[Newbflat]

So I have a general question about what makes a natural and or relaxing view in a pair of binos. *I realize that lower magnification and a larger objective lens can help bit but I have looked threw 10x's that I found more relaxing than some moderately equally priced 7x's. **

I realize that alinement and over all quality have an influence. But all things being equal ( i know... Not possible) why are some binos relaxing to look threw and others not?

Bill..

[etudiant]

Contributions to a relaxed view come from generous eye relief and a wide exit pupil.
This makes it easy to look through the glass without needing to be too exact in terms of eye placement.
The WW2 Zeiss 8x60, with around 23mm eye relief and a 7.5mm exit pupil, is believed to have been perhaps the best glass ever in terms of ease of view. They were hard to make, characterized by Zeiss as 'tip of the flagstaff' technically, so they were not carried over for commercial sale.
A modern replica might be possible, but as the glass is a big, heavy IF porro, it fails the current day market priorities of compact and light CF roofs, so no supplier seems interested.
Used examples surface periodically on the 'bay, with prices usually several thousand dollars, more for mint specimens.
A poor man's approximation might be the old East German DF 7x40, the well known Checkpoint Charlie glass. This is a smaller and lighter IF porro, likewise sporting long eye relief and a big exit pupil, with a very comfortable view, albeit somewhat yellow tinged allegedly because the glass was formulated to remain transparent even in a high radiation environment, where conventional glass would turn dark.
This glass used to be available for around $150 while the East German Army stocks were getting dumped, but are now several hundred dollars. Still a bargain, provided you get a good one. Some are in rough shape.

[bh46118]

The 6.5X32 Fury has an extremely easy view. The 8X43 ED2 and Minox 10X Porro are both far more demanding to use, but both have a higher quality view than the Fury.

Bruce

[Newbflat]

What made me ponder the question was looking threw Vortex Talon HD 8x 42's and Vortex Viper HD 8x42's and doing an a/b comparison. *I found the Vipers to be much easer on the eyes with a more relaxed view. *There both 8x 42's and have long or longish ER. *The only big difference is FOV.*
*
The difference wasn't huge but was not noticable immediately. *What causes this ease of view in one but not the other? I realizes it could be sample difference and more time with both could have led to them being closer in viewing ease.... But it got me thinking.*

Bill

[etudiant]

Originally Posted by Newbflat

What made me ponder the question was looking threw Vortex Talon HD 8x 42's and Vortex Viper HD 8x42's and doing an a/b comparison. *I found the Vipers to be much easer on the eyes with a more relaxed view. *There both 8x 42's and have long or longish ER. *The only big difference is FOV.*
*
The difference wasn't huge but was not noticable immediately. *What causes this ease of view in one but not the other? I realizes it could be sample difference and more time with both could have led to them being closer in viewing ease.... But it got me thinking.*

Bill

Excellent.
This is a much more illuminating case, two glasses, same producer, same optical dimensions, both higher end models with prices to match ($600 for the Vipers, $450 for the Talons) and yet very different optical impressions. Vortex is a reputable brand, so QC is presumably adequate to weed out real duds.
So what is the explanation for the difference in 'ease of view'?

[LPT]

I, too, find large exit pupils very comfortable to use. Some other comfort factors, though, are: field of view, depth of field and eye relief.

[brocknroller]

I find the 8x30 EII has a relaxed view and it doesn't have large exit pupils nor is it low power or large aperture. But what it does have is a whopping 70* AFOV. My eyes can roam around the field compared to the 8x32 SE in which my eyes are more restricted and are more susceptible to image black outs. The SE delivers stunning images, but it takes more work.

The most relaxing view I've seen through binoculars was the CZJ 8x50 Octarem. It does have big exit pupils and larger aperture but not a super wide AFOV.

This leads me to conclude that multiple factors contribute to a relaxed view.

In general, I find the view through porros more relaxing than roofs because of porros' better 3-D effect and apparent depth. With roofs, particularly with midsized roofs, the compression of the view makes my eyes work harder.

Brock

[stereotruckdriver]

My Swarovski 7x42 slc neu gives me the most relaxed view of any binocular that i have had the privaledge of looking through. Be it the large exit pupil the 7x mag i'am not sure all i know is it is a pleasure to use and a design that will be sorely missed!!! Why manufacturers are shying away from this format i have no clue but, i do know it will open a big void in the binocular market! I do hope that another manufacturer see's this void and see's fit to keep producing such a binocular! I really think this format is the real universal binocular, Bryce...

