Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
More discoveries. NEW: Zeiss Victory SF 32

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.

New Horizons II

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Wednesday 12th February 2020, 19:11   #101
wdc
Registered User
 
wdc's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Moraga, California
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
Bill,
Before reading your post #99 I had another go at finding the tower.

From my knowledge of the area I thought it might be 800 metres away in the train marshaling yard.

So I carefully looked for shadows and found it.
The shadow is aligned with the train tracks, so wasn't seen earlier.

The distance to the tower is 820 metres.
The height may be 300ft or 250ft. Assuming the highest trees are 60ft and their shadow length. The Sun's elevation may be only 25 degrees or so.
However, now I know the distance I can accurately get the height using a spotting scope.

Although my laser rangefinder should measure to 1100 metres it assumes a good target.
The girder structure obviously didn't give a good return.

The 312m measure was probably to an intervening tree branch. I have even had distant returns from a single leaf rather than what I wanted to measure.

The lights are incredibly bright from 820 metres, but they allow train work at night.
But they should have a cut off rather than polluting the area for miles around.

Regards,
B.
Success! I admit to using Google Earth for everything from scouting and film research, to looking for spots I may want to paint, as well as just sheer visual curiosity. A pretty powerful tool that is 'free'.

Too bad about the light pollution from the tower. I saw this photo of a coincidence rangefinder that you might enjoy having installed on your roof. I think you would put it to good use!

Cheers,

Bill
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Coincidence_rangefinder,_Overloon.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	494.9 KB
ID:	718014  
wdc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 12th February 2020, 21:28   #102
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
Bill,
That is larger than my Barr and Stroud rangefinder, which is around 1.5 metres baseline or a bit bigger.
I got is at a camera fair, but it is out of alignment.
It wasn't expensive.

I would still be interested in a modern accurate new 30cm baseline rangefinder, as laser rangefinders don't always work.

Long camera lenses work up to say 100 metres just reading off the scale.

I have used triangulation to get distances, but it isn't always very accurate.

B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 01:30   #103
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,588
Zeiss Jena produced the OEM-2, a superb but costly stereo rangefinder which were available for a pittance after the collapse of the East German regime.
There is a discussion of it here:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/3...my-door/page-3

It may be hard to find now, but by all accounts it is one of the finest pieces Jena ever produced. Well worth looking for.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 08:51   #104
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 1,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
Zeiss Jena produced the OEM-2, a superb but costly stereo rangefinder which were available for a pittance after the collapse of the East German regime.
There is a discussion of it here:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/3...my-door/page-3

It may be hard to find now, but by all accounts it is one of the finest pieces Jena ever produced. Well worth looking for.
Well, a few years ago I bought a few of them on the surplus military auction and still have one
Sorry Binastro, you'll have to come over here to collect it. It weights over 50 kilo so sending will be expensive.

Jan
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Zeiss-OEM2.JPG
Views:	29
Size:	375.3 KB
ID:	718056  Click image for larger version

Name:	Zeiss-OEM2-1.JPG
Views:	23
Size:	381.6 KB
ID:	718057  Click image for larger version

Name:	Zeiss-OEM2-2.JPG
Views:	22
Size:	346.9 KB
ID:	718058  Click image for larger version

Name:	Zeiss-OEM2-3.JPG
Views:	18
Size:	268.2 KB
ID:	718059  
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 09:33   #105
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan van daalen View Post
Well, a few years ago I bought a few of them on the surplus military auction and still have one
Sorry Binastro, you'll have to come over here to collect it. It weights over 50 kilo so sending will be expensive.

Jan
That unit is serial 666 which is the number of Satan............


Lee
__________________
"You are never alone, with a sheep"
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 12:25   #106
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 1,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
That unit is serial 666 which is the number of Satan............


Lee
No no, it is Zeiss, not that other German brand
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 13:21   #107
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan van daalen View Post
No no, it is Zeiss, not that other German brand
You mean the other brand that is plastered all over your Land Rover? Or do you now have other plans to redecorate your Landie?

Lee
__________________
"You are never alone, with a sheep"
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 14:58   #108
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
Hi Jan,
What was the original price of the OEM-2?
How much would that be in today's money?

Regards,
B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 15:11   #109
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
This afternoon I took the old Kowa 20x50 spotting scope up high.

Unfortunately, it is impossible to measure the total height of the tower as the lower half is hidden by numerous trees.
I estimate the height of the tower as 160ft.
The Google earth shows a large base, maybe concrete.

I need to look at Ordnance Survey maps to get the height of the ground.
I have some old ones, actually historic, but the ground has not moved much locally.
Then I have to use the clinometer to measure the angle to the top of the tower.

I count at least 12 seriously large floodlights at the top of the tower. They give a very bright white light.
They are angled all over the place.
Some point into the sky, which must be a hazard to helicopters with their glare.
Maybe the storms have upset the angles of the lamps.

I reckon that at 20 miles the lights are still as bright as the planet Venus.

