Pipedreams anyone? (1 Viewer)

John Russell · Apr 13, 2012

Despite the wide variety of binocular configurations on the market there are some formats such as 7x30, which are sorely missed by many.

The marketing people are probably not going to listen to us but it would be interesting to hear the wishes of other BF members, technically feasible of course.

I regard my 10x42 Swarovision as the ideal universal compromise and often use it on a Monopod (a Manfrotto 685B, which can be instantly extended or collapsed with one hand) in open country. It is much quicker to deploy and offers a more comfortable view than a scope. However, I think that these virtues could be largely preserved at 14x or 15x magnification for this application.
The current offerings, Swarovski 15x56 SLC, Docter 15x60 Nobilem and Optolyth 15x63 Royal are somewhat dated and all leave something to be desired so my personal product requirements are as follows:-

Roof prism , internal central focussing, central diopter, rubber armoured, twist-up eyecups.
Magnification: 14x or 15x
Objective size 56 mm - 60 mm
Eye relief min. 20 mm
AFOV min. 60°
Weight max. 1300 g
Flat field, edge sharpness and lack of distortion on a par with SV.
Even with 60 mm objectives, Schmidt-Pechan or Abbe-König prisms could be configured with suficient offset to allow for a minimum IPD under 60 mm for almost universal use.

Criticism or alternatives welcome.

John

Sancho · Apr 13, 2012

Hard to say.

1. Open-bridge Zeiss FL 8x32 (easier to "one-hand", and the upcoming SV 8x32 might just be a contender).
2. Canon IS 15x50 with the same glass as their 10x42L.

I think that would about do it for me.

BrightIdea · Apr 14, 2012

I'd be real happy with a 6x30 along the size of the bushnell excursion (or a tad smaller) with 8* field and optics on par with the Yosemite.

A skinnier and less expensive Katmai with less pincushion.

Or, put another way, a carson raven 8x26 form factor except with "6x yosemite optics".

FMC, phase corrected, ED.

Under $100.

ceasar · Apr 14, 2012

BrightIdea said:
I'd be real happy with a 6x30 along the size of the bushnell excursion (or a tad smaller) with 8* field and optics on par with the Yosemite.

A skinnier and less expensive Katmai with less pincushion.

Or, put another way, a carson raven 8x26 form factor except with "6x yosemite optics".

FMC, phase corrected, ED.

Under $100.

Well, you are the one with the "BrightIdea." Figure out how to do it!:smoke:

Bob

BrightIdea · Apr 14, 2012

ceasar said:
Well, you are the one with the "BrightIdea." Figure out how to do it!:smoke:

Bob

Oh, I've been known to tinker and come up with some workable items in my day, but bino's are SO SO very far outside of my realm of tinker-dom that I dont even know what to ask!

Designing optics... 2/3 physics, 1/3 optical voodoo Mojo Juju

newfie ghost · Apr 15, 2012

Love to see a seven power compact, 20,25 or even a 30 mill.

Steve C · Apr 15, 2012

I could go for a top optics 7x30-32 with a wide field the size of the Katmai. Don't think I'll live that long though.

Star Farmer · Apr 15, 2012

newfie ghost said:
Love to see a seven power compact, 20,25 or even a 30 mill.

Got one for you.

Bushnell 7x26 Elite. Reverse porro, small, beautiful view, though not compact compact.

FrankD · Apr 15, 2012

Steve C said:
I could go for a top optics 7x30-32 with a wide field the size of the Katmai. Don't think I'll live that long though.

I agree. I have often seen Steve post that he wished he couold have the size/ergonomics of the 7x28 Dakota Elite with higher performing optics...better contrast, apparent sharpness and a wider field of view. If that could be accomplished it would prove to be an excellent "grab and go" binocular.

denco@comcast.n · Apr 15, 2012

John Russell said:
Despite the wide variety of binocular configurations on the market there are some formats such as 7x30, which are sorely missed by many.

The marketing people are probably not going to listen to us but it would be interesting to hear the wishes of other BF members, technically feasible of course.

