Archives of an email list on the history of binoculars. http://home.europa.com/~telscope/listp250.txt home page: http://home.europa.com/~telscope/binotele.htm 251-300 ============================================================================= Binocular List #251: 31 March 2003 ============================================================ Subject: Hastings Brashear Binocular From: "Steve Stayton" The Hastings-Brashear Roof Prism binocular that was acquired on ebay recently is really fascinating and was new to binocular historians and collectors as far as I know until this one turned up. I will be posting a detailed description and pictures of it as found and disassembled on my website (under construction as they say) in the future as my time allows. It is a very early example of a roof prism binocular and the first one that I know of using this particular type of prism arrangement. Here are some links to some low resolution pictures: Hastings-Brashear Binocular http://www.lightmechanics.com/HB1/HB_Binoc2.jpg Engraving: http://www.lightmechanics.com/HB1/HB_Engraving1.jpg Prism Assembly: http://www.lightmechanics.com/HB1/HB_Prism2.jpg The build and finish of the binocular is consistent with quality commercial binoculars of the time but it would seem to me that this binocular is a prototype built to evaluate the usefulness of the Hastings erecting prism. The binocular is constructed in a form more typical of 19th century non-prismatic twin telescopes than that of the new Zeiss type prism binoculars of the day. It may well have been one of a kind or one of a limited production prototype build. Maybe it was a modified twin telescope body with the prism and new imaging optics replacing the original erecting lens system but I don't recognize the particular model as one I have seen before. If anyone knows of a similar binocular body without prisms please let us know. John Brashear (1840-1920) was a famous American telescope maker and optician known for his high quality of workmanship. For some info on Brashear see: http://johnbrashear.tripod.com/ The ebay seller told me that the binocular was purchased at a flea market in Pittsburgh so it is possible that it spent its first 100 or so years close to its presumed origin at the John A. Brashear Co. works in Pittsburgh. It is well known that John A. Brashear Co. built production quantities of lenses and porro prisms for the Warner and Swasey binoculars starting in 1899. (ref: W.R. Warner, The How and Why of the Porro Prism Field-Glass, Transactions of the ASME No.926, December 1901) The porro prisms used in the W&S required much less accurate face angles than the roof prism type of the Hastings. The level of precision required to fabricate the roof prism in the Hastings prism would be an obstacle in making the design cost effective for the commercial market. The Hastings-Brashear binocular is engraved with a patent date of July 20, 1897. The patent (US Patent 586,708 titled "Erecting Prism" dated July 20, 1897) is awarded to Charles S. Hastings (well known American optical scientist of Hastings Triplet fame) and no mention is made of Brashear in the Patent. Charles Hastings was employeed by Brashear to "calculate the curves of lenses" (as they called optical design back in those days) starting in 1887. Hastings 1897 Roof Prism Patent: www.lightmechanics.com/Patents/Hastings-586708-1.tif www.lightmechanics.com/Patents/Hastings-586708-2.tif www.lightmechanics.com/Patents/Hastings-586708-3.tif www.lightmechanics.com/Patents/Hastings-586708-4.tif The invention is for an erecting prism of the type commonly known today as the Abbe- Koenig (or Abbe-Konig) roof prism and was used extensively since 1905 by the German firm of Hensoldt in many of their binocular models. The Hastings prism type (aka Abbe- Koenig) is currently used in the Zeiss Victory series of binoculars. It is not clear to me why Zeiss and others refer to this prism type as the Abbe-Koenig prism and whether or not there was a description of this prism in Germany prior to the 1897 US patent. The "Abbe" refers of course to Ernst Abbe at Zeiss and Albert Koenig was an optical scientist at Zeiss. If any list member knows more about the German history of this prism please add to our knowledge. There is reference to a German Patent by Hensoldt: D.R.P. Nr. 180644, dated April 14,1905 in a recent Zeiss binocular brochure (What You Should Know About Binoculars, p.4) and in Seeger's Red Book (p114). Hensoldt 1905 Roof Prism Patent: Text: www.lightmechanics.com/Patents/DRP_180644_1.pdf www.lightmechanics.com/Patents/DRP_180644_2.pdf Drawings: www.lightmechanics.com/Patents/DRP_180644_3.pdf (You will need Acrobat Reader to view the Hensoldt patents, it can be downloaded free from www.Adobe.com ) It is of course possible that the Germans were not aware of the Hastings Patent since it was not used in any known production binoculars until the 1905 Hensoldt or it is possible that Hastings was not aware of some prior German invention of the prism by Abbe. There a construction difference between the Hastings roof prism and the Abbe-Koenig in that the Hastings is built up from 3 prism pieces bonded together while the Abbe-K type is made from 2 prism pieces. However the basic optical form of the reflecting surfaces to accomplish the image erection is the same. This construction difference is sufficient reason to justify separate Patents on the two very similar prisms. The Hensoldt form of the prism allows for a more compact prism cluster with larger objectives and larger FOV for a given prism size by moving the roof edge in closer to the optical axis of the objective lens. You can't do that with the Hastings form as the roof edge will start to vignette the rays from the objective. A note from Dick Karlson pointed out that some Hensoldt roof prisms used an airspace instead of a cemented interface. Indeed, the Hensoldt Dialyt binoculars that I have disassembled use the roof prism as shown in the 1905 Patent except that they use an airspace between the two prism pieces instead of a cemented interface. This is a further advantage in making the prism compact because the roof edge can be moved in even closer and still maintain total internal reflection (TIR) inside the second prism. The Hensoldt (aka Abbe-Koenig) prism can be used with bonded prism parts as indeed is shown in the 1905 Patent. For the on-axis rays shown in the three Patent figures the cement layer is not in the area of the TIR in the second prism so there is no problem having cement. With increasing field of view there would be some vignetting at the cement layer. The addition of the airspace allows for a larger FOV or smaller F-Number objective without increasing the prism sizes. The Hastings prism in three pieces must be bonded or it would suffer large chromatic aberration problems with the airspaced surfaces not being perpendicular to the optical axis. The Hensoldt Patent shows how the prism arrangement can be optimized for the largest objective lens diameter in Fig.3 vs Fig.1. In Fig. 3 the telescope tube diameter (dashed lines) is the same as in Fig. 1 but the objective lens is much larger in diameter. The Hastings prism and the Hensoldt prism can both be used with or without displacement of the optical axis. This is shown in the Hensoldt Patent. Fig. 1 and Fig. 3 have no displacement of the optical axis (labeled 'X') whereas Fig. 2 shows a latereal displacement of the 'X' axis. It all depends on the relative position of the objective lens axis and the prism faces. Just to confuse the issue even more for those who have MIL-HDBK-141 (the best english language review of optical prisms IMO) see Fig. 13.37 Abbe Prism, Type A and Fig 13.39 Abbe Prism, Type B. The Abbe Prism, Type A is the Hensoldt configuration and the Type B is a three piece construction but not the Hastings arrangement of parts. It's all done with mirrors as they say. All these prisms have the same basic optical geometry to perform the image erection as shown in the 1897 Hastings Patent, the variations are for improved manufacturing and reduced size. More photos and measured specs on the H-B binocular to come later. Steve Stayton Tucson -------------------------- MIL-HDBK-141 is available on line, each chapter as a separate .pdf, adding up to about 90 megs: http://www.azmackes.net/astronomy/mil_hdbk_141/ Or you can buy a reprint for $50. from Surplus Shed at http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/Miscellaneous#M1514 Hastings & Brashear are two of the most important names in modern optics. This patent has been known for some time, but the prototype model is a surprise. A roof prism made in Pittsburgh, establishing precedent over the Abbe-Koenig prism, is quite interesting. --Peter ================================================================== Subject: Resolution From: "randle dewees" >>>sharpness is a function of both resolution and contrast .....If the Zeiss glass is superior in both of these attributes, how can it be poorer in sharpness?<<< Some comments about resolution, contrast, and sharpness. Resolution and contrast are terms that are discussed and defined in many references on optics and optical instrumentation. Sharpness on the other hand has no technical definition that I'm aware of. It is a pedestrian term for a complex phenomenon, and as such is pretty useful in making a casual or general statement about the overall optical ability of an instrument to show things. The definitions of contrast and resolution are very specific about target contrast and spatial or frequency content. In a sense contrast and resolution are interchangeable at some scale. Combining the two properties, MTF provides a measure of contrast transfer at some image spatial frequency (resolution), or, somewhat conversely, spatial resolution at some contrast level. I think I'm safe in saying that a binocular that is really "sharp" has a MTF that is close to ideal, at least in the frequency range that means something to the human eye. So I'm agreeing with Arthur Tenenholtz's comment that sharpness is a function of resolution and contrast, and I also question the conclusions of that Astronomy article. Without measuring the MTF of binoculars any comparison is going to be subjective to some extent. Factors such as binocular weight, ergonomics, exit pupil correction, eye relief, distortion, flares and ghosts, will all influence the judgment of a casual evaluator. On another subject I received a Burgess 15/70 ($99) about two weeks ago. Overall a pretty powerful bino but it did have two problems. The more serious was a 4 arc-minute step error in collimation. I fixed this in a completely lucky fashion by removing and replacing one prism cover. I can probably look forward to future random changes in collimation but at least it's fixable (there are prism push screws, yuk). The other problem is the diopter adjustment is not balanced. My eyes are only 1/2 diopter apart yet I must screw the adjustable eyepiece almost all the way in. Bill Burgess offered to trade another pair but since they work for me I'm keeping them. I'll probably move the eyepiece in some fashion to help the matter (as an ex-Opticalman I know I should move the objective but that's not feasible on these binos). Otherwise, I like them - I certainly will not worry about them too much. There's not a lot of metal so they are easy to hold up - there are plastic parts and some of the metal is ridiculously thin. The eyepieces are incredibly good for the price, and "sharpness" is excellent in both barrels. These are multicoated on the outside surfaces and look to be fully MgF coated inside. . I'm really impressed with the optics, I have not used a auxiliary telescope to look at a point source but I bet the image will be more like a decent diffraction pattern than a aberrated blob. I'm a little disappointed that the Big Bino comparison did not include the Doctor 15/60 Nobilems. I've looked through several pairs, both Zeiss vintage and Doctors, and they have been uniformly excellent. One last parting spot for you telescope users. Today I recieved a Baader Planetarium Amici prism 90 degree diagonal (Alpine Astro $286). It's simply amazing. Using my C8 the diffraction pattern image of a point source is identical to a regular prism. I can't even see a diffraction spike. I will test it interferometrically tomorrow. In comparison I received a couple of weeks ago a Williams Optics 60 degree Amici diagonal (Anacortes $99) - after a 3 month back order. It was junk optically, I sent it back. With my C8 points sources looked like little double stars separated by 2 arc-seconds. Randy Dewees ======================================================== Subject: Contrast Sharpness and Resolution From: Kennyj2@___m In list *250 ( a milestone worthy of note in itself in my view ) I was interested in our friend Arthur's comments on the relationship between Sharpness , Contrast and Resolution in response to the Astro -Bino article in April's Astronomy magazine by Phil Harrington . Not being able to shed any more light on the discussion due to lack of real understanding of this important and intriguing matter , I consulted my e -friend Ed Zarenski to ask if he could. His reply was very interesting and with his permission I would like other members of the group to consider his opinions and comment where applicable . What follows is an extract from Ed's reply to me : "I think of Sharpness as the ability of the binocular to maintain a critically sharp image up to an increasing distance out from the center of the fov. I believe most others also consider the term accordingly. The adherance to strict curvature of the glass during manufacture, or a field flattener lens will improve Sharpness. Resolution, on the other hand, is the ability of the lens to bring the image to the finest point possible. Think of resolution as the ability to produce a smaller Airy disk (strictly a function of aperture) while also keeping the diffraction fringes to a minimum. If the fringes ( the rest of the pattern of rings around the Airy disk) is not minimized, the overlapping diffraction fringes make it much more difficult to resolve one fine pinpoint from the next. Although most people simply consider the size of the aperture as the limiting factor for resolution, the quality of the chemical composition of the glass probably holds equal importance towards the limiting abilities. I have seen better resolution in my 12x50 Pentax than in my 15x70 Oberwerk. Contrast is also a function of the chemical qualities of the glass, and not just the objectives but the prisms and eyepieces too. Of course, coatings helps to improve contrast and therefore resolution. But if the quality or the cut of the glass is low to begin with, then all the coatings and contrast in the world will not make the inferior lens perform better than the premium lens." Looking forward to any further comments -- Kenny . ============================================================== Subject: Optical & Film Supply From: info@___ce.co.uk >>7x50 porro prism models with the broad arrow MoD mark and the maker's imprint "Optical & Film Supply Company, NY, USA".