Five years of creeping madness and not once did this question occur to me. (1 Viewer)

BryanP said:

The Leica has a clean design about it too, is there any possibility of scuffing or marring the binoculars with these kinds of mounts?

Click to expand...

Hi Bryan,

Andreas (Conndomat) has already answered this but there is no risk of damage with the Leica mount. The right barrel rests in two plastic "V"s 10 mm thick and the left barrel rests on a neoprene pad.

Some suggest that platform mounts are less stable than hinge mounts, but I think the reverse is true. For testing purposes I have used a 3x booster behind a 15x56 (Conquest and SLC) on the Leica mount with no stability problems. There is a similar adapter from Swarovski for the ELs, which is somewhat more expensive.

An example of a failed (clamping) hinge mount is that provided by Nikon for the WX, probably the best hand-holdable binocular ever made. At Photokina last year Nikon had a tripod-mounted WX on a raised wooden floor and when I stepped onto it (I'm average weight) the binocular was visibly oscillating! Just another case of good optics and abyssmal factory accessories.

John

PS:- Enjoy your SFs.

Troubador said:

I definitely would not modify an SF in this way. Not only is the objective hinge designed only to link the two optical tubes, SF's weight distribution puts the major proportion of it nearer the eyepieces and SF is quite long, giving this weight a lot of leverage against the objective hinge. From an engineering point of view suspending an SF from the objective hinge gives me nightmares.

Click to expand...

Hi,

this image made me cringe too - even if it will not break, the majority of mass on a fairly long lever will be prone to oscillation.

I certainly would prefer the Berlebach option (shown by Andreas) or a DIY version of that.

PS: Enjoy your SF, Bryan!

Joachim

Lee,
Nightmares indeed or at least bad dreams and I'm inclined to agree. As mentioned the SF's forward (objective) hinge looks perfectly engineered for its purpose. If it were designed to handle the twisting and wracking stresses of a single point adapter as well I suspect it would look very different. I also think Zeiss probably takes a very dim view of this kind of modification.
As is well known a binocular has to be able to handle a bumpy life without failing. If an SF with the Outdoorsman mounting system just sat there on a tripod and was never touched or subjected to ordinary rough and tumble handling then I suspect it may be ok but then, who wants a museum piece.



Gijs van Ginkel
No worries, as is becoming evident in this thread it may exist but as to its real world use...


John/Tringa45
Thanks both to you and Andreas for answering my question.
Don't get me started on Nikon or their abysmal record for designing adequate ancillary equipment. Witness the collar and mounts on any of their big telephotos and zooms lenses. Its why Really Right Stuff, Kirk and all the other manufacturers exist, to make up for Nikons horrible engineering. Its almost as if they design a brilliantly engineered product, camera, lense binocular, what have you then hand the designing of mounts etc over to the summer marketing interns. Its just one of the many reasons Nikon and I broke up years ago, we still hardly talk to each other at family gatherings, thanksgiving and such.
To be fair to Nikon if the WX and its tripod you encountered at Photokina was standing on a temporary platform or riser it probably wasn't helping, they can be pretty wiggly.
Oops! Too late, looks like I got started.


For fun I've been staring at the ring system Zeiss has for the Conquests and tried to imagine something similar for the SF. Maybe if the Manfrotto Super Grip and the Zeiss Conquest ring system adapter got married and had a baby. A more refined baby with a single purpose would be possible. The grab ring would then be able to attach to or have a Arca Swiss plate at the CoG of the binocular.
In the case of the SF It would have to grab one of the tubes between the objective and ocular hinges as there is not enough tube forward of the objective hinge to grip.
Oh hell, I've included a quick and dirty drawing that explains it better, picture and a thousand words and all.
In any case it might be worth getting to know Shaper3d software for the iPad Pro and test a few 3D printed versions, put my money where my mouth is, that sort of thing.

So it seems when it comes to tripod mounts the Berlebach and Leica tray style systems are probably the way to go. Unless I try whipping up my own homemade versions (just for fun) it looks like B&H or whoever is going to get more cash from me soon.

What else can I geek out on? Bino cases? How are folks packing their SF's? Is the case that comes with it ok or are their better alternatives out there for the SF? I've only ever just chucked my bins in my backpack or suitcase and never in its own bag, that may change now that I've had to sell off a fair few goats to get the SF.

Cheers,
Bryan

Bryan

There have been grumbles about the SF case on here but I have been slipping SFs into these cases (and even posted pics to show how) for years now, complete with neckstrap and rainguard but without objective covers which I never use. The case is used for the binos while travelling by car from home to a nature site or holiday destination. Once there the binos come out of their case and don't return until its time to go home. I find the semi-hard case for SF attractive and practical but bino cases will never please everybody. Some want room for a notebook and cleaning materials, others don't and I think some would like to squeeze a sandwich in there too! Swaro has suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous complaints about EL cases, first they are too big then too small and it is probably this that led to the variety of choices Swaro offers today.


Lee

Well, news flash,
Just got this email from Joe Mannino at The Outdoorsman. To me it reads like Zeiss and Swarovski signed off on this idea, at least according to Outdoorsman. What were they thinking?
If this is true I can only think that both companies are confident that there won't be many warranty claims.
However, I'm guessing basic engineering principles like cantilever loads apply even to such mighty companies as Zeiss and Swarovski.


"Hello Bryan,
Thank you for reaching out to us!
Our stud installation on SF binoculars is a proprietary process developed by our machine shop with Swarovski and Zeiss. The installation needs to be done by us in order to maintain the warranty on your optic.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Thank you and have a great day!"
Joe Mannino



Even if I was all over this (which I'm not) I wouldn't go for it since once I have my SF's in my hot little hands I'm not letting them out of my sight.
Besides this (see photo) is now becoming a thing. So next step is to learn Shaper3D and design the adapter and start printing cheap iterations till I get it right. Then fire the file off to a machine shop and get it built.
Building this will be way more fun than sending my precious off to some strange man its never met in Arizona
Cheers,
Bryan

BryanP said:

Besides this (see photo) is now becoming a thing. So next step is to learn Shaper3D and design the adapter and start printing cheap iterations till I get it right. Then fire the file off to a machine shop and get it built.

Click to expand...

Great idea - please don't forget to put the sources on thingiverse when you're done and link it somewhere here ;-)

Joachim

jring said:

Great idea - please don't forget to put the sources on thingiverse when you're done and link it somewhere here ;-)

Joachim

Click to expand...

Yup,
it seems like the universe is trying to tell me I need a hobby as relief from my hobby of bird watching. Its funny how these things happen. If It does I'll upload the file to Thingverse and here of course.

Also, as a side note I wonder if anyone has ever had Outdoorsman modify their SF and what they think of it.

Cheers,
Bryan

Bryan, back to your original post, most 8x42 binoculars do not need mounting, and especially
the Zeiss Victory SF, with its great balance and ergos, as in steady viewing.

I can tell you like gadgets, so good for you. Let us know how you proceed in your quest.

Jerry

Lee,
Thanks for the insight and thoughts, I'll keep an open mind and give the included case a fair try.

NDhunter,
I agree, one reason I'm having fun over the whole idea of a tripod mount is I thought I might do a bit of stargazing now and then. I don't want to make it a hobby and there is better kit out there for that pastime but I figure the SF is better than nothing.
Yup, you're right about me and gadgets providing they do what they're designed to do and don't get in the way of essentials.



Regarding my off the cuff idea of designing a tripod adapter specific to the SF. When It sank in that I'd publicly shot my mouth off about cooking up a design I figured I'd better actually look into Shapr3D.
It turns out to be very intuitive and between me just messing about and a few helpful video tutorials this afternoon I managed to whip up version 1.0 of the adapter (see photos). Being version 1.0 it's very crude of course and certainly has a lot of fixing and refining in its future.
Thoughts, ideas and observations are only going to make the finished project better so please fire away.


