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="mfunnell" data-source="post: 3279381" data-attributes="member: 134332">...diverted from <a href="http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=311261" target="_blank">http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=311261</a>That's good advice - which I've taken.  I've worked the mechanism, and it seems OK.  If it is mis-assembly of some sort (and I'm inclined to think it might be) then it seems solid mis-assembly. (Does that make it better or worse?).  I've worked the diopter adjustment back and forth between full ± adjustments multiple times, then returned it to where suits my eyes, and it has not varied (beyond the marginal tweaking made necessary by my rough-and-ready methods).Sat on a level bench, with maximum extension of both eyecups and measuring with a ruler, the left is a tad under 122mm high, while the right is a tad+ over 122mm, about 0.5mm difference (roughly; using the usual conversion from tads to SI units).  This may or may not be a symptom associated with the need for somewhat radical diopter adjustment but, again, I'm inclined to think it could be.I've attached a photo (apologies for the quick P&S snapshot) showing how far from centre I have to wind the diopter adjustment.  Note that my other binoculars (Nikon Action Naturalist III, Celestron Oceana, Zeiss Terra ED) have this set to zero to work with my eyes, with or without glasses.Since it's consistent, and solid-feeling, and within the usable range of adjustment for my eyesight, I'm going to live with it given the price of the unit and the cost and inconvenience of international returns.  This might not be acceptable to others, especially those who need negative diopter adjustment (where there seems to be little range available).   ...Mike</blockquote>

Verification