New Binoculars, Helios Apollo 15x70's - Dilemma solved!

[trynda1701]

Well, after all this time, following on from my thread entitled "New Binoculars, 15x70's - A Dilemma" started November 12th 2013...

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/199461-new-binoculars-15x70s-a-dilemma/

... I've finally ordered and received my Helios Apollo 15x70's from First Light Optics.

Excellent service from FLO, who helped sort out a problem with my original delivery quickly and promptly. Received them Friday morning (4/7/14), a two day turnaround (thanks FLO), and have tried them out this evening.

First Light.

Didn't think I'd get a chance to use them tonight, as it was raining on and off all morning and afternoon, but at about 1900BST, the skies cleared dramatically, and the nearly First Quarter Moon beckoned. Attached the 15x70's to my Manfrotto monopod, and made a comparison of the Apollos with my hand held Carl Zeiss Jena 10x50's.

Impressed with the view of the Moon in the SSW. I like my Jenoptem 10x50W's, but the larger image with the higher magnification, as well as the clearly sharper view made this observation a joy. Even with the low contrast of the Moon in a bright blue sky, the image was nicely detailed. The western edge of Mare Serenitatis was well defined at the terminator, and numerous craters such as Aristoteles, Eudoxus and Theopolis were viewed. The bright ray complex near the limb around Petavius was also more prominent in the Apollos. Nice in the 10x50, but better in the 15x70's overall.

Second Light.

Hoping that the clear sky would last till dark, as the forecast was supposed to be heavy rain into Saturday, I got a bit unlucky. As I came out at 0010BST, the Moon had set by now, but the sky was mostly covered in thin, hazy cloud, except for the west to north west, clear to about 30 degress altitude. But I got lucky, and found the cluster Melotte 111 in Coma Berenices below the haze.

WOW! Even in the faint twiglight, the clearly brighter image was impressive. Yes, this is an extended object, but I loved the sharper, brighter image in the Apollos. I scanned the north western horizon, and spotted a few of the southern stars of Ursa Major more easily in the Apollos than in the Jenoptems, as expected.

I tried to see if the conditions would improve, but the haze was getting thicker. You could see Vega, Deneb and Altair through the haze, but I decided to wait for a better, clearer night to test out the deep sky performance properly.

Overall First impressions.

OK, even with the haze, the view of Melotte 111 and the Moon earlier have convinced me this has been a worthwhile purchase.

Things to note are that I will have adjust the tension on the ball head of the monopd, as I found that the weight of the Apollos were not being held when I tried to see through the haze at more than about 40 degrees altitude (I tried to see Mizar/Alcor), but the binoculars kept slipping.

Plus, I noticed that the inter-pupillary distance was slowly slipping as I used the binoculars. Can someone advise me if there a way to tighten this up?

I'll post more observations and opinions as and when the weather lets me, and the skies get darker.

Mark

[trynda1701]

So, can anyone advise if it's possible to tighten the tension on the centre hinge of the 15x70's to stop the IPD from slowly slipping?

Mark

[Damo636]

Mark

The only place I can see for adjustment is behind the tripod adapter bush cover. By the looks of things, if you loosen the tiny grub screw, the nut can then be turned with a pointy nosed plier to set the desired tension on the hinge. Thread carefully though!

[trynda1701]

Damo

I'll have a look at that when I can. I've sent an email question to FLO about it. Anyone else here have thoughts on this?

Mark

[mdstuart]

I am sure FLO will swap them for another pair if they are slipping like that.

Mark..

[BinocularSky]

Firstly, the hinge shouldn't slip. Secondly, sorry Damo, but the hinge tension is NOT adjusted as suggested above; it is inside the hinge and is non-trivial to get right.. Return to vendor and have them replaced.

I don't know which ball-head you have, but if it's one of the Weifeng ones, I have written a manual for it, which includes ball-tension "management". Click on banner in my sig then Choosing & Using > Trigger-grip manual.

[trynda1701]

Steve

I was waiting for FLO to reply back to me, after they finish checking with the supplier, but an exchange has already been mooted.

I have the DynaSun trigger grip variant, hopefully it has the same adjustments. I'm away from home till tomorrow, and hadn't had time yet to compare your manual with the DynaSun head.

Mark

[trynda1701]

Well, unfortunately, after returning the Apollos to FLO, they found that the two sets in stock had faults! So, currently without my new kit! Scunnered does not begin to cover it. :sad: :sad:

But thank you to FLO for doing their best to try and sort this out. I will try to order agin when FLO get new stock.

Mark

[chops]

Hi Mark

Did you get your hinge tension sorted, which was causing the inter-pupillary distance to slip?

