• 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.

Opticron High Resolution 7x42 porro (1 Viewer)

Is that an older model? I only know about the Imagic TGA WP porro in the current line-up, and the specs for that are on the Opticron website. They say 4m for that which doesn't sound too different from what I recall.

David
 
Last edited:
normjackson said:
May be referring to the HR model shown here (though not 7x42 for some reason) :
http://www.penninephoto.f9.co.uk/optic_fieldbin.htm
I expect 4-5m would be about right for minimum focusing distance. Don't recall them being waterproof though?...
Click to expand...

That's the one but in 7x42. I took delivery of them yesterday. I haven't tried them in the day time yet, only in the dark, but the close focus seems way too long. Feels like something is wrong with them. I'll try them today to get an idea of just how long it is.

I imagine the 7x42 would have the same close focus as the 8x42. They are supposedly exdemo and as good as new but something feels wrong with them. I'll let you know how I get on today.

By the way, the Pennine online Pennine page is a useful archive of Opticron info isn't it? I use it quite a bit.

Thank you both for your input.
 
Last edited:
Boogieshrew said:
Well, I've paced out the close focus distance and it's about 15 metres!!!

That can't be right can it?
Click to expand...
Nope |:S| That sounds rather, er, specialised. Maybe if it had been advertised as an aircraft reconnaissance model... And assume it doesn't have the waterproofing for a marine model.
 
normjackson said:
Nope |:S| That sounds rather, er, specialised. Maybe if it had been advertised as an aircraft reconnaissance model... And assume it doesn't have the waterproofing for a marine model.
Click to expand...

Nothing specialised about them, just general use binos and not waterproof but that's not unusual in an older model like this.

I think I'm going to send them back to the seller and tell them they need to get them serviced before they try to resell them.

Anyone got any ideas what would cause a porro bin to get a huge close focus distance?
 
Maybe disassembled and reassembled with the wrong separation of components.
I have seen this several times, not only for amateur work but also professional.
A secondhand 20 x 60 Pentax is also a mess as the field stops for the very small field of this binocular is a multi serrated edge, and I can't bear to use them with the disconcerting view.

I have also found many camera lenses that look fine secondhand but have been completely messed up by amateur disassembly.

It is amazing how bad the results can be.
I had a new 600mm f/8 Vivitar solid cat which is one of the finest resolving lenses ever made.
A secondhand one is a complete disappointment.
I think they are incredibly sensitive and must be set up perfectly and few people can do this work.
 
Sorry for harping on about waterproof but just wanted confirmation that the penninephoto description wasn't right.

Suppose they'd focus closer by moving the eyepieces further away fron the binocular body; a fair bit 'cos it's the close focus end that needs the larger movement. Do you find that they focus way further in the other direction than what you need for infinity focus?
 
Binastro,

Good point, you could be right, they may have been messed around with.

Norm,

they are very old fashioned looking and I would say no way are they waterproof. The Pennine blurb must be wrong.

I ahve been really bust all weekend so other than a quick pace out of the close focus, I haven't had a proper play around with them so I don't know what the focus is like in the other direction.

I hope to try them out better tomorrow.

I'll let you know.

normjackson said:
Sorry for harping on about waterproof but just wanted confirmation that the penninephoto description wasn't right.

Suppose they'd focus closer by moving the eyepieces further away fron the binocular body; a fair bit 'cos it's the close focus end that needs the larger movement. Do you find that they focus way further in the other direction than what you need for infinity focus?
Click to expand...
 
Don't know where you got it from but do recall folks on BF some years ago going for some cut price Bushnell Natureviews (I think they were) on a certain auction site which proved to have an issue with very long near focus. Also I when one BFer dismissed the merits of the Summit 8x26 MR model on the basis of the very long nearest close focus of a copy bought from said site I remember thinking at the time that was a poor basis.
I'm hoping Squidge's experiences here aren't too relevant to you :
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=217365
 
typo said:
Is that an older model? I only know about the Imagic TGA WP porro in the current line-up, and the specs for that are on the Opticron website. They say 4m for that which doesn't sound too different from what I recall.

David
Click to expand...

I think the HR 7x42 was the predecessor to the SRGA 7x42. The two probably shared a similar optical design.

The SRGA once had quite an extensive line-up ― 8x32, 7x42, 8x42, 10x42, 8.5x50 and 10x50, I think ― now much reduced. The 7x42 had a narrow FOV, around 6.5 deg, and long eye relief. It didn't have a very good close focus distance.
 
Last edited:
normjackson said:
Don't know where you got it from but do recall folks on BF some years ago going for some cut price Bushnell Natureviews (I think they were) on a certain auction site which proved to have an issue with very long near focus. Also I when one BFer dismissed the merits of the Summit 8x26 MR model on the basis of the very long nearest close focus of a copy bought from said site I remember thinking at the time that was a poor basis.
I'm hoping Squidge's experiences here aren't too relevant to you :
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=217365
Click to expand...

Good link Norm. Thanks. That is the same shop where I bought these bins. Hmmmmm?!
 
BrocknBrigadier,

they are quite old bins for sure so I was expecting a fairly long focus distance but these are about 45 feet.

They going back to the shop for a refund.

I don't think any amount of tinkering with screws is going to fix them I have told the shop that they should be sent to Opticron for a service before they are resold.

I have bought a pair of 7x42 FLs instead. Bit of an improvement! :)
 
Brigadier said:
I think the HR 7x42 was the predecessor to the SRGA 7x42. The two probably shared a similar optical design.

The SRGA once had quite an extensive line-up ― 8x32, 7x42, 8x42, 10x42, 8.5x50 and 10x50, I think ― now much reduced. The 7x42 had a narrow FOV, around 6.5 deg, and long eye relief. It didn't have a very good close focus distance.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I should have remembered the HR was a previous design, but I've never spotted another Opticron 7x42 porro model on offer anywhere. Seems a bit curious.

Cheers,

David
 
The HR 7x42 and SR.GA 7x42 were both last sold in 2003. The old HR is non-waterproof (and hence the current model being designated HR WP).

Other variants of the old HR were 8x42, 8x42 and 10x42.

The SR.GA was also available as a 12.5x50 and in two zoom variants - 7-18x42 and 9-22x50. Only the 8x32, 8.5x50 and 10x50 remain.

In 7x40 or 7x42 porro, there have been Minerva, Imagic (non WP) and Dioptron models in the past and the only current model is the Imagic TGA WP.

Cheers, Pete
 
pete_gamby said:
The HR 7x42 and SR.GA 7x42 were both last sold in 2003. The old HR is non-waterproof (and hence the current model being designated HR WP).

Other variants of the old HR were 8x42, 8x42 and 10x42.

The SR.GA was also available as a 12.5x50 and in two zoom variants - 7-18x42 and 9-22x50. Only the 8x32, 8.5x50 and 10x50 remain.

In 7x40 or 7x42 porro, there have been Minerva, Imagic (non WP) and Dioptron models in the past and the only current model is the Imagic TGA WP.

Cheers, Pete
Click to expand...

Hi Pete,

Thanks for the clarification. I remember that the SRGA 7x42 was highly regarded, being of similar spec and comparable optical performance to the Swarovski Habicht 7x42.

The current Imagic TGA WP 7x42 represents excellent value for money, too, and has a wider field of view.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 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.

Similar threads

B
Which Opticron binoculars focus clockwise to infinity?
Replies
11
Views
777
Bentley03
B
dwatsonbirder
Focus wheel cover
Replies
1
Views
494
dwatsonbirder
dwatsonbirder
S
Opticron ED/HD/VHD glass and coatings - very confused!
Replies
3
Views
1K
Conndomat
Conndomat
J
Help with interpreting Opticron tech data, please?
Replies
12
Views
843
ArchStanton
A
J
Minimum focus distance.
Replies
10
Views
984
John goshawk
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top