BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Binastro" data-source="post: 3243800" data-attributes="member: 111403">. Dear zzffnn,. With the zoom monocular the apparent field of view is less, much less, at 10 times compared with 25 times.This is nearly always the case with zoom eyepieces. At the higher magnification the apparent field of view is greater than at lower magnifications, although with the real field of view the situation is reversed.I might try to get an idea of the apparent field of view.If you could use the zoom monocular without glasses then I would say it could be useful for you at close focus using the higher magnifications. If you wore glasses you would have real problems at the higher magnifications as the eye relief gets poorer and poorer.Early this morning, I looked at local buildings and there is quite a lot of chromatic aberration with the zoom monocular. However, it is something that you could maybe live with, especially if you're using it just for close-up work. I think that this is because the optics are fast i.e. the objective lens, and this is not a high quality item. But it is useful.The zoom monocular is 170 mm long with the eyecup Folded. The Papilio II 6.5×21 is 115 mm long with the eyecups closed. The zoom monocular is about 2.2 inches longer than the binocular. The distance from the closest focus point to the eyes is about 3 inches less with the binocular.These zoom monocular weighs 319 g. The Papilio II weighs 295 g.The zoom monocular has pincushion distortion, at least using it for distant objects.I think that if you bought the 10×42 and the zoom monoculars you would find them useful for the type of observations you mention.</blockquote>

Verification