The APM 6.5x32: Mini review (1 Viewer)

[Dave_J]

I own both, but don't think I can add anything to what has been said already on the many and various threads concerning these two instruments. Similar field of view maybe, but otherwise like chalk and cheese, in terms of optical character and ergonomics (ENORMOUS eyecups notwithstanding!).

Ergonomically, I would suggest both are very much an acquired taste, especially if you don't wear glasses. Try before you buy has never been a more appropriate piece of advice, especially as the forum is littered with reports of unacceptable quality control and sample variation, for both instruments. I'm also not convinced that either is a strong candidate as a travel binocular. So, to turn your question on it's head, is there actually any major reason for you to consider purchasing either of these instruments?

Thank you for your opinion and your question. Such a reason could be, for example, their wide FOV.
However, I already have the SRBC and am very satisfied despite all its specifics. Yes, there has been a lot of debate about both instruments, yet I was interested in the opinion of someone who has both. I understand that they have a lot of differences, but they also have a few things in common, such as similar magnification (almost 7x vs 8x), similar FOV, similar weight, both are relative novelties and both are MIC. Unfortunately trying out the unit beforehand as you know is not easy unless you want to follow the martyrdom of sending it back. Plus you need to have the unit for at least some time and use it; in my experience sometimes first impressions and conclusions are not correct and you get used to a lot of things over time.
So generally I get the impression that for you both are different enough and you have a reason to use and enjoy both, depending on the need of the moment and they are not interchangeable.

 

[yarrellii]

(Suspense music) And now the plot thickens...

I wrote to APM in order to return the APM 6.5x32 after my insatisfactory experience with them. First I got the usual reply from APM customer service with instructions on how to return it. But some moments later I got another email from Markus Ludes who informed me that they have changed they eyecups. He very kindly offered to exchange the binoculars for another unit "with new narrow rubber eyecups". He explicitly mentions that "70 % of buyers do not like them and about 30% like them very much". So, I wonder if there is a new version with narrow eyecups, if they can swap the eyecups with something like the rubber eyecups of the IF... I just don't know, this is all the info I have (I've replied asking about the width of the new narrow eyecups).

This possibility has sparked my interest in the APM 6.5x32 CF, but I'll hold my breath until I get all the details. I wish there could be a way. If there is, it would be a great move from APM.

 

[Dave_J]

(Suspense music) And now the plot thickens...

I wrote to APM in order to return the APM 6.5x32 after my insatisfactory experience with them. First I got the usual reply from APM customer service with instructions on how to return it. But some moments later I got another email from Markus Ludes who informed me that they have changed they eyecups. He very kindly offered to exchange the binoculars for another unit "with new narrow rubber eyecups". He explicitly mentions that "70 % of buyers do not like them and about 30% like them very much". So, I wonder if there is a new version with narrow eyecups, if they can swap the eyecups with something like the rubber eyecups of the IF... I just don't know, this is all the info I have (I've replied asking about the width of the new narrow eyecups).

This possibility has sparked my interest in the APM 6.5x32 CF, but I'll hold my breath until I get all the details. I wish there could be a way. If there is, it would be a great move from APM.

Interesting. If this is confirmed, surely that's a good reason to wait to order now. Unfortunately, the official website doesn't mention anything like that yet.

 

[Hermann]

I wrote to APM in order to return the APM 6.5x32 after my insatisfactory experience with them. First I got the usual reply from APM customer service with instructions on how to return it. But some moments later I got another email from Markus Ludes who informed me that they have changed they eyecups. He very kindly offered to exchange the binoculars for another unit "with new narrow rubber eyecups". He explicitly mentions that "70 % of buyers do not like them and about 30% like them very much".

Interesting. I'm one of the buyers who like the eyecups of the CF as they are, but I interested in your impressions. BTW, that's Markus - he'll do a lot to make sure his customers are happy. Never had any bad experience with him.

Hermann

 

[Bentley03]

So generally I get the impression that for you both are different enough and you have a reason to use and enjoy both, depending on the need of the moment and they are not interchangeable.

Absolutely. I hadn't realised you already owned an SRBC. If you took the gamble with an SRBC, I would suggest purchasing from Markus at APM is far less of a gamble, in terms of ease of after sales recourse, if the copy you receive turns out to be not quite right.

For me, everything turned out as I had hoped, with both the SRBC and APM. Others have been less fortunate, so I'm reluctant to shout too loudly my enthusiasm for them, as quality control and sample variation are questionable at best. Purchasing either of these binoculars is a leap of faith, in my opinion, because even if you receive a good copy, you may not get on with their ergonomics.

 

[Bentley03]

Interesting. I'm one of the buyers who like the eyecups of the CF as they are, but I interested in your impressions. BTW, that's Markus - he'll do a lot to make sure his customers are happy. Never had any bad experience with him.

Hermann

I too am happy with the eyecups, now I've worked out the optimal setting to allow me to get the best out of them without glasses. But, replacing those monsters with eyecups of a more modest size will undoubtedly widen their appeal amongst non glasses wearers.