[looksharp65]

This is a golden opportunity to mention PFOV (do a search here!).
Apart from PFOV and the other abovementioned properties, I'd like to mention even exit pupil illumination.
The Nikon HG 10x32 is very comfortable to use and I believe this is part of it.

[typo]

Of the ones I have, the 7x26 and the 10x56 have the most relaxed views. Totally different in their EP, AFOV, filed flatness, colour, weight, handling etc. No idea why they are better than the others.

David

[normjackson]

I realise the OP suggests we assume equivalent collimation but I wonder if that is ever appropriate. Item by Bill Cook on collimation on Cloudy Nights site :
http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbarchi...b=5&o=all&vc=1

[typo]

Originally Posted by normjackson

I realise the OP suggests we assume equivalent collimation but I wonder if that is ever appropriate. Item by Bill Cook on collimation on Cloudy Nights site :
http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbarchi...b=5&o=all&vc=1

Interesting possibility. The only pair I've have that's been checked for collimation is my 7x36 and I was told that was 'perfect'. The view through that is pretty 'relaxed' but the others still seem better, so I guess not the whole story.

David

[normjackson]

Originally Posted by typo

Interesting possibility. The only pair I've have that's been checked for collimation is my 7x36 and I was told that was 'perfect'. The view through that is pretty 'relaxed' but the others still seem better, so I guess not the whole story.

David

Relax David, I wasn't trying to claim the prize
Even if we tried a bit harder to tie down what we mean by "relaxed view" (should we?) expect folks are gonna get theirs through different routes.

I'm the opposite of Brock (Gott sei dank! ) in that I generally find the view with wider spaced objectives less easy or relaxed. Maybe that just happens where I'm being lazy about reading a 3D picture into the image and maybe the preference would be reversed under certain circumstances : as this is a birders' forum maybe as an example I should suggest trying to isolate an lbj inside a hedge with brown leaves

I generally find the view through an old Foton 7x35 quite relaxing; I don't mind the rubbish edge performance, the yellow cast, the short eye relief is not a problem. Maybe factors that help are : both barrels equal(ly bad), low power, wide angle, decent 5mm exit pupil, low expectations...

[Bobby Dids]

Originally Posted by normjackson

low expectations...

That right there seems to be the key.

I have been quite close to purchasing an Alpha roof recently. However, having now witnessed the exhaustive dissection that a new top end model is subjected to, I fear that any purchase would be tainted with me trying to identify its shortcomings.

By choosing something a little cheaper that is considered good value for money, just perhaps (within reason) nirvana can be reached. Then again, perhaps not.

Sorry, slightly OT. Back on topic, for me its the FOV of the EII that wins it.

[Steve C]

After self collimating some vintage porros I am convinced that the single over riding element in a relaxed view is proper collimation. Just because you side by side two different binoculars of the same maker and configuration you should not assume the difference you see is not due to collimation differences as much or more than model differences. I have had collimation problems with several Vortex binoculars, so giving any particular maker a pass is not wise. I ALWAYS look for proper collimation as the very first thing I do after focusing the glass ALWAYS. Easy check too, just focus on a power line (or any long linear surface like a roof top or semi van)and move the glass away from the eyes and see if the line splits.

Another thing is not having a large difference in optical performance between the two barrels of the binocular. It also helps to have manufacturing tolerances built in fairly close and good QC. Having one max spec and one min spec barrel plus a little bit of collimation error and the view is doomed. There is more of this kind of out of the box error in any binocular brand and model than we think there might be, as far as I am concerned.

Assuming the barrels match and are properly collimated we march bravely into the world of how any individuals eyes are going to react to a given binocular system.

The field of view has to be wide enough for an adequate presence for any particular individual. Some need wider fields than others. Some perceive the width of the field differently from others.

The next thing is what sort of color bias we personally prefer. If everybody was the same here, all binoculars would have more or less the same bias.

There is the ever present question of edge sharpness. Some desire more edge sharpness than others.

There is then the question of CA. if you see it and your binocular does not correct adequately for it to suit you, no easy view will result.

There is also the simple ergonomics of a binocular too. Are the eye cups comfortable? Is it too heavy? Does it feel good in your hand and up to your eyes?

