home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!uwvax!zazen!news
- From: bunner@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Dana A. Bunner)
- Newsgroups: sci.astro
- Subject: Re: binocular question
- Message-ID: <1992Dec28.202113.10072@macc.wisc.edu>
- Date: 28 Dec 92 18:22:34 GMT
- Sender: news@macc.wisc.edu (USENET News System)
- Organization: University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
- Lines: 77
-
- In article <3220@devnull.mpd.tandem.com>, joe@woody.mpd.tandem.com (Joe Senner) writes...
-
- >two, a 10x50 minolta and a 16x50 pentax. the 16x50's were significantly
- >lighter than the 10x50's surprisingly enough, but did magnify the jitter
- >considerably. both appeared to have excellent optics. all reflections
- >from lenses were a rich green or blue and there was no obvious deformation
-
- Was this the primary (first) reflection or did you shine a light down into
- the lense and check several of the inner surfaces? Most of the low-end
- Pentax and Minolta, ie list of $250 or less, coat only the outside surfaces.
- For example the Pentax PCF and Minolta XL series only coat the outer
- surfaces. As most binoculars have in the neighborhood of 10-16 glass
- surfaces and each uncoated surface reflects approximately 5% of the light
- reaching that surface, coating just the outer surfaces does not help a
- great deal. Also these glasses are usually heavily discounted. My
- local shop sells the Minolta 7x50XL which list at $194 for $109. Pentax
- 10x50 PCF's list at $238, sell for $99.
-
- Example light loss chart for a pair of binoculars with 10 air to glass
- surfaces (2 on objective, 2 for prisms, 6 for eyepieces):
-
- 10 uncoated a-g surfaces: 40.13%
- 2 coated a-g: 35.64% (using single layer Magnesium Fluoride)
- 2 multicoated a-g: 33.99%
- 4 multicoated a-g: 27.22% Coating front & back of obj & eyepiece
- 10 coated a-g: 14.03%
- 10 multicoated a-g: 2.48%
-
- This is using standard figures of 5% uncoated, 1.5% coated, 0.25% multi-
- coated for light loss. Many multi-coatings are closer to 0.5%, this
- would yield a loss of 4.89% for 10 air to glass surfaces, and 28.05% for
- 4 air to glass multi-coated & 6 uncoated surfaces.
-
- Thus the standard ploy of applying single-layer coatings to just the
- front of the objective lense and the back of the eyepiece results in
- little reduction of light loss. You will find few binoculars under
- $60 which offer more than this. This will also often employ cheaper
- prisms which do not transmit light as well as the better BaK-4 glass models.
-
- >I guess my only concern is, should we have opted for the heavier 10x50's
- >instead? if so, why? the 16's have a 3 degree field of view (narrow, I
- >realize) compared to the 5 degree (?) of the 10's. the 16's are a little
- >jittery when locating things, but once aligned on the tripod a good
- >stable image is available.
-
- I'm not familar with these 16x50's however one other drawback, stability
- is indeed a concern ... even 10X's exhibit a fair amount of jitter,
- is the small exit pupil diameter. A 16X50 will have an exit image size
- of 3.125mm. Most people in their 20's and 30's have a maximum eye pupil
- size of 7mm. Since surface area is a ratio of squares, the size of the
- image will only illuminate about 20% of your pupil, wasting 80% of your
- night sight capability. 16x50's are designed as daytime glasses, when your
- eye contract to about 3 mm.
-
- Usually a minimum exit image is 5mm for night use. You'll need a 5mm
- image to achieve even 50% image coverage on your pupils. However if you
- are over 35-40 years old, that maximum pupil size usually begins dropping
- to the 5.5-6.0 mm range. The standard night glass has a 7mm image. Thus
- the popular sizes are 7x50, 8x56, 10x70, and 11x80. You'll find the
- images in these sizes to appear much brighter. Note that Celestron does
- not advertise the primary use of their 12x50 Pros as night glasses. The
- smallest 16X models I've seen advertised for night use are the Fujicon
- 16x70's and many consider them too dim for night use.
-
- This is not to say they can't be quite useful at night. I believe one
- sci.astro poster routinely uses 20x60's. However there is a marked
- decrease in image brightness once one begins to drop below about 4.5 mm
- exit images.
-
- >I'm hoping that the optics have had the attention
- >they need for good 16x magnification, and tend to belive so given the
- >large price jump as compared to the 10's (10's were typically in the $100
- >through $200 range).
-
- How much did the 16x50's cost?
-
- Dana
-