Vintage Binoculars (2 Viewers)

[John Dracon]

Gentlemen - This is my experience with 7x35 wide angle porros. The Bushnell Rangemaster 10 degree (525 feet) model made by Fuji Photo Optical, which was imported about 50-60 years ago to the US, is the best of any 7x35 wide angle I have examined. It has a very wide sweet spot, an incredible 3-D image, and first rate resolution across the entire field. With the eye cups removed, eye glass wearers can see most of the field. When used with an extender, 2.5x or 3x, it is surprising effective as a spotting scope. Perhaps some of you have not had the opportunity to look through this model. Used ones for sale are hard to find.
John

 

[Bencw]

Dear Hermann,
I bought a 7x42 Compact and is a really a very fine binocular, but the 7x35 Compact was my favorite for some time . I regret not to have bought the 8x60WW Bernina, but one can not have everything in life.
Gijs

That is the one I most desire, the 7x35 Compact, or 8x30. Although I would snap up almost any Hartmann in good condition, I always look out for them but you never hardly see a Compact or Bernina come up for sale these days.

 

[Pinewood]

Hello Renze,

Could it be aging Canadian Balsam? This was a problem with Leitz binoculars in the early 1950's.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Hello Renze,
Yes, Hartmann offers surprises, since the flyers I have received from mr. Hartmann, when I was visiting the company did not mention the 8x30WW Bernina and the 8x40 Bernina, but also not the 8x60WW Bernina and not their 8x30 Hartmann Tourist, so it is quite well possible that other Hartmann models are still around. With regard to the yellow cast of the image, I will look in the older transmission spectra we have measured to see whether that is the case in the models we have investigated. The suggestion that the yellowing is caused by ageing Canada balsem in the older Hartmann models sounds likely, but in later years that lens cement was not used anymore.
Gijs

 

[coolhand68]

Hi Coolhand,

I agree, I have Hartmanns, and a Binuxit and Jenoptems, and the Hartmanns compare very well, in fact I only rate my 8x30B Zeiss Oberkochen as being optically any better, mine are Polerims, and the 7x35 has superb fov ,it is the most easy and comfortable to use porro I have, and that's including the Oberkochen . Which models do you have?

Mine are 8x30 Porlerims. They are wide angle, the older one has wide angle written in English and has a serial number starting with 29, the other has wide angle written in German and has a serial number starting with 73. I also have a pair of Zeiss Oberkochen and these Hartmanns are only a slight notch below in optical performance but about equal in terms of build quality. Very impressive binoculars.

 

[Bencw]

Nice vintage Hilkinon Observer RSPB

Picked this made in Japan Hilkinson Observer 8x40 up quite cheaply, I nearly let it go by, but i'm pleased I didn't. It looks hardly used, and is marked RSPB. It surprised me as to how decent it is. It gives a good wide angle, clear and sharp image, and its light as a feather for a vintage 8x40 porro.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/95019762@N07/

 

[Binastro]

.. The 8×40 seems to be in very good condition. Made in Japan I think. Hilkinson were usually quite good.
it would probably give years of good use.

 

[Bencw]

.. The 8×40 seems to be in very good condition. Made in Japan I think. Hilkinson were usually quite good.
it would probably give years of good use.

Yep, it's mint, even the case and leather strap are like brand new, it looks as though it has never been used. I did a very quick viewing comparison with a couple of Swifts, the Grand Prix 8X40 and the Ascot 8x30 and this Hilkinson is sharper and brighter than both of those, definitely a keeper.

 

[Bencw]

ROSS Solaross 16x60

Don't know much about this, just bought it on impulse, but a cheap buy, looks in good condition but not received it yet, any info on them appreciated, I thought it might be ok for using with a tripod, but being an old 16x60 I guess likely it might have collimation issues?

 

[Binastro]

. Dear Ben,
I have one of these. It is well collimated. The resolution is excellent.
However, the glass used must be very basic as there is a great deal of chromatic aberration.
the coatings are rather basic. nice case.
They look rather interesting.
If you want the whole range there must be at least 10 variations up to at least 70 mm , maybe 40×70? and may be 80 mm? from perhaps 35mm? seven times or nine times?

This series of binocular is available in umpteen different magnifications and apertures.
Being Ross the optical surfaces are usually very good.
This was a budget line and not up to their high quality standards of which they were fully capable for military and other optics. Some of their optical goods are as good as any made anywhere.
I had a 4 inch aperture F/15 Ross Triplet collimator lens which is amongst the finest lenses I have ever tested.

