John Dracon
John Dracon
FanTao's website mentions the Bushnell Rangemaster 7x35 binocular. He lists at least five (5) variations of this wide angle piece, which some folks consider the finest binocular of this kind ever crafted. Currently, I have three variations in my collection: (1) the FPO (IF) made in the late 1950s, featuring ultraviolet filters with high index prisms and a 10 degree FOV with 14 MM of ER (2) the FPO later silver trim version (CF) with 10 degree FOV featuring standard coatings with 14 MM of ER, (3) and the Tamron "Custom" (CF) style made in the late 1960s with high index prisms and a 11 degree FOV and 12-13 MM of ER, also featuring ultraviolet filters.
Each of these pieces has what I call their own idiosyncracies. With the growing interest of some Bird Forum users in wide field binoculars, I thought I would give my assessments of some of the features which make these binoculars truly unique.
Unlike the inexpensive wide angle binoculars so prevalent in the past, these models are anything but inexpensive in terms of construction and optics. I believe that the Japanese Bushnell Rangemaster is the finest example of wide angle binoculars ever produced, rivaling those Zeiss icons, the 15x60 B and the 8x30B. That these are 50-60 years old, and yet still completely functional, speaks to their superior construction, which could be characterized as robust.
The oculars measure 15/16 " across or 23.81 MM. What we call the "sweet spot" is huge, estimated to be at least 70% of the field. And while the edges are "soft", things are still recognizable. The FPO, or Fuji designed binoculars
claim a FOV of 525' at 1,000 yards; the Tamrons claim a FOV of 578'. Those extra feet are less distinct.
One thing distinguishes these three models. The three dimensional effect is very pronounced, much more than in today's alpha porros. Interestingly, the FPO preceding the silver ring model, has ultraviolet filters. The silver ring model does not. Yet the later model, the Tamron, restores the ultraviolet filters. Why? Anyone's guess.
All three models are a handful, with the Tamron weighing in at 38 oz. I have extra large hands so the heft helps steady the view. One would need a very wide neck strap to have any comfort carrying these all day long.
All models have baffles behind the objective lens. It is the eye cups where significant differences exist, at least for me since I am a dedicated eye glass wearer and the 14 MM of ER is not adequate. I habitually remove the eye cups of models like this.
The FPO eye cup once removed (unscrewed) reveals a problem. The adjustment ring for the right ocular (or both if the model is IF) is no longer secured because is sits on a nub with serrations milled into the bottom portion. One must use the old rubber band or O ring on top to keep things together.
The silver ring FPO does not present this problem. Once the eye cup is removed, there is a metal ring which screws down and keeps everything together. The 3M sticky back rings can be pressed around the ocular glass on a flat surface, and the full view with eye glasses on can be gained.
The Tamron eyecup removal creates another problem - how to keep the metal edge from etching the eye glasses. Left in it gives the eyeglass wearer perhaps 75% of the view.
I estimate that close focus in the three models is about 12-15 feet. Not great but still useful.
I concur with FanTao's preference - the second generation FPOm but only because the untraviolet filters produce a warmer image, which I personally prefer. All three models possess superb optics. Compared to the alphas of today, they are very competitive and where portability is not an issue, very useful.
One last feature, the cases. The FPO comes with a so-so leather case. The silver ring FPO comes with the best binocular case I have ever seen. It is beautifully crafted of highly polished split leather. All leather straps are of the highest quality. The Tamron Custom is in the characteristic artificial leather case which houses all the Custom line. It is functional and protective.
If you have the opportunity to purchase one of these Rangemasters in good condition, I strongly recommend you do so.
John
Each of these pieces has what I call their own idiosyncracies. With the growing interest of some Bird Forum users in wide field binoculars, I thought I would give my assessments of some of the features which make these binoculars truly unique.
Unlike the inexpensive wide angle binoculars so prevalent in the past, these models are anything but inexpensive in terms of construction and optics. I believe that the Japanese Bushnell Rangemaster is the finest example of wide angle binoculars ever produced, rivaling those Zeiss icons, the 15x60 B and the 8x30B. That these are 50-60 years old, and yet still completely functional, speaks to their superior construction, which could be characterized as robust.
The oculars measure 15/16 " across or 23.81 MM. What we call the "sweet spot" is huge, estimated to be at least 70% of the field. And while the edges are "soft", things are still recognizable. The FPO, or Fuji designed binoculars
claim a FOV of 525' at 1,000 yards; the Tamrons claim a FOV of 578'. Those extra feet are less distinct.
One thing distinguishes these three models. The three dimensional effect is very pronounced, much more than in today's alpha porros. Interestingly, the FPO preceding the silver ring model, has ultraviolet filters. The silver ring model does not. Yet the later model, the Tamron, restores the ultraviolet filters. Why? Anyone's guess.
All three models are a handful, with the Tamron weighing in at 38 oz. I have extra large hands so the heft helps steady the view. One would need a very wide neck strap to have any comfort carrying these all day long.
All models have baffles behind the objective lens. It is the eye cups where significant differences exist, at least for me since I am a dedicated eye glass wearer and the 14 MM of ER is not adequate. I habitually remove the eye cups of models like this.
The FPO eye cup once removed (unscrewed) reveals a problem. The adjustment ring for the right ocular (or both if the model is IF) is no longer secured because is sits on a nub with serrations milled into the bottom portion. One must use the old rubber band or O ring on top to keep things together.
The silver ring FPO does not present this problem. Once the eye cup is removed, there is a metal ring which screws down and keeps everything together. The 3M sticky back rings can be pressed around the ocular glass on a flat surface, and the full view with eye glasses on can be gained.
The Tamron eyecup removal creates another problem - how to keep the metal edge from etching the eye glasses. Left in it gives the eyeglass wearer perhaps 75% of the view.
I estimate that close focus in the three models is about 12-15 feet. Not great but still useful.
I concur with FanTao's preference - the second generation FPOm but only because the untraviolet filters produce a warmer image, which I personally prefer. All three models possess superb optics. Compared to the alphas of today, they are very competitive and where portability is not an issue, very useful.
One last feature, the cases. The FPO comes with a so-so leather case. The silver ring FPO comes with the best binocular case I have ever seen. It is beautifully crafted of highly polished split leather. All leather straps are of the highest quality. The Tamron Custom is in the characteristic artificial leather case which houses all the Custom line. It is functional and protective.
If you have the opportunity to purchase one of these Rangemasters in good condition, I strongly recommend you do so.
John