Night bins/owling bins - what do I need? (1 Viewer)

RJM said:

This seems bizarre. My first thought is that you obviously don't have the IPD set correctly. But if you have it set correctly for daylight use when your pupils are small, then it should be fine at dusk when your eye pupil dilates ~2x larger than the 2mm+ exit pupil of the bino. There may something more at work here. I need to think more.

Still if you find the FoV too restrictive to follow an owl in flight, then it obviosly is not the right choice, but not because it does not reveal more detail/resolution than a lower powered/larger exit pupil bino.

Rick

Click to expand...

Rick,

I've reset the IPD on my bins tonight and it worked, just like you suggested.
With daylight use, I tend to set the IPD a bit wider ( I know I shouldn't, but it makes the FOV wider and the bins more WOW-full) but at night this is no good.

Thanks,

Ronald

John Dracon said:

Ronald - Obviously the large exit pupil of a 7x50 at night will help with alignment, but what your own pupil expansion is at your age is another matter. It is very difficult to measure the diameters of your own pupils. Your maximum exit pupil with ambient light may be only 5mm. That big exit pupil of the Zeiss 8x56 - 7 mm - may not be used in its entirety.

I had a real jolt with my last eye examination - annually with eye drops. My pupils expanded beyond 7 mm, and that evening I could see well with a 7x50. But by the next evening, I was back to 4mm at most and seeing very little.

Perhaps a good 10x50 would be helpful since magnification does help with items viewed at night. Or the Nikon 12x50 SE may be useful, although it is hardly inexpensive. Good luck with your search.

John

Click to expand...

Hi John,

I've had eye drops prior to eye examination once, got blurred vision for hours.
I didn't think of using binoculars, though. Missed a good opportunity, as I had cheap 7x50 porro's at the time.

The only straight way to measure dilation of my pupils would be a flash foto after sitting in the dark for an hour. I don't like the thought of being blind temporarily, though, brr.

The only other way is to try out my listed favourites after dark, during night shopping hours. Stores close at 9 p.m., so I've still got a month since at the end of March clocks are set for summer time here ( one hour forward). April may already be too late, since 9 p.m. will mean dusk, not dark.

Thank you for your further suggestions, but I believe 8x mag will be my comfort threshold.
The SE's are not sold here, and I don't like mailordering one from the States.

Best regards,

Ronald

PYRTLE said:

The Zeiss 8 x 56 classics are going to be the best of the bunch, much favoured by stalkers and hunters in their particular pursuit but given your interest then it does come down to aperture size for low light conditions. I use Zeiss 7 x 42 Dialyts for this purpose. If 56 mm binos are just too large for you then the Swarovski SLC that you mentioned is a great contender as well. Just get the best quality optics that you can afford - they will last the test of time whilst giving you immense enjoyment. To throw another bino but modern waterproof roof prism into the equation, have a look at the 8 x 56 Nikon Monarch. Cheers.

Click to expand...

I've used the Zeiss 8x56 Classics for a while, but... 29 years ago! They were loaners for field work involving following the whereabouts of a couple of Great Tits, well into dusk, for my biology university research project.

They gave a much, much more relaxed view than my own excellent Russian 7x50 porro's, and better performance in low light, too.
But as time has advanced, my eyes may not be so good as they used to be.

Still, for old memory's sake, I decided to take the opportunity to try a recent pair on our annual Bird Festival. That was 2 years ago, and in broad daylight, but that same feeling I had then, 29 years ago, reappeared in an instant.
I got fond of the view, the balance and handling, all over again.
I'm not listing these for fun, they are serious contenders, despite the few shortcomings they have.

The 7x42 Swaro SLC seems less bright than the Swaro 7x42 Habicht, that's what a fellow countryman told me when he selected his pair of low light bins. Not by much, but he saw a difference. That's why the Habichts are on my list, I'm interested to try them. They're less heavy, too. Bit narrow FOV, though, have to see if I could live with that.
8x56 Monarchs are, according to the same bloke, also less bright than the Habichts.
Yes, these Habichts are interesting - in the GA version, for me. Least expensive of the lot, too.

Best regards,

Ronald

ronh said:

I think a Jenoptem 7x50 Porro with the late coatings would be very interesting to own and good to use, and can be had for about $400 if you watch.
Ron

Click to expand...

Hi Ron,

I got a most kind offer from a BF member, he sent me a PM to offer me his surplus pair for free, really nice, but it's just not a bin I'd like to have.
No hard feelings, I hope, dear J.

