Can't seem to find my 3D printer anywhere and can't remember where I had it the last time I saw it. Did I lend it to you Jan?
Lee
-
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.
Why is it such a common problem now days for binoculars to have too much eye relief r (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
Can't seem to find my 3D printer anywhere and can't remember where I had it the last time I saw it. Did I lend it to you Jan?
Lee
Stephen Prower
Well-known member
Increasing extension of eyecups
In case it is helpful for 'Do it yourself' posters who have complained of binoculars that do not offer sufficient extension of the eyecups for them:
You can freeze adjustable eyecups in the 'Up' position and achieve some further extension by using bicycle inner tube. Doubled over inner tube might give you some 1-3 mm further extension; suitably shaped wings the same, or perhaps a little bit more. For comfort I sometimes also bulk out the diameter of the eyecup with doubled over inner tube before increasing extension in this way.
I add a 'technical note' for non-bicycle users:
The unstretched diameter of bicycle inner tube is related to the figure of the diameter of the tyre that it is intended to fit inside by the figure of the 'section' of the tyre. It is this 'section' figure that is printed upon the inner tube and the box in which it is supplied.
An example should make this clearer.
An inner tube of say, very approximately, 25mm unstretched diameter may be marked as suitable to be fitted inside tyres of size '26x1.5/1.75/2.125'. This will be a tube that is intended for an off-road bike with 26 inch diameter wheels fitted with 1.5-2.125 inch section tyres. The figure of 25mm will not appear either on the tube, or on the box in which the tube is supplied.
For use on eyecups therefore, if you have to hand a tube with the same markings, your 'reference figure' will be the maximum 'section' figure, namely 2.125 inches.
A greater figure should mean a greater unstretched figure of the diameter of the tube, and a lesser figure a lesser.
People may in the past have been put off using bicycle inner tube to customise binocular eye cups by the fact that few bicycles, as I believe, used to be fitted with tyres of greater than 2.125 inch section. Such a section does not afford inner tube of sufficient diameter for use on binoculars of all eyecup diameters. Stretching too far can make installation difficult, and as with any use of force, lead to damage. Fortunately for binocular 'inner tube engineers' a growing number of off-road bikes are now fitter with tyres of greater section.
I suppose, given the above caution, I had better add the usual 'Do it yourself' disclaimer of: Do it at your own risk!
[Road bike tyres are usually, certainly in Europe, sized in millimetres, rather than inches. A typical size marking of an inner tube intended for a non-sporting road bike might be '700x28-38C', where 700mm is the diameter of the wheel, and 38mm the maximum size of section of the tyre that the tube is intended to fit inside.]
Stephen
I have illustrated some of my own inner tube mods in previous posts on the Forum. A search on 'bicycle' in the 'binocular' section of the Forum under my Forum name should find them
In case it is helpful for 'Do it yourself' posters who have complained of binoculars that do not offer sufficient extension of the eyecups for them:
You can freeze adjustable eyecups in the 'Up' position and achieve some further extension by using bicycle inner tube. Doubled over inner tube might give you some 1-3 mm further extension; suitably shaped wings the same, or perhaps a little bit more. For comfort I sometimes also bulk out the diameter of the eyecup with doubled over inner tube before increasing extension in this way.
I add a 'technical note' for non-bicycle users:
The unstretched diameter of bicycle inner tube is related to the figure of the diameter of the tyre that it is intended to fit inside by the figure of the 'section' of the tyre. It is this 'section' figure that is printed upon the inner tube and the box in which it is supplied.
An example should make this clearer.
An inner tube of say, very approximately, 25mm unstretched diameter may be marked as suitable to be fitted inside tyres of size '26x1.5/1.75/2.125'. This will be a tube that is intended for an off-road bike with 26 inch diameter wheels fitted with 1.5-2.125 inch section tyres. The figure of 25mm will not appear either on the tube, or on the box in which the tube is supplied.
For use on eyecups therefore, if you have to hand a tube with the same markings, your 'reference figure' will be the maximum 'section' figure, namely 2.125 inches.
A greater figure should mean a greater unstretched figure of the diameter of the tube, and a lesser figure a lesser.
