Hi GG :hi:, aarrrrrrggggh! and egad!! :scribe: sorry to hear about the UV 8x32 HD - nothing worse than your elusive golden fleece bin with a fatal deal breaking flaw! As Leica to my knowledge still haven't released the UV 8x32 HD+ yet, perhaps you could drop them a line and see if an eyecup redesign is possible to offer more ER? Your other option is different, closer fitting glasses (I know $ since you just got these), or another bin, perhaps the 7x or 8x42 UVHD+ ? all things considered, they are pretty compact and lightish for 42mm's of such quality. (If a 42mm is still too heavy, have you tried the Swarovski 8x32 SV - it has wonderful lattitude for seeing the full Fov, and fantastic "eyeroamaboutability"!
for such a smallish bin, even for eyeglass wearers - it really is something quite special in this regard, something to do with a generous "Randpupille" as I understand it. NB. This may come at the compromise of slightly less than best in class glare handling.) More on "Randpupille" here:
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3105616&postcount=22
ER is a codependent variable for a given optical design, based on focal length, Fov, ocular diameter, field characteristics, field stops, etc. There is no free lunch however, and increases in one parameter (eg. ER) means a reduction in Fov, or requires larger oculars (hence increased weight), or different design (increased weight, cost, other compromises). Leica seems to have settled on a set of design compromises that revolve around compact physical dimensions, and lightish weight (considering the fine quality robust engineering) - what tends to be limited then compared to the competition, is Fov and ER, and they also have more pincushion distortion. :cat:
In practical use, the raw ER figure which by convention is measured from the last ocular surface, is also affected by eye cup design, glasses design (curvature, stand-off, etc), whether you are short-, or far-sighted, and even facial symmetry and characteristics, etc. Combine this with alignment tolerances, viewing distances, and parallax error etc, and getting a "nice" view can at times be difficult for us "four eyes" |8.|
It pays to try the individual models as sometimes the spec sheet is not the whole story due to the eyecup design and the fit to your eyeglasses /face. More prominent eyecups are designed to better shield the ocular surface from background reflections, but for us glasses wearers that is not so much of an advantage since it cuts down on the ER, and unless you have those fly-like side covers on your eyeglasses, reflections can enter behind the eyeglasses in the space to your face. I have found the Zeiss HT to give better ER
(for me) than the specs indicate, purely because of the fit - in fact I have to back the eyecups out ever so slightly on the 8x42 HT. Unfortunately, I don't get along with Leica's so well, and lose Fov ....... :-C
Good luck with your quest GG :t:
I'm like you and don't want anything on my eyeballs (contact lenses), and I am very hesitant about lasik surgery etc. I know a few people who have had it done, and they all have this unexplainable weird look to their expression (kind of like a deer caught in the headlights) :eek!: , most report some sort of difficulty such as seeing halos around lights at night - not ideal when you are driving! Therefore that alone crosses it off the list for now, besides, as I travel further down life's road, I find that my short-sightedness is starting to slightly correct somewhat due to changes in the eyeball .....
Chosun :gh: