• 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.

Ergonomics (1 Viewer)

hinnark

Well-known member
In this forum of binoculars we discussed about optics and brands so many times that one could think ergonomics are only a side issue for birdwatchers. On the other hand I think most of us know by practical experience about its importance.
One main property of a product that was designed by engineers with ergonomics in mind is its capacity to adapt to the user’s need. Well known elements of ergonomics at binoculars are the adapt ion mechanisms for focus, IPD and dioptre. These features come with binoculars for many decades now. One of the last innovations in respect of ergonomics introduced some years ago are twistable eyecups that allow the user to adjust the needed position for his eyes behind the eyepieces.

But now, is this the end of the story? No further development in ergonomics of binoculars needed? I don’t think so. Which improvements in respect of ergonomics would you like to see with binoculars in the future?

Steve
 
Great question! So much attention is placed on resolution that we often overlook the importance of ergonomics (and other things, like field of view). For me focusing is really important, partly because I have a repetitive strain injury that make it difficult for me to deal with focusing problems. But focusing is also an aesthetic issue for me. It is a great pleasure to use a binocular or spotting scope with a silky smooth focusing mechanism. I've always been curious about why it seems so hard for manufacturers so get the focusing right. I use microscopes for my work, and have never had a problem with rough focusing or too much play in the mechanism, yet these are common problems with binoculars and spotting scopes. Why is that? What is it about binocular and scope design that makes it hard to get good focusing mechanisms? My old Zeiss 10x40 BGAT have at least 5mm of play in the focus knob. I've used Leica trinovids that have had even more. I tried 3 pairs of Leica Ultravids and would have bought a pair on the spot if it wasn't for the rough and stuttering focus mechanism. Interestingly, most of the inexpensive binoculars I have used have very smooth focusing mechanisms, so I suspect it has something to do with roof prism binocular design and waterproofing, but I don't know enough to sort it all out. I'd love to hear an explanation of the difficulties from an engineering standpoint. I think Leica and Swarovski have come the closest to perfecting the other aspects of ergonomics for me, but focusing mechanisms are still an issue that needs work.

Bruce
 
Not much to improve beyond new materials and sales gimmicks I don't think.

As Tero suggests, it is surprising how quickly it is to become accustomed to any of a wide range of shapes and grips. Whithin reason whichever I use continuously very quickly feels "right".
 

Thanks, Steve,

I'm very glad you opened a new thread on this underestimated subject.
I think there can be a lot of improvement though I must emphasize I have a personal, subjective, point of view.
For beginnings, I wear specs. This handicap is a real set-back for me, although with twist-up eyecups and good eye relief I can see the whole FOV.
That's a good improvement on ergonomics, as my former bins gave me tunnel views.
The handicap really kicks in when it's raining or snowing. Two more glass surfaces to wipe. I have to wear a cap to keep a clear view, but can't reach the focus wheel under the brim. I tried several hats with flexible brims but these were useless with strong face winds.
I tried contact lenses for a while, but got eye damage and went back to glasses. Eye laser surgery is not for me, either.

So... I would be glad with a bino with two focus wheels on both sides of the hinge, to be able to focus when wearing a cap. I know there are some models with an off-set focus wheel, but I found the balance to be lousy.

As I mentioned on an earlier thread, the Optolyth Royal models have dual focus. Still haven't been able to find one where I live, I know of no shops that have them in store. I will probably have to go to Germany to try a pair...

Dual focus would be a major improvement for those birders that have to rely on specs to enjoy birding in adverse weather.

Stray light is equally annoying with specs. Simple shell-shaped eyecups can be purchased but these are useless when wearing specs. Why not invent eyecups for all birders to clear this problem? It's simply a matter of making a mould or two for different sized spectacles. For the moment I use my hand to keep out the light that comes in from the side, goodbye nice balance, shaky shaky views.

Another thing that bothers me is that there is no tripod attachment point on my Rolls Royce bins. I know the Zeiss 20x60 Classic IS has this, on the underside. Body shape is different from other, more conventional Zeiss models due to the IS technology, but hasn't it occurred to the engineers this body shape can also be applied in a normal binocular? The IPD setting is done by moving the ocular tubes in or out. Or is it impossible to get a submersible waterproof binocular this way? I really have no idea on this.
Anyways, the old model Swift Audubon 8,5x44 porro did have a tripod attachment on the right place, i.e. underneath.

I think I'll make some drawings of a PUEB ( Personal Ultra Ergonomic Binocular ) .....

Greetings, Ronald
 
Thanks, Steve,
Stray light is equally annoying with specs. Simple shell-shaped eyecups can be purchased but these are useless when wearing specs. Why not invent eyecups for all birders to clear this problem? It's simply a matter of making a mould or two for different sized spectacles. For the moment I use my hand to keep out the light that comes in from the side, goodbye nice balance, shaky shaky views.

Ronald,

some snow goggles have removable light shields made of e.g. leather like this:
http://images.google.de/imgres?imgu...le&start=105&ndsp=21&svnum=10&um=1&hl=de&sa=N
Maybe you can ask some optician for help?
As for the IPD settings: It is possible to make twistable eyepieces waterproof like for example the Fujinon Technostabis. But these binoculars need additional prisms (rhomboid type).
You can find Optolyth optics in Germany mostly in hunting stores. There´s a dealer register at http://www.optolyth.de/ but I would make sure by call before visiting if they have the model available you are interested in.

Steve
 
Last edited:
Ronald,

some snow goggles have removable light shields made of e.g. leather like this:
http://images.google.de/imgres?imgu...le&start=105&ndsp=21&svnum=10&um=1&hl=de&sa=N
Maybe you can ask some optician for help?
As for the IPD settings: It is possible to make twistable eyepieces waterproof like for example the Fujinon Technostabis. But these binoculars need additional prisms (rhomboid type).
You can find Optolyth optics in Germany mostly in hunting stores. There´s a dealer register at http://www.optolyth.de/ but I would make sure by call before visiting if they have the model available you are interested in.

Steve

Hey Steve, thanks!

Very nice suggestions; especially the removable light shields on the gletscherbrille. I'll print it out and will ask around whether these are available.
Come to think of it, maybe outdoor shops have these things for mountain climbers or Antarctica travellers. Good one!

Yeah, the Fujinon Technostabi has a waterproof construction, I forgot that even though I knew they existed. The idea is to make a tripod attachment socket on the bottom of the bins, and for that you have to have a flat surface of some sort. Hence my suggestion for this type of body shape.

Optolyth dealer for the Netherlands is in Brugge ( Bruges ), Belgium. I knew that from their website, but thanks for reminding me. I'll call them, or send Optolyth Germany a mail for more information on dealer stores in Holland. I'm sure there must be hunting stores here that have them in stock.
I tried an Optolyth Royal 7x42 about 22 years ago; very good balance on both focus wheels, very smooth, a joy to hold. Optics didn't impress me much so I returned them after two weeks for a pair of Swift Audubon new model 8,5x44 porro. Optics on these were better, but ergonomics much worse; I could not get used to them and sold them.
Perhaps it's time I gave Optolyths a second chance, since none of the top end manufacturers find it necessary to do dual focussing on their models ( I know, Swaro 8x30 SLC, yes, yes, but 1 focus wheel and lousy balance because the objectives are way too short to hold them nicely ). I once bought a pair, but gave them away after a couple of years to our RSPB for their programme to provide wildlife rangers worldwide with decent
second-hand bins. Must be somewhere in Africa now.

Greetings, Ronald
 
I have to wear a cap to keep a clear view, but can't reach the focus wheel under the brim. I tried several hats with flexible brims but these were useless with strong face winds.

Ronald,

My Nikon EII porros can be focussed using the thumb from below so no interference from peak of cap. If you have roofs this may not be possible but can't you just turn them upside down and focus with your thumb?

Graham
 
Ronald,

If you have roofs this may not be possible but can't you just turn them upside down and focus with your thumb?

Graham

Hi Graham,

Yes, I have roofs.

I immediately tried this and it actually works. Wow.
Only thing is the strap, if I wear the bins in the normal way and rotate them, it's across my face holding the bins upside down. Not much of a nuisance, but it takes a second or two to get it out of the way.
I could WEAR the bins in the upside-down style, but the eyelets of the bins are placed awkwardly for this position, making the bins to stand out with the objectives off my chest.

This gave me another thought of improved ergonomics for the manufacturers to notice: forget the dual focus knobs, no need for that; just add two more attachment points for the strap on the bins, so you get FOUR eyelets, two on each side of the bins, on the same level, and you can choose to wear your bins in a normal or upside-down manner. They will hang vertically in any position then. Making this so should not be very demanding, as it would be part of the housing and not of the optical system.

Am I making sense?


I'll add this ergonomic novelty to my drawings of my PUEB, hope to get them on this thread soon.

Thank you for your suggestion, it really makes the mind work. Great thread, this.

Greetings, Ronald
 
Ronald,

My Nikon EII porros can be focussed using the thumb from below so no interference from peak of cap. If you have roofs this may not be possible but can't you just turn them upside down and focus with your thumb?

Graham

I have not tried this yet and my diopter setting is zero. Wonder how it will work for those with pretty severe diopter settings?

Ron
 
I have not tried this yet and my diopter setting is zero. Wonder how it will work for those with pretty severe diopter settings?

Ron

I suppose if the diopter setting is plus-something in normal use, it can be set to minus-something in upside-down use, or vice-versa.
But on the other hand, most spectacle-wearers will prefer the zero-position as the specs themselves will deal with the diopter problem?
For myself, I experimented a bit and now have found a diopter setting slightly off the zero-position in the minus. I suffer from a lazy right eye and the FL's panoramic FOV makes my eyes want to wander off merrily in opposite directions if I don't pay attention and call them back immediately. Even with specs this cannot be corrected sufficiently, so my new-found diopter setting solves the problem for now.

Oh, and on ergonomics: I do have attached a strap once more ( having used the bins strapless for a while was nice but stashed away in the case they were not readily available, so abandoned that ), but I still use the case on my belt to rest the bins in when I have them around my neck; this solves the weight problem.

Greetings, Ronald
 
It would seem to me that ergonomics and user anatomy are a moving target -- one's eye relief, IPD, hand size and face shape (etc., etc) are all going to affect the immediate relevance of a given manufacturer's ergonomic imperative.

Easy to grip? For who" Good balance? Again, for who?

Perhaps in addition to various configurations (8vs10 x 32vs42, etc), binocular makers should now consider "small face, larger face, big hands, small hands -- well, you get the idea.

We've all got a great crop of existing choices. Additional "improvements" might merely add to sales hype and more cost. When's the last time you missed a bird ID because of bad ergonomics?
 
We've all got a great crop of existing choices. Additional "improvements" might merely add to sales hype and more cost. When's the last time you missed a bird ID because of bad ergonomics?

Robert,

well, with that reasoning, let me say made in 1920, we would still have bins like those of this time, wouldn´t we? ;) Please, give improvement (not sales hype) a chance!

For myself I have to say that I like bins that fit perfectly in my hands giving more joy in birdwatching. So here comes another idea with ergonomics in mind: gloves to the bins... A manufactorer could provide for example 3 different jackets of different size and shape for one and the same model. A kind of armoring as modules. That enables the user of the bins to choose the best fitting armoring jacket. The jacket system could be made in the way that enables the user to exchange it by himself. I can´t imagine that this would justify such a price increase.

Come on guys, more ideas desired.

Steve
 
Last edited:
...
Come on guys, more ideas desired.

Steve

From my perspective, any innovation that supports the user's needs would qualify. One that I've thought of now and then is the prospect that the eye-instrument coupling, or bio-coupling, might be enhanced to allow auto focusing (AF) based on the reflected image from the retinal surface. In general, this is similar to image stabilization (IS), and in fact AF might even be coupled with it. Bio-sensor technology and algorithm development would be needed in addition to fast auto-focusing mechanisms with reasonable power demands.

Ed
 
I think autofocusing will never work, I have a hard time with cameras that do it. At least you want to have an easy manual override.
 
Typical nay-sayer reaction, it "...will never work." But, then, if you can't use an autofocus camera you may need extra attention. How's it working out with automatic transmissions? |:D|
 
Last edited:
For myself I have to say that I like bins that fit perfectly in my hands giving more joy in birdwatching. So here comes another idea with ergonomics in mind: gloves to the bins... A manufactorer could provide for example 3 different jackets of different size and shape for one and the same model. A kind of armoring as modules. That enables the user of the bins to choose the best fitting armoring jacket. The jacket system could be made in the way that enables the user to exchange it by himself. I can´t imagine that this would justify such a price increase.

Come on guys, more ideas desired.

Steve

Hi Steve,

It took some time, but I've incorporated your gloves-idea in my PUEB - concepts. See the attached thumbnail for an idea of a leather glove like the ones already being used on larger photocameras.

I will post further thumbnails of my PUEB on this thread, and explain things where necessary.

Greetings, Ronald
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    41.2 KB · Views: 195
Warning! This thread is more than 16 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