• 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.

New BVD pages (1 Viewer)

Robert Ellis said:
As of 10/15/05, review of Swift 828 and Pentax Papilio, written by a Wayne Mones.

Hi Robert,

Heavens, you're right! Looks like there's a new skipper on BVD's helmet! Now this should be very good news as this famous website hasn't been updated for years.
But! Look what's happening. Wayne Mones is reviewing the Swift Audubons 828 roofs, while Steve Ingraham did this already years ago. Now BVD has two reviews of the 828's on its website!
I don't know what to make of this. Is it just sloppy, doesn't Mr. Mones know? It's very confusing at least.
(I didn't check the Pentax Papilions. Are these new, i.e recently introduced binoculars?).

Renze de Vries
 
Renze de Vries said:
Hi Robert,

Heavens, you're right! Looks like there's a new skipper on BVD's helmet! Now this should be very good news as this famous website hasn't been updated for years.
But! Look what's happening. Wayne Mones is reviewing the Swift Audubons 828 roofs, while Steve Ingraham did this already years ago. Now BVD has two reviews of the 828's on its website!
I don't know what to make of this. Is it just sloppy, doesn't Mr. Mones know? It's very confusing at least.
(I didn't check the Pentax Papilions. Are these new, i.e recently introduced binoculars?).

Renze de Vries


You should read the review before getting too critical. Quote from the first paragraph "In May 2005 I met the company CEO, Allison Swift, in Cape May, New Jersey where I had a chance to briefly audition the latest incarnation of the HHS Audubon 8.5x44 (roof prism)"

I found it very interesting.

Jaeger near Chicago
 
Jaeger01 said:
You should read the review before getting too critical. Quote from the first paragraph "In May 2005 I met the company CEO, Allison Swift, in Cape May, New Jersey where I had a chance to briefly audition the latest incarnation of the HHS Audubon 8.5x44 (roof prism)"

I found it very interesting.

Jaeger near Chicago

OK, I did read the review once more. I see Wayne Mones mentions a review Steve Ingraham wrote on Better View Desired about the then new Swift (820) Audubon porro binoculars. What Wayne doesn't mention though is that Steve also wrote a review on the Swift (828) roofs.
Now I see two possibilities:
1. Wayne doesn't know there's a review from Steve on the 828's already
2. Swift updated their HHS Audubon 828 roof prism binoculars and Wayne writes about this latest incarnation without mentioning the update, without a comparison to the earlier version, and without Steve's opinions about those.

Pardon me, but whatever the case might be, I can't find this very interesting. I find it disappointing. For instance, I certainly would want to know if Swift updated their Audubon roofs, what these updates exactly are, and what Wayne Mones thinks of them. But alas, I don't know anything. I'm only confused.

Renze
 
papilions are new close focus binos from pentax .they are exellent quality & great fun .look them up on the cloudy nights binocular or cloudy days sites
brian
 
I agree somewhat with Renze, I would've liked more. Though probably tough considering the reveiwer is a different set of eyes, I would love to see the Nikon LX defend its crown against the newcomers. Maybe that is further down the road.

Choice of reviews may reflect the average wants and needs of a typical Simpson Optics customer, as they are still behind it all are they not?
 
I would love to see the Nikon LX defend its crown against the newcomers. Maybe that is further down the road.

Put me on that list as well. I would love to see how it fairs against the newcomers.
 
Interesting review, but I'd have liked to see some NEED test figures. They wouldn't necessarily have been directly comparable with the old ones - he has a different pair of eyes after all - but he could have produced his own NEED figures for the reference binoculars on the site and for the binoculars under review. Figures allow the reviewer to say something more than "these are a very nice pair of binoculars" - if he's not careful, that will start a slipperly slope that ends with simply repeating the manufacturer's blurb.

Mind you, the NEED test figures are harder to produce than they look. Any time I've tried something like this I find that the resolution I see with any single pair of binoculars changes throughout the test - typically things improve for the first ten minutes or so, and then I either get fed up or get eyestrain trying to concentrate for too long at a time. I dare say there's something complicated going on that involves visual memory as well as the optics of the eye, but the end result is that I can't myself give a single figure for a binocular that I have any trust in.

These days perhaps the most objective way for BVD - or another big site - to review binoculars for resolution might be to digibin through them at a standard target, and then blow up the results.
 
mcdowella said:
<clip>
Mind you, the NEED test figures are harder to produce than they look. Any time I've tried something like this I find that the resolution I see with any single pair of binoculars changes throughout the test - typically things improve for the first ten minutes or so, and then I either get fed up or get eyestrain trying to concentrate for too long at a time. I dare say there's something complicated going on that involves visual memory as well as the optics of the eye, but the end result is that I can't myself give a single figure for a binocular that I have any trust in.

These days perhaps the most objective way for BVD - or another big site - to review binoculars for resolution might be to digibin through them at a standard target, and then blow up the results.

Did you really say "... blow up the results"? :'D

I concur with your observations about the NEED test. Steve, of course, mentions taking several observations and coming up with the same result each time ± small error. When I try it I'm very conscious that I can often see the grid lines if I give it enough observation time, and not if I don't. That raises the interesting question of how one can give all the models the same amount of time (and attention), particularly if one starts out having a preference to begin with. Prior preferences tend to be self-justifying.

Elkcub
 
medinabrit said:
papilions are new close focus binos from pentax .they are exellent quality & great fun .look them up on the cloudy nights binocular or cloudy days sites
brian

Could you post a link, please! I have been unable to find anything on the topic there. Is there such a thing like cloudy days site at all?
 
elkcub said:
Did you really say "... blow up the results"? :'D

I concur with your observations about the NEED test. Steve, of course, mentions taking several observations and coming up with the same result each time ± small error. When I try it I'm very conscious that I can often see the grid lines if I give it enough observation time, and not if I don't. That raises the interesting question of how one can give all the models the same amount of time (and attention), particularly if one starts out having a preference to begin with. Prior preferences tend to be self-justifying.

Elkcub


The ONLY review I'm interested in begins like this:

I'm middle aged, wear eyeglasses, and one of my eyes has less flexibility than the other. Sunlight makes my eyes water and so does a strong wind. I’ll carry a 28-ounce bin all day, but I prefer something lighter. My IPD is 57 mm and I prefer the porro view. I don't use eyecups, so I'm sensitive to stray light entering the eyepiece. Above all else I appreciate a sharp, crisp image that immediately snaps into focus. I will compromise on color and edge softness as long as the majority of the image is a real eye pleaser. To receive my best rating, a bin must pass my stare test and be comfortable all day long, in the field, without the slightest hint of eye fatigue. I will evaluate outdoors, in the field, under the same type of lighting and weather conditions you would experience if you owned this binocular.

The ONE thing Steve Ingraham said that convinced me to try the Nikon SE 8X32 was “Still, since the 8x32 Superior Es arrived, I have to force myself to carry anything else. They are the glasses I pick out of the pile of waiting optics 9 out of 10 times out the door.”

I couldn’t have cared less what the NEED score was.

John
 
I wonder if high resolution digital imaging could play a significant role in determining actual resolution and contrast results...
 
John Traynor said:
... The ONE thing Steve Ingraham said that convinced me to try the Nikon SE 8X32 was “Still, since the 8x32 Superior Es arrived, I have to force myself to carry anything else. They are the glasses I pick out of the pile of waiting optics 9 out of 10 times out the door.”

John

I think it was race car driver Richard Petty who collected very expensive, handmade, scale model cars. When asked, "Which do you like best?" He responded, with a wry smile, "The last one I bought." :scribe:

Elkcub
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 19 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