BinocularSky

20 hours ago, Pig said:

Well I have hit the button and bought a pair ....  should be here tomorrow .... 12 x 36 III

I happen to have one of these to review. So far, impressed!

Add a head strap and they would make a great SteamPunk accessory

See http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/255161-vixens-ultra-low-power-bins-tried-at-last/page-2#entry2784896and surrounding thread

Thanks that was a massive help I have gone for the http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00CF1LS94/1944 and this will save me £50!!! whoop

When you get it, you will find that the 'manual' is next to useless; I have written a more comprehensive one (in the "Choosing & Using" section of the web site.)

 Ii do like the ones that Philip R binos are on or anything half decent will do really.

If you're interested, I have a page on mounting binoculars for astronomy that you may find useful

where is cheapest place get

Parallelogram Mounts from please.

Apart from making your own:

Without tripod: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Orion-Paragon-Plus-Binocular-without-Tripod/dp/B0000XMYQA

With tripod: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Orion-Paragon-Plus-Binocular-Mount-Tripod/dp/B003YJPDN8

HTH

I haven't thought of using an LED finder with my bins - yours sounds great! Which make/model is it?

I know you didn't ask me , but I use a Rigel Quikfinder on mine. It helps enormously that the outer circle is as near as dammit the same size of the FoV of my x37 eyepieces.

1. Miyauchi Bj-100 20/37x100

2. Helios Apollo 15x70

3. Oberwerk Ultra 10x50

4. Opticron BGA 10x42

5. Vortex Raptor 6.5x32

6. VixenSG 2.1x42

7. Strathspey 15x70 (actually 15x62.5)

8. Strathspey Marine 10x50 (actually 10x41)

9. Frank Nipole 10x50 (yes that is a hinge-mount tripod adaptor fixed to it)

10. Zenith 10x50 (belonged to my late father-in-law -sentimental value only)

11. No-name (well, would you admit to it?) 12-60x70 (actually ?-??x49) zoom - with "the latest ruby coatings" possibly the worst binocular I've ever had the misfortune to look through. Kept for when I give talks, as an example of everything to avoid. No, I didn't buy it; it was donated.

Mark, you have a PM on the way...

Hi Mark,

It could be quite easily adapted to do, but (assuming the business end is similar to the Virgo version that I have), you would need to find a bit of 1/4" Whitworth studding (or decapitate a 1/4 Whit bolt) as both parts (mount block and hinge clamp) would have 1/4 Whit female threads.  You would also probably also need to shim it with washers to get it to fit square on so that it's looking straight back over the mount. A better solution would be to make an adaptor like the one we were discussing in this thread (or use a 1/4 Whit male-to-male adaptor - some have a locking ring so that you can determine the angle at which the mounted appliance sits).

Depending on the weight of the 10x50, you might be able to get away with mounting the hinge clamp on the paragon's L-bracket, but I imagine the vibration would be quite pronounced and difficult to damp.

Sorry, Mark, I was obviously unclear. When I asked about balancing, what I meant is this:

Even with the weight fully extended, if the tension knobs are slackened the 15x70 drops and I have to tighten the knobs to prevent this. This means that I don't get the "floating in the air" experience that I have got used to with the UA mount.

Re dew: the hideous green dew shields that I describe in the September S@N mag recently kept my 15x70 objectives clear for over 4 hrs.

The Helios Apollo 15X70 HD Binoculars are the best binoculars in the world, got a pair and there more there amazing!!!

Matt, I see from your avatar that you have them on what looks like the Paragon mount. May I ask how you balance them, please. I have recently acquired the Virgo Astronomics  "original" of the Paragon and find that the counterweight is slightly too light, so I have to tension it up a bit with the Apollo 15x70.  (Which is not surprising, given that the mount is rated for 5lb (2.3kg) binocs and the Apollo weighs 2.5kg (5lb 8oz).)

I ordered an adaptor plate for an AZ3.. Delivery was cited as "1-3 days" which, I assumed, implied that it was in stock at the importers, but that FLO did not hold stock themselves.

I was kept informed all the way as to when FLO expected to receive it and when it was dispatched to me. This doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the delivery time, but it does make one feel that even this tiny order was being "looked after". Makes all the difference: thanks!

