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="typo" data-source="post: 3439789" data-attributes="member: 83808">Jan,Just a further comment on collimation. I know someone here posted a military or ISO standard for collimation at one time and I think it was probably Bill who said it wasn't good enough. (Well I think that was the gist of it. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> )I have tried a back yard method I found online for testing collimation and it looked like most of the models I have were a degree or two out, but I couldn't spot it by eye. The exception was two binoculars that arrived in a very badly damaged carton. By eye, one had a vertical displacement of I'd guess about 3% of the field diameter and the other just over 5%. Neither made any difference at all to the appearance of stars or impaired performance in a chart test in any way.I seems likely that we do differ in our tollerance of collimation error, and it's good there is a manufacturing standard for it, but for me at least, it appears to be one of the least critical parameters in a binocular's performance. I'm sure Bill would vehemently disagree.David</blockquote>