-
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.
Vintage Binoculars (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter LPT
- Start date
Another nice charity shop buy, yashika 7x35 porro
I was going to let this Japanese 7x35 go as it had double vision when I looked through it, but it was mint otherwise, clean inside, glass unmarked, only £10, so I thought I might be able to re-align it. When I got home, I tried the same trick that worked on the Ross, swapped the objective barrels over, and would you believe it, it worked again, collimation spot on. Last year that trick only worked for me once but that is 3 times on the trot that it has worked now. Anyway, nice sharp little glass, I tried it out in the low evening light just now and it was really quite good.
I thought I found a real bargain, there was a Viking roof, 8x42, I think Navigator? It was marked £15, I had a look, nice condition, all lenses unmarked, thought, wow, then I noticed the hinge was a little on the loose side, I looked through it and found that the left side would not focus, no movement at all. Someone had obviously had a go at trying to fix it.
Oh well, nearly a great find, that's the problem with these new waterproof, nitrogen filled bins, you cant fix them like you can a porro, it's always a factory job and then it costs as much as you would pay for a working one, which means one little internal problem and an otherwise perfect binocular is basically scrap.
I was going to let this Japanese 7x35 go as it had double vision when I looked through it, but it was mint otherwise, clean inside, glass unmarked, only £10, so I thought I might be able to re-align it. When I got home, I tried the same trick that worked on the Ross, swapped the objective barrels over, and would you believe it, it worked again, collimation spot on. Last year that trick only worked for me once but that is 3 times on the trot that it has worked now. Anyway, nice sharp little glass, I tried it out in the low evening light just now and it was really quite good.
I thought I found a real bargain, there was a Viking roof, 8x42, I think Navigator? It was marked £15, I had a look, nice condition, all lenses unmarked, thought, wow, then I noticed the hinge was a little on the loose side, I looked through it and found that the left side would not focus, no movement at all. Someone had obviously had a go at trying to fix it.
Oh well, nearly a great find, that's the problem with these new waterproof, nitrogen filled bins, you cant fix them like you can a porro, it's always a factory job and then it costs as much as you would pay for a working one, which means one little internal problem and an otherwise perfect binocular is basically scrap.
Attachments
Swapping the objective barrels worked for me too. About 15 or 20 years ago I was trout fishing on the Upper Delaware river and when I stopped I went to my favorite watering hole B 
in nearby Callicoon, NY. The proprietor showed me his Pentax 16 x 50 that he used for deer hunting! He had loaned it to his brother and when he got it back it was out of alignment. I looked it over; the objective tubes did not look quite right so I switched them and the problem went away.
I got a free Guiness for my effort.:t:
Bob
in nearby Callicoon, NY. The proprietor showed me his Pentax 16 x 50 that he used for deer hunting! He had loaned it to his brother and when he got it back it was out of alignment. I looked it over; the objective tubes did not look quite right so I switched them and the problem went away. I got a free Guiness for my effort.:t:
Bob
Nice Hilkinson Warwick 9x35
Bob,
Couldn't stop thinking of Guinness after reading your post, had to have a couple that very night.
Got this old Hilkinson Warwick 9x35 this week, in really good condition, no marks, glass is perfect coatings unmarked, I will post in my "looks" thread too, as I bought it because I thought it a really nice looking binocular, it is quite nice to use too, clear, sharp, wide FOV, just a tad on the dark side.
I like it, but will have to start selling some off, running out of room.
Bob,
Couldn't stop thinking of Guinness after reading your post, had to have a couple that very night.
Got this old Hilkinson Warwick 9x35 this week, in really good condition, no marks, glass is perfect coatings unmarked, I will post in my "looks" thread too, as I bought it because I thought it a really nice looking binocular, it is quite nice to use too, clear, sharp, wide FOV, just a tad on the dark side.
I like it, but will have to start selling some off, running out of room.
Attachments
Last edited:
Interesting...I have those Bushnells and some Taylors at 525ft/10degrees.
I prefer them to the 11-degree binocs because the contrast is a lot stronger.
The extra stray light in the 11-degree seems like trouble.
I haven't tried a front black sleeve on the 525's yet....that might be
very clear indeed. The Rangemasters have the focuser and the coatings
of the Bushnell Custom line. They also have an oddly wide placement of objectives...maybe that contributes to the 3D.
