Revisiting the classic porro (1 Viewer)

In the grand scheme of things and considering the unique optical performance characteristics of these models I don't think $50-$60 for a full servicing is too expensive. Consider we might only pay $25-$50 with shipping to obtain many of these classics and then tack on another $50 or so and you are out $75-$100 for a binocular that can do things that none of the current roof prism models can...and for a heck of alot less money than what many of the current roofs go for.

Just thinking out loud here. I realize not everyone is going to necessarily agree with me.

;-)

LPT,

I am coming to realize exactly what you stated. Case in point, I was once very much into the sport of archery. Yes, to some extent the shooting aspect of it but much more so the servicing side of the sport. I can tear down and work on just about any aspect of a modern compound bow and I have all of the tools to do it. I received a great sense of satisfaction to bringing some of these models back to life.

I am now finding the same rewarding feeling by working on these vintage porros. I realize I have a great deal to learn but am enjoying the process. Steve was kind enough to send me an extensive binocular repair manual that I have just started to read. I have hopes that it will further add to my education.

Steve C & Frank
Just got a near mint 8.5x44 Audubon 804 Mark II off the bay for $80 that is severely out of collimation, and thats the only issue I can find wrong with them. Near perfect other than the alignment issue. Would I be better off getting a refund or sending to Christa for repair?

Also, what's the name of the repair manual as I might like to get a decent manual and experiment on some other binos I have laying around gathering dust?

Tom

lilcrazy2 said:

Steve C & Frank
Also, what's the name of the repair manual as I might like to get a decent manual and experiment on some other binos I have laying around gathering dust?

Click to expand...

There are several repair manuals listed here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/binocwpg/4514125899/in/set-72157623234405689
The Alii Service Notes and Seyfried books are good introductions. The Carson manual is technical and much more thorough. The Rafael Chamon Cobos link gives information on making a collimating instrument that actually works and is easily constructed.

lilcrazy2 said:

Steve C & Frank
Just got a near mint 8.5x44 Audubon 804 Mark II off the bay for $80 that is severely out of collimation, and thats the only issue I can find wrong with them. Near perfect other than the alignment issue. Would I be better off getting a refund or sending to Christa for repair?

Also, what's the name of the repair manual as I might like to get a decent manual and experiment on some other binos I have laying around gathering dust?

Tom

Click to expand...

For the $50 bucks, I'd send it to Nicholas. He'll clean, lube and collimate it and for me has reglued prisms. He has fixed things I had no idea that were an issue either. I sent him two binoculars last Fridat afternoon. They went from Oregon to Massachusetts and he emailed me a repair estimate early Tuesday morning. That puts you into it for $130. It seems the Audubon's sometimes go in waves. You won't see any for awhile, then there will be a bunch, with prices beginning to tail off at the end, then no more show up for awhile. If this is one of the latter type 4a or 4b then usually they will bust the $200 mark. The heavier, older, but wider types 1,2,and 3 may not be as much, but still will often go close to $200. I got a type 1c a while ago for less than $50 to my door. Thought I might turn it for a few $$. The optics are perfect for me and I may be buried with that thing. It is easily one of the top five image producers, roof or porro, expensive or not, I have ever had to my eyes.

PM inbound too.

Folks - By all means disassemble some old porro "beaters" to learn about how things work. Binoculars in and around a salt water environment will have the tell-tale white residue in the threaded areas. Some dissimilar metals over time will seize due to electrolysis and render re-assembly difficult if not impossible.

One can usually tell if the binocular has been inexpertly disassembled - buggered screw slots, scratched eccentric rings, paint missing from the top of the screws. Rubber covering greatly complicates disassembly. For porros two styles predominate - the Zeiss style and the B&L style. Both have advantages and disadvantages when doing repairs. You will learn this as you go along.

The Japanese models are a good source of work material, readily available and often very inexpensive to purchase, particularly if damaged. They also show the kind of evolution in internal construction in the prism seats. Earlier Japanese models had sloppy seats relying upon a simple spring lever bent down to hold the prisms in place. These often resulted in chipped prisms and mis-collimation.

Later models, even the economy Bushnell line called the Banner, had removable prism seats assemblies held by three screws accessed from the removed top shelf. It is easy to clean these and re-assemble them. I find pure alcohol and micro weave cloth to be adequate in cleaning lens and prisms. A little tip to help keep things clean. Use the Ziplock bags to put the separate components into after they are cleaned and prior to reassembly. Use disposable gloves when handling glass.

If disassembling the eye pieces for cleaning, make a drawing of the order of arrangement as you remove them. Three and five piece ocular lens can pose a great deal of trial and error when scattered around a work service area when re-assembling without some form of visual reference. I use the small 35 MM cases with each lens covered in lens tissue placed in the exact order of removal. You will discover that occular lens have different surface curves front or back. Where tubes separating the lens create air space, they must be in the exact order as original location.

