P3D Re: Realist viewer - obligatory to spend big bucks?

[fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Dr. George A. Themelis)]

>If I buy a Realist do I really need one of those vintage $100
>realist viewers? 

No, you don't.

>Do people buy the viewers because they're that much more superior 
>than less expensive viewers?

Yes, they do.

I will try and make this clear... A viewer has three major components:

A. Optical: Pair of lenses.  Simple viewers have single-element lenses 
   (usually plastic).  This is simple magnifier glass that is subject to 
   aberrations away from the center.  More expensive viewers use 
   double-element achromatic lenses that correct these aberrations to a 
   large degree.  Different people show different levels of appreciation 
   for good quality optics. 

B. Mechanical: Way to hold the slide and adjustments.  Simple viewers do 
   not offer any adjustments.  More expensive viewers offer focusing, 
   which is rather important if your vision is not perfect.  Also, 
   interocular adjustment (IA).  In theory, IA is not very important but 
   people with eye spacing more narrow or wider than normal find that it 
   helps to adjust the interocular (spacing of lenses).

C. Electrical: Internal illumination.  Simple viewers do not offer 
   internal illumination.  More expensive viewers usually do via a 2.5 V 
   screw type bulb and a pair of batteries.  The advantage of internal
   illumination is consistent light intensity and color.

Here is an outline of your choices:

* For $3.25 you can buy a Radex viewer from Reel 3-D.  This viewer 
  offers a pair of plastic lenses, no mechanical adjustments and no 
  internal illumination.  This is possible the best deal in 3d hardware.  
  Many of us (myself included) started with this viewer.

** For $50 or less you can buy something like a Star-D, Brumberger, 
   Life-Like, etc.  These viewers offer a pair of plastic lenses, 
   focusing (but not interocular adjustment) and internal illumination.

*** For $100 or more you can buy a Realist red button, Kodaslide II, 
    Revere, etc.  These viewers offer a pair of (glass) achromatic 
    lenses with shorter focal length than the simple lenses, full range 
    of adjustments (focusing and interocular) and internal illumination.

I recommend that you start with the $3.25 viewer and later switch to a good
viewer as many of us have done.  Personally, after I got used to the good
quality images from my red button viewer (which is now enlarged for
full-frame viewing and has a frosted halogen bulb for bright uniform light)
I will not use anything else.  The combination of bright images viewed
through good quality optics, is hard to beat!

One of the advantages of the "Realist format" is that good viewers are
available at a reasonable price (yes, $100+ is reasonable... considering
that Edmund Scientific sells a pair of achromatic lenses similar to the
ones in these viewers for about $80).  There is nothing like that in the
2x2x2 format.

Much of the pleasure in stereo photography is viewing stereo images.  Why
not use the best?  What good is a good and expensive camera when you cannot
see your own slides at their best?

But don't let the expense stop you.  Start low and keep looking for an
upgrade.

Regards -- George Themelis

PS. It sounds unreasonable that the Realist camera and viewer cost about 
    the same, considering that the camera is much more complicated and 
    expensive to make.  In the 50s the price of the camera was $160 
    while the price of the (red button) viewer only $20 (8:1 ratio).  
    The laws of demand and supply have brought this ratio to 1:1 today.  
    As I said, many people have sold their cameras but kept their 
    viewers.  Or, cameras were kept as valuables while viewers 
    (especially those with bad battery leaks) were thrown away.  Plus, 
    today usually people try to get more viewers (to share slides) than 
    cameras.  These factors have created a high demand for the viewers.


------------------------------