• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Best Low Light Binocular? (1 Viewer)

I hear what you're saying - and it is indeed the stern voice of reason.

But, You can also apply your philosophy of discipline 'after' looking through these bins :-O

You know the saying you can't 'unsee' somethings... I believe it is so true with optics. Once you get a good look at a few scenes from good optics it's like a drug really, you can never go back. so if one is on a budget they should not look too far beyond that.
 
You know the saying you can't 'unsee' somethings... I believe it is so true with optics. Once you get a good look at a few scenes from good optics it's like a drug really, you can never go back. so if one is on a budget they should not look too far beyond that.

Alleluia...I Seen the Light...|8.| :loveme:

(On boy, that's gonna cost me)!! :-C 3:)

Ted
 
The real difficulty is to "unsee" the deficiency/ies in lesser binoculars after viewing through the best. The OP wants to know the "finest low light set of bins out there". But, to quote again from post #41, "if one is on a budget they should not look too far beyond that." If you try out the best then to "unsee" the slight differences in other binoculars takes an effort of will which hopefully you won't need to summon up for too long afterwards.
 
Last edited:
I hear what you're saying - and it is indeed the stern voice of reason.

But, You can also apply your philosophy of discipline 'after' looking through these bins :-O
Yeah - but I'd have to pay to do so (I can't imagine where I'd find one to just look through). I doubt my 50+ years old eyes can really get full advantage from a 7mm+ exit pupil - so I think I'll stick with my 10x56 FLs as the best low-light bins I'm likely to use. They were enough of an indulgence, even at the excellent price I found mine for. And they are quite good.

...Mike
 
Yeah - but I'd have to pay to do so (I can't imagine where I'd find one to just look through). I doubt my 50+ years old eyes can really get full advantage from a 7mm+ exit pupil - so I think I'll stick with my 10x56 FLs as the best low-light bins I'm likely to use. They were enough of an indulgence, even at the excellent price I found mine for. And they are quite good.

...Mike

Sounds like you've got your bases very well covered as is.
 
Zeiss Night Owl

Quite why Leica won't offer a simple but no compromise 8X56 as would be a Noctovid of this configuration I don't know as how many birding folk need rangefinding and a ballistic calculator for bullet drop? Certainly not any member of the BBC "Springwatch" Team I'm aware of!!

LGM

What's wrong with an Ultravid 8x50 ? I'm pretty sure the vast majority of the Leica customer base don't have an iris that is wider than 6.25mm !
 
I stood for the same decision as you are right now.
I was looking for the ultimate binoculars for my dusk and nighttime badger observations.

My lineup were the:

Leica Ultravid 8x50
Zeiss Conquest 8x56
Zeiss Victory HT 8x54
Swarovski SLC 8x56

The Leica was simply to dark in the dim lit part of the shop of Jan van Daalen / House of Outdoor obviously and was put aside immediately.

The Victory HT / Conquest / SLC were left.

The HT seemed a bit darker than the Conquest and SLC and also didn't felt so well balanced which would annoy me if I have to keep te bins for many minutes in front of my eyes observing badgers. So, also the HT was put aside.

Left were the Conquest and the SLC.

To be honest this was a tough decision. The Conquest was just a shade (in the poorly lit shop) darker, but had a very smooth and precise focus knob. The SLC was just a bit brighter, but the focus knob was a bitter stiffer.

Also the price difference was tempting to pick the Conquest over the SLC and I really had a discussion with myself if this amount of money was worth it, for that tiny bit of extra brightness.

In the end my wife was the smartest of us both, as always.

She told me to buy the SLC, since I would get used to the focus knob and I would ever be doubting if the SLC was a better choice when it would be really dark.

So I ended up with the SLC and a few months later I was watching my badgers in the dark with a friend, with a Conquest, and he was suggesting to go home, because it became to dark to see anything and I was surprised because I had still quite good vision over the badger sett and we exchanged the bins for a while and the tiny bit in the shop, made a huge difference in the real dark world and the extra sum of money was well spend on the SLC.

For me the best buy ever.

Ps. Previously I owned a pair of Swarovski 7x42 and I really liked it. Very nice bright lightweight binoculars, BUT! I bought new, bigger, glasses and I saw a lot of black spots in my view. An issue where they are known for. But if you don't wear glasses or glasses which are close to your eyes, you should try them and be amazed.
 