The objective lens are easily removed with a spanner wrench. They are usually doublets, but must be re-assembled correctly. If the lens are beginning to separate, there is not much you can do. I have re-glued lens, but that is a messy and expensive fix.

One can purchase appropriate tools (excluding a collimator) for under $100 US. You will need a strap wrench, a good spanner wrench with mulitple bits, and quality drivers and bits. One can also learn to hand collimate. If your binocular has the double eccentric rings, mark them in some manner for later re-assembly. (do this before you start turning the rings) I use a very small bright dab of nail polish for marking the location of the rings in relation to the body and the objective lens itself.

None of this is rocket scientist stuff. You can make it an inexpensive hobby. Each person differs in their mechanical abilities. It is important to know or understand when you have met your match, particularly with the high end stuff. Best to send them away for servicing.

John

Tom,

It is the Alli service/repair manual that Steve sent me. Like I said, I only started reading it so I can't comment further on it. I will check out LPT's flickr link though to see what type of info is on it. Every little bit helps.

I do agree with Steve though. For $50 it seems like a no-brainer to send it to NC considering his reputation. I think it would all depend on what you plan to do with it. If it is in pristine condition and you really like the optical performance and handling then I would send it out.

John,

Thank you for all of the excellent info and advice. Some of it I have already run into with trial and error but some of your suggestions are definitely going to prove handy. The one tool you mentioned, the spanner wrench, is something that I sorely need. Any suggestions? I googled it and came up with a variety in many different price ranges. As with many tools I have ordered I am guessing that the most expensive will be the easiest to use and the most well made. The lesser priced versions will probably work but won't be as easy to use. I did see a nice set from Edmunds Scientific for $74.50 but if I can find something less expensive that works then I would certainly consider it.

Thanks.

FrankD said:

Tom,
I did see a nice set from Edmunds Scientific for $74.50 but if I can find something less expensive that works then I would certainly consider it.
Thanks.

Click to expand...

I have the Edmunds one and use it quite a bit. The removable tips are good and can be easily replaced if broken. Also, when set at a particular width it won't slip like cheaper spanner wrenches might. It's disadvantages are: 1) cost and 2) its closest settings aren't always close enough to fit those screws with the two-holed top found at the ends of center bars. For that I use a less expensive spanner wrench available from Micro-Tools. The Edmunds is great for eccentric rings and the retaining ring. (But always when using it on eccentric rings or objective retaining ring be sure to cover the glass surface of the objective with something to protect the glass in case the wrench slips. I've made 24, 30, 50 mm styrene plates for this purpose).

Frank - the spanner wrench I use is adjustable for width with a variety of tips. It is worth every penny I paid for it. Also very handy to remove the back of watches to replace batteries. The styrene plates LPT mentioned makes good sense. I use the padded vice jaws on a big vice to hold everything secure when I am breaking the rings loose. Less tendency for tools to slip. If corrosion is apparent, a judicial bit of Break Free on the edges often helps.

And if your wife doesn't object, use her hair dryer to warm up the chassis to help expand the metal. Never use an industrial heat gun. Too hard to control the heat.
Getting the correct slotted and/or Phillips screw drivers is a must. Occasionally, a tiny Allen screw is used to secure things. Inspect very carefully everything for the presence of these small screws.

If I deal with the kind of water proofing in old binoculars (black wax) around the lens and lids, that needs to be completely removed and the chassis washed and rinsed and thoroughly dried. Some of the older Zeiss porros have neoprene gaskets that are form fitting creating air tight lids, not just a pressure fit. Zeiss always uses the correct metals and materials. For some reason, the older Zeiss porros (50s-60s) develop haze on the prisms, degrading the brightness. You can see this by canting the binocular and looking through it from the objective side. Fortunately, this is easy to remove since it is not like fungus with its permanent etching. As I have mentioned in an earlier post, the Zeiss prism seats are very precise, and with careful reinstallation, the collimation is not affected.

I also use a very small vacuum to suck out the innards for bits of gunk that always seem to be present during dis-assembly.

Have fun working on these old porros. If you run into cemented plastic holders for lens, (they often break in very cold weather) avoid purchasing any of that stuff. Stick to metal and glass.

John

LPT/John,

Thank you again. I ordered the Microtools spanner wrench for now and will go and order the Edmunds Scientific model if necessary. I also ordered a nice set of mini-screwdrivers complete with all the heads I might possibly need.

Now I just need to pick out one of the models I received which were seriously faulty and start practicing.

FrankD said:

LPT/John,

Thank you again. I ordered the Microtools spanner wrench for now and will go and order the Edmunds Scientific model if necessary. I also ordered a nice set of mini-screwdrivers complete with all the heads I might possibly need.

