-
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.
Is 8x32 or 8x42 the best Birding format? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
Hi Jerry,
Am thinking maybe Chosun disagrees strongly with the premise of this thread and is highlighting his disagreement, in a polite way. o
No need to cast aspersions on some innocent squid.
WJC
Well-known member
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Hi Jerry,
Am thinking maybe Chosun disagrees strongly with the premise of this thread and is highlighting his disagreement, in a polite way. o
No need to cast aspersions on some innocent squid.
This entire thread is built upon what is the best size binoculars
to use when birding.
The answer is, there is no best size. That means whatever one may like
and use when birding is just fine. We have heard from some that
may like a larger size early and late in the day, and like the smaller
ones at other times.
I agree with that.
Chosun, I am sorry, I recently had the chance to dine on some squid,
and it was splendid. I should not have picked on you.
You said it spot on. Any size binoculars work for birding. And for those
wondering a nice 10x50 is a very good choice.
Jerry
Attachments
WJC
Well-known member
Am mortified by my mistake.
My sincerest apologies to Chosun, long may she flourish and contribute.
perterra
Well-known member
I think I did the same thing with Gwen, I feel your pain.
Here is an interesting comparison of a budget 8x42 and a premium 8x30 from Best Binocular Reviews. It is inferring that s quality 8x30 is as bright as a budget 8x42. Coatings can play a big part I guess. I have observed this myself that bigger aperture doesn't always mean a brighter image.
"I was out late in the evening testing the even smaller 8x30 Swarovski CL Companion binoculars for my review. With me, I also had a pair of Vanguard Spirit ED 8x42mm binoculars with me to assess them against.
I compared the view through both of them repeatedly, looking at a wide variety of different subjects and in different directions (towards & away from the light) over a long period of time and until way after the sun had set and it had become quite dark.
Before conducting these comparisons, I had expected to be able to quite easily observe a brighter image with the 8x42, which I thought would become more pronounced as it grew darker. But in reality, I really struggled to see any difference in image brightness. At times I did think the Vanguard 8x42s were ever so slightly brighter, but it was in no way conclusive.
Now admittedly the Spirit EDs are not quite in the same league as that of the Swarovski CL Companions, but even so they are far from poor and have features like ED glass, phase correction coatings and are fully multi-coated with anti-reflection coatings. So I am not criticizing this specific make and model as I am certain that had I used any other bin in their class, the result would have been the same.
Another surprising find was that even when I was looking at other aspects like the colors reproduced, image detail, signs of abberations and contrast, they were to my eyes still very similar.
Anyway the point is that even if there was a very small difference, it was very insignificant and really not worth me worrying about. It certainly would not mean the difference between me being able to ID and enjoy watching something like a bird in any way.
So why is this? The theory tells us that the 8x42mm should have at least seemed brighter to me:"
The author concluded.
"But leaving the biology behind, in my personal experience, as long as you get yourself a high quality 32mm binocular, I think that for the most part and for most people, the difference between the two is not a million miles apart and so yes, you may only need a 32mm binocular for terrestrial use during the day… and even in twilight."
"I was out late in the evening testing the even smaller 8x30 Swarovski CL Companion binoculars for my review. With me, I also had a pair of Vanguard Spirit ED 8x42mm binoculars with me to assess them against.
I compared the view through both of them repeatedly, looking at a wide variety of different subjects and in different directions (towards & away from the light) over a long period of time and until way after the sun had set and it had become quite dark.
Before conducting these comparisons, I had expected to be able to quite easily observe a brighter image with the 8x42, which I thought would become more pronounced as it grew darker. But in reality, I really struggled to see any difference in image brightness. At times I did think the Vanguard 8x42s were ever so slightly brighter, but it was in no way conclusive.
Now admittedly the Spirit EDs are not quite in the same league as that of the Swarovski CL Companions, but even so they are far from poor and have features like ED glass, phase correction coatings and are fully multi-coated with anti-reflection coatings. So I am not criticizing this specific make and model as I am certain that had I used any other bin in their class, the result would have been the same.