Best regards,

Ronald

oleaf said:

Ronald,

I had a chance to try out a Meopta 8x56... and in the day light it seemed superb. The eye relief was huge and I believe it had a 7mm exit pupil. I wish I had the chance to try at night but it didn't happen. Resolution was also perfect.

I've used my 7x42 Meopta at night for owling and they work fine. The 8x56 Meoptas were as well balanced as the 42's. Oh I wish I had more money!

I'm sure the Zeiss are very nice.

Cheers

Click to expand...

Are these Meopta's, the 8x56's I mean, not as big as the Swaro's of the same specs? For the price I would like to try them, but the weight is scaring me off a bit - my Canon 18x50's are now the heaviest of all binoculars I have ever had, I tolerate them for the excellent daylight detail they give me. I think the Swaro's are even heavier. How is that in the Meopta's?

Best regards,

Ronald

CharleyBird said:

As far as I understand the difference, Discoverys in the UK have diopter correction for both eyes, while XPs in the US only have left side diopter correction.
But don't quote me!

Click to expand...

Thanks!

I'll minutely inspect pictures of them on a provider's website; you may be right there, that would explain the minimal price difference as well.

Best regards,

Ronald

NDhunter said:

Korhaan:

I have waited to see what some other have said here. You mentioned night, low light duty, so could check out the Steiner Nighthunters. I had the 10x50's, they are a porro
and are optimized for low light. Steiner has named them right, "Nighthunter".
They are IF, individual focus, and they are as bright as anything out there at 10x, special coatings optimized for low light.
For daytime duty, they will not be as sharp as some better bins, but at night with
dim light you will not be dissapointed.
In Europe, they now have the XP and also a roof in the nighthunter series. But I am
thinking the 8x56, would be very good.

You will not find too many on this forum commenting on these.

Jerry

Click to expand...

Jerry,

Do you mean the Steiner Nighthunter 8x56 or the Zeiss 8x56 in my list?
The Steiners have IF as far as I know, which I don't like.

Best regards,

Ronald

KorHaan said:

Are these Meopta's, the 8x56's I mean, not as big as the Swaro's of the same specs? For the price I would like to try them, but the weight is scaring me off a bit - my Canon 18x50's are now the heaviest of all binoculars I have ever had, I tolerate them for the excellent daylight detail they give me. I think the Swaro's are even heavier. How is that in the Meopta's?

Best regards,

Ronald

Click to expand...

Hi Ronald,

From my time with the Meopta 8x56's I thought the ergonomics were very similar to their smaller 50 and 42 siblings. Very deep, smooth thumb pockets and a very balanced feel. That extra weight (at least for me) made them very easy to hold steady. With a harness I don't think the extra 8 oz is a big deal. Wouldn't bother me.

I think if you're considering the SLC you need to try these Meopta as well. Very similar in build and view. I think $1000 in the states.

Are you also considering a 7x50 format? Seems to me this would be a great owling glass.

Cheers

oleaf said:

Hi Ronald,

From my time with the Meopta 8x56's I thought the ergonomics were very similar to their smaller 50 and 42 siblings. Very deep, smooth thumb pockets and a very balanced feel. That extra weight (at least for me) made them very easy to hold steady. With a harness I don't think the extra 8 oz is a big deal. Wouldn't bother me.

I think if you're considering the SLC you need to try these Meopta as well. Very similar in build and view. I think $1000 in the states.

Are you also considering a 7x50 format? Seems to me this would be a great owling glass.

Cheers

Click to expand...

Thank you,

I'll consider the 8x56 Meopta's. I agree that the extra weight steadies them more in the hands; I once tried the Swaro 15x56 SLC's and the balance was wonderful, they were almost as steady as a Canon 15x50 IS with IS on!

I excluded the Swaro 8x56 SLC's because of their price tag, but Meopta's of the same kind are well within my price range.

Do you happen to know if the Meopta's have a better close focus distance than the 9.20 meters on the Swaro's? If so, that would make them a serious contender.
The Zeiss 8x56 Classic has about 7 m close focus, not great but acceptable.

I have so far not included 7x50 as an option; porro's are too big and the possible roof option in Swaro SLC is too expensive for me.

Best regards,

Ronald

KorHaan said:

Jerry,

Do you mean the Steiner Nighthunter 8x56 or the Zeiss 8x56 in my list?
The Steiners have IF as far as I know, which I don't like.

Best regards,

Ronald

Click to expand...

