Nikon Aculon 10x50 arrived. (1 Viewer)

[cpper]

Hello
First of all, thank you Binastro for your advices,I think I made the right choice !
Today I received the Nikon Aculon 10x50 !
They are fantastic, very sharp and bright image,confortable,they are perfect.
I can't write a review because this is my first pair, but I will try to answer if you have any questions !
I want to test them, so could you tell me what actually to test ?
I can't imagine something better then this bins

 

[Binastro]

. Congratulations, I hope you have a good time using them.

Firstly set the distance between two binocular barrels to exactly match the distance between your eyes.
Then focus probably the left half with your left eye and then use the dioptre control to get your right eye focused.

You don't really have to test them at all just use them and enjoy what you see.

Maybe if you go up to the mountains or go hiking you might need a stronger case.
I don't know if the case supplied gives much protection.
Or maybe some bubblewrap.

Just use them in the day and in the night for whatever you want to look at.

Never look at the sun with any optical instruments or even with your unaided eyes.

Just relax and enjoy them.

 

[cpper]

Thanks
I set them,they are still perfect )
The case seem to be strong and soft,although it has no carrying strap.
I will use them tonight,a clear night I hope.I will search some messiers-s after moonset.

 

[Binastro]

. Look at the moon also especially earthshine which is the light from the Earth reflected back from the dark portion of the moon when it is a crescent.
It can be very strong with a small crescent moon.

And as this is the bird Forum perhaps you have some owls to look at.

I saw and photographed a kestrel at about midday today but it was quite far off so it's not very detailed.
A few weeks ago I photographed a cormorant flying high.

 

[cpper]

I've alredy looked at the moon,at ~17:30,its very cler and sharp!
I want to spot the ISS tonight,if the sky is clear.

I love owls ! Unfortunately ,there arent many owls in my country .Look at this,my post: http://www.owlpages.info/forum/viewtopic.php?p=12715&sid=25dc16f5451e46d4d584eca56f9887cd
The ural owl seem to be rare in my area.
You can see some pictures,I posted a facebook link on the forum.

 

[bh46118]

Get off of this forum immediately before someone tells you what not to like about them. :eek!: :-O

Hello
First of all, thank you Binastro for your advices,I think I made the right choice !
Today I received the Nikon Aculon 10x50 !
They are fantastic, very sharp and bright image,confortable,they are perfect.
I can't write a review because this is my first pair, but I will try to answer if you have any questions !
I want to test them, so could you tell me what actually to test ?
I can't imagine something better then this bins

 

[brocknroller]

Get off of this forum immediately before someone tells you what not to like about them. :eek!: :-O

Oh, you mean like too much pincushion and resultant "rolling bowl," not enough pincushion (AMD) and resultant "rolling ball," chromatic aberration, field curvature, astigmatism (which has recently been downgraded from an objective optical aberration to a observer-dependent feature, depending on who's looking at it and how they are looking at it - aka the "Heisenberg Principle of Optics"), ergonomics, eyegonomics (those eyecups look pretty wide) including "nose room," build quality, AR coatings (exactly what does MC mean for the Aculon?), size of the sweet spot/edge performance measured in hundredths of an arc second, light transmission graphs and all that goes with that including color bias/whiteness of the image, peak value, and average value, collimation, vignetting of the exit pupils, internal reflections (glare, flare, and light leaks in the area around exit pupils), FOV (6.5* is very good for a 10x50), coma, prism coatings and phase coatings (PC does not apply to porros), darkening at the edges of the field, warranty, tripod exit (for adapter), and last but certainly not least, spherical aberration of the exit pupil.

I probably missed a few, but there's enough to get you started on becoming an optics obsessive. You will need at least a 3x booster and an RAF resolution chart if you want to be taken seriously.

<B>

 

[ronh]

I haven't used them myself, but by almost all accounts on two binocular forums, the lower rung Nikon Porros are very good binoculars, and the most recommended in their price range. Nikon does good work, top to bottom. Enjoy them.
Ron

 

[Chosun Juan]

... I want to test them, so could you tell me what actually to test ?

Oh, you mean like too much pincushion and resultant "rolling bowl," not enough pincushion (AMD) and resultant "rolling ball," chromatic aberration, field curvature, astigmatism (which has recently been downgraded from an objective optical aberration to a observer-dependent feature, depending on who's looking at it and how they are looking at it - aka the "Heisenberg Principle of Optics"), ergonomics, eyegonomics (those eyecups look pretty wide) including "nose room," build quality, AR coatings (exactly what does MC mean for the Aculon?), size of the sweet spot/edge performance measured in hundredths of an arc second, light transmission graphs and all that goes with that including color bias/whiteness of the image, peak value, and average value, collimation, vignetting of the exit pupils, internal reflections (glare, flare, and light leaks in the area around exit pupils), FOV (6.5* is very good for a 10x50), coma, prism coatings and phase coatings (PC does not apply to porros), darkening at the edges of the field, warranty, tripod exit (for adapter), and last but certainly not least, spherical aberration of the exit pupil.

I probably missed a few, but there's enough to get you started on becoming an optics obsessive. You will need at least a 3x booster and an RAF resolution chart if you want to be taken seriously.

<B>

Yes! exactly like that stuff - just ignore the lot of it and follow the earlier advice - just go and look at stuff !! (but not the sun) ....

....You don't really have to test them at all just use them and enjoy what you see ..... Just use them in the day and in the night for whatever you want to look at.

Never look at the sun with any optical instruments or even with your unaided eyes.

Just relax and enjoy them.

Get off of this forum immediately before someone tells you what not to like about them. :eek!: :-O

Chosun :gh:

 

[Binastro]

. This may be of interest regarding earthshine mentioned above.
Because it has been totally cloudy for many days I did not realise the moon was about six days old.

Earthshine can be a very good test for binoculars.
That is if the moon is half or 55% to 60% lit.
In other words slightly gibbous.

Earthshine varies depending on the amount of cloud on the Earth's hemisphere facing the moon.
It also depends on the transparency of the atmosphere and the elevation of the moon above the horizon.
Maybe more importantly, it depends on the experience of the Observer and the Observer's eyesight.

Having said the above if you can see earthshine with a 55% lit moon the binocular is probably very good. Many binoculars don't show this.
The real test comes at may be a 60% lit moon.
If your binocular can detect the very faint earthshine against the bright moon and the sky it is probably very good indeed.

The ideal test would be to have several binoculars with a 55% and 60% lit moon and you will find out how good the binoculars really are.

I can usually detect earthshine with a good binocular at 55% lit moon and I think occasionally at 60% lit.

However, detecting earthshine with the unaided eyes is usually very difficult with a 50% lit moon. A binocular does much better.

I don't know if there are any terrestrial tests as good as this for detecting really faint detail.

Perhaps somebody knows of such a test.

I always prefer practical real-life tests to test charts.

I don't know if the RAF have their own test charts or whether they use US standard ones.

I used to be an aircraft spotter when young and could identify an aircraft in 1/10 of a second or less sometimes flicking through a book perhaps one hundredth of a second.

Birds are probably more difficult as their outline is much more variable even for a single bird so I suspect birdwatchers might identify birds in less than one second but I don't know if they can manage one 10th of a second unless they are very easy to identify.