Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Tuesday 24th October 2017, 22:46   #26
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
That's fine, but the question was how the different configuration of prisms made one glass "easier on the eyes" than the other one.

You have simply enumerated the differences, of which I was already aware.

I don't imagine there is any literature to cite, because I'm pretty sure that "easier on the eyes" cannot be quantified.
"Easier on the eyes" can't be quantified because it is subjective but you will really notice it when you use your binoculars all day. I just read a post that said a professional wildlife observer that uses his binoculars all day would pay double the price for an alpha binocular because they are easier on his eyes.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 24th October 2017, 23:08   #27
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n View Post
"Easier on the eyes" can't be quantified because it is subjective but you will really notice it when you use your binoculars all day. I just read a post that said a professional wildlife observer that uses his binoculars all day would pay double the price for an alpha binocular because they are easier on his eyes.
I saw the same post, but that still doesn't address the question of does a different configuration of prisms have any effect on that property.

You seem to be addressing everything but the question, so I'm confused.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 00:59   #28
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
I saw the same post, but that still doesn't address the question of does a different configuration of prisms have any effect on that property.

You seem to be addressing everything but the question, so I'm confused.
With a porro you have only 4 reflective surfaces but in a roof you have 6 reflective surfaces plus the prism in a roof needs to be phase coated so there is more chance of optical aberrations in a less expensive roof because there is more chance of errors which can lead to eye strain. It is kind of like your glasses prescription being off a tiny bit.

Last edited by denco@comcast.n : Wednesday 25th October 2017 at 02:04.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 01:11   #29
Nixterdemus
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central AR
Posts: 640
"My 8x32 Sightron is pretty much perfect in regard to smoothness, whereas the 10x32 has just the tiniest amount of stiction when you are trying to fine tune it after you stop and manoever back and forth."

Perhaps that's why Sightron discontinued the 10x32, yet still produce the 8x32BL.
__________________
Celestron M2 f/5.4 100mm ED-Manfrotto 516 fluid head w/140mm sliding plate

SLV 50* 4mm-- HD-60* 4.5mm-- UWA 82* 5.5mm-- SLV 6mm-- Luminos 82* 7mm-- MWA 100* 10mm-- Luminos 15mm--TV Nagler 50* 3mm/180X - 6mm/90X Zoom
Nixterdemus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 02:03   #30
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixterdemus View Post
"My 8x32 Sightron is pretty much perfect in regard to smoothness, whereas the 10x32 has just the tiniest amount of stiction when you are trying to fine tune it after you stop and manoever back and forth."

Perhaps that's why Sightron discontinued the 10x32, yet still produce the 8x32BL.
I had the 8x32 Sightron and I didn't have a lot of love for the focus wheel. It was too hard and it had too much stiction. In my experience Nikon has the smoothest focus wheels with just the right tension and Zeiss and Canon are second. A nice smooth focus wheel is important to me. It just makes using the binocular more enjoyable if you don't have to struggle with a sticky focus wheel. I gave up on Swarovski's after having three of them with sticky focus wheels. They say the newer FP models are better but I haven't tried them yet. The worst focus wheel I had was the Swarovski Habicht 8x30. You have to have STRONG fingers to turn it I don't care what anybody says.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 02:19   #31
WJC
Registered User
 
WJC's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Twin Falls
Posts: 1,640
"In my experience Nikon has the smoothest focus wheels."

Ah, you're just saying that because it's true!

Bill
__________________
"The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."—Dr. Stephen Hawking
WJC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 02:21   #32
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n View Post
With a porro you have only 4 reflective surfaces but in a roof you have 6 reflective surfaces plus the prism in a roof needs to be phase coated so there is more chance of optical aberrations in a less expensive roof because there is more chance of errors which can lead to eye strain. It is kind of like your glasses prescription being off a tiny bit.
OK, now I see your point.

I frankly don't know the answer, but I suppose that's plausible, the roofs being more critical.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 02:23   #33
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n View Post
I had the 8x32 Sightron and I didn't have a lot of love for the focus wheel. It was too hard and it had too much stiction. In my experience Nikon has the smoothest focus wheels with just the right tension and Zeiss and Canon are second. A nice smooth focus wheel is important to me. It just makes using the binocular more enjoyable if you don't have to struggle with a sticky focus wheel. I gave up on Swarovski's after having three of them with sticky focus wheels. They say the newer FP models are better but I haven't tried them yet. The worst focus wheel I had was the Swarovski Habicht 8x30. You have to have STRONG fingers to turn it I don't care what anybody says.
You just need to focus them on infinity and look at birds that are farther away.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 02:42   #34
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
You just need to focus them on infinity and look at birds that are farther away.
Or how about just getting a Bushnell Permafocus binocular. No need to focus!

https://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-Perm...focu+binocular
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 05:43   #35
Nixterdemus
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central AR
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
You just need to focus them on infinity and look at birds that are farther away.
Oy vey hey!

That's my schtik.
__________________
Celestron M2 f/5.4 100mm ED-Manfrotto 516 fluid head w/140mm sliding plate

SLV 50* 4mm-- HD-60* 4.5mm-- UWA 82* 5.5mm-- SLV 6mm-- Luminos 82* 7mm-- MWA 100* 10mm-- Luminos 15mm--TV Nagler 50* 3mm/180X - 6mm/90X Zoom
Nixterdemus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 06:51   #36
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJC View Post
"In my experience Nikon has the smoothest focus wheels."

Ah, you're just saying that because it's true!

Bill
Why can't all the manufacturers just reverse engineer Nikon's focus wheel so all binoculars have superb focus wheels?
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 09:16   #37
sbb
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Singapore
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n View Post
Why can't all the manufacturers just reverse engineer Nikon's focus wheel so all binoculars have superb focus wheels?
Totally agree mate!
sbb is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 12:44   #38
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n View Post
Why can't all the manufacturers just reverse engineer Nikon's focus wheel so all binoculars have superb focus wheels?
The Zeiss SF has a flawless focus wheel.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 13:26   #39
chill6x6
Registered User
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 832
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pileatus View Post
The Zeiss SF has a flawless focus wheel.
Maybe the black ones do, but my gray one though GOOD, not to the EDG II or Noctivid level.
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 14:17   #40
iveljay
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wiltshire, England
Posts: 801
As I get older steadiness becomes a key factor. I need something that has a c of g that roughly corresponds with the base of my thumb that provides the main support point. I have a narrowish ipd that means that porros are usually better than roofs for this reason. My fingers are strong enough for Habicht focussers, but not steady enough, compared to my arms anymore.

I have deep eye sockets and find narrower eye cups easier than the bigger kind as I can lock them against my skull.

I am long sighted so eye relief is no problem.

So what works for me in my septegenarian years for all day use at the 8x30/40 end of things are some porros. For walking, and occasionally finding something to look at, I am happy using my old FL roofs as I can hold them steady enough for short term use.

Theorerical performance doesn't count for a lot if you're not physically up to achieving it.

We are all built differently, a bit like the old cars I used to fix when young, and it does't matter how nice and shiny that new carburetor is that you just bought, sometimes the old and dodgy one just runs better.

Last edited by iveljay : Wednesday 25th October 2017 at 14:28.
iveljay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 16:32   #41
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 571
They did improve the focus wheel in the newer black Zeiss SF. I would still rank Nikon first and Zeiss and Canon a close second when it comes to focus wheels. The Nikon EDG II is how all focus wheels should be. Incredibly smooth.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 19:17   #42
Patudo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: London
Posts: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJC View Post
It certainly SHOULD NOT make it too restricted. If you are getting the overlapping circles (the figure 8) like in the movies, you’re way out of collimation, unless you're looking at a VERY close target. The movies offer such an image to show the moviegoer that someone is looking through a binocular—it’s strictly a Hollywood crutch. That view has nothing to do with what a well-adjusted bino SHOULD be offering your eyes.

Bill
Well, Bill, either all my binoculars (including a unit recently serviced by Gary Hawkins at ECBR) and my brother's less than one year old Swarovski 8.5x42 are "way out" of collimation, or I just see things differently to you. My brother's preferred IPD is a little less than mine, and he sets them up so he sees the single circle - but when I've looked through his binoculars without changing the IPD I see the overlapping circles.

I also find - more so with some binoculars than others - the ocular needs to be placed in the right spot over my left eye to achieve maximum sharpness and if I close up the barrels enough to achieve the single circle, the left barrel goes out of that ideal spot. I also feel the barrels are closer to my nose than I would like and that my eyes are having to look inwards rather than straight outwards (if that makes sense).

I don't expect anyone else to experience the same, incidentally - just relating how I perceive things. Birdforum has taught me that we truly do see the world differently.
Patudo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 19:23   #43
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n View Post
They did improve the focus wheel in the newer black Zeiss SF. I would still rank Nikon first and Zeiss and Canon a close second when it comes to focus wheels. The Nikon EDG II is how all focus wheels should be. Incredibly smooth.
Since I use two fingers to focus I prefer a tighter action. I do not like sensitive mechanisms that move at the slightest touch.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 19:28   #44
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pileatus View Post
Since I use two fingers to focus I prefer a tighter action. I do not like sensitive mechanisms that move at the slightest touch.
I HAD to use two fingers when I had the Habicht 8x30. One wasn't strong enough. I understand though. The Zeiss focus wheel tension is a little stiffer than the Nikon's or Canon's. All three are very good though.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 20:43   #45
WJC
Registered User
 
WJC's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Twin Falls
Posts: 1,640
"My brother's preferred IPD is a little less than mine, and he sets them up so he sees the single circle - but when I've looked through his binoculars without changing the IPD I see the overlapping circles."

It's only when you have adjusted for your PERSONAL IPD, and see two fields of view, that you should be concerned.

Some people fail to look at a distant target, but rather, focus inside the binocular. In doing so, you are focusing on a target or targets just inches away. When you do that, you are crossing your eyes. When you cross your eyes ...

Bill
__________________
"The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."—Dr. Stephen Hawking

Last edited by WJC : Wednesday 25th October 2017 at 20:49.
WJC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 22:03   #46
Patudo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: London
Posts: 112
Surprisingly (?) I do in fact set my binoculars for my own PERSONAL IPD - I point out the times I've looked through my brother's because he sets his slightly narrower IPD to see a single circle, but when looking through them, I don't, although the closer the barrels are, the more they should merge.

My standard targets for sighting in my binoculars are text on signboards from around 200m to over 600m away...and the most comfortable view for me is when the circles overlap. I don't see double images, but the circles do overlap, Hollywood style. I have tried bringing the barrels closer together, especially after reading that is how it should be done, but Hollywood style just seems to suit me best. Maybe it's the impression of a wider field of view that I'm liking. Shame I can't wire my eyes to YouTube to show you what I'm seeing.
Patudo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 25th October 2017, 23:53   #47
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 524
Patudo;

If you hold your binoculars out in front of you about 6" to 1', and look through them at an object at infinity, and you don't see a single circle, something is wrong.

That's just my opinion.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 26th October 2017, 00:34   #48
WJC
Registered User
 
WJC's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Twin Falls
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patudo View Post
Surprisingly (?) I do in fact set my binoculars for my own PERSONAL IPD - I point out the times I've looked through my brother's because he sets his slightly narrower IPD to see a single circle, but when looking through them, I don't, although the closer the barrels are, the more they should merge.

My standard targets for sighting in my binoculars are text on signboards from around 200m to over 600m away...and the most comfortable view for me is when the circles overlap. I don't see double images, but the circles do overlap, Hollywood style. I have tried bringing the barrels closer together, especially after reading that is how it should be done, but Hollywood style just seems to suit me best. Maybe it's the impression of a wider field of view that I'm liking. Shame I can't wire my eyes to YouTube to show you what I'm seeing.
Just keep in mind it’s only and impression. You might want to speak to an ophthalmologist about it.

Also, half the time I think I’m safe in replying via the BF program, I’ll get something almost finished when it just dis-a-bloody-pears!!! At least this time it was small.

Cheers,

Bill
__________________
"The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."—Dr. Stephen Hawking
WJC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 1st November 2017, 22:43   #49
bluespiderweb
Registered User
 
bluespiderweb's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Southeast PA near Philly
Posts: 176
No, it's not the bins, it's me

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluespiderweb View Post
Has anyone felt that the Porros promote a less tiresome or stressful view, especially for older eyes, possibly more forgiving to aging eyes?

I had not felt this way until just recently, when I had started having some problem in my one eye, due to fluid loss, and an increase in floaters. It seems once you pass 60 or so, these things occur often, and are just a part of the life cycle for some of us when age catches up with our eyes!

My preference has always been for Porros, though I have other roof prism binos that I like a lot too. Until I started to notice a difference in a much easier view from my Porros (just today), and more eye strain from my roofs in the same conditions.

Anyone else have been there with this, or am I just letting my aging, and also fatigued eyes (due to bad sleep, and allergies) dictate what seems best at this moment in binos?

Or is it possible that I just happened on a new roof bin that was not collimated well enough, that it seemed that my view was more stressful than normal, and owing to my aging eyes, I may have just attibuted it to that? I know it's hard to say for each individual, but maybe you've noticed something along the same lines as I have?
I THINK this problem was due to my fatigues eyes, and not my comparison of roofs to Porros, so let's let this go for now. I did find the more I used the Sightron BSII 10x32s, the more comfortable they were for me. I've checked since, comparing them to other bins I have, and I did not get that weird feeling that I had at first, with the BSII's. I think that the diopter was not adjusted to the optimum for my eyes, and why I felt the eyestrain in the first place. I have not experienced it again, so it should probably condsidered an error in observation from me, even if my left eye continues to be the weakest link in the chain. That is easy enough to assign to the weakest link, but try to remember it is an individual effort here that matters most to the overall good of the many.

I do not know why the live views have been sub par, though if I spend time with them and a leaning to better focusing, that usually solves things more quickly, for sure. Though sometimes there are other factors that take charge more immediately, of course, in reality, than is hard to use so well at the moment in explanation. May be just settings of the diopter and such that keep things changing and not so clear to us for the making, or our eyes and their variable nature even to our own, let alone comparing them to others.
__________________
Barry~

Ah, you know?

Last edited by bluespiderweb : Wednesday 1st November 2017 at 22:49.
bluespiderweb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 17th November 2017, 16:39   #50
bluespiderweb
Registered User
 
bluespiderweb's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Southeast PA near Philly
Posts: 176
Hey, I don't even quite know what I said in that last post, but my advice is don't try to figure it out-if I can't, then forget it! ; ) I was probably tired-that's when words and thoughts go wrong for me.

What I have learned lately is that setting the diopter well seems to make a big difference to my eyes, and they haven't been great lately-watering like allergies are making them irritated, which isn't helping my viewing of course.

I also found that under certain lighting conditions, items appear not to be as sharply focused (bright overcast) as they are in better light (partly cloudy), but using the same binoculars, so now I know it's not the binocular. But rather the lighting, and my eyes at times, and other times, the diopter settings that affect the apparent sharpness and quality of the view. And of course, IPD and eyecup settings too.

So I have learned some important things from this strange view I first experienced with a new pair of bins, and not to jump to conclusions about it until I checked all the variables I now realize contribute to this, in any bin, whether roof or Porro.

I should probably buy Bill Cook's book to learn more about binoculars in general, and some other fine points about their design and usage. I would like to know a little more about the differences in designs that affect
what we see and why. Got anything like that in the book Bill? Sounds like Chuck really enjoyed it!
__________________
Barry~

Ah, you know?
bluespiderweb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Multimedia views lmans66 Computers, Birding Software And The Internet 4 Thursday 19th February 2009 03:01
Valentine's Day, 2 views Sue Wright Birds & Birding 9 Sunday 18th February 2007 02:20
Audubon porros vs. new Ultralite porros jedku Swift 6 Tuesday 28th March 2006 01:27
Views... ralph Birds & Birding 0 Sunday 29th September 2002 19:57

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.24271894 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:57.