APM 16x70 ED (review of sorts)

[Mr_Simnock]

So recently whilst perusing the internet I had a bit of an epiphany, instead of just staring at all the lovely astro binoculars on display why not just buy some? I have recently been promoted at work so why not? Let’s not let the extra cash go to waste I need to, post haste, purchase a new pair of bino’s for the old star gazing I thought. After a bit of reading about various objective sizes and makes I have landed myself a pair of APM MS 16 x 70 ED Apo Magnesium Series Binoculars.

I bagged mine from APM direct at the sale price of €591 (£521), which at the time of writing is still on. They arrived about a week later very well packaged, in fact I did wonder if it was simply binoculars that had been sent as the box was huge. They come with a decent bag, straps, lens cleaning cloth and tripod adapter. They also have rubber lens covers which fit very well, particularly the front lens caps which need a bit of effort to remove and pop back on.

To hold they are remarkably light, could this be due to the magnesium body? They feel sturdy and well made, the individual focusers on each eyepiece move smoothly and don’t budge once focus is found. I can hand hold these without too much effort but I prefer to pop them on a tripod (no, I won’t be going down the parallelogram route before you mention it). These binoculars are sold (minus the FK-61 ED front lenses) by quite a few companies – LUNT and HELIOS amongst them and are manufactured in China primarily for their military.

What are they like to look through? In a word – superb. I do have a pair of Zeiss 8x32 Conquest and the APMs compare very well ( I think of them as a big brother equivalent ). Two minor points - the eye relief, although good, it isn’t as good as the smaller 8x32s and there is also more CA during daylight viewing. Considering these are 70mm lenses the CA is in fact very well corrected and you have to go looking for it too, it is very minor during the day and I haven’t noticed it so far under the stars. The field of view is bright, flat and colours really come through. I haven’t noticed any pin cushion distortion either and also stars remain sharp out to at least 90% of full view. My only issue is I have to roll back the rubber eye cups to get the full view at the eye pieces but considering all else is excellent I can live with this easily.

I haven’t had too much time to look through them so far but what time I have had has been brilliant. I didn’t think they could make the dumbbell nebular stand out so easily, with averted vision a very clear round structure can be seen (with direct view it’s still there but more as a smudge). The double cluster and Owl Cluster (NGC 457) looked brilliant as did the ‘coathanger’ asterism (Collinder 399) in Vulpecula. Even in these late June early July nights (around midnight) stars down to about mag 10 are seen so I can’t wait for this autumn and winter where I should reach mag 11 easily. M31 is visible at the moment but nothing worth spending any time at, will return to that during the darker months.

All in all I’m glad I finally took the plunge, they are great binoculars and the amateur has never had it so good for under £1000 by a long shot.

[Mr Spock]

Nice review.

There's something special about viewing with large binoculars, especially under dark skies. You can almost spend the whole night just gazing.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Great review. Big bins are just awesome tools. I find a mono-pod and pistol grip easier to use than a tripod. I can imagine not going down the P-mount route: I only use mine at outreach event, really.

[LukeSkywatcher]

I dont use my 20x80 nearly enough. I used them on an 8115 tripod but thats pretty much gone into retirement. Will have to start looking for a monopod. Not completely convinced though if a monopod is suitable for wheelchair user. Im thinking it is because it only has one leg. 

[Trikeflyer]

I have some 15x 70 Apollo bins and love them. I have a made a p mount in ash from plans found on the internet and it makes the viewing effortless. It really is easier than I thought to do as I'm no diy expert. If anyone wants the plans and some pics I'll post it for you. 

Steve 

[25585]

Shipping aside the UkrainIan P-mount is good enough for up to 100mm bins and also small scopes provided they are no heavier. I will be using mine for home-based use of 66 and 80mm shorty refractors. 

@LukeSkywatcherA double tube clamp for your wheechair might work with a monopod. Then a suitable angle poise mount on top.  

[doormij]

On ‎05‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 00:44, Mr_Simnock said:

the eye relief, although good, it isn’t as good as the smaller 8x32

20mm according to the APM specs, considerable less in real life?

[doormij]

On ‎05‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 00:44, Mr_Simnock said:

and also stars remain sharp out to at least 90% of full view

With 'flat-field' lenses between prism and eyepiece it would be 99%... something for the  Mark 3 upgrade!

[BinocularSky]

On 07/07/2018 at 20:42, LukeSkywatcher said:

 Not completely convinced though if a monopod is suitable for wheelchair user.

I see no reason why not. The monopod does not need to be vertical for it to offer increased stability. (I discovered this after making a central monopod hole in the seat of my recliner, only to find that it was no more stable than having the pole go down the side of the recliner!)