<< I have seen a number of these in the UK and have a pair too, I think they are a early wartime delivery on a lease lend or hands across the sea. They seem to be based on early models MK1 etc There are a number of versions that I have seen – all made by "Optical & Film Supply Company, NY, USA" some have a small MOD arrow and some have much larger arrow I hope to put up a section with all the weird versions that I have found Hope everyone had a great time a the meeting in the US, Think it is time that the UK lot had another meeting – even if it is only at a pub. Simon Gunning www.oemspce.co.uk ========================================================= Subject: Reply From: David Bushnell Thank you,Peter, for the good wishes from you and the rest of the "Society". I'll never forget the joy of meeting all those binocular enthusiasts and would appreciate your conveying that to them. Happy Days, David --------- Today, 31 March, is David's 90th birthday; I sent best wishes on behalf of all of us. Thanks to Mike R. for reminding me. =========================================================== Subject: diaphragm From: "Claudio Manetti" Michael Simonsen asked: Is the word diafragma known as another word for Graticule? Maybe the word "glass diaphragm" is still used and well known among English speaking members. Were it not so, maybe the following message could be useful: In a small British book of the War Office, "Elementary notes on optics and their applications to service instruments, 1927", reprint of 1941, glass diaphragm is “ the glass carrying a pointer, graticules or cross-wires”. Regards Claudio Manetti ============================================================== Subject: Ross telescopic sight From: Håkan Spuhr I have just bought a Ross telescopic sight. Is here someone that got some information about it? Its marked Ross, London Power 15 Riflescope Its 25" long has a 19mm tube and outside sight adjustments. Regards Håkan Spuhr -------- I don't know that model, and in general on this list we don't get much response about a 'half-a-binocular'. But this was unusual, so I thought I'd post it. --Peter ============================================================== Subject: Too much success A web site with many reviews of binoculars & other amateur astronomy equipment is 'Cloudy Nights'. They are experiencing 'too much success'. I hope our efforts do not come to these problems. Those of you who are interested in internet publishing about binoculars might find this essay by Allister St. Claire interesting. http://www.cloudynights.com/open.htm --Peter ============================================================= Subject: Reply to list 250 From: Forslund@___ne.de (Forslund) ----------------- ------- A comment on the last contribution from Mike Simonsen: I regret that Mike did not attend the meeting in San Diego. If he had, he would be in a better position to comment on my presentation or, at least, be able to spell my name... Mike writes: I have ... reached the conclusion that to track down every military used bino ... before WW I is a hopeless task... Later he writes (without refeing to a certain time): After all, the models are usually well known by now. I definitely contradict these statements. In our research we have to collect facts and to document these for ourselvs and for our fellow researchers. The attitude to deal with a hopeless task cannot be the basis for further useful and fruitfull work. In 5, 10 or 20 years (or never...) we may have knowledge about "all" models, but we are far from this by now - at least when Swedish models are concerned. In San Diego I was able to present three earlier unknown models from Goertz, Voigtländer and Busch (all from the 20es). I have found them in Sweden in the last years. The two first mentioned I already showed in my artikel in the new edition of Hans Seegers book, but the Busch 12x60 Porro II was a world premiere. The interest in old binoculars is constantly rising and with it a demand for more and better information. Our task is to face this challenge, not to lean back and say it is hopless! Robert FORSLUND forslund@___ne.de ================================================================= ================================================================= Binocular List #252. 10 April 2003. ======================================================================= Subject: Kelsey Hayes Kelsey Hayes, of Cleveland Ohio, made the body for a 6 x 30 for the U.S. military circa WWI, a little different that the standard model. They also made a prismatic rifle telescope for U.S. Marines at that time. A web search shows they were a large manufacturing concern. Does anyone know any details about this binocular or the company? I have never seen one, nor heard of the company until recently. -- Peter ========================================================================= Subject: Hastings Brashear Prism The very early roof prism binocular discussed last list is mentioned in: Elementary Optics and Applications to Fire Control Instruments. By: War Department (I.C. Gardner). Second edition. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1921 & 1924. p24, figure 23, Hastings Brashear prism, no displacement of the ray. p113, first page of the section with prism diagrams, shows the 'Inverting Prism System No. 1 by Abbe' , an 'Abbe-Koenig' with large side pieces. (Thanks to Frank Doherty for sending me this, a long time ago. What else you got, Frank??) ------------------ Subject: Hastings Brashear Prism From: "Steve Stayton" Thanks Peter for the reference to the Hastings and Abbe No. 1 prisms in the 1921 War Office publication. Fascinating that they show both the Hastings and the Abbe form of the erecting prism. I have posted these at: http://www.lightmechanics.com/HB1/HBprism1921.JPG http://www.lightmechanics.com/HB1/Abbe_prism_1921.JPG Some additional early references to erecting prisms of the type used in the Hastings Brashear binocular have been found as well. Based on a comment from Larry Gubas that Zeiss used an Abbe-Koenig type of erecting prism in the pre-1900 Dosen-Fernrohr, I looked around and was able to find a cutaway view of that instrument in a 1921 English translation of the original German book by Gleichen: http://www.lightmechanics.com/HB1/Gleichen_Pp157_158.JPG The Zeiss Dosen - Fernrohr (Revolver Telescope) is shown in two models, Klienes and Grossen (small and large), in Zeiss 1899 and 1902 catalogs. It is the first use of the Abbe type roof erecting prism by Zeiss that I am aware of but I am not sure when this Zeiss telescope was first introduced. The cutaway view in Gleichen shows a prism of the same construction as the one described in the 1897 Hastings US Patent not the modified type of construction patented by Hensoldt in 1905. If anyone has an earlier reference to the Dosen - Fernrohr please let us know. The question still remains as to when Zeiss first used or described that type of prism in Germany. Another interesting item is a picture in the 1906 Catalog of the John Brashear Company: http://www.lightmechanics.com/HB1/BrashearPrisms_1906.JPG This shows some of Brashear's optical component fabrication capabilities at the time including what appears to be two Hastings type erecting prisms. The Brashear company supplied complete instruments as well as a great variety of optical components made to order. By 1906 he had probably made a lot of Type I Porro prisms for the Warner and Swasey binoculars, thus the "ring of Porro prisms" shown in the catalog display. Steve Stayton Tucson ----------------------- The true origins of the roof prism are unknown to me, in spite of some dedicated sleuthing. Probably the first roof prisms were made circa the 1880s, either improved or invented by Daubresse. Does anyone have more information? --Peter =================================================================== From: Stephen Sambrook Subject: Combined objectives and prisms I wonder if anyone knows of any early prism binoculars which formed their objective lenses by combining a crown convex lens with a with a concave-ground flint-prism face to give an achromatic combination ? My ignorance of technical optics is probably unsurpassed, but I wonder if such an idea used in conjunction with a Sprenger or Leman prism and a cemented field lens (as found in the Barr & Stroud porro-2 glasses) might not have had potential for producing a binocular with the absolute minimum of air-to-glass surfaces and considerably enhanced stereopsis. Best wishes Stephen Sambrook ------------------------------ There are 'prism-lens' optical elements, for example a right angle reflecting prism with concave or convex faces, they have been used in telescopes. Fabrication is quite difficult, as the curved face has be be centered as precisely as does a standard lens in a telescope. If these exacting requirements are combined with the difficulties in fabricating a roof prism, the product would likely be an exercise for the idle virtuoso, rather than a viable commercial product. And there are achromatic prisms, with cemented crown & flint elements, though I'm not sure where they're used. And as noted, there are optical elements in some binoculars with a lens cemented to the prism. No doubt, the glass types in those are carefully chosen, but whether they are crown / flint combinations is unknown to me. These binoculars cement an eyepiece element to the prism, since if the objective is cemented, then the prism has to be much larger. However, the topic of such designs is of great interest, and the 1930s B & S or Zeiss models with cemented lens / prisms might not be the only examples. -- Peter ================================================================= Subject: Stabiscope From: WIta057@___m I recently had the opportunity to handle a US military Fujinon 10X40 stabiscope. It was being auctioned off as surplus inventory. From the short demo, I could not see any apparent advantage over my Canon 10X30IS considering its weight and price. It did come with extra objectives that would boost the magnification but I did not have the chance to install them. It would seem that at 10X, the advantages of image stabilization with the added weight and cost are not really realized. I noticed is that when panned horizontally, the image had a "rolling" effect similar to being at sea which might lead to motion sickness with prolonged usage. I could not do a good test of the quality of the view because I was in a warehouse with limited sight distance for a 10X binocular and there were other bidders that wanted to try these. The view seemed sharp but a little dark considering that these are reported to be light intensified. I did a Google search and noticed that Fuji does not sell any current models in 10X40. Anyone with more information on these gyro stabilized binoculars? ---------------------------------- As far as I can remember, the Stabiscopes have a very good reputation for image quality, they are not light intensified but are 'just glass', the stabilization is indeed for a 'lower frequency' of motion / vibration than the Canons, there is indeed a rolling effect as the image 'catches up' to your motion, and they're good for use in a boat. But it has been a long while since I've seen these. Image stabilization is an excellent, useful feature, though I have yet to purchase such a binocular. The image delivered by the Canons is absolutely outstanding when stabilization is off, and it is generally felt that the stabilization works well. --Peter ==================================================================== Subject: binocular estate sale From: "Mike" Attached is a list of binoculars we've recently acquired through an estate sale here in the USA. As you can see, the list includes some really exceptional items. Prices are regrettably high (in keeping with the market and what we had to pay), but we've built in a significant cost advantage in buying them as-is (since our optical shop is overloaded). While prices are firm on individual units, I would be happy to discuss a deal with anyone interested in multiple "as-is" pieces. s/ Mike Rivkin April 8, 2003 Special Offer The following is a selected listing of binoculars from an estate near Washington DC. . This list is being made available to a small number of advanced collectors before being offered to our customer list at large. The first price shown is the item as described, and the second price (in parenthesis) is with full reconditioning performed by our optical shop. 1. Carl Zeiss-Jena 8x60, “blc”, #2161273, porro II prism, black body, w/ Benutzer strap and bottom nitrogen ports, missing eyecups (one eyecup ring dented) but body near xlnt, diopters stiff, optics cloudy but intact. Price $3950 ($4525). 2. Carl Zeiss-Jena 8x60, #2161705, porro II prism, black body w/ flared rubber eyecups, bottom nitrogen ports, body showing wear, diopters need lubrication, optics dirty but intact. Most of the difference between #s 1 and #2 is in the eyecups. Price $4250 ($4750). 3. Carl Zeiss-Jena 8x60, #48843, internal focusing, porro-I, tan (primer) body color w/ aluminum hinged fold-out eyecups in good condition, small chip at edge of r/h prism, l/h objective showing slight separation, optics dirty but otherwise intact. Price $4000 ($4600 (prism chip will be blacked out) 4. Carl Zeiss-Jena 8x60, #49236, internal focusing, porro-I, tan (primer) body color w/ alum hinged fold-out eyecups, fairly nice body condition, optics dirty but otherwise intact. Price $4500 ($4975) 5. Carl Zeiss-Jena 7x50, #62496, internal focusing, porro-I (Rohan model 3), tan color, xlnt rubber top and bottom rubber armor, fold-out eyecups intact, optics slightly cloudy but intact. Price $2650 ($3025) 6. as #5 above but earlier pebbled finish model, #40165, all rubber intact but paint not nice, optics, dirty but intact. Price $2500 ($2875) 7. as #5 above but later smooth finish model, #62300, missing left fold-out eyecup, bottom rubber split but intact. Price $2200 ($2575 – sorry, no replacement eyecup) 8. Ross 10x70, AC2010 (Seeger 1st ed., p. 305), porro-II “Captain’s Sight”, the largest hand-held glass in any arsenal during WWII, complete w/ rubber faceplate, bottom nitrogen ports, coated optics (“B”), dated 1938 w/ Ross/London markings, some wear to cosmetics but generally very good, optics cloudy but intact. Price $1800 ($2125) 9. Barr & Stroud CF 46, unusual 15x60 CF model introduced in 1949, large oculars, coated optics, beautiful cosmetic condition w/ near-new chocolate brown case, slight haziness to optics but otherwise intact, appears un-used (except for minor wear from storage. Price $850 ($1125) 10. Leitz (“beh”) 7x50, porro-II model, w/ flared rubber eyecups (stiff but intact), near xlnt condition, top markings include Eagle, Kriegsmarine “M”, North Sea “N”, serial numbers, and coated “T”, w/ gorgeous long-hooded black leather case, this also in excellent condition (no shoulder strap), stamped Eagle on top of lid, “beh” mark and (1942) underneath, both filter sets in place on underside of hood, optics cloudy but intact. Price $1600 ($1950) 11. Leitz 7x50, porro-II, with top and bottom armor, rubber ocular covers in good shape, optics cloudy but intact, very nice black leather case w/ Eagle on top and “beh” and “1943” underneath, no filters. Price $1300 ($1675) 12. Ross 16x60 Solaross, CF, slope-shoulder housing, coated optics (cloudy but intact), w/ original leather Ross case, cosmetics near xlnt, w/ neckstrap. Price $750 ($1025) 13. Barr & Stroud CF-42, post-WWII variation of famous CF-41, this one w/ reticle in right hand side, otherwise substantially the same as original, includes top nitrogen ports, individual leather ocular covers, optics clean, some wear to paint but generally good condition. Price $350 (no reconditioning necessary) 14. Ross 10x50 Stepmur, CF, XL oculars/wide field, coated optics, some wear to body, optics intact but cloudy, w/ original brown leather “Ross” case. Price $450 ($725) ============================================================ Subject: Binocular telescopes for amateur astronomers. Juhani Kyyrö appears to be from Finland, but travels in the U.S., he has a web page on telescopes: http://www.kyyro.com/ that includes some unusual binocular 'dobsonians': http://www.kyyro.com/bindob1.htm List member Dave Trott has been busy: http://members.aol.com/davetrott/page1.htm ....the first binocular, 'Big Binoculars' is new, and the second, 'Giant Binoculars', has been shared before. There are some amazing Japanese binocular telescopes in a report from the 'Binoculars and Telescopes Summit', 12-14 October, 2002, Misono, Aichi Prefecture, Japan. http://homepage2.nifty.com/bigbino/summit02/report/report_02-e.html Click on: 'introducing equipments' The first 10 or 15 pictures are of binoculars. Especially see the interpupillary adjustment mechanisms in the images labeled: --25cm Newton "Magellan" twin "Do-Bino" --8.5cm Refractor "TeleVue85" twin" and see the hand made binocular viewer: --Binocular viewer for 2inch ====================================================== ======================================================= Binocular List #253. 