This is a problem I have with mine (also from FLO). It's a pain, but I'm not sure I can bear to be without them for a couple of weeks, it would be interesting to know if anyone else managed to resolve without manufacturer replacement.

On another note, I'm going to order some of the Opticron Oregon 15x70 as a present for someone. It'll be interesting to do a side by side comparison (I doubt the recipient will mind me opening them)..

[Damo636]

My 10x50 Fuji was slightly loose from the word go and got progressively looser with use. In fairness the vendor was excellent and had agreed to replace the instrument at no cost to myself (imported from the USA) but after seeking assurance (see thread below) rectified the problem myself in about one minute flat!

http://www.cloudynights.com/topic/480777-fujinon-10x50-fmtr-sx-problem/#entry6289435

[Craig_]

Hi Mark

Did you get your hinge tension sorted, which was causing the inter-pupillary distance to slip?

This is a problem I have with mine (also from FLO). It's a pain, but I'm not sure I can bear to be without them for a couple of weeks, it would be interesting to know if anyone else managed to resolve without manufacturer replacement.

On another note, I'm going to order some of the Opticron Oregon 15x70 as a present for someone. It'll be interesting to do a side by side comparison (I doubt the recipient will mind me opening them)..

Please do a post regarding the comparisons of these 2 binoculars.

[chops]

Will do Craig; I'm intrigued myself as, since I got the binos (...*why* didn't I get some large bins 10 years ago?), I've been raving about their overall usability and now have a few friends now interested in getting a pair of 15x70s.

I'd really like to do a size by side with the cheaper Celestrons and others (even if they are all made in the same factory and same model ranges!). I'm also getting more Chromatic Aberration on the Apollos than I expected.

Mind you, I have my trusty (15+ years) pair of pocket Swarovski 10x25b Habicht and every time I raise them to my eyes I'm amazed; whilst working in the Czech Republic last week, got some surprisingly good views of Jupiter, Orion Nebula and other obvious objects (and yet more fiends which want to buy some binos - any binos!).. the quality of the optics really does help.

the problem is... I now want a parallelogram mount of course.. Damos review helped persuade me to order the Manfrotto 475b base.. more on that in more relevant topics.

[trynda1701]

Hi Mark

Did you get your hinge tension sorted, which was causing the inter-pupillary distance to slip?

This is a problem I have with mine (also from FLO). It's a pain, but I'm not sure I can bear to be without them for a couple of weeks, it would be interesting to know if anyone else managed to resolve without manufacturer replacement.

On another note, I'm going to order some of the Opticron Oregon 15x70 as a present for someone. It'll be interesting to do a side by side comparison (I doubt the recipient will mind me opening them)..

Unfortunately, I had to send them back. Martin at FLO tried to see if it was possible to adjust it myself, but as he and Steve Tonkin stated above, it's not really a good idea. Had to send them back, and as the other sets that FLO had at the time had faults, FLO had to take the 15x70's off the shopping cart till they got a new batch in!

Saving up again to get a new pair, but as I got my Flexitube 130P in the meantime, and I'm now having car problems I won't bore you with, it may be a while!

Mark

[chops]

By way of an update and comparison with the Opticron Oregon 15x70.

FLO swapped the Helios Apollo 15x70 out with zero hassle - the mount / hinge was slipping badly by last weekend, meaning IPD reverted to minimum in a few seconds. FLO delivered new and collected faulty at the same time. The new pair don't slip at all.. but the skies are either now wet, or (like now) gusting 40+kts and intermittently wet!

For Craig (and anyone else interested - Mark, if you didn't get a replacement set?) before the skies went completely, I managed to get a very brief comparison of the Oregon Opticron 15x70s (also from FLO)

First impressions are superb for £90. They're much lighter and therefore handheld observing was easier and quite a joy. The lighter construction makes them feel lower quality and less robust, however I have no idea how well they're actually constructed other than a couple of cheaper looking finished internal flanges / rings (in comparison, it's barely possible to see down the objective lens of the apollos).

Also, on first use of the tripod port (no L bracket supplied, unlike Helios), the brass bushing had been so well lubricated (or insufficiently tightened) that it worked lose and I had to use a pair of pliers to hold it whilst I took the cover cap off it. Replaced and tightened, no drama either way, but repeated here for transparency.

I don't know how well they'll survive regular use, I suspect AOK with care. Considering they have a 5 year (!) guarantee, it indicates to me the manufacturers or distributors are confident (are these the same Kunming factory as the apollos?). They have a fabric carry case (Apollo has hard foam carry box). They appear to be collimated perfectly adequately to my eyes, although I only checked anecdotally (can't think of a better phrase), rather than tested scientifically, there was no straining. I read someone comment elsewhere that cheaper binos get less good QC than pricier models, which is fair enough.

Focussing is via a single dial, plus right diopter, rather than the apollo's independent. focussing is less precise and more fussy than the better apollos (it felt as though I needed to work harder to achieve good focus).

Terrestrial viewing was slightly clearer through the apollos, afraid I didn't spend much time on this, but the apollos have the edge; Internal reflections are higher on the Opticrons than Apollos. Clarity seems good - the contrast is better in the apollos, but absolutely fine for me.

The view in the Apollos seems deeper and wider than it does in the Opticron although, when using off tripod, something about the eye cups or relief of the Opticron made it feel easier to use, possibly the eye cups are deeper than the short apollo ones (I'd like to replace these one day), although the eye relief doesn't feel drastically different, but I can't tell easily as they're both quite adequate for me and I don't often wear specs viewing (astigmatism etc). I wondered if maybe the exit pupils on the optis suited me better (looking afterwards, they're similar)? Maybe what I felt is that the eye cups aren't quite deep enough for me on the apollos as I can hold my eyes a little way off and still get full field.

Dark sky testing - well, the full moon was out at the weekend so I can't really say other than it was a nice clear image of Vega / Lyra's doubles, however tonight I've just ventured out in biting winds which I can barely brace myself against, to look at the Pleiades, Jupiter and Orion Nebulae through both, during glimpses of the sky through skidding clouds.

First impressions when I lifted them to Orion? Wow. Why didn't I buy a pair of these years ago (I said the same about the apollos when I got those, but it seems even more pertinent when they're £90, not £270.

I tried to give the Optis every fighting chance against the Apollos - by mounting them on my new paragon plus mount (wow, one of these with optis alone is fantastic to use and, to be honest, if budget was a problem, I'd go for the opti and a decent mount over better binos and a standard tripod any day). Also, the optis work immediately with the paragon, but the apollos don't mate up without an adapter.

So, what difference did I see? Well, it's not very scientific - as I say freezing, buffeting, biting winds (my hands have only just recovered) but the Apollos certainly gave marginally better definition on the Orion Nebula, even though the apollos were on the cheapest, flimsiest tripod clutched against my chest. With the Apollos, I could see the shape of the neb more clearly and slightly more easily resolve the stars within it (note the moon was only 20 degrees away).

Skies are clearer in the apollos - individual objects stand out just that little bit more, but I suspect that the difference in light transmission would be more noticeable if I had a nice lie down on a dark, quiet, night to really try and view some detail. However the Opticrons do seem wonderful for the money.

Jupiter: easy to make out the disc and two moons, maybe I'm conning myself that I can make out some banding without quiet, concerted observation, however all is clearer and rounder with better definition viewed in the Apollo, Jovian moons more obvious and surrounding star field more distinct. Perversely, the moon (only a few degrees way) had a far greater effect on reflections across the objective lens of the Apollo, meaning I needed to shield them with my hands. This didn't happen in the Opticrons and I'm sure Steve or someone knowledgeable will be able to explain why, given the shields are apx the same on each. However, the reflection within the Opticron manifested itself with a second disk superimposed on the planet, whereas the Apollo was across the front of the field and the planet was mainly unaffected (does that make sense? I suspect it's differences in the arrangement of glass /lenses)

The moon, not much between them, if anything the CA on the Opti was slightly less, but neither bad tonight. Hands were getting cold and patience with clouds and wind wearing my patience thin.

A)Opticron 15x70 Specifications (from PDF brochure)

B)Helios Apollo 15x70 specs

Field (m/1000m) Eye relief (mm) IPD (mm) HxW (mm) Weight (g), exit pupil(mm)

A)80, 18, 57~73, 276x215, 1393g, 4.7mm

B)77, 23, 60-, 280x228, 2500g, 4.67mm

Allbinos specs are slightly different giving

Opticron angle view 3.9 degrees (69m@1000) - FLO says 77. Who is right?

Apollo angle view 4.4,degrees (77m@1000)

Bottom line, if I hadn't used the apollos then I think I'd be quite happy with the Opticrons. For how long, I couldn't say, but I fully expect that they'd give a long and very satisfactory service.

If you can't justify the Apollos and a parallel mount, just get the Opticron and a parallel. The usefulness of the decent mount is, to me, a greater benefit than the enhanced optics of the Helios Apollo on a standard tripod. Thankfully, I have both and will hope for clear skies, light winds and time to enjoy them all together.

The Opticrons will, as intended, go to my brother as a Christmas present for him and his family, and I have extremely high confidence in them providing hours and years of enjoyment.

[Craig_]

Chops, thank you for your superb post.