Ronald:
I meant the Steiners, I have not had any experience with the Zeiss.
The IF is alright, but not as easy to get them focused finely.

Jerry

NDhunter said:

Ronald:
I meant the Steiners, I have not had any experience with the Zeiss.
The IF is alright, but not as easy to get them focused finely.

Jerry

Click to expand...

OK, thanks;

Individual focus is not for me, as a birder I prefer center focus.

The plot thickens, however; I just checked a website of a local store, cameraland, and there is a roof version - center focus Steiner Nighthunter 8x56,
with good specs:

FOV 122m/1000m
close focus of 2.3 m
twist-up eyecups
diopter setting on the left ocular
fully rubber armoured
fully waterproof and nitrogen filled
1140 grams

To make matters a bit more complicated:

The new Zeiss Conquest 8x56's have:

FOV 110m/1000m
close focus of 4 m
twist-up eyecups
diopter setting via a knob on the front of the hinge
fully rubber armoured
fully waterproof and nitrogen filled
abbe-koenig prisms
light transmission figure of 92%
950 grams ( same as the neu Swaro 7x42 SLC )

Both have welcome accessories.

The Steiners are € 555.-
The Conquests are € 1239.-

Difficult, difficult, difficult...

Best regards,

Ronald

KorHaan said:

Thank you,

I'll consider the 8x56 Meopta's. I agree that the extra weight steadies them more in the hands; I once tried the Swaro 15x56 SLC's and the balance was wonderful, they were almost as steady as a Canon 15x50 IS with IS on!

I excluded the Swaro 8x56 SLC's because of their price tag, but Meopta's of the same kind are well within my price range.

Do you happen to know if the Meopta's have a better close focus distance than the 9.20 meters on the Swaro's? If so, that would make them a serious contender.
The Zeiss 8x56 Classic has about 7 m close focus, not great but acceptable.

I have so far not included 7x50 as an option; porro's are too big and the possible roof option in Swaro SLC is too expensive for me.

Best regards,

Ronald

Click to expand...

Hi Ronald,

Meopta makes a 7x50 as well and the price seems good. Seems Meopta are always 50% to 70% of the alpha binocular price (at least in the USA)

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/meopta/meopta-meostar-7x50-binocular

Close focus on the 8x56's is 5 meters.

Cheers

KorHaan said:

Thanks!

I'll minutely inspect pictures of them on a provider's website; you may be right there, that would explain the minimal price difference as well.

Best regards,

Ronald

Click to expand...

I've seen pictures of them both and they are identical, with a knurled ring on both oculars. The only difference is the lettering: one says " DISCOVERY" on the top left side of the hinge, the other " NIGHTHUNTER XP " in the same place.

How's that for making one confused?

What the h*ll is the difference between these two?

Where have the times gone when all things were simple and straightforward?

Best regards, though, to all,

Ronald

Just checked Jan Meijerink's review of the Meopta 8x42 and 10x42.
He mentions the stiffness of both focus wheels three times, during his review.

How would that be on the 8x56?

Best regards,

Ronald

Ronald,

You might find the test below interesting. I don't read German so I can't make out much other than the light transmission figures.

Henry

http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A800347580/EmbedTitelIntern/Test_Pirsch_11-06/$File/Test_Pirsch_11_2006.pdf

oleaf said:

Hi Ronald,

Meopta makes a 7x50 as well and the price seems good. Seems Meopta are always 50% to 70% of the alpha binocular price (at least in the USA)

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/meopta/meopta-meostar-7x50-binocular

Close focus on the 8x56's is 5 meters.

Cheers

Click to expand...

Thank you!

The first 7x50 that I would add to my list. Same weight as the Zeiss Classics.
Close focus of 4 meters. Certainly interesting.

Now I have to find a store who has the Meopta's. There is one 200 km in the outback of the Netherlands. Will take a day's travel, but never mind.

Close focus on the Meopta 8x56's is not bad, either.

Thanks, best regards,

Ronald

Took my Steiner Peregrine XPs out at dusk to look for an owl that hangs out in one corner of the local woods. These bins really amaze me with the bright view at dusk and they function quite well in the extreme cold. We have plenty of snow so the reflection may help. Please let us know when you find the ultimate bins for owling. Around here it is hard to find the larger objective lens size, everyone stocks 30s and 40s but hardly anything larger.

henry link said:

Ronald,

You might find the test below interesting. I don't read German so I can't make out much other than the light transmission figures.