21 April, 2003. ================================================================ Subject: 'English Mechanic' articles Matt Considine is involved with old telescopes, and old papers on that subject. He scanned two pages of 'The English Mechanic, from Feb. 1895, with articles on Zeiss binoculars. The images can be found at: http://www.considine.net/mac/em/zeiss/vol_60_p546.gif (426K) http://www.considine.net/mac/em/zeiss/vol_61_p013.gif (445K) A transcription of the two articles: English Mechanic, vol. 60, #1558, Feb. 1, 1895, p546: The New Binoculars. It might interest your readers to know that, since my letter on "Zeiss' New Patent Binoculars" appeared in the "E.M." on Nov. 30th, 1894, a friend has kindly sent me for examination a monocular telescope constructed on precisely the same plan - viz, an astronomical telescope whose image was erected by two right-angled prisms. The maker's name was J. G. Hofmann, of Paris, and the telescope was supposed to be three-quarters of a century old. The lenses of the Huyghenian eyepiece were separable by a spiral adjustment, which enabled the power to be varied from 10 to 15 diams. I have also been informed that Mr. Ahrens made a binocular on the same principle some twenty-five years ago. Edward M. Nelson." English Mechanic, vol. 61, #1561, Feb. 22, 1895, p13: The New Binoculars. In your issue of Feb. 1, p546, a further short notice by Dr. Nelson appeared respecting Zeiss' new patent binoculars, following his description and criticism in No. 1549, of Nov. 30, 1894. In this second notice Dr. Nelson states that a friend had sent him a monocular telescope constructed on precisely the same plan as Zeiss' binoculars. The maker's name was F.G. Hofmann, of Paris, and the instrument was supposed to be three-quarters of a century old. With reference to this, it may be of interest to state that Messrs. Zeiss very distinctly declare, on the first page of their prospectus of the new telescopes, that the principle of these telescopes - viz., the use and arrangement of the prisms for total reflection and for the erection of the image - was not their conception, but was first invented by Porro. This is stated in a still more emphatic manner in the patent specifications - for instance, in the English Patent Specification No. 7942, from page 1, line 31, to page 3, line 4. This specification, further, most clearly shows the novelty of construction of the Zeiss telescope, and where it differs from those of Porro. It would, therefore, have been an easy thing for Mr. Nelson to have obtained full information about this matter. With reference to the instrument manufactured by Mr. Hofmann, it might be of interest to your readers to learn that the latter was at one time a foreman to Mr. Porro. He afterwards established himself in business, and he obtained a considerable reputation for his manufacture of spectroscopes. He also made Porro telescopes of superior construction, and offered them for sale. This, however, was not three quarters of a century ago, but about 25 years since - i.e., about one quarter of a century. I was not aware that Mr. H. Ahrens had also manufactured straight-sided telescopes with a system of reflecting prisms. The principle of the Porro telescope, has been, however, repeatedly invented by others since Porro. This is fully explained in a report by Dr. Czapski on these telescopes, which will be published in a few days. --J.W. Measure. ============================================================== Subject: Kelsey Hayes. I asked about a binocular marked 'Kelsey Hayes'. From: WIta057@___m Kelsey- Hayes makes automobile brake systems and components. I believe they are now part of TRW. Aloha, Wayne. From: "Preston Cook" This company has been active for many years in the automotive industry. Their primary products are brake system and suspension components. Preston Cook =============================================================== Subject: Image Stabilized Binoculars From: "William Cook" Those interested in IS binoculars might be interested in a little article I wrote for the last issue of Nor'Westing magazine. It was certainly not a scholarly piece; but them, it wasn't written for scholars. If anyone is interested, I will look up the issue and page number. I think it is still on the newstand. Cheers, Bill Cook ------------------------ See also: Gary Seronik, 'Image Stabilized Binoculars Aplenty'. Sky & Telescope, July 2000. Canon has an IS model I hadn't heard of: 8 x 25 IS, list $460. And Nikon's model is new to me: Nikon 14 x 40 Stabil-Eyes. 1700 list. http://www.ave.nikon.co.jp/bi_e/products/stabil.htm The face of the internal erecting prism shifts direction, thereby redirecting the light beam and stabilizing the image. When there is no vibration and the binoculars are parallel to the line connecting the viewer’s eye to the subject being viewed (a), the prism transmits the light straight through. When there is vibration and the binoculars are not properly aligned (b), as long as the prism is not moved the light beam will be transmitted to the viewer’s eye. This example illustrates rotation on the horizontal axis. The StabilEyes prisms feature a gimbaled frame controlled by two piezoelectric sensors and two direct drive motors to ensure constant stability. ================================================================= Subject: Fujinon Stabiscopes. Last list, I wrote that there are glass, not electronic optics. Correction: the new Fujinon Stabiscopes are indeed image intensified. http://www.fujinon.co.jp/products/optical/bn04.htm While you're there, check out the 150mm models: http://www.fujinon.co.jp/products/optical/bn02.htm Fujinon released a new binocular “THECHNO-STABI TS1232” on October 1, 2002. TS1232 has been developed as a handy version of TS1440. 1. Background We developed STABISCOPE for professionals and TECHNO-STABI TS1440 of commercial type for use on a vibrating platform such as a helicopter or a moving ship....new TS1232 for handy and low-cost binoculars with the same anti-vibration function, and compact size.....TS1232 can be marketed at about half the price of TECHNO-STABI TS1440. The anti-vibration function of TS1232 controls the erecting prisms in the gimbaled frame by the direct drive motors through a microcomputer, and gives you rock steady images at quick response. The gimbal is a mechanism that holds prisms in it in the air so that the prisms may be moved free vertically or horizontally. TS1232 has a waterproof structure ....newly adopted twist-up eye pad provided on the eyepiece section.....two AA dry batteries are used for easy portability. List Price in Japan:¥ 89,000 ============================================================== Subject: Re: Binocular List No. 252, lensatic prism elements From: "Lucas, Gene" In re: Bino List 252, the note from Stephen Sambrook and your comments, regarding "combined objectives and prisms", may I mention that in the 1970s (the late) Max Bray publically discussed the feasibility of making a small Maksutov-Newtonian corrector element, consisting of a prism with lens curves on two (or possibly three) faces, to be placed in the beam from the Newtonian primary mirror. This would facilitate making systems consisting of only spherical optics (including the primary). If properly made, the advantage would be that the prism corrector could be sold as an accessory, so amateurs could make or buy the spherical primary. Max used a four-surface Maksutov design by Donald Perry for his 3 inch Ad Astra Maksutovs (and possibly other sizes, for instance the 20 inch Maksutov at Vega-Bray Observatory). By using a different radius on the secondary "spot", third-order corrections are possible, to improve the performance over, say, the classical Gregory designs using a meniscus corrector (with the reflecting secondary spot on the inside curve). I believe Bray used a process similar to that used to produce bifocal spectacles to create the differing radius on the secondary spot, grinding and polishing the outer annulus on the inside of the corrector separately from the "spot", which can be thought of as standing "proud" of the rest of the inside curve of the corrector. In the prism form, it would evidently be possible to create the effect of a meniscus lens (for the Mak corrector) by forming radii on two of the prism faces, or presumably, a four-surface Mak corrector with an additional radius on the third (reflecting) surface of the prism. I do not think that he fully pursued the idea, as it would have obviously involved some pretty fancy fixturing to achieve the proper centering of the curves, with no adverse wedge. Proper centering and other technical production issues are handled using specialized curve generation and polishing machinery, with proper inspection and attention to details. The costs of tooling up would have to be balanced against the market for such a gadget. (N.B., usually a lesser consideration in military or aerospace optics production.) Max was an expert in this type of optics production -- he specialized in the production of small military optics for many years. While I have only a small amount of comparative knowledge in the area of optical production techniques, I did visit Bray's shop on E. Pierce St. in Phoenix (this was prior to the Ad Astra firm being sold to Kimball Organ), and I would characterize his manufacturing equipment as modified opthalmic production machinery, probably typical for small lens and prism production, esp. for a small shop. So we may state that while optical elements combining curved (as opposed to flat, or "extremely long radius") lens surfaces with a prism are feasible, they have evidently only rarely been made in practice, as you comment. There are examples of somewhat larger flat or curved plate "combining glass" elements (also possibly using holographic techniques to simulate lensing) in the "heads up" display sighthead units on modern jet fighters, such as the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, etc. These are used to present a reticle pattern (along with other information) to the pilot, projected at infinity. The size of these elements is pretty large, so as to project a large enough beam (typically 4 to 6 inches broad) to accommodate the pilot's head movements. I will defer further comments to Dick Buchroeder, who I believe is an expert on these modern systems. In my earlier career as an avionics and radar tech, I maintained and overhauled the somewhat less sophisticated, 1960s era sightheads on the F-105, F-4, and F-104 radar systems, which used a flat combing glass and large, fast doublet lenses for projection of the reticle. Gene Lucas ------------------- (Peter, while these are "mono-optical" systems, the pilot can view with both eyes -- does that qualify as a binocular?? :>)) ......they qualify as 'biocular', which is an extremely interesting category of visual instrument design. Two eyes, one eyepiece. --Peter ================================================================== Subject: Binocular Repairman Recommendation From: Leong J Tsang I have a CZJ 10 X 50 Jenoptiks that I bought for a friend for stargazing. In daylight conditions, the binocular appears to be razor sharp and steady. However, when he uses it at nighttime for stargazing, he discovered that he is getting split images of the stars and anything that he views through it. Can you give me a list of good repairman who can tell me exactly what is wrong this binocular and what the cost will be to repair it. I am also looking for rear eyecups to use on the rear of the eyepiece of the binocular. Can you point me in the right direction as to whom is selling these. Thanks in advance, Evan Dong ----------------------- We have several good repairmen & restorers on this list. We haven't heard from them in a long time, and I don't know if they're accepting new work, or if they accept all sorts of binoculars for repair. It would be helpful if they would address the list with a short paragraph about their services, location, and estimated waiting period for new jobs. Thanks, Peter ================================= Subject: Prism binocular by Ahrens From: Peter Abrahams A very unusual binocular, possibly from the 1880s, is shown in photographs on the web site. Any further information on this subject is needed. Carston Diederich Ahrens was an important figure in late 19th century instrumentation who is quite overlooked today. He does not appear in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, nor in the British Dictionary of National Biography. There are no entries in the Astrophysics Data System. His major contributions were in microscopy, but he also designed & produced a hand held binocular telescope. City directories cited by Turner (references below) include 1873, including: Ahrens, prism worker, 5 Baker Street, Lloyd Square, London; and 1874-1880, 373 Liverpool Road, London. Ahrens noted that he made many hundreds of prisms for Wenham binocular microscopes, and also experimental prisms. Ahrens was granted English patent 1710284, 31 December 1884, for 'Improvements in the construction of erecting binocular prisms'. This was similar to the earlier A.A. Boulanger design, using Porro I prisms, and without inspecting the patent, it is unclear what his improvement entailed (although von Rohr states that he did not complete the patent.) The Royal Microscopical Society collection includes a binocular eyepiece 295mm in length, with two eyepieces, by Ahrens, inscribed on the box: "BINOCULAR EYEPIECE FOR HIGH POWERS. BY C.D. AHRENS, LONDON". This was presented to the RMS by Ahrens, 31 October 1877. A calcite prism in the lower tube causes a doubling of the image. A 'double prism' of flint glass achromatizes the beam. Interocular distance is adjutable by a rack & pinion. (RMS Accession no.: 1970-101/part, also marked RMS no. 54, Turner catalogue 416, Inventory no. 91539) Museum History Science Oxford http://www.mhs.ox.ac.uk/database/further.htm?Invno=91539 Zeiss in Jena had an Ahrens binocular for inspection, cited by von Rohr. Another Ahrens binocular telescope, from the Louwman Collection of Historic Telescopes, can be seen in three small images: http://home.europa.com/~telscope/Ahrens-binocular1.jpg 28kb http://home.europa.com/~telscope/Ahrens-binoc-case.jpg 34kb http://home.europa.com/~telscope/Ahrens-b-signature.jpg 52kb Thanks to Peter Louwman for permission to post these images. ----------------------- Ahrens, C.D. On a new form of binocular eye-piece and binocular microscope for high powers. Monthly Microscopical Journal (1871) 113-115. Moritz von Rohr. Die Binokularen Instrumente. Berlin: Springer, 1920. Page 90, double telescope by Ahrens. Emil-Heinz Schmitz. Handbuch zur Geschichte der Optik. Ergaenzungsband. 