Alternatively, a clamp and a "magic arm" may offer a better solution.

[Mr_Simnock]

Quote

20mm according to the APM specs, considerable less in real life?

To be honest I always have a little trouble with this when viewing through bino's, the eye relief is fine it's just not as good as my Zeiss conquest 8x32 but I wouldn't expect it to be in all honesty.

Quote

With 'flat-field' lenses between prism and eyepiece it would be 99%... something for the  Mark 3 upgrade!

This is probably the best 70mm binocular under £1000, it's a marvel as it is, many reviews put these as better than Fujinon's legendary efforts. Optics are always a question of give and take, you could have a very flat field of stars but you will have to compromise on something else at this price point, you can't have everything and what these offer is an excellent balance to achieve something rather special. Also I don't think it's as simple as just placing 'flat field' lenses in as you mention, that extra glass for the light to pass through might give a slightly less bright image and that's something I value a lot.

[doormij]

On ‎12‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 22:29, Mr_Simnock said:

Optics are always a question of give and take, you could have a very flat field of stars but you will have to compromise on something else at this price point, you can't have everything and what these offer is an excellent balance to achieve something rather special. Also I don't think it's as simple as just placing 'flat field' lenses in as you mention, that extra glass for the light to pass through might give a slightly less bright image and that's something I value a lot.

The Nikon 10x50 WX has a 99% flat field: stars remain sharp to the edge of the 90 (!) degree apparent field thanks to the 2 field-flattener lenses between the eyepiece and the roof prism, rectilinear distortion of the Nikon WX is high, but angular distortion is very low; this is the best optical formula for a astronomical binocular you can get.

Distortion  is characterized in two ways. In positive or rectilinear distortion, the magnification increases toward the edge of the field: this causes straight lines to appear curved outward, even when the image is stationary. In negative or angular magnification distortion, the magnification decreases toward the edge of the field: this causes straight lines to appear projected onto a spherical surface curved toward the viewer, which is especially noticeable when the optical axis is moved — the image then appears to "roll away" near the field edge.

But there are no straight lines in space, so we don't bother for this Rectilinear distortion ? (except for the moon and planets maybe).

You can not make a binocular with flat field and both zero rectilinear and angular distortion; my Swarovski EL 10x50 has 95% flatfield and very low Rectilinear distortion but high angular distortion (straight lines on the edge are still straight but slightly less magnified)

Light absorption for field flatteners is low: a few percent, the huge prism absorbs much more light.

Image: Nikon WX

Garrett

[Mr_Simnock]

Quote

The Nikon 10x50 WX has a 99% flat field: stars remain sharp to the edge of the 90 (!) degree apparent field thanks to the 2 field-flattener lenses between the eyepiece and the roof prism, rectilinear distortion of the Nikon WX is high, but angular distortion is very low; this is the best optical formula for a astronomical binocular you can get.

Oh yes those, they cost £6000 about 11 times what I paid, why would anyone waste so much money on those when could purchase a decent 4 inch apo, tripod and eyepieces or even an excellent set of 100mm binoculars? Another reason why field flattener lenses wont happen is because the APM bino's are primarily made for the Chinese military, I simply can't see APM convincing the manufacturer to change the production process and overall cost increase in adding these. I'll still take my 70mm lenses over those Nikon WX bino's anyway (and your small Swarovski's) as the extra light grasp is more important to me than just a flat field.

[doormij]

On ‎14‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 18:29, Mr_Simnock said:

Another reason why field flattener lenses wont happen is because the APM bino's are primarily made for the Chinese military

No your wrong, there are several optical manufactories of optical equipment, you can actually order a binocular made to your specification or just a version of the shelf with your name printed on, all within the limits of their capabilities, flat field binoculars is not yet on their list or shelf I guess, but if you  give them the optical formula they make it for you, low quantities are no problem like 100 units.

They are privately owned companies, and they make (I guess) 95% of all the binoculars sold in the world including those from Zeiss... (Swarovski is still being made in Austria).

The latest eyepieces sold by APM are designed by European optical designers contracted by APM/ Mark Ludes, and made in China, just like the eyepieces sold by Baader (Hyperion and Morpheus).

Garrett

 

[Mr_Simnock]

On 15/07/2018 at 17:21, doormij said:

No your wrong, there are several optical manufactories of optical equipment, you can actually order a binocular made to your specification or just a versi........

