Also known as ProStaff WP.
5 degrees.
Waterproof.
360g.
Bright sunshine 8.30 a.m.
New Nikon 10x25 compared to as new 10x25 Trinovid and c.1980? very heavily used Docter 10x25.
Also Hyades large star cluster, ideal for binoculars.
Full moon.
Regulus bright white star 3 a.m.
Nikon right barrel nice star image. Left barrel one sided flare probably due to collimation, which is O.K.
On Moon the right barrel seems to be sharper than the left.
No CA seen on axis. Small amount CA near edge. Also used kitchen neon tube.
Some AMD near edge, but distortion free eyepieces.
Edge performance good although Trinovid better.
Assuming Trinovid night transmission is 85%. Nikon 77%, Docter 62%.
However, Docter is constantly in use and eyepieces had grease, particularly left barrel as 2mm shorter replacement eyecup. I suppose when cleaned Doctor might gain 5% transmission.
Magpie at 120m walking along roof Nikon bright black and white. Docter off white or dirty white considerably dimmer image than Nikon.
Two crows 124m. One on left chimney pot black. One on right had whitish streaks on flank.
Despite the Docter being dimmer, it was by far the best at seeing the whitish streaks. This is probably because the Docter is much steadier than the Nikon or Trinovid.
The Docter eyecups fit comfortably in my eye sockets. The eye relief is too much on the Trinovid and a bit much on the Nikon.
The finest resolution is best in the Docter, next the Nikon, last the Trinovid.
This is because of handling, balance and steadiness.
So strange results.
Despite the dim view in the Docter, for me it is the most usable, with the Nikon next and the Trinovid last.
I don't use glasses with binoculars.
The Nikon is probably the least robust of the three.
The Nikon is good for the price.
Regards,
B.
5 degrees.
Waterproof.
360g.
Bright sunshine 8.30 a.m.
New Nikon 10x25 compared to as new 10x25 Trinovid and c.1980? very heavily used Docter 10x25.
Also Hyades large star cluster, ideal for binoculars.
Full moon.
Regulus bright white star 3 a.m.
Nikon right barrel nice star image. Left barrel one sided flare probably due to collimation, which is O.K.
On Moon the right barrel seems to be sharper than the left.
No CA seen on axis. Small amount CA near edge. Also used kitchen neon tube.
Some AMD near edge, but distortion free eyepieces.
Edge performance good although Trinovid better.
Assuming Trinovid night transmission is 85%. Nikon 77%, Docter 62%.
However, Docter is constantly in use and eyepieces had grease, particularly left barrel as 2mm shorter replacement eyecup. I suppose when cleaned Doctor might gain 5% transmission.
Magpie at 120m walking along roof Nikon bright black and white. Docter off white or dirty white considerably dimmer image than Nikon.
Two crows 124m. One on left chimney pot black. One on right had whitish streaks on flank.
Despite the Docter being dimmer, it was by far the best at seeing the whitish streaks. This is probably because the Docter is much steadier than the Nikon or Trinovid.
The Docter eyecups fit comfortably in my eye sockets. The eye relief is too much on the Trinovid and a bit much on the Nikon.
The finest resolution is best in the Docter, next the Nikon, last the Trinovid.
This is because of handling, balance and steadiness.
So strange results.
Despite the dim view in the Docter, for me it is the most usable, with the Nikon next and the Trinovid last.
I don't use glasses with binoculars.
The Nikon is probably the least robust of the three.
The Nikon is good for the price.
Regards,
B.