Ordered a small binocular on Sunday afternoon. I accompanied the order with a request that it was sent by next day delivery as I wanted it by today; I offered to pay any extra P&P  to ensure that this happened.

An email on Monday confirmed that it would be sent out by next day delivery; no additional charge was made for this.

When it arrived today (just after lunch) it was in a box big enough to get a 15x70 in. Initial thought was "wasted packaging" - then I saw the socking great dent in the packaging. With some trepidation, I unwrapped it; the outer cardboard box was ruptured with polystyrene packing beads making a bid for freedom. The inner box was completely unaffected and the binocular inside was in pristine condition.

Firstly, good service!

Secondly, packaging that defeats the best efforts of careless carriers has to be a good thing.

I could wax lyrical about the Imagic but you'll probably think I am trying to sell it 

OTOH, it would be somewhat alarming if you were selling kit about which you felt  you could not wax lyrical!

Anyone got any suggestions for bin repairers?

Indeed I do:

Action Optics

OptRep

I managed to get hold of a used Manfrotto 222 trigger-grip head on FleaBay for a reasonable price. It arrived today, so I've been comparing it to the Weifeng WT011H (branded Konig/Olivon/Camrock/DynaSun/etc.) that we all seem to be using. 

• Overall impression is that, where the Weifeng oozes basic utilitarianism, the Manfrotto oozes quality and class. It's matte black powder-coated, so it feels warmer (and softer) to the touch -- no doubt this will change inuse it under a clear night where it will radiatively cool much quicker than the Weifeng.
• The Manfrotto ball is very much smoother. Visually, the Weifeng ball has ridges, and these manifest as a change in ball-tension in different parts of the motion. The Manfrotto ball-tension is uniform.
• The Manfrotto has a tension-adjust that adjusts the ball-tension when the grip is operated, from "none at all" to "good - the binoculars won't slip and bash my nose as I try to adjust the elevation". No such niceties on the Weifeng.
• The Manfrotto base is slightly larger and has a knurled rim. This allows it to be more easily tightened onto the monopod.
• The Manfrotto operating plunger is partly external, making it potentially more vulnerable than the entirely internal Weifeng mechanism.
• The Manfrotto QR plate is smaller and has no video pin.
• The Manfrotto QR plate release lever mechanism is external, making it potentially more vulnerable than the entirely internal Weifeng mechanism.
• The Manfrotto QR plate lock is a tiny brass thumb-lever; the Weifeng lock is a knurled thumbscrew.

Overall, the Manfrotto is clearly the better head -- as it should be at around three times the price. However, bits of it are a bit more vulnerable to damage than is the case with the Weifeng, so more care will need to be taken with storage and transport. Is it worth the extra? Hard to say: I wouldn't have paid full price for it and I won't be getting rid of the Weifeng, but I really do appreciate the better quality of the Manfrotto.

Opticron 10×42 BGA: Easily hand-holdable; very good optics. Use it as a quick "grab and go" and as a hand-holdable adjunct to my big binoc.

Miyauchi 20/37x100 Bj-100B: My main observing instrument; rarely use the x20 eyepieces. In preference, I put it on a UA T-Mount, but also have a Manfrotto 475/501 combo for a more portable option.

Helios Apollo (UA BA8) 15x70: Very good "grab & go" binocular, and superb on a monopod/trigger-grip ball-head. (see avatar! )

Oberwerk Ultra (UA BA8) 10x50: Very good quality. The weight adds inertia, which damps the "shakes".

Vortex Raptor 6.5x32: Decent quality, 8° FoV.

Strathspey (UA BM2) 10x50 Marine: Lives permanently in the car; extremely robust and reasonably good optics.

Strathspey (UA BA1) 15x70: bought to experiment on/with. Not bad. Used as a "loan to members" instrument for my local AS.

Frank Nipole 10x50: very good incarnation of "old style" binocs, rudimentary coatings and BK7 prisms. Brighter and sharper than modern budget (e.g. UA BA1 and BF4) 10x50s, and used primarily for demonstrating this.