The Docter Nobilem are very nice low light binoculars. They might even be the brightest available.
But they are indeed quite bulky. I have some big hands, but these are even to big for my hands and also to heavy to hold still for a while.
 
The Zeiss Dialyt 8x56 look very cool, but handle very poor and a definitely no go for is that they aren't waterproof, also the eyecups are not so nice when you wear glasses. The minimum focus distance is also quite long, which make them less universal. And at last, they aren't so bright anymore compared to the roof prism competitors that are available nowadays.
 
The Zeiss Dialyt 8x56 aren't waterproof.

This surprises me given they have been the go-to binocular for the diserning European (woodland) hunter since they hit the market but clearly you know what you're talking about.

To what depth are the modern low light binoculars you refer to good for?

LGM
 
Last edited:
I find the Dialyt 8x56 to be a great low light/difficult light glass. Zeiss only stopped making it a couple of years ago. I can easily see why it has a constant cult following for so many decades while other great Zeiss come and go.

Just wondering....Has Zeiss made any other binoculars which had a longer production run than the Dialyt 8x56? (With so few changes?)
 
...any thoughts on the finest low light set of bins out there? [/QUOTE said:
I'd like to propose the Zeiss 7x45 Night Owl as a candidate. It's like a 7x42BGAT on steroids; it has the same wide field and clarity, plus a 6.4mm exit pupil. Heavier than the BGAT, yes, but it's more portable than a 50/54/56.

John
 
There has been much talk here about “light grasp.” But, am I out of line in wondering about the importance of quality over quantity? A 70mm “No Name” from China is going to blow away the best 40mm of Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, and the better Nikons as related to light grasp alone. But, is it going to make for a more enjoyable viewing experience when matters of glare suppression, chromatic aberration, field curvature, astigmatism, distortion, rigidity in collimation, AR coatings, eye relief, and other things enter the equation? :cat:

Just a thought,

Bill
 
Last edited:
There has been much talk here about “light grasp.” But, am I out of line in wondering about the importance of quality over quantity? A 70mm “No Name” from China is going to blow away the best 40mm of Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, and the better Nikons as related to light grasp alone. But, is it going to make for a more enjoyable viewing experience when matters of glare suppression, chromatic aberration, field curvature, astigmatism, distortion, rigidity in collimation, AR coatings, eye relief, and other things enter the equation? :cat:

Just a thought,

Bill

Good points of thought, Bill!

IMO, you are perfectly "In-the-Line-Up"! :t:

Ted
 
Allbinos have tested the new Steiner Nighthunter 8x56 porro and rate it at their very highest level. Note that they are yet to test the Swarovski SLC 8x56 or the Zeiss HT 8x54.
 
There has been much talk here about “light grasp.” But, am I out of line in wondering about the importance of quality over quantity? A 70mm “No Name” from China is going to blow away the best 40mm of Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, and the better Nikons as related to light grasp alone. But, is it going to make for a more enjoyable viewing experience when matters of glare suppression, chromatic aberration, field curvature, astigmatism, distortion, rigidity in collimation, AR coatings, eye relief, and other things enter the equation? :cat:

Just a thought,

Bill

Yes, of course any set of binos must be able to accuratly resolve a target as distinct from simply B :) light c/o an overgenerous objective. They must also be robust so one is not constantly worrying about prism shift at the slightest bump!

I'm therfore sticking with an 8X56 Zeiss Night Owl as I've convinced myself that the carrying of what amounts to a pair of lead shot weighted bottles around my neck must afford them magical properties.

LGM
 
While on the topic of Zeiss and 'Low Light' - I noticed the elephant in the room...Did Zeiss ever sort the 'issues' with their flagship 8x54 HT and the 10x54 HT?

I remember there were entire Zeiss threads with unanimous (and seemingly evidence based and well informed) wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth due to the woeful performance of these flagship 'low light' Zeiss bins. Some highly respected members compared their performance to $100 Chinese binoculars. Zeiss was cognisant of the threads and negative feedback.
Then, it all went quiet. I possibly missed any resolution to the issues.

What was the upshot of it all...a design flaw, or early batch issues?
Were those initial concerns all sorted by Zeiss?
Is the 54HT back on the recommended list?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top