What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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.
Forums
Binoculars & Spotting Scopes
Binoculars
Need recommendation for budget binoculars for kids
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="OPTIC_NUT" data-source="post: 3214102" data-attributes="member: 121951"><p>I suspect there is a common thread to the perceived solidness and</p><p>better feel of image quality and the stiction and tight diopter issues the</p><p>Yosemites sometimes had. They really are more solid... but tight. </p><p></p><p>For at least 60 years, a key difference between ordinary and special binoculars</p><p>(in addition to fancier optics) has been how solid the focuser arms and other</p><p>parts are and how they track together. It affects having both perfectly in focus </p><p>at the same time and also how even the field is at the edges. Yosemites clearly</p><p>have a more solid, precise feel, and this comes (like it always did) from a tighter</p><p>fit and tolerances on the threads. I can feel this in Yosemites.</p><p></p><p>The problem comes with water-proofing, when O-rings and jacketing that work OK</p><p>with roofs are used in the Porro configuration, with its off-axis torque and strain </p><p>from the O-rings and jacket. So it's extra hard to ride herd on production for the</p><p>focuser and diopter. Long term, it would be easier to open up clearances and</p><p>use low-durometer rings, and slip-washers at the gaskets. Other products, like</p><p>the Bushnell "Bear Grylls" series, have similar issues, even though they are roof. </p><p>The idea is to make a higher-grade</p><p>item that sells in high quantity so you can charge less for a better thing.</p><p>It all goes a little crooked when your jackets and rings can't keep up with your metal.</p><p></p><p>If (especially) the Yosemite 6x30 wants to be a popular kid's binoculars AND top of class,</p><p>softer materials and opened clearances would make it happen. The Celestron and Barska </p><p>run the risk of sloppier movement, but there are easier for kids to use.</p><p></p><p>Just my guess, but I think even adding $10-20 to Yosemites to add soft-durometer rings</p><p>and slip-washers would be worth it, since it would catapult their ease of use and make their</p><p>field quality even more obvious. Little tweeks like that can make or break legends.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="OPTIC_NUT, post: 3214102, member: 121951"] I suspect there is a common thread to the perceived solidness and better feel of image quality and the stiction and tight diopter issues the Yosemites sometimes had. They really are more solid... but tight. For at least 60 years, a key difference between ordinary and special binoculars (in addition to fancier optics) has been how solid the focuser arms and other parts are and how they track together. It affects having both perfectly in focus at the same time and also how even the field is at the edges. Yosemites clearly have a more solid, precise feel, and this comes (like it always did) from a tighter fit and tolerances on the threads. I can feel this in Yosemites. The problem comes with water-proofing, when O-rings and jacketing that work OK with roofs are used in the Porro configuration, with its off-axis torque and strain from the O-rings and jacket. So it's extra hard to ride herd on production for the focuser and diopter. Long term, it would be easier to open up clearances and use low-durometer rings, and slip-washers at the gaskets. Other products, like the Bushnell "Bear Grylls" series, have similar issues, even though they are roof. The idea is to make a higher-grade item that sells in high quantity so you can charge less for a better thing. It all goes a little crooked when your jackets and rings can't keep up with your metal. If (especially) the Yosemite 6x30 wants to be a popular kid's binoculars AND top of class, softer materials and opened clearances would make it happen. The Celestron and Barska run the risk of sloppier movement, but there are easier for kids to use. Just my guess, but I think even adding $10-20 to Yosemites to add soft-durometer rings and slip-washers would be worth it, since it would catapult their ease of use and make their field quality even more obvious. Little tweeks like that can make or break legends. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Binoculars & Spotting Scopes
Binoculars
Need recommendation for budget binoculars for kids
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top