I think the "ease of view" is a completely individually defined and subjective thing. What it means is that if a binocular gives you the "ease of view " you need, then it is more likely to be looked at as the whole is sometimes greater than the sum of its parts, and the basket of features give you the right mix of quality. It is the reason to...as far as possible...to try before you buy. Spec sheets and reviews can narrow things down but your eyes will rule.

[Howard220]

I can always count on Steve C to have a well thought-out and high-quality answer. Don't let it go to your head. ;-) Sometime last year I commented to elkcub about my relaxed view with my newly cleaned and adjusted (by Nicolas Crista) Swift Audubon 804R's. For the uninitiated, they're 8.5x44 porros. I just hold them to my eyes and they become a "pure extension" of them. This is unlike either of my two compacts, and I know that, because they're inexpensive compacts, it is not a fair comparison.... The Swifts, I have to believe, are now properly collimated, and each barrel should be equal to each other. Sure, the exit pupil is large at over 5mm; that helps. I wouldn't say it has the greatest amount of eye relief, so that's not it... I last year compared a Nikon Monarch 8x36 with some version of an Eagle Ranger 8x32 -- I think one that was about to be updated. The Ranger provided me with much more of a relaxed view, and I commented as such to the saleslady. The Nikon had too much chromatic aberration (abhoration, I call it), and just wasn't clear, whereas the Ranger just put up a nice image immediately. No muss, no fuss. With the Nikon I had to play around with it too much to (unsuccessfully) get a clear view. With other binoculars I've tried that lack the relaxed view, I could never tell where the best focus is, and had to spend so much time and effort fussing with it. (My little Nikon 8x25 Trailblazers are like that: always having to find the best focus -- if I can get it clear at all.) Enough rambling. In an attempt to contribute positively to this thread, I am concluding that no-fuss excellent sharpness, along with other excellent optical qualities consistent in both barrels, spot-on collimation, are major contributors to a relaxed view. Yes, a generous exit pupil helps, as does a "decent-size" sweet spot. Sharp-to-the-edges is not required, in my, um, view....

[etudiant]

Originally Posted by Steve C

After self collimating some vintage porros I am convinced that the single over riding element in a relaxed view is proper collimation. Just because you side by side two different binoculars of the same maker and configuration you should not assume the difference you see is not due to collimation differences as much or more than model differences. I have had collimation problems with several Vortex binoculars, so giving any particular maker a pass is not wise. I ALWAYS look for proper collimation as the very first thing I do after focusing the glass ALWAYS. Easy check too, just focus on a power line (or any long linear surface like a roof top or semi van)and move the glass away from the eyes and see if the line splits.

Another thing is not having a large difference in optical performance between the two barrels of the binocular. It also helps to have manufacturing tolerances built in fairly close and good QC. Having one max spec and one min spec barrel plus a little bit of collimation error and the view is doomed. There is more of this kind of out of the box error in any binocular brand and model than we think there might be, as far as I am concerned.

Assuming the barrels match and are properly collimated we march bravely into the world of how any individuals eyes are going to react to a given binocular system.

The field of view has to be wide enough for an adequate presence for any particular individual. Some need wider fields than others. Some perceive the width of the field differently from others......

.

Very helpful input.
Maybe those old WW 2 Zeiss 8x60s gave such a good view because they were so hard to make that proper barrel matching and exact collimation was a minor part of the effort and was always done carefully. That plus long ER and a big exit pupil ensured easy viewing.

[bh46118]

Pages of minutiae will never be as relevant as these four words.

Originally Posted by Steve C

your eyes will rule.

[Hermann]

Originally Posted by etudiant

Contributions to a relaxed view come from generous eye relief and a wide exit pupil.
This makes it easy to look through the glass without needing to be too exact in terms of eye placement.
The WW2 Zeiss 8x60, with around 23mm eye relief and a 7.5mm exit pupil, is believed to have been perhaps the best glass ever in terms of ease of view. They were hard to make, characterized by Zeiss as 'tip of the flagstaff' technically, so they were not carried over for commercial sale.

I was lucky enough to use one of those 8x60 blc binoculars in almost perfect condition for a couple of hours, and that binocular is really quite amazing. It has one hand-finished aspherical lens in the eyepiece that seems to contribute quite a lot to the image quality, by the way. I found the 8x60H (porro II prisms) even better, not just because it's a lot lighter than the UDF. Both these binoculars are truly amazing, I wonder what they'd be like with modern coatings.

