• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Binoculars as microscope - Penta Papilio 6.5x21 vs Minox BF 10x42 (1 Viewer)

.Experiment no. 2

. Not having close-up lenses handy, I used a made in China, el-cheapo reading glasses of +2.00 dioptres costing a few pounds. The lenses are not that great, I think plastic and on reflections they do not seem to have very good surface accuracy.

With the Minolta 8×23 compact AF 8 autofocus binocular, I placed one half of the spectacles in front of the right objective of the binocular. I was surprised how close I got.
With the binocular focused at 2 m, and using the spectacle lens, the computer screen letters were sharp at about 0.4 m.
With the binocular focused at the far point the computer screen to objective distance was about 0.5 m. These are rough figures.

The autofocus worked at these close distances, as I suspected it would.
The distance from the centre of the autofocus window to the edge of the objective is about 2 cm or less than 1 inch. If one was viewing insects I don't know whether or how this displacement would be relevant.

There is also the point that the dioptre correction range of this binocular is from -12 to +4, which is 16 dioptres.
Again, I don't know how one can use this to give a very large focus range.

. But the autofocus seems to work at close distances although it was taking about 0.3 seconds to get the focus point rather than 0.1 seconds approximately when used normally.
The image of the letters on the computer screen was not good, but I was only holding the spectacle glass in front of the objective, and it was certainly not positioned or angled correctly. In addition the contrast was not that good, but I think that is because the spectacle lens to binocular gap was completely open where it should be in a blackened tube.

If done properly, with an optically good +2 dioptre close-up lens, I think the results would be reasonable.
As mentioned, this binocular was also available as a 10×23, although I haven't come across one yet.
 
Last edited:
. Hi zzffnn,
I remembered that the accessory U adapter for Pentax compact binoculars steadies the 6.5×21 Papilio II very well. It just screws into the tripod socket and weighs 18 g. It is about 6 cm long tapering to the top with a wider base. The only point to note is that the U adapter could unscrew in use, so one has to check periodically that it is secure.

I would think that the 8.5×21 Papilio II with the U adapter would provide greater resolution than the 6.5×21 held normally, at least for my viewing.

Whether looking at insects close-up and having to rapidly focus, the U post would increase resolution, I don't know, but I suspect it will.

It seems that the Papilio II binoculars are really first-rate at doing what they are designed to do. Namely looking at butterflies etc close-up.

I haven't yet looked at the Sony digital binoculars to see if they focus close and have continuous autofocus.
They are fairly heavy and expensive. Hopefully if the third version comes out with 4K technology it will be a really useful instrument.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top