People may in the past have been put off using bicycle inner tube to customise binocular eye cups by the fact that few bicycles, as I believe, used to be fitted with tyres of greater than 2.125 inch section. Such a section does not afford inner tube of sufficient diameter for use on binoculars of all eyecup diameters. Stretching too far can make installation difficult, and as with any use of force, lead to damage. Fortunately for binocular 'inner tube engineers' a growing number of off-road bikes are now fitter with tyres of greater section.
I suppose, given the above caution, I had better add the usual 'Do it yourself' disclaimer of: Do it at your own risk!
[Road bike tyres are usually, certainly in Europe, sized in millimetres, rather than inches. A typical size marking of an inner tube intended for a non-sporting road bike might be '700x28-38C', where 700mm is the diameter of the wheel, and 38mm the maximum size of section of the tyre that the tube is intended to fit inside.]
Stephen
I have illustrated some of my own inner tube mods in previous posts on the Forum. A search on 'bicycle' in the 'binocular' section of the Forum under my Forum name should find them
Last edited:
I think you should follow that up Jan. Patent it and mass produce them and the price would come down. Is there a way to measure the depth of your eye sockets? Maybe a phone app?
Last edited:
There are “flexible” rubbery 3D printer filaments (eg NinjaFlex) that could do fit the bill. I mainly use inflexible PLA as I don’t need the flexibility, also the feeder on my main printers are not well suited to printing flexible materials. You could always add rubbery bits as Stephen mentions. It raises the possibility of totally custom, perfectly fitting cups... if your measurements and CAD skills are upto it!
PEterW
See picture of my big wing cups to help the view “immersion”.
PEterW
See picture of my big wing cups to help the view “immersion”.
Attachments
What about this? The Alpine Innovations Bino Bandit. 5 star reviews on Amazon.com.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...sk_bibfd10_slicker_binocular_glare_guard.html
https://www.amazon.com/Alpine-Innovations-Bandit-Binocular-Stealth/dp/B01IRNPEWK
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...sk_bibfd10_slicker_binocular_glare_guard.html
https://www.amazon.com/Alpine-Innovations-Bandit-Binocular-Stealth/dp/B01IRNPEWK
Attachments
Last edited:
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Well, a few years back I was far beyond the North Pole circle on a temp. minus 32 degrees Celsius in a strong wind observing wild nature. It was only possible with skigoggles on or with the wind in the back. Sometimes you have to accept the worse to get the best out of it.
Issued with this nice gem it would be quite different:t:
Nice find Dennis.
Jan
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Steve ..... Here you go, more on the Bandit from Mooreorless.
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=335437&highlight=BAndit
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=335437&highlight=BAndit
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
I hope it will attach to an 8x20 pocket roof. That's the sort of bin that would most benefit from something like this!
)) --AP
Don't you think it would give you a little support when you have too much eye relief. Kind of like the winged eye cups. Maybe it it too flexible.
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
For years people complained binoculars didn't have adequate eye relief for them while wearing glasses. The makers responded with giving us lots of eye relief.
Now people are complaining their bins are difficult to use without glasses because of the eyecups not extending far enough, or enough adjustment, for use without glasses.
I'm less tolerant of this latter problem as it seems relatively easy to fix. And, as others have asked, don't these makers test their own products in the field?
Now people are complaining their bins are difficult to use without glasses because of the eyecups not extending far enough, or enough adjustment, for use without glasses.
I'm less tolerant of this latter problem as it seems relatively easy to fix. And, as others have asked, don't these makers test their own products in the field?
Steve C
Well-known member
No Dennis I don't.
I see that as a very useful item for glare protection. I do not see where it has anything to do with extending the eye cups or anything else in relationship to eye relief or eye cup extension. I did however order one.Thanks Bruce, but I had it figured out before seeing Steve's review
.
Kevin
Bino makers should definitely get out more and use their binos and accessories in all weathers. If they did we might rainguards that do not stick to eyecups and will fit and remove easily when the binos are set to small IPDs. We might also get eyecups that don't wobble or shift position.
