• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Need to adjust diopter when switching focus distance? (1 Viewer)

Canip

Well-known member
In a thread on the “Cloudynights Binoculars” forum about a review of the SRBC 12x56 and 15x56, forum member Koh made two interesting “by the way” remarks in his post of Nov. 16:

quote

“…..at 15x magnification, the persistent issue of needing to adjust diopter settings when switching focus between near and far distances—common in roof-prism binoculars within this price range—remains. I am particularly sensitive to diopter adjustments between my eyes, and among all the binoculars I’ve used, the only ones I can truly consider "true CF-style" binoculars are the flagship models from Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, and Nikon. Even the Zeiss Conquest HD requires very fine diopter adjustments during near-to-far focus transitions to achieve the precise focus I desire.….”

“….the "rainbow-colored light streaking" phenomenon ….. does not occur if the interpupillary distance and eye relief are correctly adjusted. For those observing rainbow streaks while viewing bright point light sources, I recommend readjusting the interpupillary distance and eye relief to resolve the issue.

unquote

While the second of the quoted remarks appears self explanatory (and should be noticed by those experiencing “rainbow streaks”, esp. when using an SRBC model where this effect seems to have been more prominent than with other models), the first remark may deserve further reflection.

I think many people who have had experience with a variety of binoculars may have experienced the fact that in some models, but not in others, they had to adjust the diopter when changing focus distance, at least if they are sensitive to diopter adjustments between their eyes. I am myself very sensitive in this respect and found the described “flaw” annoying in a number of my binoculars.

I am with Koh in that I usually don’t have to adjust the diopter when switching focus distance in my Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski and Nikon binoculars, but the same is true for many more brands as well.
In others, I may have to adjust diopter: funnily, in most of my Kowas, but also in one of the GPOs, in several Opticron models, in two of the Meoptas, to name just a few examples.

Koh seems to infer from his experience that

a) this only happens with binoculars other than“flagship” premium models (he names them “true CF-style binoculars”:) )

b) this is common in roof prism binoculars in the medium price category.

While I have some sympathy for his argument a), my experience tells me that the conclusion under b) is false, since I own several porro I binoculars where the need to adjust diopter when focusing annoys me (in porro binoculars, the rocking bridge can be one reason for the discussed effect, but the phenomenon goes beyond that).

What’s the experience of other users?
 
Last edited:
I'm curious about exactly where this problem occurs for you... is it within the range of typical/middle distances, or only when focusing all the way to infinity vs very close? I've never noticed it myself, but the bins I've used seriously are higher-end models (Swaro, Leica, Zeiss, but also Nikon E II) where you have no trouble either. Koh appears to think the likelihood increases with magnification, but again, I don't see it in my SLC 15x56.

The usual defect of a diopter wandering after refocusing is clearly more common in cheaper binoculars, but that doesn't seem to be what you're talking about here. Still, did you try multiple examples of the models involved?
 
Last edited:
It would seem to me that if your eyes do indeed “change” as they get tired, I would be surprised if they changed at different rates.

So I’m still puzzled.
 
I'll be interested in this, because I find it somewhat confusing.

I'm interested and confused as well.

I don't recall ever having to adjust the diopter on any CF mid to high end roof based on distance. With IF Porros, and a Leitz 9x25 IF roof, it does require adjusting focus of both barrels toward the negative to achieve sharp focus at distances below @100 yards.

Mike
 
Last edited:
Like Canip said, diopter drift in classic porroprism binoculars comes from a rocking eypiece bridge. This is a problem especially if there's more ´sticktion´ in one eyepiece tube than the other. That results in the stickier side always lagging a bit behind the smoother moving side, so diopter setting varies depending on whether you just focused clockwise or counterclockwise.

