Kevin Conville
yardbirder
"I still use the Leica quite a lot, but optically the Habicht just kills it."
"My Swarovski 8x32 SV's just kill the BN optically."
"If your binocular isn't dead enough already, my 12x50 BN would just kill it."
(this last being tongue-in-cheek, I'm sure)
Nothing is "killing" anything around here.
I've got eyes. I've looked through lots of bins. I've owned several pair of bins that, under scrutiny, are a bit brighter and a bit more contrasty. Maybe, and it's a big maybe, a bit sharper. But "killing"?
No, no, I don't buy it.
I probably use binoculars differently than some around here. I usually have them when in the field with either a camera or a spotting scope, but sometimes just the bins. In any situation I tend to use my bins for scanning areas for birds and then, closer, identifying birds. I rarely view for minutes on end. I rarely use them in the lowest light. I also tend to point the bins at my subject and am not too concerned with flatness of field or CA at the edges. I just don't care about these things, never did.
IMO field binoculars, as an observational tool for wildlife, are somewhat compromised in that they are handheld. This requirement further reduces the minor optical differences to be had in very good binoculars. It also tends to amplify other aspects of field bins. If one were to tripod mount their bins, maybe the subtle differences between, say, Leica BNs and the latest Swaro something would be more pronounced.
So much attention is paid to the last Nth of difference in bird bins when we all know that if you really want to see something break out your spotting scope. Even the humble ED50 with only a 16x mounted on it WILL kill the view through any hand held binocular.
All just my opinion, of course.
"My Swarovski 8x32 SV's just kill the BN optically."
"If your binocular isn't dead enough already, my 12x50 BN would just kill it."
(this last being tongue-in-cheek, I'm sure)
Nothing is "killing" anything around here.
I've got eyes. I've looked through lots of bins. I've owned several pair of bins that, under scrutiny, are a bit brighter and a bit more contrasty. Maybe, and it's a big maybe, a bit sharper. But "killing"?
No, no, I don't buy it.
I probably use binoculars differently than some around here. I usually have them when in the field with either a camera or a spotting scope, but sometimes just the bins. In any situation I tend to use my bins for scanning areas for birds and then, closer, identifying birds. I rarely view for minutes on end. I rarely use them in the lowest light. I also tend to point the bins at my subject and am not too concerned with flatness of field or CA at the edges. I just don't care about these things, never did.
IMO field binoculars, as an observational tool for wildlife, are somewhat compromised in that they are handheld. This requirement further reduces the minor optical differences to be had in very good binoculars. It also tends to amplify other aspects of field bins. If one were to tripod mount their bins, maybe the subtle differences between, say, Leica BNs and the latest Swaro something would be more pronounced.
So much attention is paid to the last Nth of difference in bird bins when we all know that if you really want to see something break out your spotting scope. Even the humble ED50 with only a 16x mounted on it WILL kill the view through any hand held binocular.
All just my opinion, of course.