Yours says US pattern but I don't think it is at least it is not a one piece barrel and body as far as I can see.

Enjoy.

 

[Bencw]

Binastro,

Many thanks for the info, much appreciated. Yes, I have often seen the 9x35 solaross, but first one of these I have seen. Will be interesting to see how it compares with the 20x70 Hilkinson solus I have.
Here is another view, and your right it does not look like a one piece body.

Ben

 

[Binastro]

. Dear Ben,
when you get the Ross 16 x 60 tap the side of one of the barrels.
Does it vibrate like a bell or a tuning fork?
Is the binocular housing plastic of some sort?

The Japanese 20×70 binocular will probably be better overall although it is possible that the Ross 16×60 might resolve better even though it might have severe false colour.

For actual use the Revelation 15×70 at about £55 new would give much better results.
However, these are very delicate and often out of collimation when new or if you knock it slightly. Some of these are multicoated even on the prisms giving 92% transmission although somebody suggests they are only about 62 mm to aperture.
some don't have multicoated or even single coated prisms.
The quantum 15×70 binocular is quite a bit heavier but very good indeed for the price.
These are new binoculars whereas the Ross might be 1950s and 1960s.

 

[Bencw]

. Dear Ben,
when you get the Ross 16 x 60 tap the side of one of the barrels.
Does it vibrate like a bell or a tuning fork?
Is the binocular housing plastic of some sort?
The Japanese 20×70 binocular will probably be better overall although it is possible that the Ross 16×60 might resolve better even though it might have severe false colour.

Hi Binastro,

Well, I have the Solaross now, I tapped the barrels and they have a sort of tinny sound, they seem metallic, but the prism covers and screw connections for the objective barrels are plastic. It's quite light for it's size, and it's in great condition, little dust inside, but cosmetically mint. First off, I noticed it was slightly out of alignment, I had checked both objective barrels were screwed in tight, so before getting into trying to collimate it, I tried a simple trick that has worked a few times for me before, I unscrewed the objective barrels and swapped them over, and that fixed it, spot on. It does not work every time but it's worth a try before trying to adjust anything.

First off, using a tripod, I focused on a church spire I often use to compare views. It is not quite as sharp as the Hilkinson, it does not show quite the same sharp detail, but this is 16x and the Hilkinson 20x. The Ross actually shows color with more depth, richer colors than the Hilkinson, which seems to be brighter but with colors less vivid than the Ross. I found straight away that the eye relief with the Ross is much better for me, much more comfortable than the Hilkinson. Overall, the Japanese binocular is optically better, but the Ross is not bad and more comfortable when viewing. I will see how they compare at night next time we get a nice bright moon to view.
When I was swapping the objective barrels over on the Ross, I was surprised to notice how small the front prisms were.

 

[Binastro]

. Thanks Ben for the report.
It may be that my one shows more chromatic aberration and it should.
That is interesting about swapping the barrels as I have often struggled to get things collimated. Sometimes just rotating the barrels a little bit does the job and then there is little gap. I've sometimes just resorted to putting a rubber band in the gap.
Once a well built Russian binocular had one barrel completely knocked sideways in transit. I managed to unscrew it using a strap wrench and then it just screwed back into perfect collimation. I risked this as otherwise I was just going to write it off. It had been dropped very badly and the package was severely dented. I'm not certain of my memory but it might be that it was a 15×50 or possibly the 16×50 which is from a different range may be similar to the 20x60 and 26×70.

 

[Bencw]

.
Once a well built Russian binocular had one barrel completely knocked sideways in transit.

I have received a few binoculars damaged in transit, usually due to poor packaging. It's annoying, not so much for any loss to myself, but for the fact that a perfectly good usable item has been needlessly damaged and sometimes made into a write off by someone basically not being bothered enough about it.
The swapping objectives over trick has worked for me a couple of times before, once on a Swift 8x40 and on an 8x30, always worth a try.

I just noticed today that the (plastic) left ocular arm of the Ross has a hairline crack. Funnily enough I had the same thing when I got the 20x70 Hilkinson, the (metal) left ocular arm was broken, but I had a replacement for that lying around so an easy fix. Guess if it breaks I will have just try gluing the Ross one. I am now wondering if this might be a common thing with larger vintage bins, they may be more prone to damage in storage and transit being heavy.