 

[Dave_J]

Absolutely. I hadn't realised you already owned an SRBC. If you took the gamble with an SRBC, I would suggest purchasing from Markus at APM is far less of a gamble, in terms of ease of after sales recourse, if the copy you receive turns out to be not quite right.

For me, everything turned out as I had hoped, with both the SRBC and APM. Others have been less fortunate, so I'm reluctant to shout too loudly my enthusiasm for them, as quality control and sample variation are questionable at best. Purchasing either of these binoculars is a leap of faith, in my opinion, because even if you receive a good copy, you may not get on with their ergonomics.

Oh, I see. Sorry, my mistake. Yes, I already have a pair of SRBC binoculars and use them as a general-purpose instrument, mainly for landscape scanning and occasional birding. My unit is flawless and perfectly collimated. I was wondering if by buying the APM I can still get any other added value besides the chic porro unit. Frankly, I had Meostar B1 Plus HD binoculars, which are excellent, and although the ergonomics on them suit me better than on the SRBC (narrower eyecups, a softer and more grippy surface, a nicer shape to hold, and even a nicer earthy khaki color), I recently sold them because, even after much comparison, in reality I was unable to enjoy them more than the SRBC, which are a joy to look through. The extremely wide field of view is then just a considerable extra bonus.
As for the APM, I only regret that these 6.5x32 are size-wise not a bit closer to the older 6x30 model and thus more suited for general usage when traveling. In case of purchase I would definitely choose to buy directly from APM to avoid any further problems. Anyway, thanks again.

 

[Thotmosis]

(Suspense music) And now the plot thickens...

I wrote to APM in order to return the APM 6.5x32 after my insatisfactory experience with them. First I got the usual reply from APM customer service with instructions on how to return it. But some moments later I got another email from Markus Ludes who informed me that they have changed they eyecups. He very kindly offered to exchange the binoculars for another unit "with new narrow rubber eyecups". He explicitly mentions that "70 % of buyers do not like them and about 30% like them very much". So, I wonder if there is a new version with narrow eyecups, if they can swap the eyecups with something like the rubber eyecups of the IF... I just don't know, this is all the info I have (I've replied asking about the width of the new narrow eyecups).

This possibility has sparked my interest in the APM 6.5x32 CF, but I'll hold my breath until I get all the details. I wish there could be a way. If there is, it would be a great move from APM.

Wow, that’s interesting. I will send Marcus an email as well. Might be a game changer.

 

[boboladder]

I have sent the APM back to Astroshop, Germany, this week to have it serviced/exchanged. I had an opportunity to check its performance on stars when the weather got better. Collimation was perfect but there was really not enough focus travel to infinity. I could get only pinpoint stars image through the right side optical path, after a diopter adjustment. If the bino had a traditional focusing mechanism similar to e2, APM 6x30 or many vintage binos I would consider adjusting it by myself having seen some videos on YT. The focus knob and all the mechanism is rather similar to that of Nikon action ex/aculon hence too difficult to be repaired at home. My updated observation was that APM was brighter than the e2 8x30 during cloudy days but under the clear sky at the sunny noon the Nikon was noticeably better.

 

[Ruub Gomez]

I now experience a certain play in the focus wheel of the CF and while turning the wheel I hear the sound of the grease.

 

[boboladder]

I now experience a certain play in the focus wheel of the CF and at while turning the wheel I hear the sound of the grease.

Mine also suffered from some play of the focus wheel but it didn't bother me. There were reports that CF on APM was stiff, but on mine it was rather smooth. More or less comparable to the nikon action ex 7x35.

 

[Dave_J]

What do you think about the newly modified shape of the 6.5x32 CF eyecups, as presented on the APM website? Has anyone tried them and compared them to the original ones?

 

[Hermann]

What do you think about the newly modified shape of the 6.5x32 CF eyecups, as presented on the APM website? Has anyone tried them and compared them to the original ones?

The photos look interesting, I'd quite like to have a look at one myself. However, I think the older version may have been a bit better for people wearing eyeglasses. The fold-down rubber eyecups aren't as "flat" as the screw-down eyecups, so you may well lose some eyerelief.

Hermann

 

[Dave_J]

The photos look interesting, I'd quite like to have a look at one myself. However, I think the older version may have been a bit better for people wearing eyeglasses. The fold-down rubber eyecups aren't as "flat" as the screw-down eyecups, so you may well lose some eyerelief.

Hermann

Perfect. So if you happen to see these in real life, it would be great if you would be so kind as to share your impression of them.

 

[Hermann]

So if you happen to see these in real life, it would be great if you would be so kind as to share your impression of them.

Got one here, ordered for a family member. And at the moment the prices are reduced to below 200 € ... I didn't have the time to thoroughly try them, just a quick check that everything is ok.

