[mwnold]

I am confused with Allbinos review of the 10x42 SLC's. They have the SLC New WB ranked 4th. Then they have the SLC WB HD ranked 13th. What is really confusing to me is that in the reviews they have photos of each bino. The 4th ranked bino is the picture of the older model SLC. And the 13th ranked bino is the pic of the newer model.

Have they inserted the wrong photos and specs, or I am missing something?

Thanks

[newfie ghost]

Originally Posted by mwnold

I am confused with Allbinos review of the 10x42 SLC's. They have the SLC New WB ranked 4th. Then they have the SLC WB HD ranked 13th. What is really confusing to me is that in the reviews they have photos of each bino. The 4th ranked bino is the picture of the older model SLC. And the 13th ranked bino is the pic of the newer model.

Have they inserted the wrong photos and specs, or I am missing something?

Thanks

The descripions and pictures match up correctly. Ignore it, the HD is better. If I were betting, the metrics slide over time and the review is not updated. Either they slide because of memory, or they change the metric based on comparisions to newer models. E.g., the lxl is a flat view, here's the new SV, oops now my flat scale changed.

Comparing rankings across binoculars on allbinos doesn't work. Arek admitted this himself.

To put it another way, you cannot do a comparison between any two binoculars unless you put them side by side. The comparison is relative and memory has a uncanny way of distorting.

When I bought my Nikon EDG in the store, I thought wow this is sharper than my wb el. I brought them home did the side by side, the el is sharper.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=229237

[brocknroller]

Originally Posted by newfie ghost

The descripions and pictures match up correctly. Ignore it, the HD is better. If I were betting, the metrics slide over time and the review is not updated. Either they slide because of memory, or they change the metric based on comparisions to newer models. E.g., the lxl is a flat view, here's the new SV, oops now my flat scale changed.

Comparing rankings across binoculars on allbinos doesn't work. Arek admitted this himself.

To put it another way, you cannot do a comparison between any two binoculars unless you put them side by side. The comparison is relative and memory has a uncanny way of distorting.

When I bought my Nikon EDG in the store, I thought wow this is sharper than my wb el. I brought them home did the side by side, the el is sharper.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=229237

"Sharper" is a subjective term. The red bias in the Nikon increases the apparent contrast, which can make the view look "sharper" than some other bins of similar quality.

Contrast is very important in any activity where you need to separate your "target" from the background, be it birding, hunting, or stargazing. Resolution, OTOH, needs to be compared using an objective "measuring stick" with a booster.

So one bin could out resolve another in a resolution test, yet perceptually look less "sharp" in the field or in a store than the bin with better apparent contrast.

I think this is a major reason why people report differences in which bin they think is "sharper" when they take the "Coke or Pepsi Challenge".

Ideally, you'd like to have a bin that has both excellent apparent contrast and excellent objective resolution, because once you've found your target, you want to see the most detail your eyes are capable of resolving.

However, even though these two factors can be separated out in tests, it's the totality of the view - the contrast, the resolution, the color balance, color saturation, CA control, distortion level, edge sharpness, etc. - that causes a buyer to chose one bin over the other optically. Then how they fit the hand, the face, and the wallet.

Given the small differences in alpha bins' resolution numbers, I'd prefer the bin with the better apparent contrast even if it's a hair's breath behind the other in resolution, because most of my birding is done in fairly dense woodlands.

<B>

[newfie ghost]

Originally Posted by brocknroller

"Sharper" is a subjective term. The red bias in the Nikon increases the apparent contrast, which can make the view look "sharper" than some other bins of similar quality.

Contrast is very important in any activity where you need to separate your "target" from the background, be it birding, hunting, or stargazing. Resolution, OTOH, needs to be compared using an objective "measuring stick" with a booster.

So one bin could out resolve another in a resolution test, yet perceptually look less "sharp" in the field or in a store than the bin with better apparent contrast.

I think this is a major reason why people report differences in which bin they think is "sharper" when they take the "Coke or Pepsi Challenge".

Ideally, you'd like to have a bin that has both excellent apparent contrast and excellent objective resolution, because once you've found your target, you want to see the most detail your eyes are capable of resolving.

However, even though these two factors can be separated out in tests, it's the totality of the view - the contrast, the resolution, the color balance, color saturation, CA control, distortion level, edge sharpness, etc. - that causes a buyer to chose one bin over the other optically. Then how they fit the hand, the face, and the wallet.

Given the small differences in alpha bins' resolution numbers, I'd prefer the bin with the better apparent contrast even if it's a hair's breath behind the other in resolution, because most of my birding is done in fairly dense woodlands.

<B>

All reviews are biased and subjective especially mine.

And yes the EDG has much better perceived contrast and color to my eyes. El looks a little washed out in comparison. The SV is improved in both areas to my eyes.

But if I look at the edges of various objects for example, the EL is cleaner in the center. The EDG is much sharper at the edges and it is also flatter than the EL by a significant amount.

Here's probably the best test though, I grab the EDG much more often than the EL, I guess it must be better then.

[mwnold]

Thanks guys. I am newbie and trying learn as much as I can. It's been entertaining. Maybe one day I will pull the trigger on one. I have narrowed it down to three, the SLC HD, EDG, or Victory FL T. The final differentiator will probably be the price on a used one. That probably gives the FL T the advantage.

Mike

[newfie ghost]

Originally Posted by mwnold

Thanks guys. I am newbie and trying learn as much as I can. It's been entertaining. Maybe one day I will pull the trigger on one. I have narrowed it down to three, the SLC HD, EDG, or Victory FL T. The final differentiator will probably be the price on a used one. That probably gives the FL T the advantage.

Mike

Try them all if you can. The reviews on here including mine are subjective. Once you've spent the money it is not cheap if you change your mind. Happy hunting.