Unbranded 12-60x70 zoom: also has "ruby" coating. Donated. Kept as a demonstration example of almost exactly what a binocular for astronomy should not be. (I'd be ashamed to have my name on it, so not surprised it's unbranded -- might be an early UA BZ1; still hawked on eBay)

Hold them like method #2 here: http://binocularsky.com/binoc_hold.php

Lidl 10X50 which I rarely use even though collimation and mechanics are fine. It's left way behind by my 50-year-old Wray Nine (9X60) despite basic coatings and little eye relief. Just light enough to be hand-held, but those extra millimetres in the objectives make a big difference - Hugh 

Probably a bigger difference than most would imagine. The Lidl binoclars are internally stopped to around 42mm, which means that the Wray will have over twice the light-gathering!

I use the following:

Trigger Grip (Very adjustable tension, so you can tweak it to be ideal for your binocular.)

Monopod (Superb quality; adjustable tension in the leg clamps. I also fitted a spiked foot.

This monopod was adequate for about a year, but the (non-adjustable) clamps eventually didn't grip tightly enough. If you use a monopod that doesn't have a 3/8" option, you will need one of these to mate it to the trigger grip.

HTH

Opticron 10×42 BGA: Easily hand-holdable; very good optics. Use it as a quick "grab and go" and as a hand-holdable adjunct to my big binoc.

Strathspey (UA BM2) 10x50 Marine: Lives permanently in the car; extremely robust and reasonably good optics.

Miyauchi 20/37x100 Bj-100B: My main observing instrument; rarely use the x20 eyepieces. In preference, I put it on a UA T-Mount, but also have a Manfrotto 475/501 combo for a more portable option.

Ah. Forgot about this thread. To the above, add:

Helios Apollo (UA BA8) 15x70: Very good "grab & go" binocular, and superb on a monopod/trigger-grip ball-head. (see avatar! )

Strathspey (UA BA1) 15x70: bought to experiment on/with. Not bad. Used as a "loan to members" instrument for my local AS.

Frank Nipole 10x50: very good incarnation of "old style" binocs, rudimentary coatings and BK7 prisms. Brighter and sharper than modern budget (e.g. UA BA1 and BF4) 10x50s, and used primarily for demonstrating this.

Unbranded 12-60x70 zoom: also has "ruby" coating. Donated. Kept as a demonstration example of almost exactly what a binocular for astronomy should not be. (I'd be ashamed to have my name on it, so not surprised it's unbranded -- might be an early UA BZ1; still hawked on eBay)

Looks like I commented on the unedited version

I use the monopod and trigger grip with the 15x70s, as recommended by Steve,and it's great but if you go with 25x100s you'll need some thing more substantial.

Indeed so.

Be prepared to spend around £150-200 on a decent mount.

You can certainly spend that much (or more) on a decent mount, but I usually use mine on a monopod and trigger-grip ball-head -- this combo cost me a mere £55 (after I'd upgraded the monopod -- £33 with the cheap one -- but the trigger-grips have gone up a tenner or so since). Details at http://binocularsky.com/binoc_mount.php

I am thinking of getting the Helios 15x70mm Apollo Binoculars ... and also is there a lot of difference between the Helios ones and the Celestron Skymaster 15x70mm ones.

Yes. Enormous difference. The only possible advantages the Skymaster has are that it is lighter and cheaper; in all other respects the Helios Apollo is significantly better.

What do you mean by a 'fast' scope?

A telescope with a small focal ratio, e.g. a f/4 scope is faster than a f/7 scope. The term comes from photography, where the aperture of s lens is given in terms of focal ratio, a greater aperture (short focal ratio) lets in more light, allowing fot shorter (faster) exposures.

On the batphone, so expect typos...

... I might be a bit harsh on these binoculars,

No, I don't think so. Realistic, perhaps, but not harsh. I played with some on Saturday in my local Lidl and was definitely underwhelmed. About the only thing they got right was not wasting resources by using that grotty Chinese BAK4 phosphate crown glass for the prisms; BK7 is far more appropriate in a binocular like this.

... but I seem to have a good pair.

... as the actress said to the Bishop.

Excuse my terminology, I don't know what I'm talking about.

I'm sure!