Optically they are exactly like the ones with the screw-up eyecups. The new eyecups are a softish rubber, basically like a traditional eyecup. I think these will work better for people who couldn't cope with the very large screw-up eyecups. When you turn the eyecups down, there's still enough eyerelief when I wear my glasses. A subtle difference is that the focuser isn't quite as stiff as in the older version. If that isn't just sample variation, it's a welcome change.

More to follow once I had a chance to use them in the field.

Hermann

 

[Dave_J]

Got one here, ordered for a family member. And at the moment the prices are reduced to below 200 € ... I didn't have the time to thoroughly try them, just a quick check that everything is ok.

Optically they are exactly like the ones with the screw-up eyecups. The new eyecups are a softish rubber, basically like a traditional eyecup. I think these will work better for people who couldn't cope with the very large screw-up eyecups. When you turn the eyecups down, there's still enough eyerelief when I wear my glasses. A subtle difference is that the focuser isn't quite as stiff as in the older version. If that isn't just sample variation, it's a welcome change.

More to follow once I had a chance to use them in the field.

Hermann

Thank you for the short update and overall good news. My unit arrived a while ago, purchased in the ongoing discounted offer. First impressions are very good. I confirm that the focuser has a very smooth and pleasant action. I still don't know what to think of the new rubber eyecups. I don't have a comparison with the original flat ones, but I found these to be very soft compared to the smaller SkyRover BC 6x30. I'll see if they take some getting used to or if I end up using them somehow partially folded. I expected the optics to be very good and that was confirmed. More testing as time and weather permit.

 

[Hermann]

First impressions are very good. I confirm that the focuser has a very smooth and pleasant action. I still don't know what to think of the new rubber eyecups. I don't have a comparison with the original flat ones, but I found these to be very soft compared to the smaller SkyRover BC 6x30. I'll see if they take some getting used to or if I end up using them somehow partially folded. I expected the optics to be very good and that was confirmed. More testing as time and weather permit.

Sounds good. The eyecups ... Yes, they are soft. Try to get used to them if possible. I tried the pair I've got here without my glasses, and I found I could get used to them quite quickly.

One piece of advice though: Check both barrels carefully to see if there are any differences. The pair I got will be back on its way to APM because the left barrel is not ok. The centre is sharp, but outside the centre circle the image gets soft quite rapidly. The difference to the right barrel is very obvious. This softness is most pronounced at the lower edge of the image circle. Seems like I got a lemon this time ...

It's a bit of a hassle, of course, but then I once got a binocular from an alpha maker with a blob of grease inside an eyepiece ...

Hermann

 

[Dave_J]

Sounds good. The eyecups ... Yes, they are soft. Try to get used to them if possible. I tried the pair I've got here without my glasses, and I found I could get used to them quite quickly.

One piece of advice though: Check both barrels carefully to see if there are any differences. The pair I got will be back on its way to APM because the left barrel is not ok. The centre is sharp, but outside the centre circle the image gets soft quite rapidly. The difference to the right barrel is very obvious. This softness is most pronounced at the lower edge of the image circle. Seems like I got a lemon this time ...

It's a bit of a hassle, of course, but then I once got a binocular from an alpha maker with a blob of grease inside an eyepiece ...

Hermann

It's a fact that the new soft eyecups are quite quick to get used to, requiring only light pressure in the eye socket before they start to deform and bend.

Thanks for the heads up about the possible problems with uneven adjustment of the lenses, Hermann. To be honest, if I'm being very critical, the left barrel is indeed a bit softer at the lower edge than the right lens. You only start to see the difference in the last 10% or less of the FOV. Even the actual field stop at the bottom of the left barrel has a slightly more visible violet CA band at its edge against the clear white sky than the right one.
Being that said, I don't know how badly your faulty unit is behaving, but I don't think this would bother me all that much in practice. Anyway, this is the same theme over and over again, just buying optics over the internet without being able to test them beforehand is a real frustration.

 

[Hermann]

Thanks for the heads up about the possible problems with uneven adjustment of the lenses, Hermann. To be honest, if I'm being very critical, the left barrel is indeed a bit softer at the lower edge than the right lens. You only start to see the difference in the last 10% or less of the FOV. Even the actual field stop at the bottom of the left barrel has a slightly more visible violet CA band at its edge against the clear white sky than the right one.

This is the fourth 6.5x32 I've looked at carefully, and there are slight differences between the barrels in three of them. But that's normal, even most alphas haven't got perfectly matched barrels. From your description of your unit I wouldn't bother either. I've seen alphas with worse differences between the barrels.

Being that said, I don't know how badly your faulty unit is behaving, but I don't think this would bother me all that much in practice.

About 30% is sharp, then the view begins to soften. In the lower part of the image some 40% of the FOV is unusuable. The right barrel is perfect.

Anyway, this is the same theme over and over again, just buying optics over the internet without being able to test them beforehand is a real frustration.

Yes. It's bad with binoculars. However, with scopes the situation is even worse. And even in a shop you can only check for the obvious stuff, I don't think you can do a real star test there.

Hermann

 

[komeko]

What is the outside diameter of the new rubber eyecup? I mean the narrower part that meets the eye sockets.