I always set my pupil size to a constant value and my brain to a fixed white balance temp when testing bins.
BTW, is it a duck or a rabbit in the attached photo?
Its an albatross not a duck, surely.
Lee
-
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.
The 10X42 HT compared to the SF and SV (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SuperDuty
- Start date
Its an albatross not a duck, surely.
Lee
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Pier:
I went to your site and read the discussion blog and outcome of the riddle.
Nicely done. Keep up the good work.
Jerry
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Well, I was right! :king: :loveme: (some others not so much! 
- it was the colour casts that were a more accurate representation of the bins (SF left/ HT right), which means that the brightness levels were widely distorted. Jerry, the extra Fov of the SF will not result in this brightness difference since the luminance of the target is the same, and so are the objective diameters - more likely that something unexpected has happened automatically with the phone's camera :brains: ...... Pier himself said it was just a bit of fun ...... :cat:
Well worth a click through to the 2nd page of the forum linked, since the full images show some interesting Fov comparison, and some interesting field characteristic comparison too ....... :t:
Chosun :gh:
- it was the colour casts that were a more accurate representation of the bins (SF left/ HT right), which means that the brightness levels were widely distorted. Jerry, the extra Fov of the SF will not result in this brightness difference since the luminance of the target is the same, and so are the objective diameters - more likely that something unexpected has happened automatically with the phone's camera :brains: ...... Pier himself said it was just a bit of fun ...... :cat:
Well worth a click through to the 2nd page of the forum linked, since the full images show some interesting Fov comparison, and some interesting field characteristic comparison too ....... :t:
Chosun :gh:
binomania
Well-known member
Hi from Italy.
Excuse me for the absence.
Tonight I did a further test. I did not have much time so I took a free hand with a Canon Powershot G7x Mark II. White Balance no automatic. I used on "Cloudly"
This is the result. For the camera the HT is slightly more 'luminous. I have used diaphragm priority, (AV)
1/40 for the HT and 1 1/25 a for the SF. I tried to pull accurately the lens to eyepiece but I should try with tripod and an adapter for phonescoping
Excuse me for the absence.
Tonight I did a further test. I did not have much time so I took a free hand with a Canon Powershot G7x Mark II. White Balance no automatic. I used on "Cloudly"
This is the result. For the camera the HT is slightly more 'luminous. I have used diaphragm priority, (AV)
1/40 for the HT and 1 1/25 a for the SF. I tried to pull accurately the lens to eyepiece but I should try with tripod and an adapter for phonescoping
Attachments
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
Not sure if this review/comparison have been posted before,
Zeiss 10x42 SF vs Swaro SV vs Zeiss FL
Original link:
http://www.tvwg.nl/testrapporten/kijkers/zeiss_victory_sf8x42_sf10x42.shtml
And google translation:
https://translate.google.com/transl...zeiss_victory_sf8x42_sf10x42.shtml&edit-text=
Zeiss 10x42 SF vs Swaro SV vs Zeiss FL
Original link:
http://www.tvwg.nl/testrapporten/kijkers/zeiss_victory_sf8x42_sf10x42.shtml
And google translation:
https://translate.google.com/transl...zeiss_victory_sf8x42_sf10x42.shtml&edit-text=