A similar thing happens in internally focusing roof prism binoculars if there's more play in the mechanism in one side over the other. The well-known Swarovski "issue" of more focus wheel resistance in one direction than the other comes from springs in the mechanism to overcome this diopter drift problem. It is reasonably easy to test whether something like this is happening in a roof prism binocular. The binocular should be mounted on a tripod or placed on a steady support, and another binocular, booster or such used to view the image of each eyepiece so one can determine exact focus without your eye accommodation messing things up. Set focus so that the image is sharp through the auxiliary scope in the left eyepiece, then set diopter so the right eyepiece comes to focus through the auxiliary scope, then focus both from infinity and closest focus distance back to sharp focus and check whether both tubes reach focus at the diopter setting you came up with. If you test this both for a shortish distance and a longish distance, you should be able to determine whether it is the binocular or your eyes that are the problem.

- Kimmo
 
I'm curious about exactly where this problem occurs for you... is it within the range of typical/middle distances, or only when focusing all the way to infinity vs very close?
Typical close and middle distances, but also around infinity.

Koh appears to think the likelihood increases with magnification
I don't think so.

did you try multiple examples of the models involved?
Yes, e.g. MeoStar 10x50, where I have one sample in the mountain cabin and the other at my regular home. One is good, the other not. Sample variation is in this case the reason, but I have seen too many Kowas which exhibit the effect, so some designs may be more prone to it than others (?).

See also the good explanation from Kimmo.
 
Koh appears to think the likelihood increases with magnification
That I think is very plausible.

John
 
I've had this happen with a 8x30 Jenoptem. If I looked further afield or closer in, such that a significant focus adjustment was required, I'd need to adjust the diopter. Not sure whether it was the binocular or my eyes (probably the former - build quality of this model was pretty average), or whether it could have been rectified by cleaning up the eyepiece tube, but it was part of the reason I sold it. My other binoculars seem fine in this respect although with some I'll often need to tweak the diopter slightly if I haven't used them for a while. This sort of thing is where mechanical quality really counts.
 
A similar thing happens in internally focusing roof prism binoculars if there's more play in the mechanism in one side over the other.
So this is after all the same problem that can get bad enough to make cheaper binoculars unusable, either with some use or as a defect out of the box, just a more subtle case of it. And less likely to become noticeable in better made instruments.

NLs don't seem to have the same asymmetry in focusing as previous Swaros... did they come up with an alternative to the notorious springs?
 
In my experience, Diopter readjusting issue does seen in several renowned roof prism binocular.
not only in cheap, high power porro bino such as nikon action.

just an another term of QC issue.


such as Zeiss CHD 10x32, 10x42
Kowa Genesis 10x33, BD2 10x32, 10x42
SRBC 8x42, 10x42, 12x42
Shuntu panorama 10x42
Svbony SV202 10x50, SA205 10x42
Nikon monarch 5 20x56

some is minor enough to let it out of mind

not every sample of these bino have such symptoms

among the 1000$ price high grade bino, I heard more complaints about 10 power Zeiss CHD's users.
issue about Dioptor which turns out to be bit more uneven then similerly priced other bins.

between two specific sample of CHD 10x32 & CHDX 10x32, CHDX I have righ now, shows bit improved diopter issue then older one.

again, this is about sample variation and personal sensitivity.
so, consensus about this topic could take forever.
 
Last edited:
for a close view of the technical issue behind this problem on cheap roofs have a look at : Diopter focus inconsistency (Ed x)
This problem is common among cheaper roofs.
In the video below, look how the focuser nut has excessive backlash and tilts depending on focusing direction.
As a result, the left and right pushrods (which drive the focusing lens in each barrel) exhibit a shift relative to each other depending on focusing direction.
Most often a deadspot can be felt in the focusing wheel when changing direction.
View attachment 1399108
This physical 'backlash' is maybe common with waterproof binoculars that use sliding rubber o-rings, rather than bellows seals. There is some additional friction or drag when focussing. Inevitably there will be more drag on one side than the other, so one eye will change focus sooner than the other. The focus arms will see-saw.

