Simple Question

[Bluetail]

Only putting this in the "Others" forum because it's a general question.

Which 10x42 bins produce the most razor-sharp image?

[Katy Penland]

Since I'm up and most of you lot are already abed, are you asking based on personal opinion or industry benchmarks? Heh heh, not so simple a question after all? ;)

My Elite 10x42s are the sharpest and brightest I've ever used, but they're also 6-7 years old so I'm sure coatings, optics, etc., have undoubtedly improved across the board since then. I'm equally sure that this is so subjective an observation as to be fairly worthless to you!

[Bluetail]

Good point, Katy. I'm really interested in getting an idea of what might be the sharpest for my eyes. Obviously I'll have to try them myself in the end, but it helps to have informed views to start with. I know that people's eyes vary, so what may be best for one won't necessarily be the best for someone else, so it would be interesting to know which bins are scientifically proven to be the sharpest. On the other hand, I imagine that chromatic abberation might come into it? I know absolutely zilch about this subject, but I'm guessing that bins with the most pin-sharp resolution, but significant CA might not appear so sharp to the user perhaps as bine with slightly less sharp resolution but no CA.

[Katy Penland]

That certainly seems logical, and as you say, user's eyes are going to vary widely. I can tell you, though (and I'm not trying to sell this model 'cause I know there are better and far more expensive bins out there), that our Director of Photography on a location shoot saw me using these and literally ran over to see what they were. He spotted the greenish coating and was dying to have a look, had never seen bins with coatings like that. He was very impressed with 'em, and I had a hard time getting 'em back before the dinner break was over! He couldn't have cared less about the birds I was looking at but he sure liked its brightness and clarity.

Good luck on your search!

[Grousemore]

Hi Jason, this will inevitably be a subjective answer, but having spent several weeks intensive birding with the Zeiss 10x42FL's, I'm still as impressed as when I first bought them.
There are , obviously, other good Bins on the market, but make sure you try the FL's. If you like them, contact BF Admin, as they may still be selling them...that's where I bought mine.

[Mickymouse]

I am currently using Canon 12X36 with image stabilisation and IMHO the ability to use a reasonable amount of magnification and hold it still outweighs all the other considerations, when I next upgrade I won't consider anything which doesn't have IS.
I only mentioned this as something else to consider, hopefully usefully.

Mick

[Geoff Brown]

I am currently using Canon 12X36 with image stabilisation and IMHO the ability to use a reasonable amount of magnification and hold it still outweighs all the other considerations, when I next upgrade I won't consider anything which doesn't have IS.
I only mentioned this as something else to consider, hopefully usefully.

Mick

I recently bought the 10X30 IS and they are marvellous, they suit my eyeballs and unsteady hands anyway.

[Bluetail]

Thanks for the comments folks. Any of our technically-minded guys reading this?

[Katy Penland]

Hey, Jason, since this thread of yours piqued my curiosity about chromatic aberration (since I, too, know zilch about it ;)), here are a couple URLs with some interesting info, not the least of which is an archived thread from BF that turned up on Google! You probably already know all this, but in case not, thought I'd pass them along.

http://www.birdersjournal.com/birdingReviews/swarovski10x42.htm
http://www.birdforum.net/archive/index.php/t-14426
http://www.alula.fi/gb/test_leica10xGB.html

[Bluetail]

Hi Katy. Thanks for the links. I'd seen the BF one before, but not the other two. I was particularly interested to see the review of the Swarovski since these are the bins that are top of my list at the moment. They knocked my eyes out when I tried a pair a couple of years ago and I guess what I want to know is whether there are any that produce an even sharper image. The Alula bloke didn't seem to rate them so much though. ;) They seemed heavier than my ancient Leitz Trinovids, though, and a pair that's just as light as those, but with a sharpness at least the equal of the Swarovskis would be a must-see.

[iporali]

Hi Katy. Thanks for the links. I'd seen the BF one before, but not the other two. I was particularly interested to see the review of the Swarovski since these are the bins that are top of my list at the moment. They knocked my eyes out when I tried a pair a couple of years ago and I guess what I want to know is whether there are any that produce an even sharper image. The Alula bloke didn't seem to rate them so much though. ;) They seemed heavier than my ancient Leitz Trinovids, though, and a pair that's just as light as those, but with a sharpness at least the equal of the Swarovskis would be a must-see.

Jason,
Your question does indeed sound simple, but as soon as I tried to write my simple opinion, I came up with more questions than answers. Here is my mixture of speculation and random "facts" collected from my own experience, from this forum and elsewhere. As "Alula-bloke" Kimmo has said, the best binos resolve about 2x more than your eyes, so the less than perfect eyes may be "satisfied" with the binoculars having lower measured resolution.

Some suggestions for "differentially" razor-sharp binoculars:
1) Best ultimate optical resolution: many seem to say the new Zeiss FLs - especially in the center of field. The "razor-sharpness" does not seem to cover the whole field of view, but those who actually own these binos are not too bothered. With the FLs you also get rid of chromatic aberration, which is visible (and disturbing) in almost any other roof prism binos. I have no experience on them but I would highly recommend you to try a pair.
2) "Most evenly distributed highest resolution" ;) : in my experience the Nikon HGs (10x32). According to the Alula test: the Zeiss Victory. Both of these suffer from noticeable lateral colour (CA) and are quite sensitive to eye-placement, so the sharpness may be experienced differently.
3) Sharpest "large sweet spot" (something between the 1 and 2): The Nikon SE. IMO the SEs are sharper in the center, but the HGs are more "evenly sharp". Others may disagree ;) The SEs are also quite sensitive for a perfect eye-placement, they don't have disturbing CA, but I and some others see occasional black-outs due to long eye-relief.
4) "Easiest" large sweet spot: The Swaro EL. OK, the resolution is not the very best, the light transmission may suffer from reflective anti-scratch coating and some lateral color can be seen, but IMHO these binos produce immediately a very pleasing view (which does not easily black-out during panning). Kimmo Absetz mentioned about this on some earlier thread and I can only agree. Maybe the Nikon E2s fall also in this category.
5) Shake removers: The Canon IS. No matter how good the optics are, the hands seem to shake away most details. As much as I hate to admit this, I honestly think Canon's approach to produce a sharp image has more potential than eg. Zeiss's.

As everybody says, these feelings are very personal. Those who can keep the eyes perfectly positioned with the Nikons, sing their praises - I know how to do it, but I have to concentrate a little. If you see a razor-sharp image with the Swarovski, does it matter if these binos are "only" 2x sharper than your eyes, if there are, say, 2.2x sharper alternatives which may be more difficult to view through?

That was my long answer - the short, banal one would be:
Try the Swaro EL, Zeiss FL, Nikon HG + SE, Canon IS and tell us what was sharpest to you. ;)

Regards,
Ilkka

[Bluetail]

Ilkka: thanks very much indeed for your detailed input. I had no idea it was that complicated! I guess the answer's going to depend on the way I look through my binoculars and I'm not sure I know that myself at the moment, never having thought much about it before. Some experimenting to be done here and I shall certainly try to test all the models you mention.