The other Bushnell cutoms with those eyepieces were promoted as "low wink"
to showcase that extremely wide sweet-spot (for eye placement). I don't see much
low-wink these days!
The 10-degrees binocs I call "stubbies": they are about the
profile of an 8x30. Easy to haul around. Most are fully coated and have
very tight focusers. The Rangermaster is a bit special in that regard..
...those thick-metal-slab focus arms.
Last edited:
Hi Binastro,
It feels weighty, and solidly built, but actually weighs exactly 600g, it is quite squat, only 4ins from front of Objective to back of the eye cup, and 6 1/2ins wide.
Used it in the garden this morning and it was quite good on a bright day.
Oh dear, that's exactly what I was afraid of.
I was thinking about using two cheap pointer lasers and some fixturing.
First shot was with objectives on...it's way too 'reactive' to placement.
I'm thinking...put the lasers at the right spacing 20 ft away, swap the
binoculars into the flow, no lenses. Live feedback. Of course, the real
problem then is...how to nudge the prisms. Maybe clamp the binocs
and use long rods to lever things.
I can do an awesome salvage on bumped binoculars with seperate L-R
focusers. Pull the pin, and voila, two monoculars. Alignment only has to be
approximate then. There are a few nice binocs in that era. Coatings not
always great, but the resolution can be impressive. I suspect hand-figuring
and slightly parabolic surfaces are what makes the image so crisp. A felt
hood on the front cuts glare, in lieu of coating. (they are all coated up front
but not all fully coated)
I have separated single-focus binocs as well. I can make a "trombone"
focuser with wall-anchors, 1/4-20 bolts and nuts, using the hinge mounts.
It's a little wobbly though. I need to make some precision parts. If I sliced
one of the hinge-mounts I could install a real focus wheel.
It's a lot of fun with the monster field-width binocs. Really surprises people.
I think I've found a gem in the rough for old 10x50 binoculars.
The Selsi Lightweight 10x50 wide angles (7 degree) have beat 3 other 10x50s
in head-to-head window challenges for overcast, sunlight, and dusk.
Extremely sharp and deep contrast, very little barrel distortion.
I don't generally use 10x50s, but (relatively) light weight and length cut way down
on the shaking compared to other old 10x50s.
Something to keep an eye out for. They seem a bit more rugged then some other
Selsis. No alignment problems. The Selsi chassis generally has a solid focuser but later units
get get their prisms bumped in shipping at times on the 7x35s.
The Selsi Lightweight 10x50 wide angles (7 degree) have beat 3 other 10x50s
in head-to-head window challenges for overcast, sunlight, and dusk.
Extremely sharp and deep contrast, very little barrel distortion.
I don't generally use 10x50s, but (relatively) light weight and length cut way down
on the shaking compared to other old 10x50s.
Something to keep an eye out for. They seem a bit more rugged then some other
Selsis. No alignment problems. The Selsi chassis generally has a solid focuser but later units
get get their prisms bumped in shipping at times on the 7x35s.
Thanks, I will look out for these, though this is not one I have seen often in the UK, or maybe I just have not noticed them before.
Couple of cheapies
I picked up these 2 inexpensive bins this week.
The Greenkat Japanese made 8x30 is in mint condition, it was so cheap I actually bought it for the padded case for another bin of mine, but the binocular is much better than I expected. Rubber armour and eye cups, fully coated optics, unblemished lens with a green tint to the objectives, clean inside, not a mark on it, it gives a nice clear, pretty sharp wide angle view of 446ft@1000yds. Good color rendition, pretty neutral I would say, no tint or warmness. It's not bad at all.
The Japanese made 8x40 Commodore is in nice condition, it has an impressive wide angle 472ft@1000yds FOV, but seems not quite as sharp as my other Japanese made 8x40s, in fairness, I think it might be just a fraction out of alignment so may be better when checked and adjusted. I think these were a budget binocular, but its quite heavy and solid, built much like my Swift Saratoga, but not any where near as optically good as that.
I picked up these 2 inexpensive bins this week.
The Greenkat Japanese made 8x30 is in mint condition, it was so cheap I actually bought it for the padded case for another bin of mine, but the binocular is much better than I expected. Rubber armour and eye cups, fully coated optics, unblemished lens with a green tint to the objectives, clean inside, not a mark on it, it gives a nice clear, pretty sharp wide angle view of 446ft@1000yds. Good color rendition, pretty neutral I would say, no tint or warmness. It's not bad at all.
