I guess I'll drag out this post once again since it's the best visual demonstration I can offer of the difference between the center field image of the 8x30 Habicht and an "8x30" with lower axial aberrations, not off-axis aberrations . Just follow the directions for how far away to view it in order to simulate different levels of eyesight acuity.
Hello, Visiting my son at London, after been with him at his PhD in Economics graduation in the EUI (European University Institute), Firenze, Italy, I made a visit at Harrods. Just to take a look at the place. As the last year, they have DEALS in binoculars. Two were VERY GOOD SALE offers...
www.birdforum.net
I didn’t read all the reply posts. But this is a very interesting testing criteria. A coupe of things pop out to me , maybe you could educate me a little, please.
On the surface this seems like a very scientific test method, but somewhere it was said that part of the test results were beyond everybody’s eyesight acuity, so where is the eye or brain being fooled to think one pair of binoculars are better than another ?
The next issue or observation is the Instruments themselves being used for the test. Your comparing the Habicht’s to one of the most expensive premium optics available. My eyes don’t seem to lie to me , I’m noticing clear, better, brighter , sharper images in the Habicht’s than any roof has in its price class. And that’s taking into consideration the aberrations caused by the old design and glare in the 30’s. I’m not seeing any magic when I compare them to the roof price point.
Id like to ad that you tested one Zeiss and one Habicht. What were the condition of both of the instruments, how much use and/or abuse did either one of them have. Were they excellent examples from the manufacturers, the latest and greatest, were any of them ever damaged, or refurbished. These are questions that answers could have a profound effect on the believability of the outcome.
i’m not from Missouri, but that test method with one example of each binoculars definitely can be taken seriously, but if you did that with five Habicht’s and FL‘s , I’d be more apt to agree with the results.
Specs and numbers do count , nobody should deny that. But I couldn’t count the times that I’ve read reviews with technical data, and that technical data implies a better optical image. Yet fall short when in real world application.
Paul