I'm thinking I'll do several types. One without the pedestal or post between the unit itself and the Arca-Swiss base. This model will also omit the horizontal tray or plate to support the binocular tube that isn't being clamped. My theme for this particular design is “how compact and un-intrusive can I make it”
Anyway, its the kind of fun little project that allows me to just pick up where I left off for 5 minutes or 5 hours.. Time will tell how it turns out.
Cheers,
Bryan.

Tringa45 said:

Bryan,

Just a few points:

1) Agree that the Zeiss Binofix is an awkward expensive contraption.

2) Don't like the idea of modifying the binocular for a pin type mount or putting a bending load on the hinge. The only advantage is that you can adjust IPD while the bin is mounted.

3) Go along with NDhunter that a platform mount is the most practical. The Berlebach is cheap and would accept just about any roof or Porro prism bin.

I have used the Leica bino adapter for many years and have an Arca-Swiss plate attached so that it can be mounted on a monopod or tripod. Any roof bin from 32 mm upwards can be mounted and for a test it even took the very bulky 15x56 Conquest.

If you are going to use a monopod, the Sirui L-10 tilt head is ideal and is also Arca-Swiss compatible.

John

Click to expand...

Bryan, just to add a vote of confidence in the Leica solution. I bought Leica tripod adapter 42220 not very long ago and can comfortably fit on it some different sized binoculars ranging from 8x32 UVHD to big 8x56 FL. I have no experience of other kit for this purpose but this hasn't let me down yet.

Edit: I should add that the contact between the V-shaped cradles and the binoculars doesn't seem to create marks or disfigurement on the bins. Also as another poster has already said, there is a pad to keep the contact cosy.

Tom

Hi SeldomPerched

I'm glad to hear your positive experiences with the Leica mount. When your post appeared I happened to be looking at that very mount on the B&H website. It does look useful and I'll probably be going that route. A few minor concerns with these kind of mounts for me is the size and it snagging things when stowed in the bag. Having said that if those are the only nits then I'm good to go with the Leica kit.


I'm still thinking of and sketching alternative mount systems. This kind of designing is a lot of fun and I've discovered 3D modelling software is cool so theres that.

My current design brief is thus,
if a mount is small, unobtrusive and doesn't interfere with the handheld functionality of the binocular its more likely that it could be left on the binocular. One could then utilize an Arca Swiss quick release base which would allow removing the binocular from the tripod with little fuss which then allows a camera to be be slapped on the tripod.
This means not having to first take the binocular off the tray mount, then take the tray mount off the tripod, then put that mount in a pocket, and then finally mount the camera. Anyone who has tried to quickly change multiple lenses while on a muddy trail will understand the thinking.
These use case scenarios are fun to think about and certainly are an interesting design problem but like WackaMole solving one design requirement will often mean other design problems pop up elsewhere.

I'm including a photo of one such design with its attendant WackaMole gremlin. In this case I can see the need to get the vertical component much narrower. This particular iteration is intended to slip between the two binocular tubes instead of outside of one tube like the Manfrotto quick grip. This design choice may help move the CG to the correct place and with less lever arm. It also would be less intrusive without a contraption hanging off and outside one tube when hand viewing. In a pinch it could still be mounted like the Manfrotto if ones ipd required that both tubes be close.

I'm the first to admit that in many ways my original design brief is built on shaky ground. It points to a single and limited use of needing to get multiple devices one has in the field on and off a tripod quickly. Honestly, how often does one need to do that? Happily as this is not a commercial venture and as I'm only trying to please myself by scratching this design itch I'll carry on.
In the mean time the Leica mount looks like a great solution.

Cheers,
Bryan

BryanP said:

A few minor concerns with these kind of mounts for me is the size and it snagging things when stowed in the bag.

Click to expand...

Bryan,

It takes two or three seconds to secure the binocular to the Leica adapter, probably quicker than mounting the adapter on the monopod/tripod.
Total thickness of adapter plus Arca-Swiss plate is 37 mm.

John