Perhaps we should get used to it, and think of it like those 'dual-speed' microscopes that fast-focus initially, but fine-focus if you reverse? (Maybe spotting scopes and radio dials, too?)
Learn which eye focusses first, then fine-tune the other one later.

Another possible cause comes from optics, not mechanics. There will be some variability of focal length in both objective and eyepiece on each side. This could mis-match magnification slightly, or the objective/eyepiece focal ratio could be correct, but both focal lengths could be high or low.

I haven't run equations, but I guess either condition could require diopter adjustment with wide refocussing.
 
Last edited:
Another possible cause comes from optics, not mechanics. There will be some variability of focal length in both objective and eyepiece on each side. This could mis-match magnification slightly, or the objective/eyepiece focal ratio could be correct, but both focal lengths could be high or low.
Are you seriously suggesting that tolerances in refractive indices and/or element radii could cause this problem?
Btw, on internally focussing roof prism binoculars, objective focal length is dependent on focus/diopter setting anyway.
I haven't run equations, but I guess either condition could require diopter adjustment with wide refocussing.
Lacking the relevant data, I'm just wondering what you are going to calculate.

John
 
Wow!

Binoculars with variable focal length optical trains.
Not sure if that was doubt, but on most waterproof roof prism binoculars the distance between eyepieces and objectives is fixed.
For any individual user the objective image planes relative to the eyepieces have to be constant regardless of object distance.
For near objects this is achieved by shortening the objective focal length, either by shifting a +ve. focussing lens towards the other objective elements or a -ve. focussing lens away from them.

John
 
Are you seriously suggesting that tolerances in refractive indices and/or element radii could cause this problem?
...
Lacking the relevant data, I'm just wondering what you are going to calculate.
Yes, I think you understand me correctly.
Perhaps I should have said I am an 'old porro', simple-lens guy ...
Equations work, even without data ...

Learn which eye focusses first, then fine-tune the other one later.
Should still work with internal-focus.

I first noticed different magnification in left and right channels, when trying to improve collimation in a cheap used eBay bargain.
("Tasco Futura SE" = "Opticron Sequoiah" but badged Jessop, or fake "YASHICA EUROPE Eagle ULTRA HD 8K 24900x1490" LOL)

With swapped objectives (standard first approach to fix mis-collimation, 30% success including crossed-threads), magnification was noticeably different left-right. Collimation was perfect, but at only one point in the visual field, not necessarily central!
I am not sure what the difference between channels would be, if both objective and eyepiece were +1% power in one side.
A diopter dial offset (tube length), closest focus, and field of view? *⤵
It could be useful to swap both objectives and eyepieces if "The diopter doesn't turn far enough!" is a problem for a user whose eyes differ ... (test first by holding the bins upside-down?)

If the eyepieces have different powers, I am sure you would have to move the stronger one less far to achieve the same refocus. Hence the topic of this thread: diopter tweaking ...
If they are matched with objectives that give the same magnification, the user may not notice the other differences. *⤴
I think it is a rare occurrence.

Yes, I am just considering four simple lenses, but internal focus must have the same potential issue, I think.

I have also seen magnification mis-match even in a Nikon (or Nippon Kogaku vintage). I suspect a spare part with slight mis-match (from a different era) had been used in a repair. Or maybe objectives were swapped, and re-collimated via eccentrics?🤦

The simplest "internal focus" case is the Pentax Papilio, or Nikon "Look!" that has a front plane 0-diopter glass window, just for waterproofing, or rather dust-proofing.
More complex cases are familiar to those that try to use photo camera lenses for shooting video, and find focussing changes the magnification too: called "focus breathing". There is a reason cine lenses cost ten times as much.

Internal focus binoculars also presumably 'zoom' slightly when focussing? Or are both eyepiece and objective powers varied?large_item_3464170_2c9784895b.jpgs-l1600 (15)-02.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top