... just look at the subject. I find that focusing solely on the subject and ignoring the strangeness of the overlap means I have no discomfort and can enjoy the subject.
As for the close focusing mechanism leading to unreliability or other failure, I have yet to encounter such a thing, and I can assure you that Greenshanks and Great Northern Divers look just as beautiful through binos with a 1.0 metre close focus as through ones with 3.0 metre close focus.
I too completely agree with Lee.
Instead, Hermann's first words to # 16 (like others) sound more like
terrorism than
good information! (Hermann, I'm kidding)
More reasonable here:
What I forgot to write: I'm not talking here about a focusing distance of 8m, more something like 2-3m which IMO is quite reasonable for birdwatching.
... but still unspecified, because 2m for 10x is very good, while 3m for 8x is already too far. We need to express a value that is proportionate to the magnification.
Magnification =
virtual approach, and the key word is
presbyopia.
The eye can be accommodated up to 7-8cm apart (3"), at ages under 7-8 years. Then it normalizes with maturity, up to 15-20cm (6-8"). And at a more mature age, over the 35-40 years, it is possible that it may become
presbyopic. That is, the eye can no longer focus objects closer than
25cm (10" - is optical-ophthalmic standard).
In general, in a short time the presbyopic man will need reading glasses to read the newspaper at 35-40cm (14-16"), but also from 50-60cm (20-24") away.
Collecting both information, we see that a 10x binocular that focuses at 2.5m (8.2ft), has the power to virtually bring the user up to
25cm (10") away. Mathematics is simple. Therefore, 8x binoculars should focus at 2m (6.6ft) and 7x at 1.75m (5.7ft), etc.
This
virtual focus distance (25cm - 10") is already "manna from heaven" for any
presbyopite and also for others. But it is also very beautiful and much better to be approached virtually at
20cm (8 ") distance, to see the same objects with greater magnification and detail.
So, it would be possible and even clearer for everyone to talk about
virtual focus distance, to include
any magnification. Instead of naming an incomprehensible distance, because it is without reference (it is not a reproach, it is a proposal).
And so far, nothing wrong. I never had any optical quality problems, forcing my binoculars to focus closer than what they were designed for. Indeed, the Opticron technician set one of my roof-binocular 10x to focus closer than 2m (6.6ft), which means virtual 20cm (8"), when that model was designed to "focus at shorter distances of 3m (10ft)".
So, with my presbyopia, now I can also focus objects up to 1.8m (5.9ft) !!!
The real issue that separates the waters (and the masses) is the accuracy of the focus ring.
Unfortunately, if a fast focus is needed, to facilitate the observation of moving objects (birds, UFO, etc.), the price to be paid will be the
loss of focus accuracy. This is not discussed, it is the reality of the facts.
But I believe this is the
only factor that annoys-alienate users. And it will divide the waters forever. I know the solution, but I've never seen binoculars with that function for sale.