The Japanese made 8x40 Commodore is in nice condition, it has an impressive wide angle 472ft@1000yds FOV, but seems not quite as sharp as my other Japanese made 8x40s, in fairness, I think it might be just a fraction out of alignment so may be better when checked and adjusted. I think these were a budget binocular, but its quite heavy and solid, built much like my Swift Saratoga, but not any where near as optically good as that.
Attachments
. Two nice additions, Ben.
Some of the Greenkat binoculars have very curved fields and a lot of pin cushion distortion. With very small eye relief. Although I have not seen your 8×30 before.
I have an 8×40 which is advertised as having a 10° field but it is actually 9.5° about. A bit of poetic licence I think. I think it is called the 10.
Some of the Greenkat binoculars have very curved fields and a lot of pin cushion distortion. With very small eye relief. Although I have not seen your 8×30 before.
I have an 8×40 which is advertised as having a 10° field but it is actually 9.5° about. A bit of poetic licence I think. I think it is called the 10.
Thanks Binastro,
I do quite like the Greenkat, optically not top notch obviously, but not bad and the eye relief is ok for me, maybe not great but adequate and it's like new.
I think a bit of poetic licence is often used on some of these descriptions of FOV. I also think I am going to have to become a bit more discerning and disciplined in my purchases, or my home will be full up soon. The mint Greenkat was worth getting at the price, but I have no excuse for the Commodore, I just cant seem to pass by a cheap priced half decent binocular.
I do quite like the Greenkat, optically not top notch obviously, but not bad and the eye relief is ok for me, maybe not great but adequate and it's like new.
I think a bit of poetic licence is often used on some of these descriptions of FOV. I also think I am going to have to become a bit more discerning and disciplined in my purchases, or my home will be full up soon. The mint Greenkat was worth getting at the price, but I have no excuse for the Commodore, I just cant seem to pass by a cheap priced half decent binocular.
I made this device, I put the scope the other way round and look through it and through the binocular objective out via the ocular into the box through an old 50mm objective lens at the cross hair target, which will then appear as though it is about 100yds away. I don't worry about the cross hairs being spot on, just that both barrels are hitting the same place on the target. I have made it on this plinth as I have nowhere to mount it permanent, but it would be better clamped on a bench and being made a bit longer, this is fine for up to 8x40, but anything bigger won't fit. If useful I can post more detail on construction and how it works, with some photo's?
Attachments
Last edited:
Oh well, sorry it's no help, it's a pretty rough and ready device anyway, very likely that your original laser idea would work better.
I have seen gunsight alignment schemes before. I was just curious about the two paths,
to make sure the compensation attempts give you the right correspondence to usage.
I will confess my own 'roughness' at this point: I only recently realized that many
binoculars were aligned not with prism movement but with 'eccentric rings' used to
skew the relative position of the objectives (the path is very sensitive to the
center of the objective, so they use that). I have since recovered 3 pairs of
misaligned binocs by finding the correct rotation of the objective cell, which I
disrupted when cleaning. There is sometimes a ring with one cut in it that can be
marked for putting the cell back in.
I mention this because fiddling the objective centerline or tilt may provide you with a
way to finally align your troublesome binocs. Or, there may be a skew you have lost
in replacing the objective cell, and you just need to discover the angle the cells
want to be at. With a loose top ring, you just nudge the cell(s) to rotate and look
at the distant target on plain background. Yours may not work like that, but it's
easy to find out if they do. It might be a 'rough tuning' before fine tuning the prisms.
to make sure the compensation attempts give you the right correspondence to usage.
I will confess my own 'roughness' at this point: I only recently realized that many
binoculars were aligned not with prism movement but with 'eccentric rings' used to
skew the relative position of the objectives (the path is very sensitive to the
center of the objective, so they use that). I have since recovered 3 pairs of
misaligned binocs by finding the correct rotation of the objective cell, which I
disrupted when cleaning. There is sometimes a ring with one cut in it that can be
marked for putting the cell back in.
I mention this because fiddling the objective centerline or tilt may provide you with a
way to finally align your troublesome binocs. Or, there may be a skew you have lost
in replacing the objective cell, and you just need to discover the angle the cells
want to be at. With a loose top ring, you just nudge the cell(s) to rotate and look
at the distant target on plain background. Yours may not work like that, but it's
easy to find out if they do. It might be a 'rough tuning' before fine tuning the prisms.
Last edited:
