I was a bit surprised to read that the NL 32 has 92% transmission, when they came out. The NL 42 has 91%.
The SF 42 has 92% and the SF 32 has 90%.
At least, that is what the specs say. I always wondered why the NL 32 should have more transmission than the NL 42. With Zeiss it is the other way around (and that makes more sense to me): the SF 42 has more transmission than the SF 32.
Is there an explanation for that?
Has anyone measured the transmission of the NL 32? I could not find it. I wonder how accurate the specs are considering the transmission of the bins. (For example: Optica Exotica claims that the Conquest 15x56 is a bit brighter than the SCL 15x56, althought the specs say that the Conquest has 90% transmission and the SLC has 93%.)
I know brightness is more than transmission, but I assume that transmission plays a big role in brightness? And lens diameter of course.
The SF 42 has 92% and the SF 32 has 90%.
At least, that is what the specs say. I always wondered why the NL 32 should have more transmission than the NL 42. With Zeiss it is the other way around (and that makes more sense to me): the SF 42 has more transmission than the SF 32.
Is there an explanation for that?
Has anyone measured the transmission of the NL 32? I could not find it. I wonder how accurate the specs are considering the transmission of the bins. (For example: Optica Exotica claims that the Conquest 15x56 is a bit brighter than the SCL 15x56, althought the specs say that the Conquest has 90% transmission and the SLC has 93%.)
I know brightness is more than transmission, but I assume that transmission plays a big role in brightness? And lens diameter of course.