There seems to be a hardcore of guys here who collect / deal in optics.
"To clean or not to clean , that is the question ?"
If so who should do it and should you be having it done at all ?
For my part it is not a question of "if" , cleaning is something which should be done.
Optical surfaces - delicate coatings , damp , mould , the accumulated residue of gassed out lubricants - what do these do to the inside of a binocular or optical sight ?
We might have them in warm temperature regulated homes - in the past they might not have been so lucky - age and time take a toll.
Any set of binoculars made in the 1930's-40's is now hitting on 60 -70 years of age - they were never meant to go so long without being serviced , the lubricant changed and the effects of long terms neglect being halted.
Some collectors will balk at the thought of having a set openned , as it changes them from being "origional" and "untouched" , value is the first thought - will cleaning them reduce the value ?
When buying a set - we always ask about the optical condition - it is deemed to be important -so why when we have bought them should we neglect their up keep ?
I have just had two sets returned to me from Dougie Biggart ( Glasgow Binocular Repairs) - almsot all my sets bar one have been over to him for cleaning and servicing - today all can be lifted up and used - as good as the day they were made.
In some cases Dougie has managed to remove fungal growth , reduce damage to coatings , remove flims of lubricant which are damaging the interior surfaces and to restore life into long neglected pieces of equipment.
How do others feel about cleaning / servicing - I fail to see what gain there is in letting a set of bincouclars bcome cloudy and unservicible - just letting them slowly degrade and die on in a display case.
Above all it seems to me a sin to allow this to become a "natural course of events".
My 2d for what it is worth - as it stands I have sets which can be used - as clear as the day they left the factory.
Restoratation of sets - another matter - as far as I am concerned - when does restoration become a total make over and with what end in mind , can a set which has been repainted and had its engravings refilled be considered as "mint" - some traders would have you believe this and will describe sets as being "mint" when they have had a "total make over"
To me there has to be a balance - worn paint is not totally bad - it is expected , too good often means that it is too good.
To me this is much more detremental to value and desirability than cleaning could ever be.
It just seems to me that if you have something it is worth looking after it and neglect / "just letting it be" is sometimes not the best policy - when coatings and prisms begin to go , they go.
Again my 2d , for what it is worth.
"To clean or not to clean , that is the question ?"
If so who should do it and should you be having it done at all ?
For my part it is not a question of "if" , cleaning is something which should be done.
Optical surfaces - delicate coatings , damp , mould , the accumulated residue of gassed out lubricants - what do these do to the inside of a binocular or optical sight ?
We might have them in warm temperature regulated homes - in the past they might not have been so lucky - age and time take a toll.
Any set of binoculars made in the 1930's-40's is now hitting on 60 -70 years of age - they were never meant to go so long without being serviced , the lubricant changed and the effects of long terms neglect being halted.
Some collectors will balk at the thought of having a set openned , as it changes them from being "origional" and "untouched" , value is the first thought - will cleaning them reduce the value ?
When buying a set - we always ask about the optical condition - it is deemed to be important -so why when we have bought them should we neglect their up keep ?
I have just had two sets returned to me from Dougie Biggart ( Glasgow Binocular Repairs) - almsot all my sets bar one have been over to him for cleaning and servicing - today all can be lifted up and used - as good as the day they were made.
In some cases Dougie has managed to remove fungal growth , reduce damage to coatings , remove flims of lubricant which are damaging the interior surfaces and to restore life into long neglected pieces of equipment.
How do others feel about cleaning / servicing - I fail to see what gain there is in letting a set of bincouclars bcome cloudy and unservicible - just letting them slowly degrade and die on in a display case.
Above all it seems to me a sin to allow this to become a "natural course of events".
My 2d for what it is worth - as it stands I have sets which can be used - as clear as the day they left the factory.
Restoratation of sets - another matter - as far as I am concerned - when does restoration become a total make over and with what end in mind , can a set which has been repainted and had its engravings refilled be considered as "mint" - some traders would have you believe this and will describe sets as being "mint" when they have had a "total make over"
To me there has to be a balance - worn paint is not totally bad - it is expected , too good often means that it is too good.
To me this is much more detremental to value and desirability than cleaning could ever be.
It just seems to me that if you have something it is worth looking after it and neglect / "just letting it be" is sometimes not the best policy - when coatings and prisms begin to go , they go.
Again my 2d , for what it is worth.
Comment