Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Excellent

About WJC

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
    Idaho, USA
  1. You can make your EPs out of two Plossels from any two identical (cheap) binoculars. Plossel is just the more expensive name for symmetrical doublets.
  2. I sure would like to change my cover photo. However, I have dragged and dropped, and I have uploaded, and it makes no difference. Only a tiny portion of the image is available because it fills up the top of my 27-inch screen. I have reduced the jpg to as small as my computer will allow—30kb—AND IT STILL FILLS THE SCREEN! Would someone please help. I have been using computers since they were available to the average consumer. But this is not even close to intuitive. Thanks, Bill
  3. Talk of binocular collimation always brings me out of my hole. I just try to raise the bar of optical understanding and stand tall (I’m 5’4”) against that optical nonsense about collimation currently on the Internet, all of which deals with CONDITIONAL ALIGNMENT and none of which deals with 3-axis binocular collimation. Of course, if you don’t have a certifiable collimator, the Willy-Nilly tweaking of screws is what you must try to elevate to the level of ........ COLLIMATION! Does calling a Shetland Pony a Clydesdale (also from Scotland) make it NOT a Shetland? “The truth is incontrovertible. Malice my attack it, ignorance may deride it, but, in the end, there it is.”— Winston Churchill IF the error is small; IF you choose the correct side to tweak, IF your spatial accommodation is adequate, and (perhaps) IF you can deal well with headaches, CoAl might be all you need to be happy. It is NOT, HOWEVER, collimation! And NO, it can’t be done indoors, without a collimator, anyway! There are a lot of well-meaning people out there spewing popular nonsense. Almost ever time I see binocular optics scattered all over the table, I ask how they are going to collimate it once it’s back together. So far, no one has bothered to answer. This includes one who is considered an expert in repair. For me, repair would include collimation. The photos below are of OM1 Cory Suddarth (and his Mk 5 collimator), OMC Bill Cook (and his Mk 5 Collimator), and a couple of folks who think I know what I’m talking about. Bill
  4. You should be very proud of what you did on that piece! I keep hoping that as I reach my expiration date, a few others have learned enough to keep the craft going. Too many, though, should start a business called ... SHORTCUTS R US! There are two ways to make a profit. Through shortcuts and through learning your craft well enough to do your projects in record time ... without shortcuts! The money is all the same but the latter method will earn you more of it.
  5. Dave, I hope you know I will help all I can, any time I can. My arms can't reach 4,840 miles ... but the Internet can. Bill PS Do you know Gary Hawkins?
  6. Not at all. I used my Audubon until replaced by my 8x32 Nikon SE. Just think how lucky I was. When I bought it from my sea of Zeiss, Leica, & Swarovski, it was just a great binocular and a very good price. Now, thanks to the needs of my countrymen, I have (drum roll, please) an ... “ALPHA!” Being a great bino technician requires a modicum of dexterity, experience, and common sense. However, performing a 3-axis collimation requires considerably more. Complicated? NO! Requiring special skills? NO! Requiring one to stop making lame excuses and taking asinine short cuts? Yes. There’s one know-nothing pathological liar over on _________________ who is getting an ego stroke by showing others how much he doesn’t know about collimation by overly extrapolating the math and drawings involved. Doing so, he has the super newbies wrapped around his finger. Heck, real Opticalmen can collimate 3 binos while he’s trying to figure out what his pretty drawings mean.
  7. Woah! Would you like to kiss my ring, too! I think your plan is more than adequate. However, although the nitrogen molecule is slightly larger than O2 molecule, that instrument probably lost its nitrogen YEARS ago. Do I know that with certainly? No. But has experience told me that it’s probably so? Yes. What I do know with certainty is that nitrogen is still available. But, being a Brit, just be sure it’s left-handed and metric nitrogen!
