Eyerelief problem solved with eyecup-flattening on Vortex Diamond

[John Baars]

For biking trips here in the country, I like to have a small pair of binoculars around my neck. For enjoying the view every now and then and if possible for some occasional birding.
Especially for that purpose I recently bought a Vortex Diamond HD 8X32. Got reasonable reviews. Not top of the line stuff, it had to be affordable, but certainly not junk either. Lighter than the 8X30 vintage Hartmann I normally used. With the Hartmann, although quite good, I always had to slide my glasses onto my forehead. With this one there should be plenty of eyerelief.
Nice sizable field of view of 8 degrees or 140 m. at 1000m. So with an eyerelief of 16 mm it should be doable with glasses on. Just about or just about not. It was a close call, but it became just about not.

Sixteen mm eyerelief, I believe it. But the eyepieces appear to be deep in the eyecups. Too deep. As if the eyecups were not designed specifically for this bino, but taken from another type. Saves development and production costs.
With glasses on, the field of view appears to be at most 7 degrees, perhaps even a little less.
Closer inspection revealed that the eyecups have an additional raised edge / rim 2 mm high. Now if I could just lose this, then....
Return it? It is not my habit to immediately tinker with newly purchased gear, but this solution was so obvious that I did it anyway. No sooner said than done. Cut away the rim, reworked it with polishing paper to give it a bit of neatness and voila. The full field of view is visible from now on.

Attached are a picture of a Vortex Diamond 8X32 with the original eyecups, that too-high edge is clearly visible. And a pic of my own bino with the flattened eyecups. Yesterday evening I enjoyed some views of various bright stars with it, as well as the Moon. With my glasses on.

[DeanD]

A nice, neat modification John: well done!

Something that Vortex should take note of.

[Bigzmey]

Nice do it yourself solution John. Sometimes just a couple of mms make all the difference.

[Lady Fraktor]

A excellent modification John!
Would you say these are a reasonable general purpose set? (day/ night use)
I am looking for a small set to take with me.

[John Baars]

Would you say these are a reasonable general purpose set? (day/ night use)

I would say, yes it is.
For use during the day it is lightweight, has a good field of view, sharp in the center and a reasonable bright image. CA is good enough suppressed to my opinion. It has some unsharpness round the edges of course and some field curvature. Nothing to be seriously bothered by. Younger eyes than mine accomodate even better.
It surely beats my good old 7X35 Japanese Horizon binoculars on details during the day and is on par with my 1980 8X30 Hartmann Bernina.
At night on earthly objects the 7X35 is a tad brighter due to the larger 5mm exitpupil. ( my entrance pupil is 5 mm). On stars it wins from the 7X35 by nose length, due to the higher magnification and slightly darker background. The wide field is a delight. On stars and widefield on par with the Bernina.
Stars were quite nice pinpoint. No abnormal streaks coming from the center. On Arcturus I could not find the notorious roof-prism light streak.
Due to the dimensions, weight, and waterproof design it is a better allrounder / general purpose set than the two binoculars I compared it with and which I used as such. Worth its price.
Recommended for general purposes: yes.
Not for typical deepsky of course.

[helicon]

Interesting modification and a creative solution to the problem John. Nicely done.