Henry

http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A800347580/EmbedTitelIntern/Test_Pirsch_11-06/$File/Test_Pirsch_11_2006.pdf

Click to expand...

Henry,

Thank you, much appreciated!
I don't have much trouble reading German, and I read the whole thing twice, because it's so good.
Some eye openers too, I don't know where to begin.

Firstly, to my delight, a 7 mm exit pupil in a true night bin is being recommended even for the elder people as it's forgiving for eye placement at night. The bigger exit pupil makes the use of the bins in all but dark circumstances a delight, with much less strain on the eyes. The author is aware of the diminished dilating capability of the elder eye at night, and therefor the theoretically better suited 8x42 is mentioned. But in praxis the oversized exit pupil has its merits for not only the younger observer.

Thirteen bins of 8x magnification are reviewed.

The Meopta Meostar 8x56's were cursed at a lot by the testers ( translated literally!), because the diopter wheel on top of the focus wheel was of the unlocked kind and shifted unadvertently when people tried to focus.
( I hope this has been addressed in the 7x50's, otherwise they're off my list.)

Best of all were the Zeiss 8x56 FL's, with maximum day/night light transmission figures of 94 and 93 %, best overall view, colour, contrast, well, about everything was better than the rest.
(These are way out of my price range. I do hope that they have micro detents on the diopter setting by now; my 2006 7x42 FL's had the nasty habit of shifting + or - 1 diopter on their own will, without me noticing it.)

The Leica Ultravid 8x50's are only 935 grams. I didn't know that, I thought they were well over a 1000 grams. They came out of the test as very good. Better than the 8x50 Trinovids, though the higher light transmission figures of the Ultravids were not obvious to most of the test panel in the field. The Trinovids appeared just as bright, though 6 or 7 % lower in measured light transmission.
( Way too expensive for me, again. Pity.)

The Optolyth Via Nova 8x56's didn't match their price on quality, they did less well in the test than other expensive ones.

The Optolyth Royal 8x56's had reasonable - but not outstanding - center field sharpness, with fuzzy edges. But they are still popular with hunters, the author stated that some people simply learn to live with shortcomings but he didn't have a clue why the Royal 8x56's were still popular.
( I think it's the two focus wheels; a second focus wheel on the far side of the hinge is practical when you're wearing a hat. Most tradional German hunters do.
As a note, I'd like to see that design copied more in truly outstanding big aperture bins.)

The Zeiss 8x56 Classics came out second in light transmission; they had very good ergonomics, and though they were the longest of all the bins tested, the ease of handling and viewing were highly appreciated. Sharpness and resolution were top notch. Field of view was described as being mediocre at 110m/1000m.
They were described as lightweights, too.
The stated close focus of 7 meters was in practice 5 meters for the test sample.
( These are getting more and more attractive; the freeze-and-thaw test inflicted on all test models had no influence on the externally focusing Classics, not mentioned anyway. All bins were submitted to two days in -20 degrees Celsius in a freezer, than thawed rapidly in a warm water bath. The focus and diopter action was slow, as was the bridge. But no leaks. Accessories only involve a strap and a rainguard. No bag.)

The Zeiss 8x50 Conquests performed well, but had a rough focus wheel.
Surprisingly bright and easy to handle, good quality optics for the price.
( The 8x56 Conquests are certainly worth looking at, they might be as good as the Classics but fully waterproof and nitrogen filled, good eyecups, compactly built and slightly less weight. If only the focus is smooth I think I'd like them.)

The Swarovski 8x56 SLC's were less favoured than the 8x50's by the test panel. The stated 9.20 m close focus appeared to be just that in the sample. It is quite heavy, and found over-priced for the performance.


Well, I picked out most of the things that had my special interest here. There's
far more to read, but I leave it with the things I mentioned.

Thanks again, Henry,

Best regards,

Ronald

statestat said:

Took my Steiner Peregrine XPs out at dusk to look for an owl that hangs out in one corner of the local woods. These bins really amaze me with the bright view at dusk and they function quite well in the extreme cold. We have plenty of snow so the reflection may help. Please let us know when you find the ultimate bins for owling. Around here it is hard to find the larger objective lens size, everyone stocks 30s and 40s but hardly anything larger.

Click to expand...

These are certainly on my list.
I've located a store that has them in stock.
The hydrofobic Nano coating is welcome too on these.

More to contemplate...

Best regards,

Ronald

Henry,

I forgot to mention that the eye relief for the Zeiss Classic 8x56's was measured at 20 mm, so slightly better than the stated 19 mm.

Ronald