14 replies to this topic

[GADify]

Am I the only one who dislikes these modern hard plastic adjustable eyecups? 

 

[Edit - not hard plastic as per Oberwerk, but rather soft rubber over aluminum. See post #10 below]

 

I love my Mavens but these eyecups drive me crazy: 

 

 

 

And looking around online, it seems like these are the new standards for a lot of high end brands, but while the adjustability is useful, I find the hard plastic to be uncomfortable. I greatly prefer the old standard soft eyecups like these on my Fujinons and seemingly every older pair of binoculars I've owned: 

 

 

 

I asked Kevin at Oberwerk about this at NEAF and the impression I got was that the modern eyecups were more durable and people liked the adjustability, and he seemed surprised that I didn't like the hard ones. I understand that the fold-down rubber can tear over time, but they seem easily replaceable while the hard adjustable eyecups do not. I also like how the softer eyecups help to block out ambient light

 

Am I the only one that feels this way? Does anyone else dislike the modern hard plastic (though usefully adjustable) eyecups? Is my nose just too big? You can tell me. LOL

Edited by GADify, 16 April 2025 - 10:25 PM.

[pat in los angeles basin]

would a bino bandit  change that?   Pat

[JoeFaz]

The durability and adjustability of the hard plastic eyecups is probably the main contributor, as Kevin told you. As an eyeglass wearer, I do find that I strongly prefer them (the hard plastic isn't touching my face, so the comfort level in that regard is not a factor). Some rubber eyecups are more or less of a pain to use if you need to roll them down to use with your glasses. This might be a contributing factor as well --- more and more people are wearing glasses, and eye-glass-friendliness is an increasing demand on bino makers.

 

If I didn't wear glasses when using my binos, I think that I would likely agree with you and prefer the rubber cups for the comfort factor. Still the durability and adjustability factors really are appealing in the plastic eyecups. Sure we can replace the rubber eyecups over time, but I have little interest in having to do so if there's a better alternative.

Edited by JoeFaz, 16 April 2025 - 09:36 AM.

[Michael_S]

I prefer twist-down as well because they are easier to deal with while wearing glasses.

 

I think that hard vs. soft eyecups, regardless of mechanics, is an important consideration beyond comfort even for eyeglass wearers: I have a sizable negative eyeglass correction, so use "high-index polycarbonate" lenses, and those evidently scratch easily, even when sold as "scratch-resistant"  . I didn't look hard yet to find evidence for scratches that would definitely have been caused by, say, turning the diopter adjustment ring on vintage Porros while touching the glasses, but I figured rubberized eyecups would at least lower the scratch risk. — Can anybody confirm this?

 

I am glad that my two 'modern' binoculars do have rubberized covers on their (otherwise hard) twist-up eyecups.

Edited by Michael_S, 16 April 2025 - 12:26 PM.

[GADify]

would a bino bandit  change that?   Pat

I didn't even know that was a thing! Interesting. 

 

I think it would help with stray light but wouldn't help that the hard plastic eyecups mash into my nose. Still, could be worth a try! 

Edited by GADify, 16 April 2025 - 12:45 PM.

[GADify]

The durability and adjustability of the hard plastic eyecups is probably the main contributor, as Kevin told you. As an eyeglass wearer, I do find that I strongly prefer them (the hard plastic isn't touching my face, so the comfort level in that regard is not a factor). Some rubber eyecups are more or less of a pain to use if you need to roll them down to use with your glasses. This might be a contributing factor as well --- more and more people are wearing glasses, and eye-glass-friendliness is an increasing demand on bino makers.

 

If I didn't wear glasses when using my binos, I think that I would likely agree with you and prefer the rubber cups for the comfort factor. Still the durability and adjustability factors really are appealing in the plastic eyecups. Sure we can replace the rubber eyecups over time, but I have little interest in having to do so if there's a better alternative.

 

 

I prefer twist-down as well because they are easier to deal with while wearing glasses.

 

I think that hard vs. soft eyecups, regardless of mechanics, is an important consideration beyond comfort even for eyeglass wearers: I have a sizable negative eyeglass correction, so use "high-index polycarbonate" lenses, and those evidently scratch easily, even when sold as "scratch-resistant"  . I didn't look hard yet to find evidence for scratches that would definitely have been caused by, say, turning the diopter adjustment ring on vintage Porros while touching the glasses, but I figured rubberized eyecups would at least lower the scratch risk. — Can anybody confirm this?

