You can actually hold a 15x STEADY? I tried a Meopta Meostar HD Plus 15x56 and there was no way I could hold it steady. I was all over the place. I struggle with 10x.Nothing wrong with redundancy
I always use objective caps because i hike a lot.
My Zeiss 15x60 is big but i can still handle it quite well for short periods. The Zeiss FL's became collectors items i guess because they are expensive, like 1300,- euro for a FL 10x56. If in good quality i think they are worth it.
-
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.
What's your favourite bins of all time..... and why? (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Rg548
- Start date
Wow! What kind of hand hold do you use? Are you bracing against something or kneeling down? When I go 10x or above, I need IS.
Thotmosis
Well-known member
Yes of course when you are sitting with your elbows on a table you have already much more stability. Or fixating your bino against a tree or wall. But that's obvious. The funny thing is i can handhold my Leica Duovid 8-12 at 12x more stable then my Habicht 10x40 GA, which is lighter... But as i said in post 82: it's not a completely stable view, e.g. i can not read license plates of cars but flying raptors and boats is just fine.
Loud Green Man
Well-known member
Zeiss 8X56 Night 🦉
No Pain = No Gain
LGM
No Pain = No Gain
LGM
avidopticguy
Active member
Ziess SF 8x42 - super shap large fov and easy viewing ergonomics and balance
Would/could have been Swaro SLC HD 8x42, but did not correct for my vision at infinity. SLC - I liked the price, view, contrasty image, size, slightly yellow/warm color tone
Would/could have been Swaro SLC HD 8x42, but did not correct for my vision at infinity. SLC - I liked the price, view, contrasty image, size, slightly yellow/warm color tone
Great thread - I've enjoyed (and been surprised by some of) the responses.
Surprised this hasn't been on the list yet, maybe just too early...but...
the Zeiss SFL 8x40.
And then, I'll be bold and say Nikon 8x32SEs (since I got them back for a service from Nikon and still can't figure out what faerie dust the sprinkled on them).
Surprised this hasn't been on the list yet, maybe just too early...but...
the Zeiss SFL 8x40.
And then, I'll be bold and say Nikon 8x32SEs (since I got them back for a service from Nikon and still can't figure out what faerie dust the sprinkled on them).
Boogieshrew
Well-known member
Nikon 8x32SEs 👍👍👍
tenex
reality-based
I've never seen an Audubon and would love to. What is the view like, with that wide field: how much is sharp, and do the edges have coma/astigmatism or just field curvature? (somehow these look quite different to me)
rdnzl
Not Sure.
Very nice wide views. No coma and weird colors. Sharp to the edges. Some slight curvature, or pincushion effect, but not to where I even pay attention to it. The only downside is their size. They are quite the chunk. I have 3 of them. This one stays home because it is closest to new condition. My other two have a few scars, but the optics are still excellent.
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
What? How can you say this?
I like the Swift Audubon but it is not sharp to the edges,
--AP
Last edited:
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
"The blur occurs in the distance of 70% +\- 5% from the field of view centre."
Swift Optics 820 ED Audubon 8.5x44 - binoculars review - AllBinos.com
The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.
I thought curvature and pincushion were two completely different things, but what do I know …
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Well, this situation has simply got to stop!
For starters please review the attached paper that Renze de Vries and wrote in 2005 to find out what you've been missing (also see the contents of THIS THREAD). At the time the article was written we didn't yet know the 804 Audubon originated in 1958 and was marketed by Swift & Anderson — the predecessor to Swift Instruments, Inc., which was incorporated in 1960. Shown below is only known specimen of the original Audubon on planet earth. And I own it. It was made by the Japanese company Tamron Optical Co. JL E-45. (If anyone can dispute this, now's your chance.) The one rdnzl presented on post #87 is the Swift-Pyser Type 3a shown on Pg. 13. Very wide FOV, short eye relief, and heavy. I assume his other two are of the same vintage. All excellent optics but not multi-coated.
So, I assume you yearn to experience the most modern Audubon, and those are Type 4, starting on Pg. 17. The 804ED is the ultimate experience but they are unobtanium at this time. Mine were sold a few years ago, so I couldn't even loan you one. (*Incidentally: the Model 820ED is fine instrument but, contrary to the ads, it does not have air-spaced objectives which makes a big difference.) There are usually one or two Type 4 Audubons available on the famous auction site at any given time.
Your thought is correct, they are different. Curvature refers "Field Curvature," and pincushion refers to a type of "Distortion." They are different Seidel Aberrations and can be corrected independently, but they can also be easily confused at a descriptive level. All of the 804 Swift Audubon binoculars display pincushion distortion, which controls the "globe effect" while scanning, and field curvature, which (sometimes) appears as image defocus at the at the edge of the field. The only time I was ever consciously aware of its field curvature was when viewing the side of a man-made flat building. In a three- dimensional natural visual environment, pure field curvature isn't easily identifiable because equi-distant objects at the extremes remain in focus.I thought curvature and pincushion were two completely different things, but what do I know …
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
We might keep in mind that Allbinos is oriented to astronomical observations and apparently assumes that zero field curvature is the best optical design under all circumstances. In my opinion, for terrestrial observation some yet-to-be determined amount of field curvature (absent coma or astigmatism) is needed to prevent the weird situation where object points at different distances are forced to be in focus. Human observation of the natural world necessarily requires an optical defocus gradient to create a valid perception of spatial "flatness.""The blur occurs in the distance of 70% +\- 5% from the field of view centre."
Swift Optics 820 ED Audubon 8.5x44 - binoculars review - AllBinos.com
The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.www.allbinos.com
Ed
Last edited:
edwincjones
Well-known member
I do not, can not, have a favorite of ALL times.
Over the years my interest and bino activities change.
Currently my favorite is my Fujinon TS-X 14x40.
As I age and eyes deteriorate along with my steadiness
the higher mag with IS is great.
Tomorrow my favorite may change.
edj
Over the years my interest and bino activities change.
Currently my favorite is my Fujinon TS-X 14x40.
As I age and eyes deteriorate along with my steadiness
the higher mag with IS is great.
Tomorrow my favorite may change.
edj
Binocollector
Well-known member
I guess Canip forgot to post the sarcasm sign. He certainly knows the difference between pincushion distortion and field curvature
. However - very interesting post about the Swifts. Thanks. Now I want one
.