But when it comes to eye relief and how much it should be, and when it comes to designing eyecups to work with this ER, it isn't a case of them doing it right or doing it wrong. It is a case of making their system work for the biggest proportion of the customers. It will never work for every single individual due to the endless variations in facial structure and spectacle lenses and frames. Just because a binos ER/eyecup system works for all the product development folks at the bino factory is no guarantee it will work for everyone in the world.
I am not saying they can't do better, but it isn't a simple task.
Lee
Maybe a bit far fetched, but could it be that it is some sort of sales trick? One might imagine that the closer the eye gets to the image, the more immersive it seems...? Or is it our eyes... It is a fact that as we get older we have more problems dealing with the converging rays coming from the outer sides of the ocular, so backing up a bit is more comfortable to the eye for people who could benefit from reading glasses...?
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
It seems that most complain about eyecups not extending far enough causing one to hold the bins away from their eye sockets a bit therefore slowing the positioning of the bins relative to their eyes thus slowing acquisition of the subject. A particular bummer for birders, as we know.
Eyecups that extend further with more positive increments between fully in and fully out, it seems to me, would fix the problem for most everybody.
I appreciate that this may be easier said than done but it's the matching of the eyecup to the eyepiece that's what's needed here.
Agreed, and the challenge is to come up with an eyecup that extends far enough but will still retract to a compact size and isn't so bulky that there is no room for wide noses in between for those with narrow IPDs, and has intermediate settings that are secure but aren't so complex and bulky that they increase the size of the eyecup. Easy peasy: not!
Lee
wdc
Well-known member
It is amusing to hear a non-eyeglass wearer decrying the fact that a specific binocular won't fit, since, as a lifelong eyeglass wearer, the majority of binoculars ever made don't fit me, as they were not designed with long eye relief in mind. With regard to the AFOV, FOV, and long eye relief, I would point at the Zeiss 8x42 Victory SF as a design that accommodates my needs, and has a very wide FOV. Its possible to market one that has a wide field and fits those that wear spectacles. They are not mutually exclusive. Nikon MHG is another example at less than half the price.
Birders may be an aging demographic, which might explain demands for more eye relief being met. I agree with others that a replaceable eye cup could be the simplest solution for manufacturers and consumers. If Zeiss can do it with the Conquest, I would expect more to be following suit.
As also has been hashed out, the inconsistency with ER specs is a real disservice to the consumer. Like Chuck, and probably others on this forum, eye relief is a primary factor for me when considering a bin, however I've got bins with stated ER of 17mm (8x32 Trinovid HD,7x42 Ultravid BR) that fit me fine, and ones that claim 19mm (Opticron 8x32 Traveller) that don't. It means you trust the spec when you can't physically try it out, only to find yourself stuck with something that might not work for you. I'm resigned to it, but wish there were 2 specs published for eye relief: actual and available.
-Bill
Birders may be an aging demographic, which might explain demands for more eye relief being met. I agree with others that a replaceable eye cup could be the simplest solution for manufacturers and consumers. If Zeiss can do it with the Conquest, I would expect more to be following suit.
As also has been hashed out, the inconsistency with ER specs is a real disservice to the consumer. Like Chuck, and probably others on this forum, eye relief is a primary factor for me when considering a bin, however I've got bins with stated ER of 17mm (8x32 Trinovid HD,7x42 Ultravid BR) that fit me fine, and ones that claim 19mm (Opticron 8x32 Traveller) that don't. It means you trust the spec when you can't physically try it out, only to find yourself stuck with something that might not work for you. I'm resigned to it, but wish there were 2 specs published for eye relief: actual and available.
-Bill
wdc
Well-known member
Hi Lee, I don’t doubt the spec of the Opticron, but I do lament the lack of a standard
for publishing them by manufacturers. Available eye relief is apparently how Zeiss and Leica
are doing it. It is more helpful, from my perspective, but if it is not specified as such,
the uncertainty for the customer remains.
-Bill
for publishing them by manufacturers. Available eye relief is apparently how Zeiss and Leica
are doing it. It is more helpful, from my perspective, but if it is not specified as such,
the uncertainty for the customer remains.
-Bill
