[keithdrengen]

That is my question, the biggest I have seen is 8x30:

http://outdoor-optics.com/verrekijke...inoculars.html

CJ

[dustyview]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "biggest." Bushnell makes the Natureview Plus in 8x30, like the Orion you posted, but also a 4x30 wide angle that gives a 900 ft. FOV and therefore a "bigger" view with the same 30mm objective.

I would like to see an RP design w/ a 32mm objective made with the same quality as the Custom Compact Elite E2......

[ceasar]

I believe that Bushnell made a really big one that many people, like me, mistook for a Roof Prism. It was an 8 x 50 or so, if I recall correctly. Some one should come up with it, bye and bye, I'm sure.
Bob

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by ceasar

I believe that Bushnell made a really big one that many people, like me, mistook for a Roof Prism. It was an 8 x 50 or so, if I recall correctly. Some one should come up with it, bye and bye, I'm sure.
Bob

Though that's not really a reverse porro but an over/under porro.

See the Funky Bin thread for links and photos of those! I've still not seen one of these second hand.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=140154

In fact you can characterize porros by the angle the L-shaped porro cluster makes to the vertical or horizontal. An over/under porro has the L is tilted at 45 degrees straight (with the point of the L at the outside of the bins). See the picture of the Rollei or L11A1 British Army bins to see this. You can rotate the porro cluster one way or the other that you can make "reverse porros" or "normal" (forward?) porros.

So I guess the case for the biggest "reverse porros" is just before they become "over/under" porros.

The biggest you can make an over/under porro is when

IPD = 2*(objective radius + housing thickness)

or

objective radius = IPD/2 - housing thickness

or for a rough approximation (which I could just have stated)

objective diameter ~ minimum IPD

The minimum IPD is usually 55mm. So 50mm for an over/under porro is perhaps a reasonable maximum.

I leave the case for the true reverse porro which just needs a bit of trig and the cluster angle to be included. But it will always be smaller than this.

And as you become more and more reverse the "offset" (the length of the side of the L) of the porro cluster becomes more important.

The other issue as you get to larger reverse porro objectives is you need bigger prisms (to deal with a bigger light cone) so you might have a problem with those mechanically interfering with each other.

I suspect this is why you don't see reverse porros larger than 30mm to meet all of these requirements.

[ceasar]

Thanks Kevin,
Now my memory is refreshed. The ones I was thinking of were the Bausch and Lomb Elite 8 x 50 shown in Thread 7 of your link.

Back in the70's or early 80's I had the opportunity to use, briefly, a rather compact Swift 9 x 36 Reverse Porro at the Hawk Mountain Migration Watch Site. It had Individual Focusing. The IF was OK for the long distance vistas there. The guy who was using them kept his fingers and thumbs real busy focusing them. I recall them as being very bright and sharp but at that time, I was used to using binoculars that could best be described as "pedestrian;" cheap Sears copies of Zeiss's or Nikon E's. The gentleman using them was from Boston, as I recall. Now that I think about it, I wonder if he might have been with the Swift Company.
Bob

[Renze de Vries]

Möller & Wedel 8x32 Marox, Germany, 1950's

Great build quality, very expensive at the time and some peculiar features like the two 'diopter controls' and the adjustable stem to be placed against the forehead.

renze

[falcondude]

Originally Posted by Renze de Vries

Möller & Wedel 8x32 Marox, Germany, 1950's

Great build quality, very expensive at the time and some peculiar features like the two 'diopter controls' and the adjustable stem to be placed against the forehead.

renze

two diopter controls? Another phrase for individual focusing?

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by falcondude

two diopter controls? Another phrase for individual focusing?

No, no, it's exactly that: diopter controls. The controls don't have enough travel to be used as focus controls (the focus wheel proper is located halfway the hinge pin, see photo) so I guess their function is to adjust close focussing distance and/or infinity for users in need of strong eye compensation.

Renze

[elkcub]

Renze,

What are the dimensions and weight of the binocular?

Ed

[falcondude]

Originally Posted by Renze de Vries

No, no, it's exactly that: diopter controls. The controls don't have enough travel to be used as focus controls (the focus wheel proper is located halfway the hinge pin, see photo) so I guess their function is to adjust close focussing distance and/or infinity for users in need of strong eye compensation.

Renze

Thanks for clarifying this. It feels good to learn something new each day

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by elkcub

What are the dimensions and weight of the binocular?Ed

Height is 120 mm, width 100-115 mm

Weight is 490 gr, although I should subtract something for the fine layer of dirt inside the prism cluster which should be removed by boiling the cluster apart which I won't do because I'm not yet ready. But it is marring the view.

Renze

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by falcondude

Thanks for clarifying this. It feels good to learn something new each day

Falcondude,
(and Ed, because this may add to your fascination with adjustable eyecup-history)

You're so right. There's another fine example to be found in the central screw in-screw out stem between the oculars of the Marox. As you may know, binoculars eyecups from the 1950's and 1960's can be pretty unfriendly because they're hard and never seem to fit your face nicely. I once bought a big Zeiss West 10x50 porro and after some disappointment to get friendly with the eyecups I decided to modify the eyecups (by applying my all-time favorite, bicycle inner tube) and contemplated to put some provision on the ocular shaft's screw between the oculars to rest my forehead against, and find ideal eye relief. Well, I found a nice rubber foot under my preamp (it had 4, so it wouldn't miss one) and screwed it onto the IPD-scale with no trouble at all (have a look at the picture and you'll know what I mean). It's a pity no-one took pictures of me then, because I definitely looked like the proudest inventor on earth.
Sometime later I bought the Moeller&Wedel Marox, and learned my great invention had already been invented half a century earlier in Germany. And in the UK the idea had been taken up by Ross, where a rubber accessory was used with equal success. In the 1960's if I'm correct.

Renze

[KorHaan]

Is that a piece of bicycle inner tube around the lefthand eyecup, Renze?

Ronald

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by KorHaan

Is that a piece of bicycle inner tube around the lefthand eyecup, Renze?

Ronald

Klopt.
See pictures.
After this first try however I decided I liked a more rounded approach better. This cup (see last picture) is built from 4 layers of inner tube.

I also decided I should write an article called The Tyred Binocular (and became awfully tired by the idea).

Renze

[Steve C]

There is nothing handier for the binocular hobbyist than a bicycle innertube of the appropriate diameter, a small sharp scissors, a razor blade or x-acto knife set, and a little patience.

[ScoutMan]

Renze,

a piece of rubber plumbing pipe connector of the correct diameter also works. 1&1/2" works on the Leupold Yosemites for example.

[Renze de Vries]

Correct!

The most useful, i.e. versatile, multi-purpose part I've found and applied, is the Swift eyecup as found on their post-1985 models. They're still readily available. There's a ridge inside which can be removed with a sharp knife so the rubber eyecup will slide nicely over most pre-1970 hard standard eyecups.
A drop of glue and there you are.
Also, this Swift eyecup can be applied with great result to (too) large diameter eyecups as found for instance on Nikon E's and SE's. This time the Swift cup slides INSIDE the standard cup, making it just a bit smaller on the top as well as adding a few millimeters to the height. If you're hampered by blackouts (as a non-spectacle wearer) this is the way to go. In most cases no glue is needed as the Swift eyecups fits in snugly. In case you need more extension, pull up the Swift eyecup and glue in place.

Renze

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by Renze de Vries

The most useful, i.e. versatile, multi-purpose part I've found and applied, is the Swift eyecup as found on their post-1985 models. They're still readily available. There's a ridge inside which can be removed with a sharp knife so the rubber eyecup will slide nicely over most pre-1970 hard standard eyecups.
A drop of glue and there you are.
Also, this Swift eyecup can be applied with great result to (too) large diameter eyecups as found for instance on Nikon E's and SE's. This time the Swift cup slides INSIDE the standard cup, making it just a bit smaller on the top as well as adding a few millimeters to the height. If you're hampered by blackouts (as a non-spectacle wearer) this is the way to go. In most cases no glue is needed as the Swift eyecups fits in snugly. In case you need more extension, pull up the Swift eyecup and glue in place.

That's a very interesting tip, Renze.

Where do youget your parts? Do Swift still sell eyecups as parts?

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell

Do Swift still sell eyecups as parts?

I bought 6 pair with no problem at all, but maybe Holland is heaven. Just try it, there's a good chance they're still available.
For instance, Nicolas Crista should know.

Renze

[elkcub]

I got a pair recently from Swift.

Ed

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by elkcub

I got a pair recently from Swift.

Ed

Is there a part number or description that they like rather than "post-1985 eyecup".

What are the contact details?

I know if I tried that on a Bushnell parts rep they'd get uppity (!).

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell

Is there a part number or description that they like rather than "post-1985 eyecup".

What are the contact details?

I know if I tried that on a Bushnell parts rep they'd get uppity (!).

Say for instance Audubon 804 HR/5

Renze

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by Renze de Vries

Say for instance Audubon 804 HR/5

Renze

Thanks, Renze!

[elkcub]

I must say, Renze, you really are the eyecup expert of the family.
Ed

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by elkcub

I must say, Renze, you really are the eyecup expert of the family.
Ed

That's what history has in store for you when you don't have a driver's license, you don't own a car, you're stuck with a bike and your tyres go flat all the time.

The most important thing I learned from the eyecup experiments is, that the eyecup's size and shape is not only of consequence to how the binocular is 'felt', i.e. more or less comfortable, but that it's also of crucial importance to the binocular's performance. For instance, if an eyecup's diameter is too large the binocular will have a tendency to 'get stuck' in the eyesockets with the result that the Apparent Field of View will be perceived as rather small, closed in. A rigid fit creates a small (perceived) view. Or: apparently there has to be some kind of looseness in the binocular-eye interface which can be quite critical.

Renze