Google earth would give much more information if available as stereo pairs. Clearly this is available, but I don't know who has access to these.
But with care it is still very useful in 2D.

Regards,
B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 15:23   #110
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
Apparently submarine periscopes used anamorphic lenses to widen the horizontal field of view.

Would anamorphic lenses work in front of binoculars to seriously increase the horizontal field of view?

There were 120 degree eyepieces also on periscopes in the 1940s.

B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 17:18   #111
wdc
Registered User
 
wdc's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Moraga, California
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
This afternoon I took the old Kowa 20x50 spotting scope up high.

Unfortunately, it is impossible to measure the total height of the tower as the lower half is hidden by numerous trees.
I estimate the height of the tower as 160ft.
The Google earth shows a large base, maybe concrete.

I need to look at Ordnance Survey maps to get the height of the ground.
I have some old ones, actually historic, but the ground has not moved much locally.
Then I have to use the clinometer to measure the angle to the top of the tower.

I count at least 12 seriously large floodlights at the top of the tower. They give a very bright white light.
They are angled all over the place.
Some point into the sky, which must be a hazard to helicopters with their glare.
Maybe the storms have upset the angles of the lamps.

I reckon that at 20 miles the lights are still as bright as the planet Venus.

Google earth would give much more information if available as stereo pairs. Clearly this is available, but I don't know who has access to these.
But with care it is still very useful in 2D.

Regards,
B.
Google Earth will show you elevation above sea level wherever the cursor touches. Its at the lower right, between 'eye height' and latitude/longitude.

I did manage to catch Mercury a few times, yesterday evening. Once from a parking lot, scanning with 8x42 MHG. Naked eye was iffy, as in barely with averted vision, knowing exactly where to look. Seemed over 20 or so below Venus. Later, at home, it was surprisingly harder, as it was lower in altitude, and still in bright murk. In fact, a pair of stars in Aquarius were as easy to spot, twinkling off to the right (west). At home I used an Ultravid BR 7x42, and put the 65mm scope on it briefly. Then it was dinner time!

Cheers,
Bill
wdc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 18:36   #112
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
Thanks for the info Bill.

I saw Mercury easily this evening in exceptionally good transparency with my distance glasses with Mercury at 5 degrees above horizon and still very easily at 3.5 degrees above horizon.
With many street lights and bright house lights etc. nearby.
Mercury was white rather the the normal pink as seen in England.
There was almost no low level haze, most unusual.

I did use the 8.5x44 binocular initially, but it was super bright in that.
Only used it for seconds before switching to my distance glasses.
I probably saw it without glasses also.

There are far fewer birds now that the tree has gone over the road.
But saw Herring gulls in binocular.

Regards,
B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 20:24   #113
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 1,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
You mean the other brand that is plastered all over your Land Rover? Or do you now have other plans to redecorate your Landie?

Lee
Maybe the cut a way of a certain 32 would do?

Jan
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 20:28   #114
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 1,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
Hi Jan,
What was the original price of the OEM-2?
How much would that be in today's money?

Regards,
B.
This one was built in 1977 and the "retailprice" was 149.000,00 DM.
In todays value it would be 67.000,00 euro's.

Jan
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 13th February 2020, 21:26   #115
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
Thanks Jan.

A fair price, I think, for that type of quality optics.

B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 07:17   #116
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 1,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
Thanks Jan.

A fair price, I think, for that type of quality optics.

B.
Somewhere on the internet I saw a picture of it without the housing. It is really full with prisms and other glass.
BTW, the current price is 1% of the original.
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 08:40   #117
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan van daalen View Post
Maybe the cut a way of a certain 32 would do?

Jan
Marvellous, meraviglioso, prachtig, wunderbar!

Lee
__________________
"You are never alone, with a sheep"
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 11:28   #118
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
Jan,
If I had anywhere to put it, I would buy it at 1% of the original price.

What is the maximum listed accurate range?
What is the magnification?

I have ex gov. stuff that cost 0.1% of the original cost.
For some reason they have to get something for them, when it would be easier just to scrap them.

5 dealers bought the Ark Royal aircraft carrier.
It cost a lot just to move her.
I got 3 20inch diameter bearings, which are now used on rotating observatories.

B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 13:36   #119
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 1,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
Jan,
If I had anywhere to put it, I would buy it at 1% of the original price.

What is the maximum listed accurate range?
What is the magnification?

I have ex gov. stuff that cost 0.1% of the original cost.
For some reason they have to get something for them, when it would be easier just to scrap them.

5 dealers bought the Ark Royal aircraft carrier.
It cost a lot just to move her.
I got 3 20inch diameter bearings, which are now used on rotating observatories.

B.
B,

18 kilometers and it is a 14x50.

Regarding the ex gov. stuff it is the same here. Transport costs are by far exceeding the purchage prices.
But......the road to get it is much more interesting than the possession of it

J.
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 13:54   #120
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,880
Thanks Jan, that is a really capable Zeiss rangefinder.

