-
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.
HT's win (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter AZ8
- Start date
In the hunting world, that's a respectable award. Sorry to hijack your bird forum. I just felt like sharing. Didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. Man. You guys take things way to serious.
NDhunter
Experienced observer
AZ:
Thanks for posting this review. The new Zeiss HT, is well rated as it should be.
The Outdoor Life reviews may not be what some of the diehards here like to see.
They are simple reviews and to the point.
Welcome to the Birdforum, keep posting, there are lots of outdoorsman on this
forum, and that includes hunters.
Jerry
mooreorless
Well-known member
The Outdoor Life reviews use1951 Resolution Test Targets and use 3x extender while testing. Sure it might not be enough for the larger objective lens binoculars etc. , but is better than nothing. Their big thing is low light use and they test using a black with white stripes round target set out 100 yds. for binoculars and 200 yds. for spotters. They have someone turn this until they can not see it. It seems they have thought about the same thing about the better optics that I have read on it to some extent. The only thing they don't test for WP and throw, drop, run over the optics. If they did I am sure they would get some feedback, esp. if any high end items failed
.
.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
One thing to keep in mind is that everything in optics wiggles & jiggles. For example, it is quite possible for one brand of binoculars to display its highest resolution at one distance and a second brand at another. This would be due to the manufacturer's choice of instrument optimization criteria, and that, in turn, might be driven by the demographic being marketed to. It wouldn't be at all surprising for hunters to have different optimizations than birders, and both somewhat different from astronomers.
The use of low power telescopes is a good idea, but it's also critical for the observers to only report on discerning target lines, not allowing any subjective factors to enter in. This could be tough if ownership bias isn't carefully controlled for, as well as discussions between the observers.
Just a few thoughts. Nothing to detract from Zeiss' award.
Ed
The use of low power telescopes is a good idea, but it's also critical for the observers to only report on discerning target lines, not allowing any subjective factors to enter in. This could be tough if ownership bias isn't carefully controlled for, as well as discussions between the observers.
Just a few thoughts. Nothing to detract from Zeiss' award.
Ed
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Well, they are really good but you would need to try a pair in the field for a spell. I think you would be impressed but individual wants and needs differ and they may not be perfect for everyone.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Thanks Jerry!
Yes, its the low light performance that stands out!! These are the first pair of binos I've used way past sunset and still able to see elk in the dark timber! I mean waaaay past sunset!
These are the best optics available to hunters today. Hands down.
Those who wear glasses might find 16mm a bit inadequate. Don't hunters wear glasses?
Ed
PS. Have you compared these in the field with the new 8x42 Swaro SLC HD (ER=18.5mm)?
Last edited:
Well, I should have prefaced that statement with..."in my honest opinion". We all have different reasons for one over the other.
For me, it's far more important to see elk/deer during the grey light of predawn and the darkening landscape after sunset, than seeing the grey and yellow feathers from an orange-crowned warbler or the pinkish bill on a dark-eyed junco. B
Have a great summer!
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
\Well, I should have prefaced that statement with..."in my honest opinion". We all have different reasons for one over the other.
For me, it's far more important to see elk/deer during the grey light of predawn and the darkening landscape after sunset, than seeing the grey and yellow feathers from an orange-crowned warbler or the pinkish bill on a dark-eyed junco. B
Have a great summer!
Heretic!
Ruff
Two birds in one.
Wow there was a certain amount of bashing going on there, non? After birders, the word is that open country hunters are the second greatest users of binoculars in the civilian world, and their opinions do count. Also, IMO, a lot of the durability that gets built into quality bins is probably mostly due to those guys too.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Ruff,
I'm sure you're right about that. However, I was serious in asking about hunters who use eyeglass in post #10. For many of us, 16mm isn't quite enough. What do you think? SLCs were originally designed with the hunter in mind, perhaps even the new 8x42 SLC-HD. Did the review (and award) take all needs into consideration?
Ed
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Ed, have you tried the HT with eyeglasses? I have, as has a friend of mine and they work perfectly - full field of view and nice circular field stop with no vignetting.
If you compare the ocular / eyecup design from HT to FL, you can clearly see that the HT eyecup seats more flush than the FL and allows a tighter eyeglass fit. I think the 16 mm figure is too conservative.
Try them and let us know - then gripe, if necessary.
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
The phrase "Best NEW binoculars of 2013" sounded kinda weaselly to me. Digging a little deeper I see the "competition" was indeed only newly released products, most selling 70-90% LESS than an HT! Nevertheless, at least there is some objective testing done though the actual numerical results are not disclosed ala the Allbino's testing.
The Great Buy award for the Nikon Monarch 7 left me scratching my head, especially their praise for the "clarity all the way to the edge image" which seems contrary to the comments here on BF.
The Great Buy award for the Nikon Monarch 7 left me scratching my head, especially their praise for the "clarity all the way to the edge image" which seems contrary to the comments here on BF.
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Well, I read what I could find HERE about how they selected Zeiss as the 2013 winner. No mention of Swarovski or Leica products that I could find. Kahles is the closest if they are still a subsidiary of Swaro. There is brief mention of eye relief with rifle scopes, but nothing specific about binoculars.
I guess you may be right, since to my knowledge Swaro or Leica didn't introduce any NEW binoculars in 2013, so they couldn't win the "Best NEW binoculars of 2013" award on that basis.
Anyway, it's interesting. I'd never really thought about comparing only binoculars introduced in the same year, if that's what they did.
Liver and loin. :king:
Ed
Ruff
Two birds in one.
I don't know but I'm inclined to suspect that Swaro and Leica also didn't provide samples for the test and therefore took themselves out of the running. I've seen first hand how discouraging it is for other manufacturers to run up against Zeiss- for instance, I was at a birding optics show when Bushnell were first bringing out their Elite line, which was indeed creating quite a stir, and told the rep that the new bins were excellent but not quite as good as my then-current Z's- the man sort of slumped and said it wasn't a fair comparison because nobody could come up to the level Zeiss was setting. I suspect the rest of the sentence was 'for less than or equal to their cost,' but that was not said.
Last edited:
Good optics to have a direct correlation with cost.... Not to say one cannot raise the price up for the sake of doing so, but for some reason, this industry appears to know how to price an optic depending on the quality.
Why doesn't Bushnell enter the race and become an Alpha? They have been in the business for a long time. Is it that the Alpha pack has saturated the market to the degree to which the market will not support high priced optics anymore? ...so the only market left is that under $1000 or $500 price point and quality?
Why doesn't Bushnell enter the race and become an Alpha? They have been in the business for a long time. Is it that the Alpha pack has saturated the market to the degree to which the market will not support high priced optics anymore? ...so the only market left is that under $1000 or $500 price point and quality?
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Bushnell was an alpha - with Bausch and Lomb, which produced optics in the 90's as good or better than the big 3.
Right now, I would still say the Elite is an alpha level view but I don't trust their build quality.
