These two are easy to answer, simply choose two continents
Well, I understand what you mean! :t:
These two are easy to answer, simply choose two continents
...If you're referring to the focus wheel on the Sightron's when you say [...I wouldn't like the focus operation though...], I would suggest you try them before you are so sure...
Unless of course you're one of those who believes that more expensive is always better, no matter what the data may show? But I am hoping you are more objective than that, which is why I asked if you had tried the Sightrons in the first place.
Oh good grief. I give up.
Hmm...you must not have read the rest of that sentence which refers back to my previous post that spells out what my issues with the focus operation are likely to be given other's reports: speed, smoothness, turns the wrong way, and lack of close-focus. In particular, neither of the latter two aspects requires a hands-on test, unless the specs are wrong and it matches my FL by turning clockwise to infinity and by focusing down to 5 feet (for butterflying).
I'm not biased against cheap binoculars; I own a number of them, and I've bought several for others over the years (most recently the Leupold 6x30 Yosemite and Bushnell 8x42 Legend Ultra HD), but I've not encountered any that matches the top-end stuff overall, so I have little interest in them for myself. I'm a user-collector and fairly satisfied with my collection, so a bin has to be better than what I already have for me to be interested. No one claims that the Sightron is as good as the best optically, so it is already disqualified before we even get to questions of ergonomics.
--AP
are likely to be
Many people, including myself, have complained about the plastic-like feeling of their armor, its unnecessary Klingon-like protuberances that dig into your hands and the sharp edges of their eyecups that dig into your eye sockets, but for justabirdwatcher their ergonomics are the best at any price---this may look like a rather naive claim, however preferences indeed are a rather personal thing.I was suggesting you try the Sightron's because IMO they have some of the best ergonomics of any binocular I've ever held, at any price.
Not when one compares bins with the same type of design, such as open hinge/bridge.Ergonomics are 100% personal, so it's a dead end discussion.
But the subject I raised WAS ergonomics. ...The more I look at all the binoculars out there (and I see about 75-100 birders/month where I work), the more I realize just how important things like ergonomics (balance, weight, grip, body style, eyecups, focus wheel, etc.) are in whether I'm happy or not with a pair of binocs...
Many people, including myself, have complained about the plastic-like feeling of their armor, its unnecessary Klingon-like protuberances that dig into your hands and the sharp edges of their eyecups that dig into your eye sockets, but for justabirdwatcher their ergonomics are the best at any price---this may look like a rather naive claim, however preferences indeed are a rather personal thing.
Not when one compares bins with the same type of design, such as open hinge/bridge.
the counterclockwise to infinity focus and lack of close focus are deal breakers.
The more I look at all the binoculars out there (and I see about 75-100 birders/month where I work), the more I realize just how important things like ergonomics (balance, weight, grip, body style, eyecups, focus wheel, etc.) are in whether I'm happy or not with a pair of binocs.
We seem to always hear about optical performance, and while important, it's not as important to me as it once was. Perhaps because there are now so many models that are within 10% or so of the best glass out there. Once you reach that 90% mark, other things become increasingly important in the field.
We seem to always hear about optical performance, and while important, it's not as important to me as it once was. Perhaps because there are now so many models that are within 10% or so of the best glass out there. Once you reach that 90% mark, other things become increasingly important in the field.
The largest underlying cause of short eye relief is the pressure to produce a compact size for the aperture.
Eye relief is almost always a portion of the eyepiece focal length, and driving down the objective FL
drives the EP FL down to maintain power. Other than that, it's a matter of skipping some elements
that help increase the eye relief...going with a cheaper EP design. You can have trouble cramming in
an advanced EP sometimes, or a lot of its tradeoffs are squandered on countering the aberrations of
a short objective FL.
This.
There is no magic, and nothing is free.
Amen.
------------------Maljunulo---------------------
I think you guys missed my point. I think many of the current offerings provide much more eye relief than is necessary for those of us who do not wear glasses. How about producing optics with shorter eye relief, where you don't have to extend eye cups? Seems like that would make things simpler, not harder.
------------------------------------------------
Thanks for reminding me.....we really did stray on the bit.
.
Your eye is the last element
in their designs. Looking at a real store and relaxing the ultimate-performance
requirements can help you find something a lot more comfortable to
actually use than the fussy thorobreds.
No binocular has ever been rejected because of excessive eye relief,
It would be an interesting test if you could provide two versions of the Swaro 8.5x42, one regular and the other with say only 13mm of eye relief but a 450'@1000yds FOV. I'm not holding my breath waiting though.
...I have rejected several pairs I either owned or was considering purchasing because of excessive eye relief. When I extend the eye cups to their full-out position and STILL have to hold the binoculars away from my face, that's ridiculous...
No binocular has ever been rejected because of excessive eye relief, but many have died in the market because they had too little.
Manufacturers have no incentive to offer short eye relief designs.
It would be an interesting test if you could provide two versions of the Swaro 8.5x42, one regular and the other with say only 13mm of eye relief but a 450'@1000yds FOV. I'm not holding my breath waiting though.
his problem has come up a lot over the last few years. From what I can tell, the problem is that to save money, the eyecups designed for the 10x version of a bin (which typically have shorter eye relief) are used on the 8x version.