• 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.

How much eye relief needed? (1 Viewer)

AlanF

Member
First post here. Looking to buy my first pair of top quality binoculars and I'm wondering if 16mm is enough eye relief for a glasses wearer with lenses that measure approximately 3mm thick. Really looking at the Zeiss 7x42 FL if the eye relief is enough. Would like to try a pair in person, but there are none available locally. I appreciate any help with this question. Thanks.

AlanF
 
Hi Alan,
I wear glasses and I have a pair of Nikon 10x32 HG with an eye relief of 16mm. I find this is ok but only just enough and my glasses are quite thin. I also have the 7x42 Zeiss Classic and I find it's perfect with glasses on but I'm not sure what the eye relief measurement is. If you want to use your binoculars with your glasses on I'd personally go for 17mm or more.
Good luck
John
 
Hi Alan and Welcome to Birdforum, on behalf of the moderators and staff.

I can't help with your question, I'm afraid, but there's a good chance that we have a Member or two here who could test this out.

Cheers,

Andy.
 
AlanF said:
First post here. Looking to buy my first pair of top quality binoculars and I'm wondering if 16mm is enough eye relief for a glasses wearer with lenses that measure approximately 3mm thick. Really looking at the Zeiss 7x42 FL if the eye relief is enough. Would like to try a pair in person, but there are none available locally. I appreciate any help with this question. Thanks.

AlanF

In general terms, binoculars with an eye relief of minimum 15mm should give you sufficient eye relief to obtain a full field of view, especially if you are a spectacle wearer. The 7x42 BGAT* had an eye relief of 18.6mm. 16mm for the FL's is sufficient.

It is still better to try them first, at the end of the day we are all different.
 
AlanF said:
First post here. Looking to buy my first pair of top quality binoculars and I'm wondering if 16mm is enough eye relief for a glasses wearer with lenses that measure approximately 3mm thick. Really looking at the Zeiss 7x42 FL if the eye relief is enough. Would like to try a pair in person, but there are none available locally. I appreciate any help with this question. Thanks.

AlanF

It doesn't matter how thick your lenses are, but the distance between your lenses and your eyes matters.
For example I need 18mm eye relief, so the Zeiss Dialyt 7x42 is perfect for me and all current FLs are more or less useless.
 
Alan:

I would suggest just trying individual binos and seeing how they work. I have a pair of pentax with 22mm and a pair nikons with 17mm, and they both have about the some amount of eye relief, to me anyway, and I can see the entire field with each. I also have a pair of with 18 mm of relieve, and I see only about 75% of the field. It does depend on the individual bino.

Nikon, Pentax, Celestron all have binoculars with plenty of eye relief. Leica and Swarovski usually have very poor eye relief. I have heard that Zeiss
FLs have very good eye relief.

Best of luck. I would highly recommend getting binos in which you can see the entire field o view. I have settled for less and been very unhappy.
 
AlanF said:
First post here. Looking to buy my first pair of top quality binoculars and I'm wondering if 16mm is enough eye relief for a glasses wearer with lenses that measure approximately 3mm thick. Really looking at the Zeiss 7x42 FL if the eye relief is enough. Would like to try a pair in person, but there are none available locally. I appreciate any help with this question. Thanks.

AlanF

Alan: As pointed out in other threads, the millimeter measures of eye relief are not that helpful when comparing across brands. For me, 16 mm was not enough on a Nikon, but was plenty on the Zeiss 7x42 FL that I now have. The 16mm on the Zeiss also seems to be provide the same relief as the 18mm claimed by Swarovski on the 8.5x42. There is no substitute for trying them out yourself, but I found the Zeiss 7x42 to be perfect for me. As for the optics, they have the most stunning view I have ever seen through binoculars.

Bruce
 
Not to upset the thread, but I just thought I would point out that today's bins are skewed towards the folks with glasses. Long eye relief seems to be the norm and in some cases is out of control (23mm on some of the Swaros).

Anyone that does not (yet!) wear glasses should try, try, try before you buy, as excessive eye relief can be just as troublesome as insufficient ER. In my experience, blackouts are often the result of excessive ER.

Rgds,

Steffan
 
Last edited:
Marley said:
Not to upset the thread, but I just thought I would point out that today's bins are skewed towards the folks with glasses. Long eye relief seems to be the norm and in some cases is out of control (23mm on some of the Swaros).

Anyone that does not (yet!) wear glasses should try, try, try before you buy, as excessive eye relief is just as troublesome as insufficient ER. In my experience, backouts can often be the result.

Rgds,

Steffan

I completely agree,. This is one of the sins of the Nikon HGs and to some extent of the Zeiss FLs. I have the feeling that if I could go back to contacts or have Lasik surgery, I would really want to change bins again.
 
All,

It is a real problem if you cannot try out a binocular yourself. The eye relief figures provided by manufacturers are rarely true in real life, there are millions of different eyeglass-frame designs out there and even more different facial anatomies, and thus it is hard to tell much by the published figures. If you wish to compare specs, the only more-or-less reliable sources I know of are Jan Meijerink's test reports on www.tvwg.nl and my ALULA reviews. Twentse is in Dutch, but you will be able to find the e-r figures in the tables with a bit of sleuthing. Each of us use a measuring method which yields results consistent with itself and between models. So if you get to try one of the tested models and find its eye-relief sufficient, then another tested model with as much or more e-r will probably (but not absolutely certainly) work.