Now I just need to pick out one of the models I received which were seriously faulty and start practicing.

Click to expand...

Frank
Did you order the Microtools spanner from an Australian website or somewhere in US?
Tom

US through amazon.

I'm with LPT on the reward of restoring a blind binocular back to sight.
One of the worst cases I came across recently was this San Giorgio.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/binoculars/6755916243/in/photostream
It was like looking through brown nicotine. almost impossible to make out any detail at all.
After restoring the view is bright sharp and wide, as is my beaming grin.
Here is an example of a Kershaw bino prism before and after. I kept one side filthy for people to view the remarkable difference.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/binoculars/4798788745/

Simon,

That is a very impressive comparison pic and a testament to how excellent some of these classic binoculars can be once they are restored to the original performance levels. I continue to be impressed by the performance of many of these bins.

On another note, I have run into the issue of having many of the vintage porros offering not enough eye relief even with the metal eyecups removed. The surface of the ocular is just recessed too much into the eyepiece mount to allow for the full field of view.

I found a fairly simple solution now that I have a nice set of micro-screwdrivers at my disposal. The metal eyecups on many of these models are actually a two-piece unit. The top part of the eyecup typically unscrews. This remedies my issued with eye relief on most of these models but not all. Some of the models still have the ocular surface recessed a good deal from the edge of the remaining section of the metal eyecup. Well, I found out that the remaining part of the eyecup can be removed as well.

The left eyecup simply twists off. The right eyecup though is another matter as the diopter adjustment is connected to it. However, there are three small set-screws located along the lip of the eyecup which can be removed carefully. Once they are then the metal eyecup simply "pops off" leaving just a thin metal sleeve that extends out away from the prism housing.

What I have found is that this thin metal sleeve is actually narrow enough in diamter to allow the ocular surface to get closer to my eye and now I can see the fieldstops clearly with the remaining models.

Does it look "acceptable"? Well that is up to the consumer but it sure works very well at allowing me to see everything these binoculars are capable of delivering.



I will see if I can add some pics when I get home later.

I've noticed that a lot of the binocular repair manuals tout the American (B&L) style one piece body porro as being more robust than the Zeiss style porro with removable objective barrels. I have about 20 vintage porros in my collection which isn't enough of a sampling to draw an accurate conclusion but so far I would tend to agree that the one piece body porro seems to be more durable. Have any of you members with large collections noticed a measurable difference in durability between the two body styles?

I have five of the old Canon porros (one piece body) and while I had to disassemble most of them for cleaning/lubrication all five of them were still perfectly collimated when purchased. I've had three binoculars with the Z style body that suffered from collimation issues although only in one of the three was the problem related to the body/objective barrel connection.

Steve

steve@37n84w said:

I've noticed that a lot of the binocular repair manuals tout the American (B&L) style one piece body porro as being more robust than the Zeiss style porro with removable objective barrels. I have about 20 vintage porros in my collection which isn't enough of a sampling to draw an accurate conclusion but so far I would tend to agree that the one piece body porro seems to be more durable. Have any of you members with large collections noticed a measurable difference in durability between the two body styles?

I have five of the old Canon porros (one piece body) and while I had to disassemble most of them for cleaning/lubrication all five of them were still perfectly collimated when purchased. I've had three binoculars with the Z style body that suffered from collimation issues although only in one of the three was the problem related to the body/objective barrel connection.

Steve

Click to expand...

It seems to me that WWII era B&L type binoculars (I have about 8) hold their collimation exceptionally well compared to Zeiss type binoculars. In fact, I don't recall ever having had to adjust collimation on any of my REL's or B&L's. This was not the case with some Zeiss types and certainly with a lot of Porro II's.

Steve,

I wish I could offer significant input into this subject. My experience with these binoculars is limited in time frame. I only started collecting them a few months ago. In that time I have received a good sample of both styles. I would agree, in general, that many of the Zeiss style have been out of alignment while "most" of the American styles have not. Again, this is an extremely limited time frame and not a very large sample in the grand scheme of things. I would certainly trust LPT's or Simon's experiences more with this subject.

My experience is also limited. But what I have is an even split. I will say the B&L style do seem more robust than the Zeiss style.

Thanks for the responses guys. I've got some more porros of both types coming in this week so my "sample pool" continues to increase.

Steve

steve@37n84w said:

Thanks for the responses guys. I've got some more porros of both types coming in this week so my "sample pool" continues to increase.

Steve

Click to expand...

Anything interesting Steve?

FrankD said:

Anything interesting Steve?

Click to expand...

Canon 7x50, Nikon 7x35 9.3* Wide Field, Nikon 9x35 7.3* Wide Field, and Jason Commander EWA 11*. Got the best deal by far on the Jason on one of the few sites where vintage binos still sell cheap shopgoodwill.com.

Steve