Originally Posted by etudiant

A poor man's approximation might be the old East German DF 7x40, the well known Checkpoint Charlie glass. This is a smaller and lighter IF porro, likewise sporting long eye relief and a big exit pupil, with a very comfortable view, albeit somewhat yellow tinged allegedly because the glass was formulated to remain transparent even in a high radiation environment, where conventional glass would turn dark.

The yellowish tinge of some military binoculars was indeed caused by a type of glass that remains transparent in a high radiation environment. Perhaps the best known examples of this are the Russian BPO 7x30 and the Zeiss Jena 7x40 EDF. However, the yellowish tinge was also a conscious design decision because in some light conditions, for instance on foggy days, the perceived contrast is higher. As far as I know the East Germans did some extensive testing on this in the 1970s before the EDF 7x40 was introduced. Some details can be found on Albrecht Köhler's website (in German). You also find some information on some other Zeiss binoculars there, including the results of ray tracing tests of the eyepieces of the UDF 7x50 and the UDF 8x60.

As to what modern binoculars have relaxed views, my "best" pair is the Hensoldt Fero D17, a big, heavy and seemingly indestructible 7x50 porro. Very good eye relief, large exit pupils and an image that's *very* sharp in the center, gradually becoming slightly less sharp towards the edges.

Hermann

[jogiba]

Zeiss 7x42 FL's with a nice wide 8.6 deg FOV and the lightest weight of the premium 7x42s.

[Steve C]

A couple of other things occurred to me since my above post.

The first thing I should have included there was contrast. This overall presentation of color and if we have the right levels for our eyes is pretty important too, event though it can be enhanced to a certain extent by color bias.

Next is perceived depth of focus. The idea that depth of field/focus is inversely related to magnification has been pretty well discussed here before. However, not all binoculars of the same magnification are going to be perceived to have the same dof...they can sure be different to my eyes anyway. While it is pretty obvious that 8x glass has better dof than 10x glass, not all 8x or all 10x seem the same within their magnifications. The less perceived dof, the more you need to use the focus and the less pleasant the view. Like Howard, I have a Swift Audubon porro and it has a very easy view. One of the reasons is that it has a superb (for my eyes anyway) depth of field. If I don't need to come inside about 100' to focus on something within the nearer ranges of that binoculars capabilities, I simply do not have to focus it. A generally greater dof is another reason I really like 7x. I really hope the upcoming Prime HD in 10x will seem to me to have a greater dof than some other 10x binoculars. One reason I don't like to use 10x as much as 7 or 8 is because I always need to fiddle with the focus.

I suppose resolution has a role, but I think that even most of the lower mid range glass we can get today has enough pure resolution to fill the needs of an "easy view", assuming everything else is in proper balance.

[Newbflat]

I find this all very interesting. From reading here and around a little I'm left with the feeling (be it somewhat obvious) that collimation is most likely the biggest factor in an easy on the eyes view. Then lots of other factors adding to the total quality of view.

So, too re phrase the question...... From my understanding Zeiss 7x42 B/GA Dialyt's have a very loyal following for brightness and field of view, but mostly (as i understand it) for there wonderful ease of viewing. The obvious comparison of the moment is the Zen ED3 7x43's. The speaks on these two are very close. ER and FOV are nearly the same. So forget nitpicking ultimate sharpness or the small field of view differences. Assuming that they're both in collimation shouldn't they both be equally easy on the eyes?..... or if not, why?

I'm not implying there is a difference.. i have never looked threw ether. Its just a question. Any one out there had both?...

Bill..

[James Bean]

If you can't afford a Zeiss 7x42 FL, you could do worse than find a used Bausch & Lomb 7x42 Discoverer, nice examples selling for around £100 ($160). If greater magnification is required, the old but good Swift Audubon 8.5x44 is a really "nice 'n' easy" view, delivering 'reach out and touch' magic. Not waterproof, but robust and easy on the eyes. If you want an easy view to last a thousand years, hunt down a Zeiss BGA 8x50 Octarem... awesome!
If you want the pinnacle of perfection regardless of cost, go for a Zeiss 7x42 BGAT ClassiC.

[normjackson]

Some real heavyweights there James.

BTW a near mint Octarem B at Focusoptics for £225 ATM

[jaymoynihan]

Originally Posted by James Bean

If you want the pinnacle of perfection regardless of cost, go for a Zeiss 7x42 BGAT ClassiC.

with the *P* added, (phase coated), the of the "easy view".