About too much e-r. This I feel is a problem of eyecup design. It should be very easy to design eyecups which twist out enough to make any e-r in the eyepiece suitable to any anatomy on the planet, but for some reason many makers do not bother to make their eyecups twist or pull out far enough. Again, this means that e-r figures alone don't tell the non-glass-users much about how suitable a particular binocular is for them.

Kimmo
 
Marley said:
Not to upset the thread, but I just thought I would point out that today's bins are skewed towards the folks with glasses. Long eye relief seems to be the norm and in some cases is out of control (23mm on some of the Swaros).

Anyone that does not (yet!) wear glasses should try, try, try before you buy, as excessive eye relief is just as troublesome as insufficient ER. In my experience, backouts can often be the result.

Rgds,

Steffan

I agree with what you are saying. If I did not wear glasses, I would look for binos that had less ER. However, it is all a matter of perspective. Since I do wear glasses, I believe that binos have in the past been skewed to those who do not wear glasses,
though I agree that it is changing. Four years ago it was really difficult to find binos with decent ER; now it is pretty easy, and I can understand why those who do not wear glasses are upset. Nevertheless, I will probably never buy a Leica or Swarovski bino simply because their binos have poor ER, especially Leica. (I realize that many Swarovsky models have ER of 20 or more, but the models that I would be interested in have ER of 15 or less.) The only Zeiss with decent eye relief is the FL.
 
Last edited:
Lewie,

I understand your situation. I suppose if I wore glasses, I would be much more satisfied with the ER options.

I also agree with Kimmo's advice, as ER is very hard to judge from the published technical data alone. I also agree with Kimmo's statement regarding ER and eyecup design. If the eye cup was designed to extend past the designed focal plane (read ER), then any unique facial features (like deep eye sockets) could be accommodated by adjusting either above and below that ER plane as needed.

Alas, manufacturers have not yet reached this conclusion.

As for the inconsistencies of ER and blackout....

I own a pair of Swarovski 8.5x42 ELs and they have 18mm ER (which I find to be excessive) and which is very touchy with respect to blackouts (for me).

I also own a pair of Swarovski 10x42 SLCs that have an ER of 14mm, which I find give me no blackout problems at all.

I recently bought (and returned) both the Zeiss 7x42 FL (16mm ER) and the Leica Ultravid (17mm ER) due to blackout issues. Otherwise, both bins were outstanding.

I recently bought a pair of Nikon 8x32 LX-Ls that have a published ER of 17mm, and they give me no blackout problems whatsoever.

Go figure, right?

As so many have noted, you really have to try them out in person and buy the bins that fit your own unique features.

Best regards,

Steffan
 
Last edited:
When looking through bins with eyeglasses,does not the curvature of the lens and the seating of the glasses on the bins lens play a part?
My eyeglasses have a very pronounced curvature on the lenses.For me the solution would be contact lens,but unfortunately,my prescription is to strong for an adequate lens,the distant view is fine but i need another pair of glasses for entering notes etc. have tried bi-focal contact lens and the problem here is the other way round,fine for reading but not quite sharp enough for distance .

POP
 
Marley:

Thanks for the information. If the Leica with 17 mm of ER is too much for you, maybe the 8x42 Ultravid with with 15.9mm might work for me. ER is very strange. Usually I look for 20mm of ER, but I took a chance and ordered the Nikon Premier LX L 8X32 with 17mm, and it works perfectly for me; any more ER would be too much. And I love the optics.

I have often thought that if I didn't wear glasses I would hate to screw out the eye pieces to the the right ER, then screw them back in so the binos would fit into the case.

Have a great weekend.

Lew
 
Lewie said:
Marley:

Thanks for the information. If the Leica with 17 mm of ER is too much for you, maybe the 8x42 Ultravid with with 15.9mm might work for me. ER is very strange. Usually I look for 20mm of ER, but I took a chance and ordered the Nikon Premier LX L 8X32 with 17mm, and it works perfectly for me; any more ER would be too much. And I love the optics.

I have often thought that if I didn't wear glasses I would hate to screw out the eye pieces to the the right ER, then screw them back in so the binos would fit into the case.

Have a great weekend.

Lew


Lew,

If you wear eyeglasses the concern should be if there is enough ER with the eyecups in the closed position. If 20 mm (the max) is too much with eyeglasses on, you simply unscrew the eyecups a bit and that 20 mm drops according to your needs. I wear eyeglasses and have never found a bin with too much eye relief.

People who don't wear eyeglasses often find high ER (18, 19, 20+ mm) bins unsatisfying even with the eyecups fully extended. Those who force the eyecups deep into their eye sockets seem to experience the greatest frustration.

As someone mentioned, the solution to excessive ER is a longer eyecup!

John
 
Marley said:
I recently bought a pair of Nikon 8x32 LX-Ls that have a published ER of 17mm, and they give me no blackout problems whatsoever.

Go figure, right?
Hi Steffan,

Happy to hear that the Nikon LXLs work well for you - I think the smaller exit pupil of the 8x32 may help a little (compared to the larger glasses you have tried).

Ilkka
 
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