1, Das Fernrohr. Bonn: J.P. Wayenborgh, 1982. Pages 175-187. Turner, Gerard L'E. The Great Age of the Microscope, The Collection of the Royal Microscopical Society through 150 Years. Bristol: Adam Hilger, 1989. (page 327, binocular eyepiece) ================================================================= ====================================================================== Binocular List #254. 01 May, 2003 ================================================================= Subject: Repair services From: Binofixer@___m Binocular Group Readers, I wanted to take advantage of Peter's last posting and let you all know that my optical shop is open for business. For those of you that don't know me, I am a US Navy Opticalman, and use a Mark-5 collimator with all my projects. I can handle anything from a simple clean and collimate to full restoration, compacts to big eye's. If anyone wants references from current bino list members that I do work for. I'll ask their permission for you to get in touch with theses people for their comments. Some personal background. I was formerly Captain's Nautical Seattle, Senior Optical Tech (after our famous Bill Cook tweaked my rusty skills back into Mil-Spec range) from 90 to 97. Then developed an optical repair shop and optical testing facility at Orion T&B Center in California form 97 to 2000. As for turn around time, that depends on the project itself. The simpler the job, the faster it gets done. No body really wants their work "rushed." I'll stop rambling, If any one wants to contact me and discuss repair projects, e- mail me at binofixer@___m. Cory Suddarth Suddarth Optical Repair Servicing Optics Since 1975 205 W. May St. Henryetta, OK 74437 (918)650-9087 ==================================================================== Subject: Repair services From: "Mike" As Deutsche Optik Service, we continue to do alot of out-of-house repair work. For a quotation, ship the item to us at Deutsche Optik Service, 4606 Mission Gorge Place, San Diego, CA 92120 and we will contact the sender on receipt. E-mail inquiries to info@___heoptik.com. Particulars also appear on our website under the "Contact Us" page. s/ Mike Rivkin ================================================================ Subject: Repair Services From: "William Cook" When I closed my shop the last time, I told our CEO I would not be opening it back up. However, the Seattle economy is in the sewer and marine businesses—even the well- established and respected—are dropping like flies. Consequently, Emery has asked me to open back up as a hedge against us becoming a 106-year old corpse. As a result, I am now taken on about 30% of what we did in the past—some spotting scopes and handheld binoculars—no big eyes or antique telescopes at this point. As far as techniques and equipments: Our reputation speaks to that. However, I would ask anyone to send me an email with exactly what they THINK is wrong with their instrument—along with its maker and vintage—before sending it to me. CAVEAT—folks, I have tried to hold the high ground in doing repair and restoration. The market, however, is not will to pay the price. People all want Smithsonian work and Wal-Mart prices. I just can’t go there. My price for cleaning and collimating current run binos—or those recently out of production—will be very fair for the level of quality offered and the skill brought to bear. Unfortunately, on the older pieces, prices are going to be substantially higher. Lets, say for example you send me a 1939 Leica 7x50 with some clouding and one broken prism. The cost on this would probably be $320+. Some folks would find this too high. I can respect that. However, they do not understand the difficulties of disassembling a binocular in which the sealants have turned to cement, or the time it takes to track down an exact match for a 60-year old prism, or the care that must be taken in de-swaging a couple of objectives without fracturing the micro-thin walled brass. You see, one can be an expert on bino history and still be clueless about what makes’m tick. This time around, I just want to be taking in work from the average guy who wants better than average work done on his average binoculars for a fair price. High maintenance customers have taken me below the profitability level on two other occasions, and I just can’t go there this time. On behalf of the FEW bino craftsmen left out there, I must say that while “collectors” seem to need to chat about their “babies” two or three times a week, a craftsman just can’t waste time accommodating that and keep prices down. So, if you want to give me a shot at some of your work, I am here for you. Finally, I promised that if I should ever put my shingle out again, OM1 Cory Suddarth would go back to being optical “dog meat,” instead of the optics god (little “g”) I have made him out to be. Well, while I would certainly like to have fun with that, there would undoubtedly be some non-English speakers who would take me the wrong way. So, I won’t go there; Cory is top drawer, any time, anywhere. Kindest Regards, Bill Cook, Chief Opticalman, USNR-Ret. Mgr. Precision Instruments & Optics, Captain’s Nautical Supplies, Seattle Freelance lens designer Freelance optics writer ======================================================================= Subject: Amateur Astronomy There's been very little email to the list in the past week. There are 140 of you out there, in maybe a dozen countries, and I will send out lists as fast as I get a half dozen emails. We focus this list on the history of binoculars, with a little attention to current developments. There has been lots of action in several related fields. 'Binoviewers' for amateur telescopes are becoming more popular; there are over 10 models available now, priced from about $400 to $1400. They work very nicely, though are limited to higher powers (compared to the normal range of telescope eyepieces.) Commercial binocular telescopes for amateurs, twinned refractors or reflectors, are also becoming more popular. There are several email lists on 'groups.yahoo.com' relating to amateur astronomy & binoculars / binoviewers. Or you can search the web for binoviewer makers or retailers: Baader / Astrophysics; Televue; Denkmeier; Siebert. A few weeks ago, I emailed the address of a Japanese binocular star party: 'Binoculars and Telescopes Summit', 12-14 October, 2002, Misono, Aichi Prefecture, Japan. http://homepage2.nifty.com/bigbino/summit02/report/report_02-e.html Here is an excerpt from a report from Italy: 31 Oct 2002 From: davide@___eccanica.it Subject: bino-starparty report. Last week-end the 2nd edition of the Italian bino-starparty has taken place near Rome.... There were a Fujinon 25x150, the beautiful Baader Planetarium binoviewer, and many Astromeccanica’s binoscopes owned by different guys: Helios (150mm f/5), Takahashi FS102 (fluorite 102mm f/8), Borg 125ED (125mm f/6.7), Vixen ED114SS (114mm f/5.8), Intes Maksutov (150mm f/12). For deep-sky I concentrated on the Helios, Fujinon, and a Meade LX50 SC12”, while for planets observations I used Taka and Intes maks (both a single MK67 with binoviewer and MK66 binoscope). Binoscoping in the Helios was an unforgettable experience: we used both 30mm widescan2 (25x with 82º AFOV) and Meade UWA6.7 (112x, again at 82º) with and without O3 interferential filters. Solar system observations were done in the Takahashi binoscope with Lanthanum 2.5mm (330x) and the Intes 150mm maks (used with many eyepieces, from 200x to 350x). Both an Astromeccanica Intes binoscope and a standard Intes instrument (alone or with Baader binoviewer) were used. You can find some photos of the previous edition (and as soon as possible of the last one, I think) on the websites: http://www.asam.da.ru (click on “binostarparty”) http://www.astromeccanica.it (click on “about us” and/or the link in the popup window) Davide Del Vento http://www.astromeccanica.it ============================================================================= ============================================================================= Binocular List #255: 05 May 2003 ========================================================================= Subject: Fungus From: Peter Abrahams A long time ago, I ran across a reference to an article in a journal that I never thought I'd see: Indian Journal of Technology, from 1963. But University of Washington, Seattle, has it, and I copied it a couple of months ago. Footnoted in this article were some hopelessly obscure military publications; and also a text from the journal 'Nature', which is found in any college library. The Nature article has information that is possibly very useful. During WWII, programs to research & treat fungus in optical instruments were undertaken in Australia. They began using the compound sodium ethylmercurithiosalicylate, now known as Thimerosal & widely used in vaccines, eye drops, nasal sprays, ear & other topical products. It was mixed with the paint & sealers used inside the binocular body. This was quite effective, and I believe Thimerosal shouldn't be too hard to obtain. Have any of the repairmen / restorers on this list used this compound? Are there any physicians or chemists who know how a person could obtain this? I scanned these articles, added some other texts, and placed on the web site a long page on fungus in optical instruments: http://www.europa.com/~telscope/fungus.txt These WWII articles mention lens cements - balsam and n-butyl methacrylate.....I'm not sure what methacrylate is. I know there were synthetic lens cements 60 years ago, presumably this is one of them. They also use the term 'luting', which was new to me and means sealing. Can anyone locate this document; it could be very helpful: Baker, P.W. Bibliography on Tropic Proofing of Optical Instruments. Royal Radar Establishment Tech. Note 747. Malvern, England. 1969. A Zeiss question: Some on line sources note a paper on lens fungus issued by Zeiss in the 60s, but there are no citations....does anyone have a reference to this? Here is the introduction I put with fungus.txt: Many old optical instruments have fungus growth on a glass surface. Fungus does not look like haze but has an appearance like hairs or tendrils branching from a center. While the fungus can be removed by cleaning, it frequently has etched the glass, since fungi secrete enzymes and acids to chemically alter their environment so they can absorb nutrients. This etching requires repolishing, which if done unprofessionally will ruin the instrument. It is not possible to tell if the glass is etched until the fungus is cleaned. Maintenance of optical instruments involves prevention of future fungus problems, especially if located in damp regions. To sum up the lengthy documentation below: --WWII research programs on fungus in optical instruments (Turner, below) used sodium ethylmercurithiosalicylate, now known as Thimerosal and widely used consumer medical products. When mixed in paint used inside the binocular, this was found effective at preventing fungus. It is not known if Thimerosal is so used today. --Hydrogen peroxide, or bleach, can be used to kill fungus. --Leitz documents describe a fungus treatment of 94% distilled water, 4% clear ammonia (for cleansing) and 2% hydrogen peroxide (to kill fungus). --Carl Zeiss Oberkochen, dept. KuDi, sells: Fungus Cleaning Agent "Fungusreiniger NEU". Dilute with ethyl alchohol, leave on glass for one hour or more, then clean. Not poisonous but avoid contact with skin. 100ml bottle, INR 0117.362 500ml bottle, INR 0117.361 1000ml bottle, INR 0117.360 --Notes on treatment & prevention are found at the end of this text. =============================================================== Subject: Danish Galilean From: Well, in response to the request for more people to respond to the list, I have added a page on my geocities homepage. I recently acquired a danish military marked galilean binocular. Same type as shown in Dr. Seegers book abb7 ( picture 7) As I already had a german version of this binocular, I have taken some pics and put it all on a page, with comments. http://www.geocities.com/mikedenmark/plc3/armeglas.htm Let me know, if you can´t see the pics, then I will have to look into it. Btw..I got the german bino through eBay, one of my very few purchases on eBay...astonishing 6 weeks delivery time, at a postal rate of $ 2.-From the Appalaches in the US. Seems the local post only comes by, once a week. Maybe Lil Abner´s granddad brought it back home in WW1? Michael Simonsen Mikedenmark@___ele.dk -------------------- Also check out the other unusual binoculars on Mike's site http://geocities.com/mikedenmark/germanoptic/gallery/itemlist.html ================================================== Subject: USN Bigeyes From: "Steve Stayton" I ran across these two nice US Navy pictures recently. I don't how long they will be posted so get a look while they are still there: http://www.atlanticfleet.navy.mil/mtwhitney-bigeyes0419.htm http://www.atlanticfleet.navy.mil/tr-bigeyes0131.htm Steve Stayton ================================================== Subject: Optical equipment repair From: "Rolf Penzias" I have not written to the list in awhile, but have been following various items of interest. On the subject of repair it very heartening in a world of the pervasive throwaway mentality, goods, gadgets and electronics, to still have old school technicians like Bill Cook and others around. Regards, Rolf Penzias penzias@___l.com =================================================== Subject: American Optical From: Peter Abrahams There is a very large web site on the history of American Optical company: http://web.meganet.net/dickwhitney/RBWAOHistoryIndex.html There is nothing on binoculars or telescopes on the site; and I emailed the author, who replied that he didn't have any knowledge of AO binoculars. An American Optical catalog from 1935 'Optical Specialties' has 13 pages of prism binoculars & Galilean field glasses, but they very much appear to be imports. Also in 1935, AO acquired Spencer. During WWII, a very large quantity of 'Spencer' binoculars were manufactured, though I have no production figures. Some are noted to be 'from commercial stock', but this is unlikely; they are military form & no ads or other notes about a commercial model are known. Some are unusual models, all are very well made. US Navy models include 6 x 30, 7 x 35, and 7 x 50 configuration, and some were sold to consumers after the war. The Spencer 7 x 50s are distinguished by their prisms - oversized objective prism & undersized eyepiece prism, a larger eyepiece, and a field of view that is wider by one half a degree than the standard WWII 7 x 50, with an apparent field of view of 7 degrees, 39 seconds. The 6 x 30 has also been found marked USMC. A previously unknown Mark has recently been found, the Spencer Mk 18 7 x 35 USN Bu Aero. So the questions are, who designed these, where were they made, why are they marked Spencer, & why is there so little record of them at AO & elsewhere - given all the Marks & Mods, there must have been tens or hundreds of thousands made. ---- This chart of Spencer WWII models displays well in Courier font, after you remove the line breaks that email will insert: SCHEDULE OF BINOCULARS, NAVY DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF SHIPS, FILE NUMBER S2407 - 533074. 8|2|44. MK | MOD | GENERAL ARRANGEMENT | CONTRACTOR | MAGNIFICATION | APERTURE | FIELD (DEGREES) | EYE RELIEF, MM | TRANSMISSION % | BUREAU | STATUS (1944) | REMARKS 3 | 0 | -------- | SPENCER| 7 | 50 |7d39'| 14.5 | ---- | SHIPS | OBS. | TAPERED AXLE 3 | 1 | 481746-S | SPENCER| 6 | 30 |8d54'| 11.3 | 55 | SHIPS | OBS. | COMMERCIAL STOCK 3 | 3 | -------- | SPENCER| 6 | 30 |8d54'| 11.3 | 55 | SHIPS | OBS. | 3 | 4 | -------- | SPENCER| 7 | 50 | --- | ---- | ---- | SHIPS | OBS. | COMMERCIAL STOCK 3 | 5 | 494021-S | SPENCER| 7 | 50 |7d39'| 14.5 | 57.8 | SHIPS | OBS. | COMMERCIAL STOCK 13| 5 | 300872-O | SPENCER| 7 | 50 |7d39'| 16 | 57.8 | SHIPS | OBS. | 17| 0 | -------- | SPENCER| 7 | 35 |7d38'| 11 | 80 | AERO |EXPMTL.| 19| 0 | 300853-O | SPENCER| 6 | 30 |8d54'| 11.3 | 55 | MARINE| ----- | MIL SCALE - LEFT BARREL 20| - | 300864-O | SPENCER| 7 | 35 |7d10'| 10.7 | 56 | MARINE| ----- | 30| 0 | 494040-S | SPENCER| 7 | 50 |7d39'| 14.5 | 57.8 | SHIPS | CURR. | WATERPROOF 31| 0 | 481756-S | SPENCER| 6 | 30 |8d54'| 11.3 | 55 | SHIPS | OBS. | COMMERCIAL STOCK ============================================================== ============================================================== Binocular List #256: 12 May 2003 ============================================================== Subject: Albert Koenig From: Peter Abrahams Albert Koenig was a lens designer for Zeiss, who was responsible for the many types of Koenig eyepiece and the Zeiss 'B' apochromatic telescope objective circa 1930. He was co-designer of the Abbe-Koenig prism and accomplished much more in a long career at Zeiss. There has been no English language information on Koenig. A text has been posted with a summary of his optical work; and a translation, by Chris Plicht, of Horst Koehler's tribute to Koenig. http://home.europa.com/~telscope/koenig.txt Any further information on Koenig would be very welcome. ====================================================== From: Peter Abrahams I have posted two images of a very unusual binocular by the German optical company Merz. Courtesy of the Louwman Collection of Historic Telescopes. http://home.europa.com/~telscope/Merz-binoc2.jpg 99kb http://home.europa.com/~telscope/MerzBinoc.jpg 123kb] Some information about Merz is available at: http://home.europa.com/~telscope/tsgerman.txt ========================================================= Subject: Deutsche Optik new model From: "Mike" An update on our Porro-II binocular project (the first sample of which was passed around at the collector's meeting in February to much enthusiasm). At present, we're still dickering with the manufacturer and gasping at the tooling costs. To begin with, tooling costs will be reduced if we go to a IF model, but a 7x50 IF binocular screams for rubber armoring and we're back to a tooling problem. As an alternative, we could go with a buffed and polished look to create a living room binocular, but the market for such a 7x50 is unknown and somewhat dubious. Thus, I'm beseeching your readers for feedback: should we (a) add the IF and armor and position it as a marine glass; (b) add the IF and no armor for astronomers and general use; (c) add the IF and polish for a living room look, or (d) stay with the CF feature for birders and a generally wider appeal? On other fronts, our latest (Summer) catalogue is now on-line and will be in the mail shortly. We've also purchased a small lot of those gorgeous Swiss Army Leicas we've had previously. This is the light weight 8x30 model with rubber armor and laser protection filters, and these will also include an unusual monopod by Bolex. You won't see them in the current catalogue, but they'll be available early this summer. Finally, we still have a handful of the estate binoculars (see list #252) remaining in stock, and I would like to clear the lot. All reasonable offers considered; please call or e-mail to discuss. Thank you! s/ Mike Rivkin Deutsche Optik ---------- From: Peter Abrahams Personally.....I don't like the look of rubber, but it is very helpful in preventing damage from shock. That makes it a tough choice, unless it was so expensive to tool up for rubber, that you had no choice. Without rubber you can get a clean high tech machined look that I really like. Rubber 'hides all faults'. I'm not sure what you mean by buffed, but a non reflective dark matte finish is much more practical. Anything that glints should be avoided. I think a medium grey would be: 1.unusual, stands out in crowd of binoculars. 2, shows the lines & design of the glass much better than black. 3, doesn't get as hot in the sun which is a big problem with black in my thinking. Some list members are the macho types who wouldn't be caught dead with a CF glass. But my opinion is that you'd eliminate a lot of potential customers with IF. I personally prefer CF. CF can be quite water resistant but probably at a cost. --Peter ===================================================== From list 255: >>Thimerosal fungus treatment...... n-butyl methacrylate lens cements Subject: Thimerosal From: "peter de laet" Thimerosal is a highly toxic mercury contianing compound still used in medicine today. It shouldn't be all to difficult to trace the producers of the stuff. I will try to get my hands on an address, and will keep you posted. Best regards, Peter de Laet, MD ========================= Subject: Thimerosal; and Polymethylmethacrylate (PMM) From: "Lucas, Gene" I believe Thimerosal is the active ingredient in some types of contact lens wash solutions. This presents a problem for some people (including myself), who are allergic to the chemical. I was having a severe irritation problem with my contacts until I noted that the solution I was using (supplied by the contact lens manufacturer) contained Thimerosal. My experience was that the sensitivity continued to increase with use, as well. Fortunately, there are other types of contact lens solutions that do not contain Thimerosal. Contact lenses develop a milky coating from prolonged exposure to the wet, bacteria laden environment in the eye, thus the need for daily removal and cleaning. I would speculate that perhaps a contact lens cleaning solution might be of use in eliminating fungus on, say, binocular optics. The problem would be to determine the "therapeutic" dosage. Methacrylate is the chemical name of the precursor compound for a class of transparent plastic polymers -- to quote the Merriam Webster dictionary, "Polymethylmethacrylate (1936) is a thermoplastic resin of polymerized methyl methacrylate which is characterized by its optical clarity." and, "Methacrylonitrile, CH2:C(CH3)CN, Clear, colorless liquid boiling at 90 deg C; used to make solvent- resistant thermoplasic polymers and copolymers." (See also similar entries for methacrylate ester and methacrylic acid). From the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific Terms: Polymethylmethacrylate -- thermoplastic polymer derived from methyl methacrylate, CH2==C(CH3)COOCH3; transparent solid with excellent optical qualities and water resistance; used for aircraft domes, lighting fixtures, optical instruments, and surgical appliances. Sometimes abbreviated PMM, this is one of the earliest plastics used for lenses. I believe "Plexiglas" is a Dupont trademark for similar transparent solid plastic compounds. n-Butyl Methacrylate is evidently a clear liquid that would be polymerized (changed into the solid form) by the addition of some chemical agent and probably heat. Some forms of modern optical cements contain the two chemicals (plastic precursor and polymerizing agent) in a liquid solution, and are activated (polymerized to form the solid) by exposure to heat or to Ultraviolet (UV) light. This "hardening" action is different than for traditional Canadian balsam, which hardens by drying when heated, or evolution of the natural solvents. Balsam also can deteriorate with exposure to heat, light, humidity, fungus, and age. The modern plastic resins are designed and rigorously tested for superior resistance to all of these agents. I can't locate a reference that gives the refractive index for PMM just now. It is somewhat lower than for glass. The advantage in making complete lenses of thermoplastic resins is in volume production by molding the lenses, avoiding the grinding and polishing operations. Plastic lenses are now very common in all kinds of inexpensive equipment. They are seldom used for precision lenses, partly due to the problem of poor scratch resistance. Of course, Peter's initial comment was concerning the use of the plastic in liquid form as a cement. Gene Lucas (17250) =========================================================== Subject: French vocabulary, unusual model from France I wrote to list member Jean Laurent Pernice: > Can I ask you a few questions about the meaning of French words? > --Jumelle. This can mean prism binocular, or Galilean opera glass? > --Is there another word for 'binoculars' in French? binoculaire? > --Lunette d'approche. Does this mean a terrestrial, 'birding scope' Can it mean 'rifle scope', to mount on a small gun? > --Longues-vues Is this word still used? Does it mean hand held telescope? > --Lunetiers: There was a Societe des Lunetiers, Paris, maybe they made spectacles only > Also, See the great pictures at: http://histv2.free.fr/19/voir.htm From: "jean-laurent.pernice" Napoleon has been very frequently painted with a observation monocular on his hand . The meaning of jumelle is double in french. first is twin the second is the same than binocular or binoculars (you can write and say one " jumelle "or one pair of "jumelles " . This word is not specific for galilean or prismatic binoculars or opera glass , you can use " jumelle or jumelles " to speak about the 3 optics . The others words for binoculars are " binoculaire " or "lunette binoculaire " The word binoculaire is use to describe the binoculars and also optic like microscope . The word " lunette " has 3 significations , first is most common it is glasses the others are observation monocular (marine monocular or terrestrial monocular or astronomical monocular ) or a binoculars and in this case we speak of galilean binoculars. The Lunettier is the man who built the "lunette " glasses . Futher more the word of lunettier when you speak about binoculars is i think most pejorative and it was used by manufacturer of prismatic binoculars at the beginning of the 20 th century to describe optic of poor quality For lunette d'approche i think that there is no specific signification or maybe in military vocabulary . .(just optic which allowed to be close to an object ) For the longue vue the meaning is hand held telescope for astronomical , terrestrial or marine use .this word is still in use . Maybe you can help me to identify one binocular . Size of the objective 50 mm , magnification almost 8 , reticle on the left eye piece ( a cross ) and eye piece inclined at 90 degrees. Probably french but i not see any markings . Regards Jean-Laurent ---------- http://home.europa.com/~telscope/temp/bin.Fr.un.id.50mm.8x.cross.reticle1.jpg 395kb http://home.europa.com/~telscope/temp/bin.Fr.un.id.50mm.8x.cross.reticle2.jpg 343kb (I've never seen anything like this model. --Peter) =========================================================== From: "Lucas, Gene" Subject: Gyro-stabilized "Big Eyes" in ocean survey The following web page describes 1986-1990 visual ocean surveys of seabirds to also track dolphins, porpoises, and whales using "25X gyro-stabilized big eyes" binoculars. There is a photo of a crewmember sighting through what appear to be 25x100 (or so) straight-throughbinoculars with some equipment underneath, presumably the gyro-stabilizer. The picture is too dark to make out much detail. Can anybody comment or give info on this gyro mod to what appears to be the standard Litton EOS "Big Eyes" (or maybe a possilbe Russian big eyes)? http://www.montereybay.com/creagrus/ETP_cetaceans.html Gene Lucas (17250) -------------- I can't imagine how those could be gyro stabilized; I'd guess it was a mistake in writing up the project. But there's a lot I haven't seen. --Peter ====== Subject: Another Big Eyes news photo & other web pages From: "Lucas, Gene" Shreveport Times photo (search on "binoculars"in this page to find this one) http://www.shreveporttimes.com/photo/galleries/gtmo1/photo9.html Lance Cpl. Jason Black, 21, from Shreveport, looks through a pair of "Big Eyes" binoculars while Cpl. Paul Carpenter, 27, from North Richland Hill, TX, stands on duty at the North East Gate in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Both men are members of the U.S. Marine Company B, 1st Battalion, 23rd Marine Regiment based in Bossier City, Louisiana. ------- Subject: Aother interesting web page with German optics and books Here is another interesting web page that offers the Seeger books, and a number of interesting surplus German (and other) military optics items. Binoculars, theodolites, periscopic sights, rangefinders, tripods, surveying instruments, etc. -- including some spare parts for German binoculars. Prices in Euros. http://www.hegeroptik.de/index.html There is one section in English, but don't hesitate to "shop around" the other German language sections to find more stuff of interest. Gene Lucas (17250) -------- Subject: Canadian Navy Big Eyes Another web page with a good photo of "Big Eyes" at work. Canadian Big Eyes http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/mspa_gallery/gallery_e.asp?x=1&page=9 "May 9, 2002 - Somewhere in the Arabian Sea - On the bridge wing of the destroyer HMCS ALGONQUIN, tactical acoustic sensor operator Leading Seaman Robb Franklin of Sudbury, Ontario uses the "big eyes" (long-range binoculars) to watch the British supply ship RFA Fort George sail by. HMCS Algonquin is deployed on Operation APOLLO, Canada's military contribution to the international campaign against terrorism." This web page looks like it is planned to index lots of photos of Navy stuff, including "Driectors" which are the large ship mounted rangefinders. I can only view the stuff using Internet Exploder! http://navalhistory.flixco.info/ ----------- Subject: Web page with stuff on Soviet T-72 tank equipment Here is a Web page with stuff on Soviet T-72 tank equipment, including SOME stuff on the sights and "biocular" rangefinder. Just found this, haven't read through it. Could be lots of stuff here to wade through. AFV Interiors -- cover shot shows binocular (?) sighthead on Soviet T-72 tank http://www.kithobbyist.com/AFVInteriors/ Commander's binocular periscopic sights -- see pictures 10 and 14 This reminds me of a US tank periscope that was surplused out in the 1960s-70s. http://www.kithobbyist.com/AFVInteriors/t72/t72a.html Look at pictures 11 and 12. http://www.kithobbyist.com/AFVInteriors/t72/t72b.html Commander's sight -- look at picture 4 http://www.kithobbyist.com/AFVInteriors/t72/t72c.html --------- Subject: WWII Army rangefinder web sites The following web page from the Northwest Historical Association (WWII historical re-enactors and enthusiasts) consists of an