Canuck Bob
Well-known member
After handling armoured bins, Steiner 7X30 porro, it dawned on me there seems no way to access the mechanics of the bins. How do repair shops work on this type of bino?
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
How do they work on armoured bins? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Canuck Bob
- Start date
WJC
Well-known member
On some binos like the Fujinon MTR-SX and FMTR-SX, or the old Swift Seahawk or Storm King, the shop has to have new armor in inventory to be put back on IF the armor has been damaged in removal.
One of the ways manufacturers have to prevent “unauthorized tinkering” with the bino is to stop selling parts—including armor—to repair shops not sanctioned by the manufacturer. This is especially true for the most expensive units.
Steiners require special tooling and techniques. They were usually a money draining headache to work on. So I usually sent them back for replacement. These days I think more are coming from Asia than Germany, anyway.
One of the ways manufacturers have to prevent “unauthorized tinkering” with the bino is to stop selling parts—including armor—to repair shops not sanctioned by the manufacturer. This is especially true for the most expensive units.
Steiners require special tooling and techniques. They were usually a money draining headache to work on. So I usually sent them back for replacement. These days I think more are coming from Asia than Germany, anyway.
Canuck Bob
Well-known member
Thanks Bill,
From some honest reports you wrote about Steiners I am aware my cheapie bins are disposable. Their new warranty, Heritage something, hopefully covers replacement if needed. Thanks for your no nonsense style.
It struck me that as a guy favouring used purchases armoured bins might not be repairable easily or for a reasonable price. You sure confirmed that. Nice classic porros in my future.
Is there a style of roofs easily repairable? When I say repairable I'm thinking collimation I guess.
Bob
From some honest reports you wrote about Steiners I am aware my cheapie bins are disposable. Their new warranty, Heritage something, hopefully covers replacement if needed. Thanks for your no nonsense style.
It struck me that as a guy favouring used purchases armoured bins might not be repairable easily or for a reasonable price. You sure confirmed that. Nice classic porros in my future.
Is there a style of roofs easily repairable? When I say repairable I'm thinking collimation I guess.
Bob
gunut
Registered Offender
its getting to the point where the makers don't want to pay a boat load of techs to tinker around with anything but the alphas....the mid and lower end stuff is more and more becoming throw it against a brick wall an send the customer a new one type of warranty repair.....as for aftermarket....unless the bins were grandpas and you feel some kind of attachment to them most of the time its not worth repair costs....they want 2/300 just to clean an old Zeiss porro prism....and if something breaks or cracks in the process....:smoke:
WJC
Well-known member
But you can spend years learning your craft only to have some yahoo pass through your shop and say "You're cleared up to $25" to do $240 with of work on his $49 binocular. In so many ways, we are all ignorant. But, when it metastases into self-inflicted/self-important stupidity, it's terminal.
High prices separate the techs from the wannabe techs. :cat:
PS I still can't get back onto OT. See ya there when I can. Steve C is talking to Ilya about it.
Attachments
Last edited:
Canuck Bob
Well-known member
My only wish list contains 7X or 10X Nikon MC Es. If bought complete and priced right I would not hesitate to spend some repair money.
The whole disposable issue concerns me. A guy might be stuck with a parade of binos with poor QC. It would be nice to know a warranty pair would be collimated properly rather than another crap shoot replacement, oh well.
Someday I might look for an EWA 7X35 porro but not without much research.
The whole disposable issue concerns me. A guy might be stuck with a parade of binos with poor QC. It would be nice to know a warranty pair would be collimated properly rather than another crap shoot replacement, oh well.
Someday I might look for an EWA 7X35 porro but not without much research.
WJC
Well-known member
You're certainly welcome. But while that "no-nonsense style" worked great in person, it has caused many headaches on the net. It seems some people spend more time reacting than reasoning. So, I have killed off the Curmudgeon. That doesn't mean, however, that I have trashed my experience or given it to another to be filtered through the ineffective PC filter. The truth isn't always pleasant but it is always the truth. The mature can deal with that reality. :cat:
Given the price of honest repair, that seems sadly inevitable.
There is an abundance of optically fine yet very inexpensive binoculars offered.
Their failings are mostly in the mechanicals and the quality control, so if they sell to the retailer for under $100, replacement rather than repair is obviously more economical.
Just try to get a nice 40 year old watch repaired, if you are fortunate, you'll be told there is still one specialist left who handles these antiques.
WJC
Well-known member
"There is an abundance of optically fine yet very inexpensive binoculars offered."
Why do you have to be so ... so ... etudiant?
I take my hat off the masters of the craft. But it's not the consumer's fault they painted themselves into a corner—financially. When you can buy 95% of the "Alpha" for 20% of the price, the "Beta" is plenty good for me. I’ve owned dozens of the most sought after electric guitars in the world. All were above my skill at playing and my favorite was not my Ric 375 Deluxe in Maple Glo, but the “boat paddle”—a humble Telecaster ... from Mexico.
Why do you have to be so ... so ... etudiant?
I take my hat off the masters of the craft. But it's not the consumer's fault they painted themselves into a corner—financially. When you can buy 95% of the "Alpha" for 20% of the price, the "Beta" is plenty good for me. I’ve owned dozens of the most sought after electric guitars in the world. All were above my skill at playing and my favorite was not my Ric 375 Deluxe in Maple Glo, but the “boat paddle”—a humble Telecaster ... from Mexico.
Surely that is just as it should be.
Few are truly alpha in any trade or profession. Those fortunate few can make magic even with marginal tools, but prefer high quality alphas because it is less hassle.
Others who may want to approach the idea, but without the need for sustained excellence, are easily distracted by marketing specifications and features, as well as by lower prices.
WJC
Well-known member
Bingo! When I speak of "Alphas," I always do so in quotes. The term is not really for anyone who understands the industry.
A story:
Once, while shopping for a guitar at Gruhn’s in Nashville, I saw a young man who was about to get his first guitar.
It must have been torture for him to have wandered all over this legendary shop, knowing the most his father could afford was an old Dan Electro . . . 30 years before they were “Retro.”
For most of his time shopping, he had been surrounded by some of the best guitars in the world, and yet, all he was taking home was a guitar that had originally been sold by Sears and which would have undoubtedly embarrassed him had it been seen by any of his guitar playing friends.
It was not hard to tell by the way the young fellow and his father were dressed that even this meager expenditure was going to be a sacrifice. The boy could not hide his disappointment, although out of respect and love for his father he was making every effort.
About that time, Jerry Reed came in. Reed was well known around Nashville, and in Country Music circles. But, Gator and Smoky and The Bandit were yet to come and he could move about freely. While talking to one of the sales people, he picked up on what was going on with the boy and his father.
Turning to the young man, he asked if he could see the guitar. As best I could tell—I was in an awkward position to move closer—he was talking about its “feel” and “balance.” Then came the magic. Reed flipped the switch and started “Pick’n” the guitar and making it sing (if you think mega-twang is singing) in his highly recognizable way.
He played no more than 20 or third 30 seconds. But, that’s all it took. He handed the guitar back to the boy, winked at the father and headed off into the office. From that point, until he left, the kid vibrated with excitement and his smile seemed painted on. Mathematically, this was the same guitar he had been ashamed of moments earlier. Yet now, he saw MILES of potential and performance. Thirty percent of viewing performance has nothing to do with glass or metal, but rather brain and personality.
So it is with binos. For all the words that keep being bandied about, so much is up to the user. Mathematics does not—and CANNOT—tell the whole story. We pit bino against bino, and article against article, and review against review, and start all over again.
This is GREAT for those who derive pleasure out of such things. But, to the novice I say that with a little accurate information and a pocket full of common sense, you can easily make a logical selection out of a field of 50 binos in less than five minutes, if you are so inclined.
A story:
Once, while shopping for a guitar at Gruhn’s in Nashville, I saw a young man who was about to get his first guitar.
It must have been torture for him to have wandered all over this legendary shop, knowing the most his father could afford was an old Dan Electro . . . 30 years before they were “Retro.”
For most of his time shopping, he had been surrounded by some of the best guitars in the world, and yet, all he was taking home was a guitar that had originally been sold by Sears and which would have undoubtedly embarrassed him had it been seen by any of his guitar playing friends.
It was not hard to tell by the way the young fellow and his father were dressed that even this meager expenditure was going to be a sacrifice. The boy could not hide his disappointment, although out of respect and love for his father he was making every effort.
About that time, Jerry Reed came in. Reed was well known around Nashville, and in Country Music circles. But, Gator and Smoky and The Bandit were yet to come and he could move about freely. While talking to one of the sales people, he picked up on what was going on with the boy and his father.
Turning to the young man, he asked if he could see the guitar. As best I could tell—I was in an awkward position to move closer—he was talking about its “feel” and “balance.” Then came the magic. Reed flipped the switch and started “Pick’n” the guitar and making it sing (if you think mega-twang is singing) in his highly recognizable way.
He played no more than 20 or third 30 seconds. But, that’s all it took. He handed the guitar back to the boy, winked at the father and headed off into the office. From that point, until he left, the kid vibrated with excitement and his smile seemed painted on. Mathematically, this was the same guitar he had been ashamed of moments earlier. Yet now, he saw MILES of potential and performance. Thirty percent of viewing performance has nothing to do with glass or metal, but rather brain and personality.
So it is with binos. For all the words that keep being bandied about, so much is up to the user. Mathematics does not—and CANNOT—tell the whole story. We pit bino against bino, and article against article, and review against review, and start all over again.
This is GREAT for those who derive pleasure out of such things. But, to the novice I say that with a little accurate information and a pocket full of common sense, you can easily make a logical selection out of a field of 50 binos in less than five minutes, if you are so inclined.
Last edited:
richard866945
Bino repair man
Armoured bino's can be repaired.
I recently bought a Steiner Senator 15x80 on eBay in which the prisms in one side where very hazy. The eyepiece had been dislodged leaving a gap. I took the chance that I could dismantle it and clean the optics. The rubber armouring came off slowly and carefully and the sealed body was opened without damage. I now have a beautifully clean and aligned binocular, sealed and gassed, with no sign from the outside that it has been taken apart. I'll use it for a while then offer it for sale.
I understand that Steiner will not contemplate doing such a repair and it did take a few hours but it has to be worth it considering the cost of a new one.
I have been repairing optical instruments for 50 years and my son is taking over the business.
I recently bought a Steiner Senator 15x80 on eBay in which the prisms in one side where very hazy. The eyepiece had been dislodged leaving a gap. I took the chance that I could dismantle it and clean the optics. The rubber armouring came off slowly and carefully and the sealed body was opened without damage. I now have a beautifully clean and aligned binocular, sealed and gassed, with no sign from the outside that it has been taken apart. I'll use it for a while then offer it for sale.
I understand that Steiner will not contemplate doing such a repair and it did take a few hours but it has to be worth it considering the cost of a new one.
I have been repairing optical instruments for 50 years and my son is taking over the business.
I remember seeing that on Ebay. What is it about Steiner that puts repair people off ?
The British Army ordered 14500 Steiner porro 8x30r military. I'm assuming of a construction type that can be serviced given the high price of the contract !
WJC
Well-known member
They go over the top with tools, techniques, and unsubstantiated bragging. Also, the armor on some of their models IS the body, and most optical shops don't have replacements lying around. Sometimes I think our two armies wrestle over who can waste the most money. :cat:
VIGNETTE # 41
The Development of the M19 Binocular
Much of the information in this book deals with the development of military binoculars and there’s no doubt that much by way of experimenting and development went on throughout the Second World War. Still, looking at so many of these units, primarily the 7x50, one might get the idea they were just more rugged versions of the few civilian offerings of the day. Two notable exceptions from the war years were the Navy’s Mk 42 and 43.
The Mk 42, by Pioneer Instruments, was a 7x50 with a 10-degree field of view, air-spaced triplet objectives, and polished aluminum mirrors to replace the heavier erecting prisms. The Mk 43, produced by Square D, was a 6x42 instrument with an 11.5-degree field. These became two of the most sought after instruments developed at that time.
However, there was another binocular that came along much later that wasn’t a copy of anything else available—the US Army’s M19.
Inception
In 1955 U.S. Army Ordinance was requested to design and develop two new binoculars with sizes and weights dramatically reduced from the 6x30 and 7x50 instruments of the day. Frankford Arsenal was assigned the task, which resulted in the development of the T13 and T14 binoculars; the T14 morphing into the M19.
The M19 was an f/3 instrument, allowing it to be somewhat shorter than traditional 7x50s, which operated around f/4. The objectives consisted of three air-spaced lenses and eyepieces of three doublets. Weight in the M19 was reduced from previous designs by restricting the prisms to only accommodate the required light cone. This might have been engineering gone awry, as it allowed considerable light seepage which reduced contrast.
*******************************
Drawing of Optical Layout
*******************************
Modularity
Two of the biggest problems related to the M19 were in modularity and collimation. With each of its components manufactured to aerospace tolerances, it wasn’t designed to be repaired but rather replaced by similar units in the field. In theory, the right and left telescopes, prism housings, and eyepieces, would be interchangeable without inducing errors in alignment, and with prisms cemented together at the factory there was never to be a problem with lean.
Collimation
Collimation issues were researched ad nauseum and engineers even knew what size particle of dust in the threads would cause what disparity in alignment.
A further improvement could be found in eyepieces that didn’t rotate as in other binoculars. In the M19 they moved fore and aft in the same orientation in order to prevent collimation errors from being induced by eyepiece rotation. There seemed to be no allowance for the spatial accommodation of the user, which would have lessened production costs tremendously. On the drawing board the M19 looked like another quantum leap. But as Winston Churchill put it:
“However elegant the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.”
Envisioned in 1955, Farrand Optical engineered the concept into a few practical units of the T14 in 1959 and 1960. Also at that time, Frankford Arsenal made some modifications on the unit, calling the final product the T14E1 which is the unit that became the US Army’s M19.
The Optics Division of Bell & Howell won the contract and started producing the binoculars with Japanese optics.
The Army believed the M19 could be manufactured in such a way as to dramatically cut production costs once R&D expenditures had been recouped and by 1980 production was up to about 2,000 units per month. Yet by the early 1990s, they had once again fallen back to civilian offerings for their binoculars, choosing to replace the M19 with a Steiner Commander II (without compass), calling it their new M22. Then, by the middle of the decade, they changed again. The M22 would now be the Fujinon AR (Nautilus) from Kama-Tech, the American arm of Kamakura in Japan.
So, Where Are They Now?
On any given day Internet auction sites feature dozens of military binoculars produced from the turn of the 20th Century through the Second World War. But with the design being so innovative, where are all the more recent M19s? One might think they would dominate those sites. It was 30 years from inception to peak production. But without a healthy dose of common sense engineering can never meet its potential and responsible parties were seeing the Mk 19 wasn’t the panacea it was conceived to be.
—The specs were too stringent throughout the design and any company would be hard-pressed to meet them and stay in business. This was especially true concerning alignment tolerances.
—There was no consideration for the user’s spatial accommodations which, given other considerations relative to tight tolerances, might have aided the instrument’s success.
—The “O” rings in the housings sometimes failed allowing the prisms to fog up. (The EPs used a flexible bellows.)
—The adhesive holding the prisms together (Norland 61) had to be used in just the right quantity. Often it wasn’t.
—Finally, the Army was worried that because of its modularity and pre-collimated construction, the binocular could be stolen a piece at a time and reassembled at the thief’s leisure.
Although one of the original write-ups on this instrument claims “A repair facility would have to stock 250 parts and 125 specialized tools,” further reading reveals a clearer picture:
Only two special tools are needed to repair the M19.*See page C-9 of the TM 9-1240-381-24&P, Oct. 1978. The myth of the number of special tools needed comes from a misreading of the original paper on the difference between M17 and M19, where it was claimed many special tools were necessary to service the earlier M17.*
Finally, concerning the M19, editor Daniel Vukobratovich offered the following:
“I suspect that the lack of experience in designing binoculars since WWII was the reason for this list of failures.” ***
Last edited:
WJC
Well-known member
They don’t bloody care. MIL-SPEC was once well-thought out. But as the story of the M19 showed us, Today, huh!
A general reads an article that gets him twitterpated. The next morning, if he has enough stars, he drops the magazine on the colonel’s desk and says he want 2,000 of those. Then, knowing the procurement formula, the colonel drafts the specs for what the army is willing to buy—and it looks so important and well-thought out. He has zero knowledge of optics except the general wants what’s in the magazine AND as long as it fits the basic formula that has been used these last 70 years, he gets it. :cat:
There is a "How it's Made" segment on YouTube showing the assembly of what appear to Steiner 7x50 binoculars. They use UV curing cement to set prisms and another adhesive to fasten objectives to the body. After viewing the video I assumed they were essentially non-reparable.