 

[Binastro]

. I was offered a 9×40 Japanese TOHO I think made in Tokyo American-style one-piece body extra wide-angle binoculars a with claimed 8° field for £20.
I asked the seller to check carefully whether it was collimated and in good condition.
He told me that he couldn't sell it to me as he had found that one of the arms was cracked.
I offered him 5 pounds and he accepted that and as I was buying another item it was post included.
That binocular is as new in its case and is rather good except that I had to hold the eyepiece with my left finger as the arm is almost cracked all the way through and I don't have a replacement.
As far as I can tell the thing would be to break it and cement the two parts together maybe. But I haven't done anything about it.
the field is actually 7.80° and it is a very nice small lightweight binocular.
so here we have what is basically a new binocular which is very lightweight but has a broken arm. maybe somebody dropped it although there is no sign of damage.

Regarding the probably 16×50 Russian binocular with one barrel completely bent over. The barrel was absolutely solid and I just couldn't move it. I didn't know whether a rubber mallet or a strap wrench would be best. Anyway with a lot of force I freed it with a strap wrench. Some of the threads were damaged but by being careful it screwed straight back in to perfect collimation. It is quite a good binocular basic with high-quality optics although the coatings are not modern.

 

[Bencw]

. I was offered a 9×40 Japanese TOHO I think made in Tokyo American-style one-piece body extra wide-angle binoculars a with claimed 8° field for £20.
He told me that he couldn't sell it to me as he had found that one of the arms was cracked. I offered him 5 pounds and he accepted that and as I was buying another item it was post included.
That binocular is as new in its case and is rather good except that I had to hold the eyepiece with my left finger as the arm is almost cracked all the way through and I don't have a replacement.
.

Hi Binastro,

I have found Soviet optics to be generally good. The Toho will be Toho Koki Co. Ltd., Tokyo I think? I have never seen one, but they are said to have crisp bright optics. Rather confusingly they made a model with the same name as a Swift model called Belmont . I have found that parts on some Japanese vintage binoculars can be very similar, it might be possible to find a replacement on a scrap binocular. The arm I replaced on the Hilkinson came from an old Japanese made VIPER 9X40 I picked up at a boot sale, I used the prisms to replace some cracked ones in an 8x30 and they were fine. The arm from the Viper was identical to the broken one on the Hilkinson.
If you want to send a pic of the broken arm showing how the ocular cell is held in, with the dimensions, diameter of ocular cell hole, length of the arm, I will gladly have a look through my bits and bobs, if I do have anything that might fit you can have it with pleasure.
I wonder why it seems always to be the left arm that breaks.

 

[OPTIC_NUT]

Hello Renze,

Could it be aging Canadian Balsam? This was a problem with Leitz binoculars in the early 1950's.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Of 4 yellowed and slightly-yellowed binocs I got at auction,
all were from the 50s and 60s, and two had carry cases that
smelled faintly of cigarette smoke..

Don't forget the possibility of nicotine. It isn't that common now,
but it stained walls all around the world for 30-40 years.
It can penetrate better than dust. The tar+nicotine can even
move through as a gas. Top-notch binocs were still not tightly sealed.
The grease was supposed to trap dust.

I haven't gotten to cleaning-prism ability yet, but I'm good at lenses
inside + out. When some yellowing on field lenses inside was stubborn
to isopropyl, I tried a hunch: just water and a touch of detergent,
a soak. Worked like magic. That's common for nicotine.

 

[Bencw]

Don't forget the possibility of nicotine. It isn't that common now,
I haven't gotten to cleaning-prism ability yet, but I'm good at lenses
inside + out. When some yellowing on field lenses inside was stubborn
to isopropyl, I tried a hunch: just water and a touch of detergent,
a soak. Worked like magic. That's common for nicotine.

Yes, I forget about nicotine, and the simple detergent/water shifting something better than alcohol is not something I would have thought of.
Removing,cleaning and replacing prisms is pretty easy, the problem is re - aligning the binocular afterwards, that's the bit that can drive you nuts. I have a home built collimation device, it works, but still can take hours or even days to get them aligned. I have a Jenoptem that I have been going back to on and off for months, it just wont align, I have aligned others in between, including Jenoptems, but I cant seem to get this particular pair right, horizontal is fine, but the right image shows slightly to the right of the left image and no matter what I try with the prisms and objectives it either gets worse or ends up back just the same, it just wont align.

 

[LPT]

but I cant seem to get this particular pair right, horizontal is fine, but the right image shows slightly to the right of the left image and no matter what I try with the prisms and objectives it either gets worse or ends up back just the same, it just wont align.

If the barrels are straight and you you're still unable to collimate by eccentric ring or prism adjustment, try shimming (extremely thin slivers of paper or metal) under one of more of the prisms. Tedious process but it should work. At the very least you should be able to conditionally align.