View Single Post
Old Thursday 23rd June 2011, 23:29   #24
mooreorless
Registered User
 
mooreorless's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntingdon,Pa.
Posts: 2,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surveyor View Post
Here is a link to a portion of the OL review. I found no mention of how the tests were done and how objective/subjective they may be.

They rated the Alpen 10x25 3rd out of four of mid sized binoculars, below a Pentax 9x32 and a Minox 8x33.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/ga...ode-1001345786

Use the "Previous" button above table to scroll back through binos.
Ron in the past when Bill McRae was testing optics he used a 3x booster and on some of the reviews he posted the boosted resolution, this is not saying 3x was enough power. The 2001 issue is one they did post the resolution, Pentax 10x50 DCF WP 3.7 SOA, Nikon 10x35EII 3.9 SOA and the "Editors Choice" Zeiss 8x56 BT*P* 3.7 SOA. Low Light test was conducted under natural light in the evening using a 10 inch dia. disk covered with alternating white and black stripes and they rotated this every few seconds until the person couldn't say what direction the stripes where facing and how many min. after sunset this was. Supposed to check for flare, workmanship, aesthetics[beauty,ugly etc.], applicability [intended purpose] and price value. Example spotting scope the EC was the Nikon Sky&Earth 20-60x80mm with 1.8 arcsec
I think they do the same thing now that Bill McRae retired, but I am not impressed sometimes.
I had my mother buy my boy the 2001"great buy" Alpen 8x25 reverse porro for him at Christmas time and it is decent. Well this was quite a while ago.

Tom, Thanks for the excellent review!
__________________
Regards,Steve

Last edited by mooreorless : Friday 24th June 2011 at 06:53.
mooreorless is online now  
Reply With Quote