 

Oh dear oh dear your trying to refute points I'm not even making, oh and thanks for turning a thread about how great these 16x70mm bino's are from APM into some kind of daft point scoring contest.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

6000 quid and you have a 10x50mm pair of bins with flat and extremely wide field (and no doubt superb optical performance). For that kind of money I could also get my current favourite bins (Helios LightQuest 16x80, which is razor sharp up to the edge of the (narrower) FOV), but I have 2.56x more light (or a full magnitude deeper), or the APM 16x70 under discussion here (lighter than my 16x80), and I would have money left for a very big Dob (and even throw in a pretty good Zeis, Leica or Swarovski 10x56 pair). I have looked through some seriously expensive bins (Leica, Zeiss) in the 8x42 - 10x56 range, and compared the view side by side with my old Helios Apollo 15x70, and despite the obvious quality of the Leica or Zeiss bins, I found the extra light grasp of the Apollo 15x70 a boon. My current 16x80 is clearly better than the old Apollo, so I doubt the Nikons would charm me so much that I would buy them even for half that money.

[admin]

On 14/07/2018 at 17:29, Mr_Simnock said:

... why would anyone waste so much money on those 

 

On 15/07/2018 at 17:21, doormij said:

No your wrong ...

 

12 hours ago, Mr_Simnock said:

... some kind of daft point scoring contest.

Gentlemen. This is SGL. Spats allowed on other forums are not permitted here. Please play nicely  

[Mr_Simnock]

Sorry about that, it was turning a bit too reddit. I'm just frustrated at getting doormij to understand that the extra cost in adding field flattening lenses would potentially raise the cost of the finished article to a level that might make them hard to shift for APM. I think these bino's for the money are just fantastic value, they really don't need any more tinkering with. I also don't think these would be possible at this price point (still at 591 euro's) without being mass produced by Synta in China and APM managing to get an agreement to just fit different lenses at the front. I don't think there are any ANY 70mm poro prism binoculars at all with field flattening lenses and I think I know the reason why, although I would be pleased to be proved wrong. Taken today with my mobile phone pressed against the left eyepeice.

[

[FLO]

On 04/07/2018 at 23:44, Mr_Simnock said:

These binoculars are sold (minus the FK-61 ED front lenses) by quite a few companies – LUNT and HELIOS amongst them

A very interesting read but I am curious, who is saying the Helios LightQuest-HR 16x70 is the same minus FK61 glass? 

Steve

[Moonshane]

How can bins (or anything)  be the same but with different optics?

 

[Mr_Simnock]

Its very common for manufacturers to produce the same item and just slap different names on them depending who the customer is, take a look at the images below, all rather similar no? And it's been pointed out on other astro forums that the Lunt, APM and Helios bino's are basically the same model bar very minor changes.

On other photos (I'll put more up later) you can see all 3 models have the same lens caps , baffling, eye pieces and rubber eye cups. Synta are basically onto a winner with these.

 

[FLO]

1 hour ago, Mr_Simnock said:

Its very common for manufacturers to produce the same item and just slap different names on them depending who the customer is, take a look at the images below, all rather similar no? And it's been pointed out on other astro forums that the Lunt, APM and Helios bino's are basically the same model bar very minor changes.

That isn’t what I asked ?

You say in your review the Helios binocular is the same as the APM model “minus the FK-61 ED front lenses”. I think we can agree both binoculars are from the same factory but it is your comment regarding the glass type that most interests me. Are you guessing the Helios model uses different glass? Or has a retailer, distributor or manufacturer stated it? 

Sorry to be pedantic but details like this matter and I am genuinely curious. 

Steve 

[BinocularSky]

On 19/07/2018 at 23:36, Mr_Simnock said:

 Synta are basically onto a winner with these.

How? I understood that these Helios/Lunt/APM binoculars were made by United Optics of Kunming, China. I thought Synta (Technology Corporation) is a Taiwanese company. Is this incorrect?

 

[Mr_Simnock]

Your right they are made by Kunming United Optics not the Taiwanese Synta.

Quote

That isn’t what I asked

That's because I was responding to Moonshane not yourself

[FLO]

On 04/07/2018 at 23:44, Mr_Simnock said:

These binoculars are sold (minus the FK-61 ED front lenses) by quite a few companies – LUNT and HELIOS amongst them...

So, about that glass type ? 

Are you guessing the Helios model uses different glass? Or has a retailer, distributor or manufacturer stated it? 

I am not denying your experience of the APM model. I know this binocular performs very well, regardless of the brand name. 

Steve 

[Stu]

27 minutes ago, Mr_Simnock said:

That's because I was responding to Moonshane not yourself

But the question is still basically the same. It is well known that many companies rebrand the same model, but not to change the optics in a model that looks exactly the same.