article on use of the Vickers machine gun, and includes photos of a Barr and Stroud optical rangefinder, a clinometer, and a Vickers "dial sight" which looks like half of a binocular on an azimuth dial mounted on a tripod. http://www.nwha.org/news_2Q2001/news_page4.html "Several special instruments were developed for use with the Vickers. The first was the clinometer, a device that was attached to the tripod. As the barrel was raised it could be measured against the clinometer to find the angle of elevation. In 1939 the clinometer was replaced with the more sophisticated dial sight. A Barr & Stroud rangefinder (which looks quite similar to the model used by German artillerymen) was used to determine the range to targets. If the target was out of the line-of-sight then a map could be used to obtain the range along with either a slide rule or range table for calculating the proper gun elevation. In addition there were charts for determining adjustments du to the relative elevation of the target to the gun and for wind speed and atmospheric conditions." This site is selling a Swiss/Swedish Wild M41 WWII rangefinder (nice photo): http://www.samcoglobal.com/access.html More pics and higher price for the Wild M41 (note 1972 placard) http://www.simpsonltd.com/Wild%20Rangefinder.htm A HUGE Norwegian rangefinder (search site for "rangefinder") that serviced a captured 280mm gun http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/lexington/12/fortresses/soertroendelag/oerlandet.h tm Gene Lucas (17250) =================================================================================== =================================================================================== Binocular List #257: 18 May 2003. =================================================================== Subject: Fungus/Inst. Repair, etc, From: "Osborn Optical Systems" An interesting note on fungus-proofing can be found in the Army TM9-1603, dated 1951. It states, "Because the active fungicidal element employed tends to speed up corrosive action on metallic finishes and soften optical cements, fungicidal capsuls will be used only in those instruments which are being rendered unserviceable or which experience has shown will be rendered unserviceable by fungal growth." Repairs. I've been out of town for the last few binolist's (restoring several WWII, 13 1/2 ft. rangefinders) so I didn't drop the Osborn Optical Systems name in the repair & service pile. Just a reminder, we perform any type of repair or restoration, to any type of optical instrumentation. We have about a dozen different types of collimator systems ranging from 1" up to 12" and can hold accuracies to 1/10 arc second. Our restoration and repair work has been unmatched, period. A quick note about the U.S.N. 9x63, a number of these were made from parts kits in the 1970's utilizing the Mk32, 7x50 bodies. A word of warning. In the last few months, we have seen a number of the Russian 15x110 military mounted binoculars. All of them had been purchased on eBay from sellers in Russia at about half the price of "new, in the store" instruments and upon reciept by the winners, were delivered to us for "not being right". Upon inspection, they appear to have been assembled from floor sweepings at the factory or depot. The insides have all had considerable rust and dirt, a wide variety of incorrect screws and poor fitting parts, not to mention the lack of proper optical assembly or collimation. Unlike the earlier units that seemed to have been made for military contract, these, must be made of left-overs or reject parts. They can be made workable, but by the time a technician is done, they cost as much as a full price unit! ------- These WWII 13 1/2 ft. rangefinders are at the Fort MacArthur museum in San Pedro, CA, which is actually a part of Long Beach these days. They are in storage until I am done with them, at which point they will indeed be on display. I am trying to have one done by the 4th of July. I'd like to ask the list if anyone has an Army M2 or even civilian B&L 8x56 that they would be willing to donate or sell to the museum. These were used on the W.W.II Army anti-aircraft fire control directors of which the museum has one which has been restored, but is lacking the binocular. I can provide a receipt and non-profit tax deduction information for anyone willing to donate this binocular. Take it easy, Earl -------------------- The M1 was an 8 x 56, with oculars set at about 80 degrees to the body, made by Keuffel & Esser for use with Height Finder T9E1, which was cancelled and 'no more than a pilot Binocular M1 was ever made'. The M2 was an 8 x 56 by B & L, for searchlight control, issued to the Engineer Corps, and 2,476 were procured at $70. (Source: Frankford Arsenal. Encyclopedia of Army Ordnance Binoculars. Philadelphia, no date, after 1944.) =========================================================== Subject: Thiomersol (fungus preventive) From: Thiomersol is readily available-my hospital pharmacy stocks it-the pharm tech indicates the common name is merthiolate. Both merthiolate and mercurochrome were very common mercury/alcohol based topical antiseptics used to sterilize instruments by soaking and as a skin antiseptic. I believe mercurchrome had the characteristic red orange color; an advantage when using, as it showed clearly the areas treated. Mercury concerns has decreased their use in recent years but they have the advantage of not causing antibiotic resistance as the use of topical antibiotic ointments may. They can be irritating. Methymethacrylate is used as tissue glue by surgeons. I believe commonly available super glues are chemically closely related. Arnie ===================================================================== Subject: fungus treatment From: guus kasteel Probably enough has been said at the list or in the fungus.txt on the mode of action of thimerosal. The thing I would like to add is that thimerosal (the nonproprietary name) is available from most chemical suppliers in small quantities such as Sigma- Aldrich and should be easily obtained via a local chemist. They probably will not sell to individuals. Though it is still widely used in injection, ophthalmic or topical solutions, please note that the concentration in medical use is much lower as stated in the fungus.txt paper; 0.2% versus 0.01 to 0.001%. Handling the pure component requires certain safety measures to avoid absorption via inhalation (dust) or via the skin (!). Very similar to the fungus problem in optical instrument, electronic equipment may be damaged by fungi. Many of you will be familiar with the typical color and smell of the interior of WWII (and later) military electronic equipment. This is caused by coating used for moisture and fungus proofing, developed by the Signal Corps Ground Signal Agency. The spray paint was fortified with salicylanilide, phenyl-mercury- salicylate (a similar compound as thimerosal) and pentachloorfenol. I have no idea on the concentrations. Guus Duchateau ================================================================== Subject: Re: stripping and coating of small lens lots From: rab I've made the acquaintance of Mr. Al Misiuk, a coating pro at Sirius Optics, who is stripping the golden coatings off my 30x180 binocular objectives. Al has expressed a willingness to discuss small-lot, custom coating services for people like us. I'm reluctant to mention what he's charging me, since I don't think he's charging enough. His email addresses are as follows. misiukal@___l.com amisiuk@___optics.com Regards, Dick Buchroeder --------------------- Stripping coatings is not something we'd need done very often, but it requires experience to know how to approach each optic element. Treatments that will remove coatings can also attack glass. Misiuk has a good reputation. --Peter ===================================================================== Subject: Review Kronos There's a long review of the Kronos BPWC2 6x30 binocular, by Holger Merlitz, at: http://de.geocities.com/holger_merlitz/kronos6x30.html =================================================================== Subject: Hercules 18mm binocular From: "Loren A. Busch" A friend would really be pleased if someone could identify these and might have an eyecup replacement. Marked "Hercules" 6(8?)x18, and Made in Occupied Japan. I loaded images to a Web page: http://home.netcom.com/~lbusch/mysterybinoculars/ ---------- I haven't seen this Hercules before, the design is a little different than the typical Japanese 'open frame'. Eyecups: Taking them to repair shops & hoping a more recent eyecup fits, is one possiblity. I've lathe-turned workable eyecups out of ebony. Others are casting duplicates of eyecups using resin. --Peter ============================================================ Subject: The Porro II Dilemma From: Kennyj2@___m It is refreshingly unusual to be asked for opinions on any binocular at the design stage , and not as easy once put on the spot to make a sensible suggestion . I think that although a Centre Focus bino is certainly much more appealing to the great majority of binocular users , I have a feeling that for all but boating and some hard -core "old fashioned " astro -use , a 7 x 50 Porro configuration is becoming somewhat out of vogue . Most serious birders these days seem to prefer water -proof roofs ( even though IMHO the image through all but the VERY best is inferior to that through a good porro such as the Nikon Superior E range ) and there seems to be a trend towards higher -power models from 8.5 through to even 12x. Many amateur astronomers seem to be slowly realising that the traditionally favoured and thus oft recommended 7mm exit pupil is surplus to requirements in probably 90% of viewing situations . That is to say that it may be ideal for a 20 year old person in a really dark sky location but for a 50 year old in average conditions , a 7 x 42 or even 7 x 35 performs just as well , usually with the added bonus of wider fields of view So , although personally I find Individual focussing a bit of a pain ( and can think of more interesting uses of rubber than covering binoculars with it ) : - ) , for what it's worth my advice is , regardless of tooling costs , go for the sailing and astronomy market and stick with IF and rubber . Regards to all - Kenny . ====================================================== Subject: New Porro II From: gordiray@___t Why not get the Kamakuras or one of their or some other Chinese factory to copy the now widely publicized KM blc 8 x 60 Porro II IF no rubber? Why no rubber?-because it adds lots or weight which is better alloted elsewhere in the package. The 7.5mm pupil gives the rotating eyeball more margin for scanning the field while fully dilated on a boat, at night, in a vibrating helicopter, etc. Recall that the eye pupil is not at the center of eyeball rotation. I have a dkl 10 x 80 Busch type to which blc/eug oculars from the 80 deg inclined 10 x 80 were hybridized. Their f.l. is longer than the Busch type 28mm. so the hybrid has magnification lower than 10. Those 6 element oculars, which seem to have also been used on the deck mount 8 x 60 (?). synch beautifully with the Busch objectives and prisms, at least subjectively. I acquired it already hybridized,and it seems more comfortable than the unmodified Busch l0 x 80. Everybody is selling 7 x 50 . Ridiculous red blocking coatings are used as gimmicks for distinction. Wide field, big eyepiece, rugged,big prism , glue minimized , rubber free in 8 x 60 or 9 x 70 succeed. High cost? recall the many SLR camera lenses , which require tighter tolerances than eyepieces, were selling for far less than telescope eyepieces of similar dimensions and component counts, even with the focuser included. --Gordon Rayner =========================================================== Subject: Porro II Project From: "James J. Gorman" As one who much prefers the Porro II configuration to the Porro I, for perhaps idiosyncratic reasons of hand fit and "feel", I am much interested in the DO Porro II project. With respect to Mike Rivkin's request for feedback, I would suggest CF and a pebbled synthetic gray covering for widest appeal. The last polished binocular I recall was the ill-fated silver version of the Rollei/AVIMO 7 x 42. I most often use IF in daily walks in the fields with the dog, but most acquaintances who regularly use binoculars, whether for birding or marine use prefer CF. A very nice 7 x 50 Porro II glass was by Kershaw, named "Vanguard". It seems to me a modernized version of the Ross/Kershaw No. 5 Military glass, but I have been unable to find reference to it in my admittedly modest binocular library. It has a butter- smooth if unusual CF arrangement, with some internal mechanism, rather than an external bridge connecting the oculars. The image is quite excellent, being very bright and sharp, with only quite minor edge distortion. The color rendition is superb, and the contrast excellent without being overbearing. Mine has a small collimation error, some minor dirt and fungus, and the left ocular barrel appears to have been dislodged and imperfectly reset. With that, however, it is a truly excellent field glass. It has the feel of an early 50's design, with a serial no. 53681, though whether Kershaw ran all their binocs. in the same series I do not know. I would be much interested if anyone knows something about this binocular, and wonder whether it is similar in concept to the DO project glass. Take Care, Jim Gorman ----------- Jim sent some .jpgs, but I am over-committed now & don't have time to ftp them. The Vanguard is a unique design, with odd curved prism housings that look like they were designed by an art deco committee, but are quite comfortable to hold. I like it, but I'm not sure anyone would want to replicate it! The Deutsche Optik design is more of a classical 'tuna can' Porro II. Somehow no good photos of it were taken at the Feb. meeting. I don't find any background on the Kershaw Vanguard; I know they were make in 7x, 10x, & 12x; and that internal focus would make for a very interesting disassembly. --Peter ==================================================================== ==================================================================== Binocular List #258: 03 June 2003 ================================================== Subject: Substandard products From: afeldman I found Earl Osborne's mentioning about the "parts '15x110'" binocs coming out of Russia a little "deja vu." I recall back in the middle 1990's, there was an influx of 85 size Russian nautical Chronometers. Here too they tended to look cosmetically okay at first glance, but even a less than careful examination revealed exactly the same things as Earl found, i.e. incorrect screws, wrong parts, and in general, to use Earl's comment, "floor sweepings." I later found out from reliable sources that there was a small "cottage industry" Poland that specialized in cobbling together all manner of fakes, including, but certainly not limited to, WWII German Military "Leica" cameras made from Russian Zorkis(?). Interestingly enough the industry is alive and well and still produces counterfeit orders and medals, of rather good quality actually. However, I suppose due to the "nature of the beast," I cannot recall ever having seen any quantity of counterfeit items of an "optical" nature. Obviously opportunity and the "demand" will always engender such ... Cheers, Allen =================================================== Subject: Porro II from D.O. From: Arthur Tenenholtz It would seem to me that very few birders would be interested in a 7x50. Birders may go for a 7x42, but seem to prefer an 8 power with large objectives. Those who mentioned that 7x50 is generally overkill are supported by RoyBishop in his article on binoculars for astronomy in the current OBSERVER'SHANDBOOK of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. However, Bishop holds that the excess of the exit pupil size, over the maximum pupil diameterof the over thirty set, provides a "picture window," which allows for finding or holding a target or ease for those who are on a moving platform. This is especially useful for the marine set and not without value for others. Of course, I cannot understand why anyone would want a new Porro II 7x50when the British #5 glass is available from Deutsche Optik for $200, unless modern coating , and a Porro II design, promise to make a spectacularly contrasty and bright image. Is this theoretically the outcome of such a design? Would not such a glass have to be at least 40% brighter than the current Fujinon Polaris or the Zeiss 7x50 BGA glasses, for anyone to really notice? As for configuration, I would opt for the most secure prism mountings, the Achilles' heel of any Porro compared to a roof prism glass; individual focussing, for their watertight integrity, and a nice retro pebbled finish in shade lighter than black. This might appeal to backyard astronomer or to a hunter, as well as a yachtman. Of course, someone would still have to convice me why I should buy this binocular in addition to my modern 7x50 glass and my reliable Leitz Marseptit. I should note that Fujinon, on the registration card, asks how large is their boat, of the purchasers of its porro glasses. Well, occasionally, I do ride the Staten Island Ferry which must be nearly 100 meters long... Arthur Tenenholtz ===================================================== Subject: optical and film supply From: "David Hoyt" I received my 7x50 optical and film supply co. new york usa. it is mint, in the original leather case and web neckstrap. it has a small broad arrow under the name. serial 3757. it apprears to be a quality glass. has the two filters in the lid pouch. I would be pleased to learn more about this ww2 supplier. ======================================================== Subject: Serial numbers From: Another short piece of info on serial numbers: The danish military received two mittlere Blinkgerät 1916 Model II on 6th of march 1918. from Zeiss. The two monocular 4x20 for these had the serial numbers:941950 and 940124. Michael Simonsen ============================================================== ============================================================== Binocular List #259: 12 June 2003 ========================================================= Subject: Hensoldt serial numbers From: "Phil Anglin" I am interested in finding information on the Hensoldt binocular serial number ranges for the various binocular models. Specifically for the period of 1930 thru about 1950. I am particularly interesting in knowing if Hensoldt started out with a new serial range after WWII. That is did they start at '01" again and go up from there? The reason I ask is because I have encountered many sets of Hensoldt binoculars that I assumed to be pre-war (these were not military coded or deinstglass marked) that bore low 5 digit serial numbers, in the 15,000 to 30,000 range. I have also encountered the same model glasses that were military marked that tend to bear medium range 6 digit numbers (i.e. 300,000 range). I was also curious if Hensoldt assigned a specific serial range for each model that they made. If I could study a sample of say 1000 sets of Hensoldt binoculars I may be able to sort these questions out, of course this opportunity is not likely! Thanks Philip --------- I have not seen any documentation on Hensoldt serial numbers. If such a list is known, please share it with us. --Peter ============================================================= Subject: Old Naval Binoculars From: "Harry Cavanagh" Can anyone offer information or help. I have for repair/overhaul an old binocular as follows. The appear to be from a German naval ship. The nameplate/decal has been removed. Name: FARTGLAS WECHSLER Inter-ocular distance adjust: AUGEN-ABSTAND Moderating glass/filters: NACHT Weight: Approx 10 -12 pounds Magnification: 20 (?) The ray shades can be raised. There is the remains of an adjustable head rest to enable comfortable viewing/eyepiece distance. The eyecups are missing. Eyepieces have individual focus. L/H side has a graticule - a circle with a small (+) plus sign in the centre. There is the letter 'T' engraved on one of the prism housings. There was a graticule illumination which is missing. The R/H side is very dirty and in need of cleaning. L/H side OK. There is an open sight for quick alignment. The adapter for mounting on a stand is missing. Any information would be most helpful. Thanks Harry Cavanagh Ph.353 -(0)1-8477348 mailto: ======================================================= Subject: Russian quality control. From: I have spoken with a number of people who have been involved in Russian industrial production over the years. The crux of the matter is that there was only a military industry. Essentially only products of military application were made. Design and engineering were generally excellent. The limited availability of materials and modern (not 1930's stolen German or 1950-1990 US tech obtained by espionage)industrial techniques perforce modified those designs. Actual construction was driven by arbitrary quotas for production with no regard for the quality of the final goods. After production the best were sent to the military, the next best exported to client states and the worst kept for domestic, non-military sale. Unfortunately, this model persists. After so many generations of workers used to the shibboleth of "you can't pay me less than I can work" it will take some time to purge (a poor choice of words in the Soviet context)the system and replace it with a modern, western industrial model. This doesn't take into effect the widespread theft and black market industry currently thriving. One importer of Russian goods tells me he has local inspectors in Russia selecting things for him and he still has to personally inspect and service most items before sale with a 10% rate of salvageable goods-and these are hand selected! As you know I've really liked Russian and Eastern European optics-when they are right they are great and great value -Arnie ========================================================== Subject: New binocular development From: gordiray@___t Why not propose to Fuji Omiya an in-house (not Light, etc) 8x60, 9x70 with big widefield oculars and large Porro II prism? Maybe even the magnesium bodies they made for Bushnell during the early quality era when that name meant something. One can imagine the 25x150 prism drums and eyepieces mated, as is ,to a reverse engineered objective of about 70mm. While not quite as wide an apparent field as the km blc 8x60 variants, the image quality would be better near the edge, and they would be multicoated. Let us try to patronize this company before they decide to get out or go all-Chinese glued in or Steiner-ize glue-in. Perhaps they might even stop using the cheap ,brittle auto body filler as prism fixation cement in the subcontracted FMT AND MT. Incidentally, it was my suggestion which sparked the high eyerelief F series, as competition for the CZ 7x50B, BGA which used to be the rage among the marlin and swordfish crowd. --Gordon Rayner ======================================================== A very nice amateur astronomer's 10 inch binocular telescope from Germany, made by Uli Vedder: http://ulli.vedder.bei.t-online.de/bino_ger.html =============================================================== =============================================================== Binocular List #260: 22 June 2003 ===================================================== Subject: Hensoldt Serial Numvers From: "Gordon M. Jackson, Jr." In July 2000, I inquired via e-mail of Dr. Mergen at Hensoldt AG, " whether there exists a chronological list of Hensoldt (including 'bmj') binoculars according to type and serial number," and received the following: "Thank you very much for your inquiry. Unfortunately at Hensoldt's a chronological list of Hensoldt binoculars according to type and serial number does not exist. A good overview over the different Hensoldt binoculars and their year of market launch you will find in - Hans T. Seeger, Feldstecher, Verlag Bresser Optik, Borken, 1989 and an overview over the German Military Letter Codes and Hensoldt binoculars for the military you will find in - Hans T. Seeger, Militärische Ferngläser, Hamburg 1995, ISBN 3-00-000457-2 and in - http://www.radix.net/~bbrown/codes_full.html where you also will find some more sources for information. 'The difficulty in matching Hensoldt serial numbers with the year of manufacturing is that obviously serial number only between 1 and 999 999 were given and after the serial number 999 999 was given they seem to have sarted with 1 again. As Hensoldt is manufacturing binoculars since 1897 we unfortunately do not know how many "cycles" the serial numbers went through and as we lost all our records, drawings, tools and spare parts in the aftermath of WWII, we regret being unable to locate the exact year of manufacturing of any Hensoldt binocular manufactured before 1945. "Yours sincerely, Hensoldt AG Zeiss Gruppe Vertrieb Zeiss Ferngläser Dr. Mergen (Webmaster)" ============================================================ Subject: Soviet glass From: gordiray@___t I use the Soviet era optical book by Begunov, et al. Cost was trivial . Do not know if it is still available. It was from Mir, Moscow, and was at collegebookstores in the 80s. Have you seen it, or have feel for Russian optics books? I was very disappointed with the 15 x 110 and 20 x 110 that Mitch of Sovietski and Rivkin of Deutsche Optik were pushing. I wrote to Soviet Embassy in l970 after seeing one used in shot in Time mag during the Sino-Soviet brder problems. No response. Why all the yellow glass? They obviously copied the interocularspacing-prism lateral motion Cardano mechanism from the Zeiss 12 x 60 and 25 x 100. I wonder if they took any 12 x 70 or 15 x 90, if any were made, and if any were not first taken by u.s. or to Heidenheim? The 20 x 110 is too complicated, has yellow glass, weird distortion patterns, too many elements, etc, but is mechanically sounder than the 15 x 110 from Siberia. Every specimen, of both models, which I have seen has been out of collimation, though the comparatorless, collimatorless hack at Sovietski, moonlighting from Sweiss's , said one was ok. But definitely was not. What is the story on the Kunming , etc copies of the East German copie/adaptations of the prewar Asembi? All these seem to be out of collimation, plus improper spacers, etc? Maybe Osborn will choose to shed some light on this topic. He was pushing those for a while. Or the French modifications of the WW II Busch 10 x 80? He had some of those also. --Gordon Rayner =================================================================== Subject: Maker identification From: "Grimsey" Recently I picked up a small 8x25 porro binocular. It has a marking on the top left plate "Ruka Rathenow". Would that be the model i.e Ruka or the maker? Personally I have not heard of this before. They are coated of quite good quality, centre focus and have 2 prism adjusting screws on each housing. The quality of the leather case suggests they are far from cheap glasses. Any information from the group would be welcome. regards Phil Grimsey ------ Runge & Kaulfuss, Rathenow. 'RUKA' Manufacturer of optical equipment, 1930s - WWII. 6 x 30, 7 x 50. WWII code: dym , with a mark: /__\ like a prism. Any further information on this obscure maker would be welcome. --Peter ================================================================== Subject: Photo Adapter for Binos by Jeff Charles From: "Lucas, Gene" Here is a link to Jeff Charles' interesting pages on astrophotography and tele- accessories. You will find a photo and description of a gadget to do photography with binoculars here -- it slips on over the eyepiece. http://www.eclipsechaser.com/eclink/image/astrogd.htm "A Pocket Size Telescope Converter for Binoculars" http://www.eclipsechaser.com/eclink/image/astrogd.htm#bino [Quoted from the web page]: "This patented telescope converter attachment for a binocular accepts 24.5 mm diameter eyepieces. With the shown 9 mm eyepiece, it increases the 10x magnification of the binoculars to 40x. The other side of the binocular can be used as the finder scope. The front section of the adapter is interchangeable to accommodate different binoculars. The patent (D312,087, issued in 1990) is available for license. (c) Copyright 1988, 1998 Jeffrey R. Charles. All Rights Reserved." --Gene Lucas ================================================================= ================================================================== Binocular List #261: 7 July 2003 ==================================================================== Subject: Hensoldt serial numbers From: hans.t.seeger@___ne.de (Hans Seeger) A short comment to Hensoldt serial numbers. A list similar to that one asked for by Philip Anglin exists in my PC, but only a short one. I have listed nearly 400 Hensoldt serial numbers. A very small sum compared to the more than 7000 Zeiss serial numbers in my files. My Hensoldt list was given to Karsten Porezag the author of a Hensoldt history and to Dr. Besenmatter, formerly constructor of Zeiss Hensoldt binoculars and scientific advisor of this book. Both are now collecting material for the 2nd volume of the Hensoldt history from about 1905 to 1945. Recently the Zeiss-Hensoldt factory invited again a group of binocular experts for the 2nd meeting in Wetzlar and we delivered our old Hensoldt binoculars, brochures and other material for research purposes there. As previously, the material will be returned to the owners afterwards. My contributions were 27 binoculars and the list in question. The experts promised to be of assistance for this book in the future. Now the author has nearly 100 binoculars and comprehensive material for inscpection. Maybe that a list of serial numbers will be included in the 2nd volume of Porezag's Hensoldt history. Until then my list will be not published elswhere. If you or other readers of this letter provide me with your Hensoldt data I will incude these in my list and forward the numbers to Karsten and ask him to include the numbers in his book and give credit to you. Another point: The numbering system used in the Hensoldt factory seems to be very complicated and I have only a vague feeling about their proceeding. Therefore I didn’t include any suggestions or lists into my book. From my data I can see that there was a more or less “constant” number sequence from about number 300.000 to 900.000. The “lowest” bmj is 422706, the highest 590154. This number circle was continued after WW II, the lowest post war Hensoldt number in my list is 691058. An “intermediate” bino is depicted in my book on page 109, number 600463. For details see Abb. 63, left photograph. By the way: I can recommend the 1st edition of the Hensoldt History. You will find the very first Hensoldt binoculars and a lot of other interesting details. The book is in German. I think that you can get copies from Deutsche Optik. Hans Seeger ----------- Porezag, Karsten. Hensoldt: Geschichte eines optischen Werkes in Wetzlar. Band 1: Familien- und Gruendungsgeschichte bis 1903. Wetzlar: Karsten Porezag, 2001. 448 pp. D.O. is selling this for about $50., and it is a very fine book; volume 1 of a future three volume set. There is much on Hensoldt's first binoculars. --Peter =============================== Subject: 'Old Naval Binoculars' question. From: hans.t.seeger@___ne.de (Hans Seeger) Question “Old Naval Binoculars” by Harry Cavanagh. The glass in question is a 10 x 80, 20°. Some versions and details on the construction can be seen in my book on pages 354 to 358 and on page 251 (Kevin Kuhne’s chapter in English). Stephen Rohan has depicted this glass on page 105 and the following pages (Eyes of the Wehrmacht). If this glass was made by Zeiss you will find the serial number on the lower side of the cast housing. Please inform me about this number. Hans Seeger ============================================================= Subject: Hensoldt From: I can enlighten a little meagre bit on Hensoldt binoculars. On june 13th. 1905 A letter says that according to the danish representative of Hensoldt in Copenhagen, one Lt.Col. Pade, Hensoldt will in the near future be delivering a new design of binoculars, without mirrored prisms. Presently, The latest deliveries from the company has been manufactured of steel! Instead of Aluminium. The reason for this is, that the oxidation of the aluminium parts in the binos deteriorate optical performance! The surfaces of the prisms gets coated with oxidations products from the aluminium. Does anyone know what this means? Apparently it is NOT the silver mirror surface, that deteriorate. And the new design mentioned, must be the first true Dialyts. The flawed design mentioned above, is the old type with flat oval prism housings. Has anyone seen one of those, made of steel? Or maybe the steel design is the type with only objective and ocular openings in the prism house casting?. ( but still retaining the silver mirror prism system) Later, in early 1906, the same representative confirms that deliveries of the new straight through design has been made. Unfortunately there is no reference til serial numbers. If this should be said in short, then: Alu oval prism house binos up to around 1904-1905 One piece prism houses of steel 1905-1906 Dialyts 1906. One can speculate, that the idea of the one piece casting prism houses are caused by moisture in the old screw assembled oval design. It may be a neccessity in order to make the silver mirror prisms work well. Then the revised design of the roof prism makes the old, and probably fairly expensive steel castings dispendable. Now the tubes of the dialyt can be turned on a Lathe? I think those thin wall steel castings must have had a fairly high fault rate in the production....they are extremely thin. Michael Simonsen mikedenmark@___l.com --------------------------------------- (I sent a copy of Michael's email to Hans Seeger. --Peter) From: hans.t.seeger@___ne.de (Hans Seeger) It is true that Dialytes were introduced in 1905, see my book on Feldstecher pages 108 - 109. The remark on steel housings of late Pentaprism glasses refers to those with the "rounded shoulders", i. e. to models which have a one part prism housing like Abb. 115 and 116 in the book on Feldstecher and Abb. 67 (page 115) in my book on Military Binoculars. Earlier models of these had an aluminium body. I have a monocular of this shape with magnetic properties indicating a steel housing; I cannot tell if cast or steel sheet. The weight of this 12 x 26 (without serial number) is 240 g and would (to my feeling) not be much lighter with alu housing. The left hand glass in Abb. 67 has steel housings. The explanation of some sort of layer on prisms caused by a volatile aluminium compound is very unlikely. Aluminium oxide is not volatile. Only in case of strong corrosion of aluminium this will be transformed into a white powder. Normally, a very thin and transparent aluminium oxide layer prevents oxidation of this metal. Therefore some manufacturers did not paint the interior of early binoculars in order to gain the impression of higher luminosity. --Hans ============================================================= Subject: Recent imports From: "Osborn Optical" >> What is the story on the Kunming , etc copies of the East German copie/adaptations of the prewar Asembi? All these seem to be out of collimation, plus improper spacers, etc? Maybe Osborn will choose to shed some light on this topic. He was pushing those for a while.<< Ah. So the new term for selling is "pushing". I suppose the term may be appropriate for optical addicts. At any rate, after about 200 units, it was noticed that the quality was indeed slipping. The last 50 or so, were definitely suffering from indifferent assembly. My last trip to the factory revealed that with the turning over of much of the factory from military control to privatization , the quality control was leaving as well. From our standpoint, they were not worth the work to continue importing. In my contact with other folks that are still handling them, they are having to put considerable work into them to be saleable. >> Or the French modifications of the WW II Busch 10 x 80? He had some of those also.<< I only had one French variation that I had taken in trade quite a while back (since sold), but, I may have another coming. They are fixed focus and have no filters. There is a desiccant cartridge inserted in the hole that the filter drive shafting used to occupy. The eyepiece lenses are the standard 10x80x45 degree lenses in a one piece, fixed focus cell. The objectives utilize a different cell as well with brass spacers and retainer rings. Some have the original prism housing, and others have been found with a different casting that incorporated an machined boss on the bottom that supports a synchro. From "the top of the optical repair mountain" ;) , Earl ==================================================================== Subject: Ruka From: "William M. Beacom" The photocopied booklet I prepared has a page from the 1937 Geco Catalog#65 with 13 different models of RUKA binoculars in both regular and Leichtmetall. --Bill Beacom ----------------- This is an interesting line of Porro I, center-focus binoculars. The Artisem, Splendido, & Dumaris are about 70 degree field. The bridge between the eyepieces and the center post is not flat, but is arched, in a manner usually thought of as 'characteristically French', so perhaps this characteristic is not limited to French models. --Peter 6 x 24 Mars. Leichtmetall. 8 x 24 Hermes. Leichtmetall. 6 x 30 Spezial. (Reticle) Leichtmetall. 8 x 30 Spezial (Reticle) Leichtmetall. 10 x 30 Spezial (Reticle) Leichtmetall. 6 x 30 Decoris. 8 degree field. 8 x 32 Artisem. 8.5 degree field. 6 x 36 Claro. 7.5 degree field. 8 x 36 Splendido. 8.2 degree field. 7 x 40 Ultramar. 6.3 degree field. 10 x 40 Dumaris. 6.6 degree field. 7 x 50 Orion. 7.3 degree field. 15 x 50 Sirius. 3.6 degree field. ============================================================================== Subject: Voigtländer From: In the archives here in Copenhagen, I found a letter here, dated 15. November 1934. It is an offer of a binocular from a local representative of Voigtländer & Sohn, Braunschweig to the danish army. The binocular mentioned is a special military model, all metal, black painted overall, without any leather covering. It has moulded on numbers on the oculars, to make adjustment in the dark easier. It can be delivered in either black or grey. The special feature is, that it is completely water proof, and "can stand even extended time, submerged in water" ! Due to the large production presently, it can be sold at a very favourable price. The reason for this, is the fairly large orders for this binocular made by the NSDAP. (National Socialistische Deutscher Arbeiter Partei, ) One note here. In the nazi movement, for some reason, Braunschweig was an important city. I cannot recall the details, but I think the local party was very very active, that a Gauleiter was arrested for criminal activities, and that the riot police had their hands full trying to seperate the different groups from various parties, read: major street unrest. In view of this, it is concievably that local party groups did order binoculars on a more than modest scale. So the information in Mr. Seegers book on page 97 (2. edition) Abb 54, top left, is correct. This binocular is indeed a Voigtländer product. Date is around 1934. And as mentioned elsewhere: exist in both black and grey. Seeger has a picture of a grey item. I myself have a black one. And the main reason for the odd prism house design is, that it is watertight. Any collector out there with a spare specimen for a test??? I supply the bucket of water. Around here, it saw some testing, and a statement on its specifications were made. This was done on request from the danish representative of Voigtländer. It must have stirred some interest, as a later dated letter supplied the army with prices for 100 and 1000 pieces. As far as I can see, no purchases were made. The actual Bino of this type, I have, was found in a junk shop here in Copenhagen. Michael Simonsen Mikedenmark@___ele.dk ========================================================================== Subject: News from D.O. From: "Mike" For giant binocular enthusiasts, please note that we currently have one (1) 40x150 and a handful of 20x120s available for sale. All come from IDF (Israel Defense Force) military stores, and they've been cleaned, collimated, and include tripods and yokes. Most were made by Kowa, but a couple of the 20x glasses are from Nikon. Pricing is $4990 for the 40x150 and $3500 for the 20x120s. Please advise if interested. Regrettably little progress to report on the new binocular project, as we are starting the summer slowdown in Europe and continuing to battle the falling dollar and rising costs. However, I'll keep you posted. s/ Mike Rivkin Deutsche Optik ================================================================================ Subject: New models - Deleted models From: Kennyj2@___m I have not corresponded for a little while mainly because I continue to have absolutely nothing to offer on "the HISTORY of Binoculars " , and would not wish to be accused or suspected of trying to introduce unrelated topics to list members , which I have been guilty of in the past . That said , I thought it might be of some interest to someone here to know that Swarovski are bringing out a ( very expensive ! ) 8 x 32 version of their highly regarded EL series . I have been quoted an introductory price well over $1000. This quite hot on the heels of Nikon , who last year brought out a 8 x 32 version of their similarly celebrated High Grade / Venturer . Of course , purely on optical merit , the old favourites Leica roofs and the porro Nikon Superior E continue to be tough acts to beat in the 8 x 32 range . I for one am pleased that such major manufacturers are evidently so aware of the desireability of a smaller binocular to be putting so much research and development and of course marketing , into such sized units , but still lament the passing of the once commonplace 6 x 30 and 7 x 35 sizes . Regardless of all theoretical argument to the contrary , even at my age firmly in the "over 50s club " I still prefer a 5mm exit pupil even in broad daylight , and have a hunch that good quality , centre -focus , modern -looking, waterproof , phase corrected roof prism, wide -field models from the top guns in 6 x 30 and 7 x 35 could yet make a "comeback " . I concede this could be no more than wishful thinking . I hope someone influencial is reading this :-) Summertime regards to all -- Kenny . ================================================================================ ================================================================= Binocular List #262: 16 July 2003 ================================================================= Subject: 'Pushing binoculars' From: Stephen Sambrook Re. Earl Osborne's observation about 'pushing' . . . In Britain, at least, it's not a new expression. I came across it recently in some correspondence between C. Baker & Company (London dealers in microscopes &c) and Voigtlander in the early years of the 20th Century. The term then was used to indicate that a retailer would introduce the products of one company to its customers, rather than those of another maker. All rather genteel, and not in any way derogatory. C. Baker were politely telling Voigtlander that it would not be possible to 'push' the latter's products unless an extra discount were made available. The German firm had wanted Baker to 'push' as an integral part of a proposed agency agreement. In the end Voigtlander conceded the point and gave Baker's what they wanted. 'Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.' Stephen Sambrook ----------- To which I can only add: 'There Will Always Be an England' --Peter ================================================================== Subject: Japanese binoculars From: Nekosan My web pages have moved to : http://www.cameraguild.jp/nekosan/ I have added some new items also. Toshiba WWIIbinoculars. http://www.cameraguild.jp/nekosan/mazda.htm Postwar opera glasses by Minolta and Kowa. http://www.cameraguild.jp/nekosan/promin.html I'm preparing a Mikron page. Maybe within this year. Best Hayao "nekosan" Tanabe ============================================================================ Subject: Re: 6x24 From: Fan Tao I picked up a Russian wide angle 6x24 binocular on eBay, which I believe is the model mentioned in R.C. Gregory's book. It is very stubby, similar in shape to a Sard 6x42 though much smaller of course. This model does not appear to be military as it is center focus. From its serial number (6909242) one can surmise that it was made in 1969. Although the maker is not spelled out, it has the prism logo of KOMZ (Kazan Optical Mechanical Plant). This 6x24 model does not currently appear on KOMZ's web site. According to Gregory, the Russian 6x24 has a field of 200m at 1000m (although elsewhere in his book he also estimates it at 210m). I confirmed this with an estimate of a bit more than 11 degrees for the true field, or around 68 degrees for the apparent field. This is a bit less than another 6x24 wide field binocular of that era, the Leitz Amplivid. I found the Russian 6x24 to have a sharper image though. Like the Amplivid, it has low rectilinear distortion, i.e., straight lines remain straight across the field. I disassembled the Russian eyepiece and found it to have a 3-2-1 configuration, not commonly found in binoculars. One or more of the elements is slightly yellow, causing the image to be the same. The eye relief is reasonable at around 15mm measured but the usable amount is reduced by the fixed eyecups. I found the Russian 6x24 to be an interesting little binocular. Pictures and more information can be found on my web site: http://binofan.home.att.net/rus6x24.htm Fan Tao -------------- This is a very interesting binocular. If any list members can find a retail source for them, I believe there would be some orders from list members. --Peter ========================================================================= Subject: G