Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_31.thumb.jpg.b7a41d6a0fa4e315f57ea3e240acf140.jpg

Are these binoculars hopelessly outdated and useless, even for a beginner?


Recommended Posts

I am at the very beginning of this journey and am learning fast.  I have read some guides and have reigned in my enthusiasm to splash out on a big flashy telescope and see what I can see in the night sky at home with some binoculars first as a way of introducing myself to the layout of our galaxy.

I bought some binoculars for about £10 in a charity shop. They're clearly old and I always seem to see double through them.  

Can someone knowledgeable tell me if these are even worth bothering with trying?  I can't find much on the net about them.

 https://photos.app.goo.gl/o4cghH3xcB9cUVj52

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

There are online guides on how to fix the double vision, the binoculars probably need collimation. But having looked at the picture they are zoom binoculars. Whilst I think charity shop find are great, zoom binoculars are generally not as good as a fixed pair but you already have them and I'd use them at their least zoomed position. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you've got them now.....

Generally, Zoom binoculars are best avoided because they often are lower quality or suffer from misalignment as you seem to be finding. I have a pair of 7x35 Chinon's and they give me nice widefield views, around 10 degrees.

I would try them at the lowest magnification setting, are they still out of alignment then?  If so, the only option I would think would be to open them up and see if there is any possibility to adjust the prisms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll find lots of information on binocularsky website.

For general use including night sky I prefer 8*42 (8 is magnification 42 is size of aperture) as easy to hand hold with minimum wobbling.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, happy-kat said:

For general use including night sky I prefer 8*42 (8 is magnification 42 is size of aperture) as easy to hand hold with minimum wobbling.

Totally agree, not too heavy and give a good field of view. Ideal for cruising around and good for terrestrial use too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. The Nikon Action and Olympus DPS 8x40 get good reviews and are not too expensive. I have the Nikons. Old binoculars bought on Ebay and from charity shops can be  great  and I have several pairs  but in my experience they usually need an internal clean and sometimes a realignment.  The latter causes eyestrain and discomfort in use. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A cheap alternative might be some of those Bressers 10x50's that Aldi or Liddl have on offer from time to time. I got a pair for £15 a few years ago and they still work absolutely fine. They'd be a bargain if they were now another tenner. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a pair of Chinon Countryman 7x35. I've had them since the '70s and were quite expensive at the time. They are still better than a lot of the newer binoculars and give a really nice wide field of view.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

Chinon (Japan) could make exceptional lenses to rival or exceed Asahi Pentax. Very good glass that will probably exceed Olympus and Nikon. I have a pair of 8x40 wide angle 9°.  Chinon produced the first production autofocus camera lenses. Chinon got bought out by Kodak Japan.  You should be able to compensate vision on one of the eyepieces. You may want to use a monopod or video head tripod when looking up for long.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/01/2018 at 17:32, brantuk said:

A cheap alternative might be some of those Bressers 10x50's that Aldi or Liddl have on offer from time to time. I got a pair for £15 a few years ago and they still work absolutely fine. They'd be a bargain if they were now another tenner.

I have a pair of these bought some years ago. They work fine for day or night use, but I did have to recollimate them after a while. Considering how much you can pay for premium binoculars I thought they were an absolute bargain.

Edited by Cosmic Geoff
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a story......i was passing a charity shop near me,and in the window was a pair of Carl Zeiss 8x30 binos which were in mint condition,now they were being sold as broken as there was double vision.So for £10 i thought i would take them and get them collimated.When i got a good look at them i noticed that one of the front lenses was slightly unscrewed,so tightened it up and to my joy....collimation was perfect.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By andyrawlins
      Here is a review and then a couple of questions to the forum
      The experience I gained assessing my new Nikon Action EX 10x50s https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/369052-comparison-of-pentax-sp-50-wp-10x50-and-nikon-action-ex-10x50-cf/?tab=comments#comment-4009551 led me to dig out my old Vivitar Series 1 8x25.  I bought these in 1995 for £99, so not an insignificant amount then.  Series 1 was Vivitar's premium range at a time when (I believe) they were well regarded for their optics (now they seem to sell basically children's toy binoculars). Anyway, despite their price/apparent pedigree and excellent build (made in Japan) I never got on with them, finding them very difficult to focus and to keep in focus.  They rarely got used and indeed got superseded for general use by the Inpro 10x50 mentioned in the thread above.
          
