the opposite. Too much eye relief if the eye cups are folded down. With few exceptions. Like the Oberwerk 10x50 and 15x70 Ultra binoculars, which are perfect for me wearing glasses with the eyecups folded down.

[ckwastro]

Wish that were the case for me. The Obie 20x65s are tight for me but I put up with it because I really like the optical performance. I can just see the entire field with my glasses pressed against the eyepieces.

 

That is what has kept me from buying IS bins. They’re all 15mm or less with the exception of the Canon 10x42 at 16mm. With all the complaints about the eyecups I’m reluctant to buy without trying first, which is near impossible. We have Bass Proshops, Cabelas and Sportsmans Warehouse, along with several smaller sporting goods and outdoor shops, and none of them stock any IS binoculars.

 

I probably need to bump my minimum eye relief up to 17-18mm to make darned sure it will be comfortable for me.

Edited by ckwastro, 10 June 2022 - 01:16 AM.

[warpsl]

Has anyone compared the obie 20x65ed vs a nikon 18x70?

[MT4]

Wish that were the case for me. The Obie 20x65s are tight for me but I put up with it because I really like the optical performance. I can just see the entire field with my glasses pressed against the eyepieces.

 

That is what has kept me from buying IS bins. They’re all 15mm or less with the exception of the Canon 10x42 at 16mm. With all the complaints about the eyecups I’m reluctant to buy without trying first, which is near impossible. We have Bass Proshops, Cabelas and Sportsmans Warehouse, along with several smaller sporting goods and outdoor shops, and none of them stock any IS binoculars.

 

I probably need to bump my minimum eye relief up to 17-18mm to make darned sure it will be comfortable for me.

I have the too little eye relief problem with many binoculars.  What I do is that once I’ve determined that any short eye-relief instrument stays in the collection I would perform an eyecup surgery to improve the effective eye relief.  This usually involves cutting off any unnecessary rubber bits from the eyecups in order to get as close to the ocular lenses as possible.  On some instruments, I would remove the eyecups altogether and put on O-rings, a trick I learned from SMark. 
 

With the above mods, I am able to use instruments such as the Nikon 18x70 and the Canon 15x50 IS without any problems.   What I’ve found is that there’s a big difference between being able to just about see the full FOV (i.e. perhaps missing out on the outer 5% of the field) and having something like 1mm of extra eye relief to spare.  Aside from increased viewing comfort, that extra 1mm of eye relief helps avoid vignetting around the edge of the field and remove the need to constantly try to see the field stop.

 

Of course, a key downside of carrying out these mods is that it’s more difficult to sell the instruments down the line.  I am not in the habit of flipping instruments so it’s not that big of a concern to me.  

[ckwastro]

I have the too little eye relief problem with many binoculars.  What I do is that once I’ve determined that any short eye-relief instrument stays in the collection I would perform an eyecup surgery to improve the effective eye relief.  This usually involves cutting off any unnecessary rubber bits from the eyecups in order to get as close to the ocular lenses as possible.  On some instruments, I would remove the eyecups altogether and put on O-rings, a trick I learned from SMark. 
 

With the above mods, I am able to use instruments such as the Nikon 18x70 and the Canon 15x50 IS without any problems.   What I’ve found is that there’s a big difference between being able to just about see the full FOV (i.e. perhaps missing out on the outer 5% of the field) and having something like 1mm of extra eye relief to spare.  Aside from increased viewing comfort, that extra 1mm of eye relief helps avoid vignetting around the edge of the field and remove the need to constantly try to see the field stop.

 

Of course, a key downside of carrying out these mods is that it’s more difficult to sell the instruments down the line.  I am not in the habit of flipping instruments so it’s not that big of a concern to me.  

I would be very interested in this. Do you have links or pics of the mods you have done, and how to do them? Would love to take a look at those, especially if it opens up a lot more possibilities. Thanks!

[MT4]

I would be very interested in this. Do you have links or pics of the mods you have done, and how to do them? Would love to take a look at those, especially if it opens up a lot more possibilities. Thanks!

 

The basic idea is that we just need a thin layer of rubber over the flat top of each eyepiece in order to prevent our eyeglasses from coming into contact with such flat top.

 

For the O-ring idea, SMark has a wonderful write-up in the following thread, complete with tons of pics:

https://www.cloudyni...earing-glasses/

 

Here's my Canon 15x50 IS after an eyecup surgery:

https://www.cloudyni...5#entry11264211

 

So how did I cut and smooth out my Canon's rubber eyecups?   I simply used a pair of scissors and a nail cutter.   The scissors were obviously for cutting / trimming the rubber bits that prevented my eyes from getting close to the ocular lenses.   The nail cutter's file was used to smooth out what was left of the rubber eyecups.   (I know, it's very low tech but the end result speaks for itself )

 

Having performed rubber eyecup surgeries on a few of my binos, I have learned a valuable lesson:  If the rubber eyecups are removable, which should be the case with most rubber eyecups other than Canon's, then remove them, cut them and smooth them out before putting them back on.

 

These relatively simple mods have allowed me to use and enjoy many more binos than I could have without doing the mods.   Here are some those binos:

  1)  Nikon 18x70                          <-- Barely useable before I put on O-rings.

  2)  Canon 15x50 IS                    <-- Somewhat useable prior to the eyecup surgery,  and much more comfortable after

  3)  Zeiss Dialyt 10x40 B T*P      <-- Somewhat useable prior to the eyecup surgery,  and much more comfortable after

  4)  APM MS ED 20x70               <-- Useable prior to the eyecup surgery, and much more comfortable after

  5). Zeiss 15x60 BGAT*               <-- I've put flat rubber washers on the flat tops.  Now very comfortable with my glasses on.

 

Hope that helps open up more binocular possibilities for you.

Edited by MT4, 10 June 2022 - 11:22 AM.

[ckwastro]

Thanks so much! I will definitely give this a shot! Much appreciated.