Another surprising find was that even when I was looking at other aspects like the colors reproduced, image detail, signs of abberations and contrast, they were to my eyes still very similar.
Anyway the point is that even if there was a very small difference, it was very insignificant and really not worth me worrying about. It certainly would not mean the difference between me being able to ID and enjoy watching something like a bird in any way.
So why is this? The theory tells us that the 8x42mm should have at least seemed brighter to me:"
The author concluded.
"But leaving the biology behind, in my personal experience, as long as you get yourself a high quality 32mm binocular, I think that for the most part and for most people, the difference between the two is not a million miles apart and so yes, you may only need a 32mm binocular for terrestrial use during the day… and even in twilight."
Last edited:
Sometimes binoculars seem relatively brighter, but it's a matter of having
an extremely high contrast design. This can be corroborated by also
looking for color saturation, which will always be richer in the high-contrast pair.
Baffling, insets, and quiet design have fluctuated a lot through binocular history.
Sometimes the push for shorter total barrel length messes up contrast.
If you tried out Conquests you might find a similar 'fade'.
an extremely high contrast design. This can be corroborated by also
looking for color saturation, which will always be richer in the high-contrast pair.
Baffling, insets, and quiet design have fluctuated a lot through binocular history.
Sometimes the push for shorter total barrel length messes up contrast.
If you tried out Conquests you might find a similar 'fade'.
Last edited:
Very plausible and quite helpful in understanding why short fat binoculars are harder to make.
The longer focal length is advantageous isn't it?
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello Dennis,
Regarding post #91
There is no need for all that bold type, unless you want to annoy me and others of my ilk. This is especially true because the article added little to the debate, since there was no control for aspects of the two binoculars, other than objective size. In my recollection, others have posted about how much an 8x32 Alpha's coatings and baffling put them close to a poorer 8x42.
Please, if you are satisfied with the 8x32's slight inconvenience in aligning the objectives, the eyepieces and one's own eyes and with its slightly limited twilight factor compared to an 8x42, of equal quality, that is certainly fine with me. Believe me, how you satisfy your optical needs do not require the internet equivalent of shouting.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood
Regarding post #91
There is no need for all that bold type, unless you want to annoy me and others of my ilk. This is especially true because the article added little to the debate, since there was no control for aspects of the two binoculars, other than objective size. In my recollection, others have posted about how much an 8x32 Alpha's coatings and baffling put them close to a poorer 8x42.
Please, if you are satisfied with the 8x32's slight inconvenience in aligning the objectives, the eyepieces and one's own eyes and with its slightly limited twilight factor compared to an 8x42, of equal quality, that is certainly fine with me. Believe me, how you satisfy your optical needs do not require the internet equivalent of shouting.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood
I guess the perceived result is partly based on the fact that our eyes don't perceive brightness differences linearly and partly because of the better contrast of the 8x30.
Still we know that hardly an 8x30 with the best coating can compete with an uncoated 8x42 when it comes to image brightness, so the result seems strange. A budget 8x42 will always be brighter than any 8x30.
It leads me wonder how dark the test conditions really were?
Last edited:
Steve Babbs
Well-known member
Sorry I can't be bothered to read all this but I was in x 42 camp until I actually sat down and compared my 8 x 42 s with a friend's 8 x 32. Okay it wasn't a totally 'fair' test as they were different brands but they were the top 'alphas' of the time: Leica and Bausch and Lombe. For most of dusk we could see no difference. When it was almost dark the 8 x 42 did win, but there was a very small amount in it. It was difficult to see which was brighter. I was converted. When the 8 x 42 were retired they were replaced by 8 x 32s.
With the same light transmission 42mm lens collects 72% more light than a 32mm lens. Maybe the difference was not as big in your example.
Still I think your example proves the huge exaggeration of the results of new improved coatings we hear today. The stories of the significantly brighter image with the new improved light transmission of 95%( compared to optics with 92%). If the difference between a 32 and 42mm aperture is perceived as small a newer optics with 2-3% higher light transmission has to be insignificantly brighter.
WJC
Well-known member
