The radical reinvention I'd like to see is a stabilized dual power binocular, offering a very wide angle low (2x-4x) power setting along with a stabilized 10x.Most of these wishes are tweaks to what we already have…I want radical reinvention.
Binoculars that can make the wearer invisible, soundless, and scentless, all at the push of a button.Most of these wishes are tweaks to what we already have…I want radical reinvention.
The topic of carbon fibre has been covered before. The lay-up for a binocular housing would be complex and expensive for a minor weight saving, when you consider all that glass. Thermal conductivity doesn't play any role for binoculars with low magnification and most nowadays have insulating rubber armouring anyway.
As regards titanium, its wall thickness would have to be a third of a magnesium housing or half that of an aluminium housing to save any weight and would probably be vulnerable to buckling (coke can effect). AFAIK, you couldn't cast it anyway and its machinability is problematic.
John
Lol, doesn’t really help though…I can’t walk a km out into the lake, even if the birds can’t see me.Binoculars that can make the wearer invisible, soundless, and scentless, all at the push of a button.
Good point.I wonder why Leica did not do more with the Perger prisms (the modified porro prisms). As yet they are only used in rangefinder binoculars.
Gijs van Ginkel
Total internal reflection (no aluminium, silver or dielectric mirror coatings), no need for phase coatings and less bulk than traditional Porro 1 or Porro2.I'm not really sure about what advantage the perger prism had over the standard prism design.
With those advantages why aren't they used more often....Total internal reflection (no aluminium, silver or dielectric mirror coatings), no need for phase coatings and less bulk than traditional Porro 1 or Porro2.
John
To quote from a 2003 catalogue on the introduction of the Ultravid BR/ BL line:
'Magnesium and titanium are the strengths of the Ultravid lightweights. A body shell made completely of magnesium and the hinge shaft of highly rigid titanium guarantee longevity and they are what make the lightness of the Ultravid models possible.'
So as Fazal indicates in post #36, it is the hinge shaft - rather than the focuser housing - that’s made from titanium.
And the catalogue also includes a sequence of three photos showing: the rough castings of the main body housings; the semi-finished housings with the hinge shaft and objective housings fitted, and; the finished assembly.
For images and details about Andreas Perger’s prisms see the thread: Perger Prisms
Perhaps because they are not that compact and Leica usually strives to be the smallest and lightest in class.I wonder why Leica did not do more with the Perger prisms (the modified porro prisms). As yet they are only used in rangefinder binoculars.
Oil lenses as in Frank Herbert’s Dune:Most of these wishes are tweaks to what we already have…I want radical reinvention.
“OIL LENS: hufuf oil held in static tension by an enclosing force field within a viewing tube as part of a magnifying or other light-manipulation system. Because each lens element can be adjusted individually one micron at a time, the oil lens is considered the ultimate in accuracy for manipulating visible light.”
Well, I shoulda/coulda just said that...Well rather than be prescriptive and get into lengthy discussions with all you retired old codgers about materials technology that is 30 years out of date (surprised no one has mentioned beryllium graphene, or 3D printing yet .... unless Ferrari objects ! lol) I will just set the parameters .....
Hi W220,An image stabilized NL 7x30 with weight no more than 650 grams/23 ounces.
. . . There seems to be a common assumption that since roof prism binoculars are ‘better’ than traditional Porro style ones
- they have a more compact profile, are usually internal focus and also have various convenience features such as adjustable eyecups -
then their prisms must also be optically better
However, as a general optical principle, the simplest solution that produces an acceptable outcome is best. And Porro prisms provide that solution
Since Porro prisms don’t have a roof - where the light column is split and then recombined - then there is no de-phasing, and therefore no need for correction
And as all four reflective surfaces of Porro prisms have total internal reflection (the uncoated surfaces act as perfect mirrors),
then there is no need for reflective coatings to prevent light loss - verses the need for dielectric coating on one surface of most RP’s
So at best, the use of coatings on RP’s to address deficiencies, enables them to reach the level of Porro prism performance *
Another neglected point is that RP's must be manufactured to a much higher degree of precision than Porro prisms, to achieve equal optical performance
Back in the 1980’s it was often noted in popular articles, that the required degree of alignment of Porro prism faces is to within around 2 minutes of angle
In contrast, the alignment required of RP faces is to within around 2 to 3 seconds of angle
- so RP production requires around 50 times as much precision! (120 seconds divided by 2 to 3 seconds)
And while computerised automated cutting and polishing technology may enable RP tolerances to be routinely met, the difference still remains . . .
Nice wish list ChosunWell rather than be prescriptive and get into lengthy discussions with all you retired old codgers about materials technology that is 30 years out of date (surprised no one has mentioned beryllium graphene, or 3D printing yet .... unless Ferrari objects ! lol) I will just set the parameters .....
How the manufacturers get there is up to them.
- Earth Friendly (that includes no invasion of Indigenous People's country's to steal their resources too !)
- variable 7-9x to 12-20x zoom with auto IS
- 45mm objective diameter
- 76°AFov sharp to the edge
- 20mm ER
- 599 grams weight
- Best on market CA control
- Best on market glare control /blackness
- Best on market sharpness and resolution
- Best on market contrast /microcontrast
- Best on market aberration control
- Best on market clour neutrality, fidelity and saturation
- 96%+ transmission
- Dual density armouring/ perforated leather covering.
- Large knurled metal fast CW focusing wheel
- Best on market waterproofing
- Best on market tolerances and smoothness
- Nikon Monarch HG form factor ergonomics
- Sub $2000 AUD price with lifetime unconditional warranty.
Not too much to ask for is it .... ? 😉
Chosun 👧
Hi Ali (post # 51),
To help put things into context . . .
A) For some history and images (including the transmission paths) of the various roof and non-roof prisms used in handheld binoculars, see from post #28 on at: New Horizons II
B) In relation to roof vs Porros prisms in general:
* However, Schmidt-Pechans have a unique technical imitation compared to other roof prisms: the two facing surfaces perform both transmission and reflection functions. Consequently, the surfaces must be separate to enable reflection, but then any anti-reflective coating applied to aid transmission compromises the reflection quality.
C) Over time, the two roof prism winners have been the Schmidt-Pechan’s - by a big margin, and the longer Abbe-Koenig’s where better performance is required.
The chief S-P advantage is physical compactness, both front-to-back and side-to-side. See an image comparing S-P and Upendahl prisms from different Leitz/ Leica Trinovid models. It’s from Jan in post #95 at: What binoculars have the best build quality?
n.b. While the Uppendahl is no wider, its offset optical axis means that it intrudes much further into the main binocular body (note the position of the two on their metal bases).
D) As indicated in the link about Perger prisms, since they are not a roofed design they avoid the various related imitations. However, they are not as compact as S-P’s. And although they are A-K like in terms of general shape, they don’t allow as straight a binocular body - see the 'banana' shape of the Geovids.
John