I regard my 10x42 Swarovision as the ideal universal compromise and often use it on a Monopod (a Manfrotto 685B, which can be instantly extended or collapsed with one hand) in open country. It is much quicker to deploy and offers a more comfortable view than a scope. However, I think that these virtues could be largely preserved at 14x or 15x magnification for this application.
The current offerings, Swarovski 15x56 SLC, Docter 15x60 Nobilem and Optolyth 15x63 Royal are somewhat dated and all leave something to be desired so my personal product requirements are as follows:-

Roof prism , internal central focussing, central diopter, rubber armoured, twist-up eyecups.
Magnification: 14x or 15x
Objective size 56 mm - 60 mm
Eye relief min. 20 mm
AFOV min. 60°
Weight max. 1300 g
Flat field, edge sharpness and lack of distortion on a par with SV.
Even with 60 mm objectives, Schmidt-Pechan or Abbe-König prisms could be configured with suficient offset to allow for a minimum IPD under 60 mm for almost universal use.

Criticism or alternatives welcome.

John

I don't really understand all this wishing for some other magnification or objective size when for the birding the 8x32 is the PERFECT all-around format. Don't mess around with anything smaller or the optics will be a PIA or bigger and it will be to heavy. 8x32 is it! PERFECTION! Get a good 8x32 preferably alpha and you don't need anything else.

John Russell · Apr 15, 2012

[email protected] said:
Get a good 8x32 preferably alpha and you don't need anything else.

Dennis,

I don't think your comments are particularly relevant nor do they warrant using unnecessary forum space by quoting my OP in full.

Please don't tell me what I need. I can't recall seeing posts from you on the scope forum and there are many birding situations that require more than 8x magnification. Purchases of four bins and two scopes (all alphas) in the past few years may disqualify me as fickle, but I think you can top that.

John

brocknroller · Apr 16, 2012

John Russell said:
Despite the wide variety of binocular configurations on the market there are some formats such as 7x30, which are sorely missed by many.

The marketing people are probably not going to listen to us but it would be interesting to hear the wishes of other BF members, technically feasible of course.

I regard my 10x42 Swarovision as the ideal universal compromise and often use it on a Monopod (a Manfrotto 685B, which can be instantly extended or collapsed with one hand) in open country. It is much quicker to deploy and offers a more comfortable view than a scope. However, I think that these virtues could be largely preserved at 14x or 15x magnification for this application.
The current offerings, Swarovski 15x56 SLC, Docter 15x60 Nobilem and Optolyth 15x63 Royal are somewhat dated and all leave something to be desired so my personal product requirements are as follows:-

Roof prism , internal central focussing, central diopter, rubber armoured, twist-up eyecups.
Magnification: 14x or 15x
Objective size 56 mm - 60 mm
Eye relief min. 20 mm
AFOV min. 60°
Weight max. 1300 g
Flat field, edge sharpness and lack of distortion on a par with SV.
Even with 60 mm objectives, Schmidt-Pechan or Abbe-König prisms could be configured with suficient offset to allow for a minimum IPD under 60 mm for almost universal use.

Criticism or alternatives welcome.

John

John,

While I haven't tried a Docter 15x60 Nobilem, it's on my Wish List. From reading everything I could find about these bins, they don't seem to be "dated" unless you mean because it's a porro and roofs are in vogue.

Or if you mean because they didn't go ahead with the changeover to the magnesium body like they had planned before the recession? If you're using them mounted, the weight saved wouldn't be an issue.

With roofs, you always need to be concerned about undersized prisms truncating the exit pupils, no worry with the Docter, that's for sure! Plus, it has the latest AR coatings, you don't need dielectrics with a porro, so I'm not sure what's outdated about it.

Could you explain what you meant? Thanks.

Brock

ronh · Apr 16, 2012

John,
There is hope for you, at least I have hope for you. The awaited Zeiss HT is touted as a hunting binocular, and hunters are probably the main users of the big 15x60-ish size. A 15x or at least a 12x56 HT...I can just feel it in my bones. Also, it will break the $3000 mark, whoopee!
Ron

karmantra · Apr 16, 2012

John: What about the 12x50 Swarovisions? Stunning views, great reach, steady in the hands, can be mounted on a mono or tripod with the Swarovski UTA.

denco@comcast.n · Apr 16, 2012

John Russell said:
Dennis,

I don't think your comments are particularly relevant nor do they warrant using unnecessary forum space by quoting my OP in full.

Please don't tell me what I need. I can't recall seeing posts from you on the scope forum and there are many birding situations that require more than 8x magnification. Purchases of four bins and two scopes (all alphas) in the past few years may disqualify me as fickle, but I think you can top that.

John

I am not telling you what you need! I am telling you that I think the 8x32 is the perfect format for all around birding. What I am saying is that if most people in most situations could only have one binocular an 8x32 would be the one to have. Sure there are situations where a 7x or a 10x would be advantageous but an 8x32 is still the best all around size IMO.

John Russell · Apr 16, 2012

Brock,

I agree that the Docter 15x60 Nobilem comes pretty close and for this level of quality it is quite reasonably priced. However, as a glasses-wearer I would prefer twist-up (down) eyecups and the 15 mm eye relief is borderline. In addition, I think looksharp65 is on to something with his concept of perceived fov, a characteristic which my 10x42 SV has in abundance; hence the preference for roof prisms.

The weight of the Nobilem would not be a great handicap. With covers and strap my SV weighs 1 kg and in certain situations I'm willing to carry a monopod which, with head and bino adapter, weighs 1,4 kg. With a visus of only 1,0/0,7 I was able to read number plates at about 250 m, which I think would pose a problem for most freehanded.

Ron and Karmantra,

A 12x50 SV (when Swaro eliminate the focussing inconsistencies) or a coming Zeiss 12x56 HT would no doubt offer an improvement, but the cost is hard to justify for a relatively small increase in magnification and the 10x42 SV is so universally good that I'm not willing to trade it.

It's ironic that the Zeiss 15x60 BGAT sold in such small quantities while in production and is now so sought after.

John

John Dracon · Apr 17, 2012

John - Yes, it is ironic. I'm trying to remember what I paid for my Zeiss 15x60 BGAT when they first came out, but $2,200 sticks in my mind, and that was around 15 years ago.

I recall talking to a Zeiss representative at a trade show, and he told me the 15x60 had massive prisms, not to mention of course two (2) 60 mm lens plus very complex eyepieces with a concave or dished in lens. Getting a 4 mm exit pupil isn't difficult, since we all know it only takes a 60 mm objective lens. but getting a wide field at 15 power plus long eye relief is another issue.

Some number cruncher at Zeiss could probably tell us what it would cost today to produce the 15x60 BGAT, but I suspect we wouldn't want to pay that price. I won't hazard a guess.

Interestingly, both the B 7x50 and B 15x60 have objective covers that are simply
el cheapos. After a short period of use, the connecting portion begins to rip and is unrepairable. requiring replacements which are expensive and just as short lived.
Not up to Zeiss standards of excellence.

ceasar · Apr 17, 2012

Duct tape won't repair the objective covers? Hm?

Bob

Mark9473 · Apr 17, 2012

brocknroller said:
John,

While I haven't tried a Docter 15x60 Nobilem, it's on my Wish List. From reading everything I could find about these bins, they don't seem to be "dated" unless you mean because it's a porro and roofs are in vogue.

Or if you mean because they didn't go ahead with the changeover to the magnesium body like they had planned before the recession? If you're using them mounted, the weight saved wouldn't be an issue.

Brock, do you mean the sticker on my Nobilem's box stating they have a magnesium alloy housing, was put there in error? I'd be interested to see if you have more information on this.

Mark.

John Russell · Apr 17, 2012

John Dracon said:
I'm trying to remember what I paid for my Zeiss 15x60 BGAT when they first came out, but $2,200 sticks in my mind, and that was around 15 years ago.

I recall talking to a Zeiss representative at a trade show, and he told me the 15x60 had massive prisms, not to mention of course two (2) 60 mm lens plus very complex eyepieces with a concave or dished in lens. Getting a 4 mm exit pupil isn't difficult, since we all know it only takes a 60 mm objective lens. but getting a wide field at 15 power plus long eye relief is another issue.

John,

You're a lucky man to own a 15x60 BGAT. I recall reading somewhere that it also has rather complex objectives - not the usual cemented doublet.

I don't think that wide AFOV and 20 mm eye relief in a 15x60 are that difficult to achieve. A modern replacement for the Swarovski 15x56 SLC could use the eyepiece construction of the 10x42 SV in conjunction with larger objectives having a 50% longer focal length.

It would not surprise me if, despite minimal differences in the specifications, the 8,5x42 SV and 10x50 SV shared the same eyepiece construction, likewise with 10x42 SV and 12x50 SV.

John

Pipedreams anyone? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

porromaniac

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

John Dracon

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread