That of which shall not be spoken...... (1 Viewer)

Hi Clive,
I will have to try the 8x21 in the daytime. They may have switched from Japanese to Chinese production?
I have never had any problems with it. It hasn't steamed up, opens exactly 90 degrees etc.
I only take it out of my pocket if I need to see a road sign or what is in the charity shop window without crossing the road. It is always in its case and original plastic bag.
Or I might take a quick photo and look at the screen enlarged.

My most used binocular is the old 10x25 Docter. Excellent colours, fine resolution. And despite thousands of times used, it stays put when opened unlike any other 10x25 binocular I have tried. It probably isn't phase coated?
It looks motheaten and devoid of paint on the top. It won't win a beauty contest.

I don't like 8x20 binoculars, but I do like 6x18 binoculars. Maybe personal preference.

Binastro said:

Hi Clive,
I will have to try the 8x21 in the daytime. They may have switched from Japanese to Chinese production?
I have never had any problems with it. It hasn't steamed up, opens exactly 90 degrees etc.
I only take it out of my pocket if I need to see a road sign or what is in the charity shop window without crossing the road. It is always in its case and original plastic bag.
Or I might take a quick photo and look at the screen enlarged.

My most used binocular is the old 10x25 Docter. Excellent colours, fine resolution. And despite thousands of times used, it stays put when opened unlike any other 10x25 binocular I have tried. It probably isn't phase coated?
It looks motheaten and devoid of paint on the top. It won't win a beauty contest.

I don't like 8x20 binoculars, but I do like 6x18 binoculars. Maybe personal preference.

Click to expand...

I notice the Doctor 8x21 is no longer available on Amazon so I assume sold out? Should be more in then sometime as it seems it's still being made I think?

I would have though for the uses you mention the 4x12 (or 6x16) monocular would be better although it seems as though you've been using the Helios 8x21 at night? Mine isn't much use even in daytime.

Got the Optima, at last, at last, at last, the postage nightmare is ended, ok I'm still waiting on some other packages but they aren't very urgent. The guy at the depot told me the postman in question has been having a lot of complaints so seems I might be getting a replacement and get back to normal as it worked fairly well before.

So on the way home I did a quick stop to check out the Optima and immediately it looked much more what I am after. The view had a larger feel to it than the others and the 6x mag seems useful and yet it's hardly much bigger than the Viking 4x12 but when I got home I noticed it too (as well as the Helios) didn't seem to be as colourful as the Viking but then I gave the Optima a "little clean" with a damp sponge as it was a bit grimy and now I'm trying to dry it out on my small oil heater and hope I haven't destroyed it already but it should unfog or unmoisture ok I think :eek!::eek!::eek!::eek!::eek!: It's definitely not waterproof or even moisture proof that's for sure.

It's in great condition (well was) so looks as though I got a great deal paying about 1/6th of it's retail price.

Try and get a few pics of them all together later but looks like I have fared quite well with it all in the end. Just the Helios really that doesn't seem very impressive.

Seems to be drying out ok, just a bit longer should do it. Phew......

Hi Clive,
It is a mistake to open any optics parcel and try it straight away. It always mists up and I do this myself.
Don't force dry.

Tried the Helios just before sunrise, overcast very dull.
Read small fire notice in window 40 yds away.
10x25 Docter much better. 50% better resolution, brighter, colourful and steadier.
Helios, I have to use both hands and a third would help.
I would think Helios useless for flying birds.
It is an emergency use instrument. I have identified odd shaped balloons and other UFOs.
But Helios all fine, good central resolution somewhat curved field, which I used to keep a walker clear coming towards me, using bottom of field.
The Helios stiction is perfect. It stays at the opening set.
It does now reach 91 deg but only noticeable on long horizontals, but easily set at 90 deg.

If you missed the prism position a fraction it might cause offset.

I like smaller bins. 4x21(3.5x21), 4x22, 5x25, 6x18, 6x20, 7x23, 8x24, 8x25, 10x25 a lot.
I like EWA and small eyerelief.
8-20x24 Pentax best of three excellent.

I don't like 8x20 and 8x21.

People go on a lot about how good the 8x25 Swarovski is.
But will it stay at the exact IPD repeatedly thousands of times over ten years and fold repeatedly to go in my pocket? I doubt it.
The 10x25 Swaro and Leica definitely don't. At least the ones I tried new.

The 10x25 Docter does this and the function is 100%. The Swaro and Leica I tried the function is near to zero %.

Binastro said:

Hi Clive,
It is a mistake to open any optics parcel and try it straight away. It always mists up and I do this myself.
Don't force dry.

Tried the Helios just before sunrise, overcast very dull.
Read small fire notice in window 40 yds away.
10x25 Docter much better. 50% better resolution, brighter, colourful and steadier.
Helios, I have to use both hands and a third would help.
I would think Helios useless for flying birds.
It is an emergency use instrument. I have identified odd shaped balloons and other UFOs.
But Helios all fine, good central resolution somewhat curved field, which I used to keep a walker clear coming towards me, using bottom of field.
The Helios stiction is perfect. It stays at the opening set.
It does now reach 91 deg but only noticeable on long horizontals, but easily set at 90 deg.

If you missed the prism position a fraction it might cause offset.

I like smaller bins. 4x21(3.5x21), 4x22, 5x25, 6x18, 6x20, 7x23, 8x24, 8x25, 10x25 a lot.
I like EWA and small eyerelief.
8-20x24 Pentax best of three excellent.

I don't like 8x20 and 8x21.

People go on a lot about how good the 8x25 Swarovski is.
But will it stay at the exact IPD repeatedly thousands of times over ten years and fold repeatedly to go in my pocket? I doubt it.
The 10x25 Swaro and Leica definitely don't. At least the ones I tried new.

The 10x25 Docter does this and the function is 100%. The Swaro and Leica I tried the function is near to zero %.

Click to expand...

Very good 3

Fully agree with three hands for the Helios. I'm wondering now did my "little clean" of that one introduce some moisture maybe in around the ocular lenses as I can't see any around the objective but it was steaming up at both ends although I think on the outside of the ocular due to my warm eyeball being so close. I think I was picking it up when it was cold and that was maybe the problem. If I stand back a couple of meters and focus it on my coloured glass pane thing ceiling light then it looks good, bright, some contrast and colour, but looking outdoors so far with it has been very bland but maybe still some moisture inside and I hope it improves.

It wasn't very scientific how I aligned the prism but when I look down the objective I get it completely filled with light from the ocular end and I get a fairly good exit pupil at the ocular end so I'm fairly sure it's near enough. I did in fact notice the off horizontal and tried moving the prism again before the glue set but it didn't make any difference with the limited movement available. There are basically two side tracks that the prism sits in and it can only really be moved forward and backwards so it only needs to be overlapping the other lens light paths.

I must have drowned this Optima as it's still totally misted or has only cleared a little. Hopefully by tomorrow I will be able to see through it again and see if it lives. I'll certainly not do that again if possible.

I think I might have wrecked the first 8x20 RSPB HD I got as it was practically frozen solid when it arrived so I left it for 5 mins to warm up and then tried the focus and dioopter but they were both very stiff and then it didn't focus right from then on but it was probably dodgy anyhow and one hinge very loose. At least I got a pretty much perfect one in exchange and it's really very good and I like it a lot but it is very blue biased so not the best colour producing but a super little bin in any case and I never thought I would get on with another 8x20 the last one having been the Nikon HG.

Hopefully get a better idea of the Optima capability tomorrow but from what I saw today it seems to have the most promise of them all for what I want and I may be able to use the pouch and lens cap from the Viking as they seem to fit the Optima and it didn't come with any but did have the strap and I think the Viking will be a constant Kitchen companion for reading those pesky small print food labels as I don't have any magnifying glass (used to use an inverted bin) so it's all getting there and maybe I did choose right in these three if I can get the Helios working better otherwise I might be after another 8x25 or something similar like a 7x25. I think Helios used to do a 7x25 in a porro folder but that all seemed to disappear although there are images of it still online. I think I would like one of those but I just wish some-one would make one with the colour of the Viking but a big view and still in a small form. Now that I would like. Something like a Nikon M7 monocular in 6x18mm or so.

Wow, just found this while looking for the 7x25
http://www.microglobe.co.uk/lascala-compact-penguin-f-7x25-binoculars-p-6581.html

This below is like my Helios but the text on mine is white and mine seems to be plastic body coated in black rubber paint and the hinge doesn't stay put very well but the focuser does and it's quite hard to rotate but is very fast also so only need be slightly moved when distance viewing.
http://www.1stoptics.com/pl/productdetail/202

Helios 7x25 folder
http://www.flybird.co.uk/folding_compact_monoculars.htm

I'm definitely liking monoculars a bit more now although it certainly has been a strange journey so far. Definitely these small ones can take some getting used to.

The Scala 7x25 might not be in stock. I hope one can use it without filters.

My Helios is with Gold letters I think. I'll look.

The 7x25 Monocular is Russian, made in several colours. I have the 5x25, would like the 7x25 but don't know this company. They seem to sell everything, maybe fish and chips also. Do they have a contact number?

Olympus used to make a nice EWA reversed Porro about 10 or 12 years ago. I don't think made any more. A pity.

More haste, less speed.

Binastro said:

The Scala 7x25 might not be in stock. I hope one can use it without filters.

My Helios is with Gold letters I think. I'll look.

The 7x25 Monocular is Russian, made in several colours. I have the 5x25, would like the 7x25 but don't know this company. They seem to sell everything, maybe fish and chips also. Do they have a contact number?

Olympus used to make a nice EWA reversed Porro about 10 or 12 years ago. I don't think made any more. A pity.

More haste, less speed.

Click to expand...

Think that Co. is perhaps no more as I had wanted to buy the 7x25.

I'm really speeding now. The Helios is in bits.

Why wreck one monocular when you can trash two at once :eek!::eek!::C

The pec pads, blower, cleaner fluid, new cloth are all out and I have managed to clean a prism pretty perfectly but the recessed objective is defeating me. No matter what I seem to do it just won't dry and without crap all over it and I just can't get at it properly or get it out maybe is what it needs.

I did manage to tighten the hinge really well but it will probably work slack again.

My Optima has been on the heater all day and finally it seems to be clearing but there's still a lot of moisture in there. At least now I'm starting to be able to see through it again. I've been letting it warm up slightly and then winding the focus in and out to expel the damp air and that seems to be working although very slowly.

If I could just get the Helios objective clean then I could put it all back together but I'm definitely in difficulties with that.

Maybe better leave it until tomorrow and an overnight dry out (of my mind) might help.

Waterproffing is so good. Just run the bins under the tap but don't even touch these things with a wet cloth.

The morning after the night before.......

So I got the little bugger objective out and give it a damn good thrashing, I mean cleaning.

Of course I didn't do any of this perfectly and so not as well as I would have liked and as I always do things in reverse I watched some lens cleaning pro vids this morning to see what I have done wrong.

Amazingly I can see an improvement in the contrast, colour and sharpness through the Helios now but when I picked up my Kowa 8x32 and had a look it just sort of destroys any notion that this is worth bothering with for me.

I'm more diissapointed with the Optima really. It's fairly cleared now but when I properly look down it there is a sort of debrie film left on I think the prism or maybe ocular lenses and so there is some loss of contrast etc but it may have been pretty much like this when I got it as I did not know then to check for this as it's never normally an issue with water proofed bins.

So what I have most learned (or been reminded of) is that not weather sealed optics will deteriorate pretty much the moment you start to use them due to dust and moisture build up and if you aren't a cleaning pro and don't have the correct gear, ability and technique to do the job properly then you are in trouble if you want good clear optics and I do but don't have the cleaning expertise so these types of things are pretty much out for me I would say.

The little 4x12 is therefore the current champ as it's the only one I got new and didn't require cleaning but I suppose it's only a matter of time but cheap to replace.

I wanted to leave the Optima in the sun near a window (not fire starting near) to see if some UV would help but currently it's doing it's usual pissing down outside.

I might summon up the patience to have another go at doing a better cleaning job of the Helios now I know more about it but I'm not sure if I can be bothered with using it even if I could clean it. I sure fixed the hinge though as it absolutely fixed in position wherever I set it.

The Optima doesn't seem easily dismantalable and maybe I will have to consider sending it for specialist cleaning and again I have to decide if that would be worth it.

I think that's it. Defintiely waterproofing of any future optic I procure is a very important aspect on the list. All reminds me of mouldy camera lenses, another pain.

Of course the 10x25 Hawke binocular quietly gets on with it's job without issue so it's the real champ.

Monoculars I'm again not so sure about. It will take more time to see if I get any kind of useful use from this pile of semi crap I have. At the moment I sort of feel that I'm not really any the wiser about it all but am probably done with this experiment, for now at least.

Monoculars

CliveP

CliveP said:

The morning after the night before.......

Monoculars I'm again not so sure about. It will take more time to see if I get any kind of useful use from this pile of semi crap I have. At the moment I sort of feel that I'm not really any the wiser about it all but am probably done with this experiment, for now at least.

Click to expand...

1. It's sad that you seem to have been put off by your venture into monoculars.

I eventually dug deeper in my pocket, and followed a different route.

2. My first venture was, like you, to buy from Quicktest:
a) A Docter-type Bynolit 8x21 folding monocular
b) An, I believe Russian, as opposed to similarly specified Chinese, BGT2 2.5X17.5 'spyglass' type monocular (circa 25g),
and from somewhere else:
c) A cheap conventional monocular of a make and specification that I now forget.

I still use the Russian spyglass for:
* Reading the captions in museum display cases (or for instance in the British Library, the manuscript letters of famous people)
* Viewing paintings in art galleries between the heads of a crowd
* Reading the numbers of approaching buses,
or as a convenient pocket magnifying glass.

I find it very useful.

But I could not get on with the Bynolit.

3. My second venture was to buy off AliExpress for about £15 a Chinese MP2 Russian-pattern, or 'Military' as I call it, 8x30 Porro monocular (270g).

[The monocular was confusingly marked, in Chinese fashion, 'BNU5 8x30M', namely the designation of the Russian BPU5 8x30 binocular. It was further supplied with an outwardly genuine Russian factory inspector's signed certificate, in Russian and English, for a BPU5 binocular to boot!]

My trials were promising; I read BF thread:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=273852

and was encouraged to give up, at my demand for a better level of performance, upon sub-£30 pricing, low weight and convenient pocketability; cut out anything in between the Russian 2.5x17.5 spyglass and the higher end Helios/Opticron/Kite 5x30 to 8x32 type; swallow hard; and plunge on the Helios 8x32 AMD+ (260g).

The Helios now competes in my line-up for 'go everywhere' bicycling or rucksack optic with an Olympus 7x21 PCIII Classic (184g) or Olympus 10x25 PCI Tracker (280g). Its advantages are:
* It hangs ready for immediate use more conveniently than a binocular from a carabiner at my belt
* It is probably less ostentatious than a binocular for use in parks and similar public places
* It has a brighter image than the two binoculars
and of course:
* It is near optimal for two-eyed viewing.

The offset, as well canvassed on every Monocular thread, is the greatly reduced apparent image size, however highly resolved, contrasty or bright the image may be, of the Helios compared with the binoculars.

It's a personal choice, according to proposed usage, how acceptable the offset might be to another person.

4. I have since strayed once, and bought a £24 Chinese MP Russian-pattern Military 12x45 Porro (380g) from AliExpress that features, enticingly, a highly contrasty and very well resolved image, smooth focussing and good apparent depth of focus -- But shoddy cosmetics, a close focus distance of some 20yds (20m), and no tripod bush!

I have ordered from AliExpress for £0.96 a tripod adapter that is intended to clamp to a mobile phone, and shall mount the adapter on a Finn stick (ie Selfie stick!) or brace (ie Gorillapod), and attempt to jury-rig a suitable support so that I can seriously start to explore in the field the practical utility--or not!--of the beast.


Stephen

I'm kind of getting to like the little 4x12 as I think it is definitely something that I would easily throw into my pocket when out without binoculars and it's very useful around the house also. I found myself actually using it to view the lenses of the Helios monocular when I took it apart. The 4x12 could of course never replace the capability of even an average bin but it isn't unpleasant to view through.

Of my three monoculars it's the clearest, brightest (even with only a 12mm objective) and very nice colour reproduction and very sharp. I just did a test this morning against the Optima which is basically a Specwell rebrand and would cost more than your Helios AMD and I could read a distant number plate more easily with the 4x12 costing about a 1/5th of the Optima at retail prices. Part of this was down to more shake with the 6x and not being so bright with the smaller exit pupil of the Optima.

I was quite surprised by this as the Optima does now seem to be free of moisture and the optics pretty clean and clear again but it still lacks in every department compared with the Viking excepting that it has a larger view, more magnification and less distortion softness out towards the edges but now I am using the Viking with the rubber eyecup folded down and this helps me get nearer to the ocular and get more of the whole view and makes it seem more relaxing with both eye use.

The Helios would out resolve them all with it's bigger 21mm lens and 8x magnification but it's not nearly as nice a view nor so easy to use as the 4x12.

So the 4x12 is somewhat the surprise to me as I had certainly entertained the thought of returning it on first impression but I can see now that it's almost a culture shock to go from using large binoculars or even small ones to this sort of thing but I do think at least this little monocular does fill a gap were a binocular is not appropriate or the best option so I am a convert here.

My initial hope was to find something very pocketable but that provided some semblance of an effective outdoor viewer and I think if the Optima was as bright etc as the Viking then this would be it, so perhaps a Viking 8x20 might be of use to me but for now I have the 10x25 that I wish to try for a while and I will still give the Optima and probably the Helios 8x20 another few goes over the year to see what I think about them in brighter seasons.

I remember back at winter start that I considered any compact binocular then useless with the lack of light becoming available and yet here I am sitting finding myself warming to a budget 4x12?

I seem to be getting used to just lifting it up with both eyes open and putting it to one eye and my brain just sort of automatically switching to that view without even closing the other eye and this approach does give some sort of feeling of a larger relaxed view and seems more easily achieved with the lower magnification.

I'm sure I will definitely use this 4x12 and it may well be another perhaps better 4x12 that I may purchase in future and leave anything requiring more power to the binocular end of things although this is what I have still to decide and it's not straight forward without being able to try all of the options but certainly for now I've got plenty of things to tryout more and be getting on with, and hurray for no more waiting on post but I am of course already planning my next postal trauma while simultaneously asking myself why???

Breaking news (well another attempt I suppose) but I just discovered how to open the Optima which was pretty easy in the end.

Gave it all a bit of a blow out and the dirty prism a little wipe with a clean lens cloth and it made a definite difference but I think I need to give it the cleaning fluid treatment next.

Anyhow, that was great to discover as it means I can probably give that a bit of a clean every now and again if it needs one and I never thought that would be possible but it's much easier than with the Helios as there is no gluing involved. It's just a little prism cage. It seems it was that part that collected the gunk as before I replaced the cage I assembled the monocular without it and it seemed vary clear.

Currently it still isn't as clear as the Viking but hopefully using the fluid will bring it much nearer. If it does I will be very happy but I will do it later taking some time to be careful and not damage any surface or whatever.

At least this time I've had some practice with the Helios and watched the pro vids. I'm nervous but excited3

Will report how it goes.

That was a pretty decent cleanup job although getting at the crud trapped between the prism faces which are set together with some sort of paste was something of a challenge and I will spare you my methods bearing in mind the heart health of those who may get rather exorcized about such things.

I kind of enjoyed the challenge and certainly feel more comfortable doing such things now that I've had some more practice but what I seem to have discovered is that this Optima monocular just does not have as high transmission, contrast and colour as the basic modern Viking which leads me to suspect that it must be actually rather old and has lain in a drawer of a previous owner for many years and since it's in such good condition I imagine never was used very much.

I think the prism is coated with something very basic like aluminium perhaps or perhaps the silver has tarnished or something so unfortunately it did not turn into a glittering glory and never will however clean but it does seem much better than it was.

It's confusing as it's clearly much better engineered and built than the Viking but the Viking Optics are distinctly brighter etc so it's the only conclusion I can think of and that is that it's quite old although externally identical to the current Specwell except it says Optima instead of Specwell.

The modern Specwells must surely be better than a budget Viking and if they are then they must really be impressive? They no way justify the price if this is not the case and it turns out this Optima is not old.

I'm quite impressed with the job I did on it and I will be using this one also for definite. I finished up working on the Helios and it's quite a good result too so it could get some use for something.

Glad I tried now and learned something about cleaning internals and it's not to bad if you have materials and a technique to actually get the surface clean and free from as much dirt as possible and a 4x12 monocular is certainly a very useful tool for close inspecting.

So I now have 3 monoculars that are basically well useable which is not to bad.

I suppose this might all depend on your eyes or your prescription vs. budget. In our budgetary range, my girlfriend prefers a monocular to binoculars. No matter how much she adjusts binoculars, they make her eyes hurt. She does, admittedly, have a very different left and right eye prescriptions.

Since we use binoculars and monoculars mostly to double-check something we might take a photo of, that probably plays a part too. Even with my compact binoculars, or her monocular, we're only viewing wildlife for a couple minutes a a stretch, tops.

CliveP said:

I'm kind of getting to like the little 4x12 as I think it is definitely something that I would easily throw into my pocket when out without binoculars and it's very useful around the house also.

Click to expand...

CliveP

Congratulations!

After all your travails, you seem to have arrived. Good for the Viking 4x12!

1. Want a final punt?

Here's the Chinese version of the Russian 2.5x17.5 monocular:

http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Mini-Thumb-Ring-2-5x17-5_455764391.html

Note the photos & material: ABS Plastic/Aluminium alloy/Optical glass.

Some of the vendors on AliExpress confusingly mix in similar photos with photos showing a different, more 'Russian', paint-sprayed metal looking finish. I suspect the latter to feature an earlier version or different model entirely. Coupled with wildly inaccurate specs, it's a not infrequent Chinese practice (Didn't I say 'punt'?!).

2. Here's the monocular on sale for £2.40 with free postage:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Outdoor-2...179905?hash=item3aa94821c1:g:-nIAAOSwPgxVSLvA

I've ordered a couple: one to see what they're like, and the other for the case. I need a case for the Russian model that I bought from Quicktest.

If they're good, I foresee a large order to supply me with presents to give next Christmas!

Don't be put off by the low price! Vendors market similar Chinese goods at a variety of sometimes wildly inflated prices. If they all look to be the same product, I buy the cheapest. Even at £2.40!

3. Forget most of the specs that vendors give out on the web!

I've never thought to treat my Russian model like a binocular, and so spec it. I've just used it, and found it very satisfactory. I was a little casual about protecting it in my pocket, and it got dust inside. I found it easy to dismantle it to clean out the dust, and now give it suitable protection.

However I now roughly spec my Russian model as:

* Field of view: Greater than 7.5 degrees.

I measure:
* Close focus distance: 26in (66cm).

I calculate
* Exit pupil: 7mm.

There's a good Zone of sharp focus. The Field stop, as I believe it's called, is not in sharp focus, but blurred.

I don't have a comparator conveniently available to record an impression of Brightness. But I've never had the impression of a dark image.

Likewise Depth of focus is certainly not shallow.

4. The Quicktest Russian 2.5x17.5 monocular is a more 'serious', and expensive, purchase, than the cheap Chinese product:

http://www.quicktest.co.uk/acatalog/Smallest-monocular--2.5-X-17.5-MONOC2X17.html#SID=287

As I said, I am a satisfied customer. I consider the monocular good value at Quicktest's price.


Stephen

Ok, ok I bought another one....

... and this one's totally different or maybe not.

... another 6x16 and another Specwell rebrand so not perhaps very different.

The difference I am hoping for is that - since this one is new boxed and I couldn't resist the low price - there will be much more clarity than with the Optima and if not then it means I did a great cleaning job or these Specwell rebrands just are not that good and that will be bad.

Been trying the Optima this morning now that it's cleaned and it's actually sunny and I realised that even though it's only slightly larger than the 4x12, if I hold it the same way then it shakes, so I discovered that if I wrap my right hand right around the barrel, protruding over the end and use my left hand to focus and brace it against my forehead, then I have just been able to read the small text under the main text on my test street sign so this is good and if the new one is nice and bright and better contrast/colour (surely it can be better than the Viking?) then that will be great. I can definitely notice an improvement in the colour with the Optima now that's it's cleaner inside but it still lags the 4x12 in colour, contrast and brightness and the 4x12 I can just hold between my fingers and thumb so it's still appealing for that reason but it does lack some magnification for outdoors where a 6x like the Optima is better so lets see if this next one is any better. I just didn't want to go to 8x with increased size, less fov, more shake and less close focus ability. That's when my bins take over but I was considering another Viking, the 8x20, but went for this new 6x16 instead as now I know they are built so well and that I can clean them. Can't see how to do that with the Viking although if it ever reaches the stage of needing cleaned then I will have nothing to loose in attempting to dismantle it to find out.

So on it goes. I did look at the 2.5x17 but I don't think I need to go lower mag or more compact than the 4x12 and it has a wider fov (afaik) although a 7mm exit pupil in a monocular is kinda interesting and should certainly be bright enough!

Hi Stephen,
I cannot find my Russian 2,5x17,5 monoculars.
But I did just find the binocular version quickly.
Firstly, the long hard oblong discoloured yellow and white plastic case hurt my hands trying to open it. I used a penknife. Case marked ARENA? in cyrillic. Original tissue paper. Made in Russia all.

These devices are Galilean so don't have field stops.
There is no exit pupil.

There is good ribbing internally and quite well blackened.
Seems to be all metal, including brass, and glass optics.

They are fairly complex, maybe triplet objectives.
Typically the multicoating is different colours each objective.
Transmission is quite high. Some surfaces single coated, some possibly uncoated.

This binocular is a pain, if IPD not exactly right field is not very sharp. Tightening hinge helps. Just hand turn or compass points to tighten.
One eyepiece slight edge chip, but not optically important.

Monoculars much more practical.

P.S.
The right outer barrel is marked BGT2 in cyrillic. White letters on black stippled finish. No other markings.
The arms and barrels are one piece castings, so you cannot detach the barrels to make two monoculars. Well you could saw it off, I suppose.

Binastro

1. Here's Quicktest's image of the Russian 2.5x17.5 monocular that I bought:

http://www.quicktest.co.uk/acatalog/Monoculars.html

http://www.quicktest.co.uk/acatalog/info_MONOC2X17.html


2. I found an image of the Arena binocular version of the Russian 2.5x17.5 monocular by a Google Image search:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/SMALL-TINY-...095391?hash=item3d0d79dd5f:g:n-EAAOxye3BRvBCm

The individual barrels are marked identically to the Quicktest monocular.

The white plastic appearance box that comes last in the offered images is marked, just like yours, 'ARENA' in Cyrillic.


3. Note the logo on the barrel in each case! Note the marking 'BGT2 2,5x17,5'!

Now here's the Chinese version that I have ordered:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Outdoor-2...179905?hash=item3aa94821c1:g:-nIAAOSwPgxVSLvA

The marking is 'MGT2 2.5x17.5' ('M' can be taken to be a misrendering of the Cyrillic letter that corresponds to 'B' in the 'original' Russian marking) and the logo the same as the logo on the Russian monocular and binocular.

Here's a clearer view of the logo on a similar specimen of the Chinese version:

http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Mini-Thumb-Ring-2-5x17-5_455764391/showimage.html


4. So that's how the Russian version binocular, Russian version monocular, and Chinese version monocular relate to each other!


5. I've checked out those specs for the Russian version monocular that I gave in daylight.

Field of view is just over 7.5 degrees, maybe 8 degrees.

Depth of focus is very large.


6. As for a mini-review, the focus wheel feels very loose, but does not affect the focussing. One-handed focussing is a doddle once one has got the knack of how to hold the monocular.

Eye placement comes pretty easily.

Apparent image size is little magnified from the image size perceived by the naked eye.

The advantage in use of such a low-powered optic is that the monocular gives an image in clear focus in circumstances where the naked eye may not.

Hence the utility of the monocular for me. I can, as I said earlier, read 'difficult' text such as the captions on museum exhibits, or the numbers of approaching buses (where I live the numbers of buses are closely spaced).

Hence no doubt why the binocular version, with its greater, but still small, apparent image size, is described as intended for use an 'opera glass'.

Some people may have perfect eyesight, or varifocal spectacles. I don't have either.


7. We've strayed off low-powered monoculars for birdwatching, except for captive or very tame birds.

But what birdwatcher wouldn't want to have a clearer view of the Stone curlews in Golders Park zoo than the naked eye affords? And from a 25g pocketable monocular?

Especially at such a low price as £2.40, if the Chinese version that I have ordered performs as well as the Russian version!


Stephen

Interesting stuff Stephen, thanks.

You've almost got me ordering that Russian quicktest version but I think I wouldn't like it as much as the 4x12.

You may like the 4x12 and the little Chinese made Viking is surprisingly good given that it beats a much more expensive Japanese Specwell in many aspects. I'm wondering now though if it's a lot down to just the difference in exit pupils. The 6x16 with it's 2.5mm against the 4x12 with it's 3mm. The 3mm seems definitely prefereable so I'm wishing that the Specwell had been a 6x18 and I'm also more curious about the Specwell 7x25.

Or how about this?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RARE-Fold...351531?hash=item1c5f8feaab:g:F8YAAOSwKtlWk27r


Edit:Took another look at the Specwell 7x25 and it seems I would loose some close focus plus it's bigger than the 6x16 and I've just been doing a little birding with the Optima 6x16 from here and with the rubber eyecup on it folded down (as I did with the 4x12) then it seems better (bigger view and it is wide at 10deg) and I'm becoming more pleased with it and thinking that yes this is the monocular for me. Been swopping back and forth with the 8x28 Bresser bin and the monocular is almost as enjoyable which is a good sign. Suppose it helps that's it's the first snowy morning here and the sun is also out so it looks pretty nice and well, pretty. Think it definitely helps in becoming more accustomed to the monocular also.

What I'm really pleased about is that the 6x16 (2.5inches by 1 1/4 inches eyecups folded) is about 1/6th the size/volume of the 8x28 bin and on this bright morning I am getting worthy viewing from it. It's strange and good but what I notice about having the eyecup folded down is that there is definitely a more pronounced feeling of obtaining a closer view when raising the monocular to my eye than it seemed with the eyecup folded up and I noticed this with both the 4x12 and 6x16. Progress.

Hi Stephen and Clive,
My 2,5x17,5 binocular (actually opera glass) doesn't have a V.
The one in the photo linked was probably for the film V, where they had an interesting way of changing the government.

The Russian one is multicoated. From the photo the Chinese one may be single coated.

More importantly, if the Russian one has triplet objectives, does the Chinese one have doublets?

Russia and the Soviets cared little for patents or copyright. The Chinese are worse.
At least Zeiss acknowledged Russian patents for the Russar lens, although Schneider were forced to pay royalties to TTH for the Xenon I think.

Whether theft of designs actually benefits countries in the long term, I don't know. I suppose it does.
This is now on an industrial scale.

I suppose the Chinese ones could be seized by trading standards if they are fakes, but they don't do a thorough job. They are more rightly concerned about fake pharmaceuticals and 'protection' that doesn't protect.

Binastro

I hope to report in due course on the Chinese 2.5x17.5 when it arrives.


Stephen

Stephen Prower said:

Binastro....


7. We've strayed off low-powered monoculars for birdwatching, except for captive or very tame birds.

But what birdwatcher wouldn't want to have a clearer view of the Stone curlews in Golders Park zoo than the naked eye affords? And from a 25g pocketable monocular?

Especially at such a low price as £2.40, if the Chinese version that I have ordered performs as well as the Russian version!

Stephen

Click to expand...

"Someone told me it's all happening at the zoo.
I do believe it, I do believe it's true."

It's been a while since I visited the zoo, but when I did I would take my SLR camera (yes, that long) with a zoom lens, which would enable me to see the birds and animals close up, and then I'd photograph them (or as they say today, "image them").

So I wouldn't be using a monocular for that purpose, and I would imagine others also take their camera to the zoo (DSLRs).

Given the stability issue that people can have with monoculars (unless they fit perfectly into your eye orbits and you have a steady arm), I think they are best used for quick looks. Hence, why practically every covert government operative has one.

Or if you're a birder and on your way home from work or at lunch, having a monocular could come in handy if a rare bird comes into view. I think this is particularly true for guys. Women usually take their handbags everywhere they go and as packed as they are, they can still fit a compact bin in there along with sunglasses, a make-up kit and mirror, mascara, lipstick, mints, cell phone, credit cards (so they can buy more handbags), loose change, a nail file, small individually wrapped chocolates, creams/moisturizers/lotions, and last but not least, a small canister of pepper spray.

Brock