 

I am glad that my two 'modern' binoculars do have rubberized covers on their (otherwise hard) twist-up eyecups.

 

Oh that makes a lot of sense. I wear glasses but don't *need* them (except to read - **** aging) and prefer not to use them on telescopes and binoculars where I can focus to compensate. I can absolutely see how the adjustable twist eyecups would make sense with them on, though. Thanks for the insight! 

[JoeFaz]

I prefer twist-down as well because they are easier to deal with while wearing glasses.

 

I think that hard vs. soft eyecups, regardless of mechanics, is an important consideration beyond comfort even for eyeglass wearers: I have a sizable negative eyeglass correction, so use "high-index polycarbonate" lenses, and those evidently scratch easily, even when sold as "scratch-resistant"  . I didn't look hard yet to find evidence for scratches that would definitely have been caused by, say, turning the diopter adjustment ring on vintage Porros while touching the glasses, but I figured rubberized eyecups would at least lower the scratch risk. — Can anybody confirm this?

 

I am glad that my two 'modern' binoculars do have rubberized covers on their (otherwise hard) twist-up eyecups.

Modern AR coatings are typically harder than the lenses themselves, so the hardness of the lens material really shouldn't matter here. You shouldn't be able to scratch through the coatings just using your binoculars.

[pat in los angeles basin]

If you have a ball cap with a stiff bill, grasp the binos along with the bill and you can take the load off the eye sockets and skin completely, the addition of holding the bill makes the view even steadier. Pat

[Scott99]

Am I the only one that feels this way? Does anyone else dislike the modern hard plastic (though usefully adjustable) eyecups? Is my nose just too big? You can tell me. LOL

I am right with you on the eyecups.  Prefer the older rubber ones.  The new ones are only useful for switching between glasses and not.   I've often complained that my super-expensive Zeiss binos' eyecups are not high enough, even at the highest setting, while my <$100 80's Nikons rubber eyeguards are all in precisely the right spot.   I always move every modern bino's eyecups to the maximum height.

 

A lot of design aspects are better in older binculars.  I also dislike central diopter adjustment.  And they removed the IPD and focuser graduated scales from new binoculars - a mistake IMO.    The fad of cutting gaps - indentations - into the barrels of binoculars for thumbs is thankfully going away now, just like the awful undercuts in astro eyepiece barrels.   Roof binoculars have finally gotten lighter after a couple decades of being massively heavy. 

[OBERWERK]

Am I the only one that feels this way? Does anyone else dislike the modern hard plastic (though usefully adjustable) eyecups? Is my nose just too big? You can tell me. LOL

Just to clarify, there's no "hard plastic" used on any of our twist-up eyecups.  It's a soft rubber cover over an aluminum twist-up band.  

[GADify]

Just to clarify, there's no "hard plastic" used on any of our twist-up eyecups.  It's a soft rubber cover over an aluminum twist-up band.  

 

Thank you - bad terminology on my part because of my feeling the difference between the two styles. I'll make a note in my OP. 

[celltx]

What about adding a soft rubber eyepieces on top of the existing "hard" ones? This is an example of such rubber pieces:

 

https://www.amazon.c...e/dp/B0DLNY9TF7

[OBERWERK]

What about adding a soft rubber eyepieces on top of the existing "hard" ones? This is an example of such rubber pieces:

 

https://www.amazon.c...e/dp/B0DLNY9TF7

Here's what our twist-up eyecups look like- an aluminum band with a soft rubber cover.  It's thin on top to maximize usable eye relief.  

[GADify]

Please, everyone, don't mistake my complaint about modern adjustable eyecups as a dig against Oberwerk. I have Oberwerk BT-82XL-EDs and I love them. I was trying to make it a generic question about what seems to be a commonly used part or design without any specific company being at fault. Apologies if I came across that way at all. 

[LoveWillSteerTheStars]

Here's what our twist-up eyecups look like- an aluminum band with a soft rubber cover.  It's thin on top to maximize usable eye relief. 

Someone who does not wear glasses & uses the cups "up" could put a felt donut between the metal & the rubber, to give it some cushion.  Or a silicon washer/gasket.  People who try to glue the silicon rings onto old bins that have lost their eyecups might find that those rubber covers fit & can hold the silicon in place.