  8. Hi, Dave, Nope. But some people don't get it. A new Roll Royce Phantom and a used Volkswagen Beetle are autos. But that's where the similarity ends. Every time I see a bino broken down all over the kitchen table, I ask what method is going to be used in collimation. So far, I have received no answers. I'm such a bad fellow. Realistic but bad. Bill
  9. I think you will find the "trick" not to be in reassembly but in collimation once that task is completed. 100% of the “collimation tips” CURRENTLY on the Internet are WRONG and deal only with CoAl (conditional alignment). This task, shared in Jan Seifred’s, Choosing, Using, & Repairing Binoculars, the Edmund Scientific booklet, Collimators & Collimation No. 9072, and others, erroneously reference the LONG-OUTDATED Brit method developed using their MK 1 collimator (attached), which they (the Department of Munitions) had abandoned by 1941. CoAl is adequate for SOME observers IF the binocular is going to be used by them or others with nearly the same IPD, IF the error is small, or IF they have adequate spatial accommodation. However, for a complete disassembly/reassembly operation, alignment will usually fall short of not inducing some degree of eyestrain.
  10. The Internet is filled with “collimation tips” to teach you how to “conditionally align” your binocular. ABSOLUTELY NONE will teach you how to collimate. In some cases, conditional alignment will serve you. Most of the “collimation tips” come from those who want you to think they’ve just discovered a sure-fire, 5-minute brain surgery technique. But fighting that battle for 44 years, I say: More power to them. Experience is the best teacher, ANYWAY.
  11. “An innovative Newtonian-style reflecting lens…” What a wealth of brain cells with which to cheat those with not so many! Bill
  12. I published the following on Cloudy Nights in January 2007: >>>Not "Newtonian" in the accepted sense of the word (they have objective lenses).<<< Stephen is always the gentleman. I would love to be, but just about every day, I have to try to unscrew the ideas of someone who has had his or her mind made up about something relating to binoculars, but in no way relating to reality. As far as the "Newtonian" binocular, I offer the following. It was taken from a rather large rant I sent off to a largely uncaring group of binocular merchants about 5 years ago. The bottom line? No matter what name you slap on the side, millions of people will believe that a binocular company of the same name actually exists and that everything we see in print must be true. Have fun. Bill Story #3: The Ads To further (and finally) illustrate just how in tune and caring some optical distributors are, I would like to quote a few of MANY screw-ups I picked out of one national catalog: 1) “Large 50mm objective lens gathers 87% of incoming light.” No! It may transmit only 87%, but it gathers 100%. Yes, I know what they meant. BUT, there was not one word said about coatings because THEY apparently didn’t know what they meant. 2) A particular telescope, which was a folded REFRACTOR, was advertised as: “An innovative Newtonian-style reflecting lens…” 3) They also have a 7x50 Ruby coated binocular that has: “Large 50mm PRECISION objectives gather light effectively, for bright hassle-free viewing.” Does that mean some sizes create a hassle!? Pity, really! 4) The same bino has a right eye adjustment that “can correct for any eye combination.” I guess that means if you have 3 eyes you are still set. That ad concludes by saying the “optical components are precision and fully coated.” I probably shouldn’t be too critical. I once had a telescope that was coated with . . . “precision.” 5) Another ad read, “Mirrored Optics Provide Faster Light Transition” Of course, they were looking for “light transmission.” However, that is not the point. Light can travel the distance around the earth 7.45 times in ONE SECOND. So how much quicker is light going to travel through a 6-inch binocular because of mirrored optics!? It is pretty obvious that the people who write ads like these haven’t a clue what they are talking about. Still, what does their publication say about the manufacturers who supposedly proofed the ad copy!? Oh, and this is just the tip of the iceberg; I could write head-shaking volumes. And, there is really no need to pick on these poor people. There are other catalogs that are even worse. Of course, we can expect this from the purveyors of junk. However, this “who cares / who knows” mentality is running rampant and is poised to strangle every honest, caring and knowledgeable optics merchant and technician. Yesterday, a representative of one of these giants was visiting my store and was honest enough to verify what I already knew: “You’re right, its all manufacturer driven; I can’t deny that. The guys at the top want more and more of the market share and that means pushing boxes out of the plant. That’s all it comes down to – boxes, not optics.”
  13. This just goes to show that the marketing department is just as stupid and crooked as anyone else in the company. Is it a Newtonian or a Porro prism unit. Not to worry; they're clueless as to the difference. Of course, it's not about optics; it's about pushing the boxes out to the trusting or cranially challenged masses.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.