It would have been nice to have the Ark Royal aircraft carrier in my back yard, but even a Land Rover Defender wouldn't be able to haul her out of the water.

I used to go the these dealers and the stuff they had was amazing.
When enormous quantities were thrown on the skip I tried to save some.
I gave a lot of optics to RAF museums. Even the curators didn't know they existed.
They have probably deteriorated now in unheated hangers.

Some of the Zeiss survey lenses are incredibly high quality.

Regards,
B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 16:12   #121
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 1,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
Thanks Jan, that is a really capable Zeiss rangefinder.

It would have been nice to have the Ark Royal aircraft carrier in my back yard, but even a Land Rover Defender wouldn't be able to haul her out of the water.

I used to go the these dealers and the stuff they had was amazing.
When enormous quantities were thrown on the skip I tried to save some.
I gave a lot of optics to RAF museums. Even the curators didn't know they existed.
They have probably deteriorated now in unheated hangers.

Some of the Zeiss survey lenses are incredibly high quality.

Regards,
B.
For a while I parked the Defender in the front entrance of the shop.
To park the Ark Royal aircraft carrier there.......
Wouldn't that be something.

J
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 16:45   #122
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan van daalen View Post
For a while I parked the Defender in the front entrance of the shop.
To park the Ark Royal aircraft carrier there.......
Wouldn't that be something.

J
Especially if was covered with a picture of a certain bino!

Lee
__________________
"You are never alone, with a sheep"
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 14th February 2020, 17:38   #123
Omid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foss View Post
Hi Omid, you made some great points, and inspired a couple counter-points: Sculpture is generally more expensive and requires floor space (cannot be hung on a wall). That may be part of the reason the scales are tilted toward painting. If 3D cinema was as evolved as 2D, folks might find it more pleasing. That said, would extra wide spacing of binocular barrels increase the 3D (modelling) affect?

I enjoy following your thread, thanks.
Jack
Hi Jack,

Thank you for your comments. Regarding sculpture vs painting, I sated my opinion but its a subject we can leave to art experts to discuss. Here's one expert's opinion:

http://www.italianrenaissanceresourc...sus-sculpture/

Regarding 3D cinema -once sufficiently refined- being preferable to 2D, I don't agree for the reasons I stated before. The issue is not technical quality of the images. It is far more fundamental. I came up with the notion of 3D film and cinema (or 3D art in general) adding little to enhance visual aesthetics on my own. Since then, I did some research and noticed that I am not alone in noticing this. Here is an excellent article on the subject:

https://www.dr-lex.be/info-stuff/3dfail.html

This author's view is in agreement with the "utilitarian nature" of stereoscopic vision I mentioned in my above post. He explains some further aspects too. For example, he argues that watching a film is a passive experience, and that is not a bad thing. People go to a cinema or sit behind their TV to relax and do absolutely nothing during 90 to 120 minutes. While looking at things in a 3D world is not a passive process, it is very active.

The notion of stereoscopic vision being important when we need to actively interact with the environment is a very deep concept. Depth perception is needed if you are a hunter (like me) or predator (like a lion). If you are a software engineer working for Google or an antelope running away from a lion, you don't need it


Sincerely,
-Omid

Last edited by Omid : Friday 14th February 2020 at 17:56.
Omid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 15th February 2020, 11:11   #124
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,842
Why We Focus Binos

I can think of two reasons why we have to change distance on which our binos are focussed.

Firstly, lets imagine our bins are luckily focussed on the middle distance and this is where the birds are. But then a new bird flies into the scene and is either beyond the current point of focus or is closer. To examine this new bird we need to adjust the focus point.

Some minutes later we are walking away from this scene and encounter a new place where the birds are at a different distance from the outset. So when we lift up our binos they are focused on the wrong distance and we need to adjust the focus.

In all these scenarios the reason for adjusting the focus is to bring the plumage and shape of the bird into sharp focus so as to identify the species and observe its behaviour.

Lee
__________________
"You are never alone, with a sheep"
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 15th February 2020, 16:48   #125
Omid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 491
Why do we need to focus binoculars?

Hi Lee,

Thank you for your explanation but that was not what I had in mind. Let me explain the question again: Human eye (when young and healthy) can focus on objects at any distance from about 20cm to infinity. In technical terms, this is called "accommodation". Having such amazing "autofocus" sensor behind the eyepiece of binoculars should eliminate the need for focusing the binoculars themselves.

Why isn't the eye's amazing accommodative power sufficient to bring objects seen through binoculars into sharp focus?

Last edited by Omid : Saturday 15th February 2020 at 16:57.
Omid 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
New horizons Omid Ruffled Feathers 0 Wednesday 10th July 2019 01:15
Sloping Horizons NoSpringChicken Photoshop, Paintshop and Printing 8 Thursday 28th August 2008 07:23

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.27791691 seconds with 40 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:29.