      Using what I learned when assessing the Nikon's I decided that the focus problems were down to four things: 1. a small exit pupil, quoted as 3.12mm, so you need to have the eyepieces correctly positioned over each eye; 2. a short eye relief that I estimated to be about 11mm. I found the view (without glasses) to be best with the short (4.5mm) rubber eye cups folded down.  Wearing glasses, it was like looking down a drain pipe with a severely vignetted view; 3. difficulties getting the interpupillary distance right: for some reason the image is significantly brighter when the binoculars are set wider than the correct distance.  However, at this, what would appear to be the correct separation, they will not come completely to focus. When they are brought down to the correct distance (60mm for me)  the image suddenly gets darker but actually focusses well; 4. a very 'low geared' focus wheel and seemingly very short depth of field which necessitates a lot of focus twiddling every time you change view (not for objects at infinity, obviously).  Because of these things, its crucial to get the binoculars correctly positioned over the eyes and to keep them in that position.  Once they are correct the image is actually not bad.  To be specific, the image is almost exactly like it looks with the naked eye: the same colour balance, the same detail and resolution, the same clarity, the same brightness - just a bit bigger.  Its quite uncanny really. In contrast, the Nikons give an almost hyper-real clarity, detail and brightness and as serious wow factor. 
      Compared to the 10x50s they really didn't seem to magnify that much  (I found the objectives to actually be 23mm so 7.4x not 😎 but maybe this is something to do with AFoV. FoV is quoted as 'Wide Field 8.2°'.
      So basically they magnify the image but not the brightness which is fine for daylight use but fairly useless as night.  The big advantage, however, is that whereas the Nikon's are over a kilogram and will only just fit inside my zipped up coat when round my neck, these weigh a third as much (350g) and are a fraction of the size (105x120mm).  They easily fit in my coat pocket.  
      So I think I should give them more of a chance by keeping them in my coat pocket so they are there when I need them (the best binocular is the one you have with you!). 
      On to my question then: does anyone know anything more about these older Vivitars: whether they are actually any good and when and why the company seemed to give up with proper optics?  I can find nothing on the internet.  All I have is the Vivitar brochure from the time (attached) in which the certainly seem to regard themselves as makers of 'proper optics'. 
      I'd also welcome comments on the issues I found and whether my conclusions are correct.  



      IMG_20210113_0002.pdf
    • By anyela
      Hello, my eight yeard old child wants to get into astronomy so she asked for a telescope. I have read that binoculars are as good as telescopes. Since I have always wanted to get into astronomy but never found the time, I thought I tag along and buy one that both can use. Can anybody recommend me a telescope that  is good enough for astronomy but can also be used by a small child.
      Thanks
    • By andyrawlins
      Hi All
      After much research, primarily on this site and The Binocular Sky, I got hold of the above binoculars.  I spent ages writing a review specifically for this site of what I found, as a thanks for all the advice I had received.  By the power of idiocy I then managed to post it on Cloudy Nights instead (I had both open in my browser).  Too much Christmas port I guess  
      Anyway, too late to take it down as some have already replied and I guess I shouldn't post the same thing on two sites so here is a link to my review on completely the wrong site   No offence at all to Cloudy Nights but I wrote it with the Stargazers Lounge audience in mind and it may make less sense on a US site.
      Comparison of Pentax SP 50 WP 10x50 and Nikon Action EX 10x50 CF




    • By WiltsStarGazer
      Hi,
      I have Skytee 2 mount, on which I use the side mount for my 200p and use the top mount for my 127 Mak, sometimes at the same time. (Yes, I got carried away with secondhand bargain madness during the first lockdown 😏)
      What I would like to do is use the top mount to mount my 15x70 binoculars so I can let the family see what I'm looking at without having change the height of eyepieces on the scope or them using steps.
      For this I would need a sturdy adaptor which has a dovetail (vixen?) base with the normal screw fit for the tripod mounting bracket between the lenses.
      Does such a thing exist? If it does, I haven't been able to find it.
      Does anyone know of one?
      Thanks
       
    • By tylersk90
      Some say 10x50 can be held, other say it’s shakey, or at the limits of what’s possible. We all know the YMMV differences between each of us, but what I find misleading is the weight of the bins are never mentioned. Some 10x50s are twice as heavy as other brands. (I have some APM apo ED 10x50 that are over 3lbs, while the Orion Scenix 10x50 is like 1.7 lbs.)
      How much are the recommendations we read speaking in strictly magnification terms? Or is it possible the wide range of opinions from the community come from unwittingly comparing apples (3lb 10x50s) to oranges (1.5lb 10x50s)?
      Cheers!
      Tyler
       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.