-
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.
Why is there so little actual discussion here? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter CSG
- Start date
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
You need to post something incendiary. Try telling the world how your HT blows away any Swaro. and you should get a suitable response.
I am one who likes to read more than comment, so I fit into this category. I add comments where I have experience with a product, but don't get into the mine is better than yours and this binocular is the best discussions.
I assume there are many more like me.
I have been here for four years, but have less than a couple hundred comments, or less than 3 comments per month.
I assume there are many more like me.
I have been here for four years, but have less than a couple hundred comments, or less than 3 comments per month.
looksharp65
Well-known member
If this forum would be a playground for brand fanboys only, I'd have left it long ago.
Yes, I am interested in reading reviews when they cover binoculars I'm interested in.
But I'm even more interested in getting deeper, beyond superficial technical numbers and into how things REALLY look when we look through binoculars and WHY they look like that.
It's about the physiology of the binoculars + eye/visual system which decides how we perceive contrast, colours, brightness, depth of field, perceived FOV and so on.
Since this is my primary interest, I have posted quite a few threads trying to approach these aspects, and I'm to some extent surprised to see how little they seem to have changed the course of the forum. But that's only me, I guess.
//L
Yes, I am interested in reading reviews when they cover binoculars I'm interested in.
But I'm even more interested in getting deeper, beyond superficial technical numbers and into how things REALLY look when we look through binoculars and WHY they look like that.
It's about the physiology of the binoculars + eye/visual system which decides how we perceive contrast, colours, brightness, depth of field, perceived FOV and so on.
Since this is my primary interest, I have posted quite a few threads trying to approach these aspects, and I'm to some extent surprised to see how little they seem to have changed the course of the forum. But that's only me, I guess.
//L
John Dracon
John Dracon
65 - I believe this forum is read by a variety of folks, some with deep knowledge about the technical aspects of binoculars and others with deep knowledge about using them. And everyone in between. Expertise in one aspect doesn't necessarily translate into expertise in another aspect. So we share our experiences, biases, and opinions with one another, hopefully in a respectful manner.
Occasionally, someone comes along like Professor Merlitz who helps us understand the scientific aspects of optics. Optical engineers designing these things seem to avoid disclosing themselves for their own reasons, but I'm confident they read some of the posts on this site. The old joke about a jackass being a horse designed by a committee may have some relevance here. How to explain an outstanding binocular such as the Zeiss HT with so-so eye cups? Don't know. Anyway, this is a forum for the intelligentsia, the snooty, the techocrats, and the great unwashed folks like me.
John
Occasionally, someone comes along like Professor Merlitz who helps us understand the scientific aspects of optics. Optical engineers designing these things seem to avoid disclosing themselves for their own reasons, but I'm confident they read some of the posts on this site. The old joke about a jackass being a horse designed by a committee may have some relevance here. How to explain an outstanding binocular such as the Zeiss HT with so-so eye cups? Don't know. Anyway, this is a forum for the intelligentsia, the snooty, the techocrats, and the great unwashed folks like me.
John
edwincjones
Well-known member
I find this forum most useful when
I am considering a specific binocular, or class;
and can review many threads and comments for the past years.
and/or
when I ask a question on a new thread, no matter how dumb
edj
I am considering a specific binocular, or class;
and can review many threads and comments for the past years.
and/or
when I ask a question on a new thread, no matter how dumb
edj
FrankD
Well-known member
CSG,
It is a bit funny that you made that observation. I have been an infrequent vistor here over the last month or two. When i have popped in I seem to see countless threads with new posts on them typically in the main discussion forum and in the Zeiss, Leica, Nikon and Swaro forums.
It is a bit funny that you made that observation. I have been an infrequent vistor here over the last month or two. When i have popped in I seem to see countless threads with new posts on them typically in the main discussion forum and in the Zeiss, Leica, Nikon and Swaro forums.
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
You imply that if more people posted more frequently it would be better. Frankly, I'm here for information exchange, so I prefer if people don't post unless they have something substantive to announce or add. I am sometimes embarrassed how often I post, and how many of my posts are repeats of old info, because I think I my threshold for judging whether it is worth posting is sometimes too low. I wish more folks would dig through the archive thoroughly before posting a question. I'd post a lot less if they did.
--AP
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
CSG,
I know you have an HT, and to add to the discussion here, why not give a detailed review? - what you like, what you don't, how it works in the field, what you have compared them to........
We have very few user reviews of this binocular, despite the fact it has been 'out there' for more than a year.
Well, following what seemed to be protocol here, made some comments in the existing threads about the HT's.
Unlike some of the engineers that hang here, I'm just a regular guy without an optician's degree. What I told Mike Jensen was that of all the binoculars I've ever used, the HT is the best one I've used to date. Ergonomics, brightness, sharpness, FOV, overall image presence are the best I've seen. If I could only own one binocular, it would be the 8x42 HT.
Unlike some of the engineers that hang here, I'm just a regular guy without an optician's degree. What I told Mike Jensen was that of all the binoculars I've ever used, the HT is the best one I've used to date. Ergonomics, brightness, sharpness, FOV, overall image presence are the best I've seen. If I could only own one binocular, it would be the 8x42 HT.
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Something that just isn't happening here much anymore [and I miss it] are the great technical discussions from people like Henry Link et al. If you do a search, you will find some great topics, complete with photo's, for things like edge sharpness, CA, boosted resolution.
These sorts of threads were usually great fodder for discussion and would often lead to alternate discussions involving different binoculars. I would love to do a mega alpha and near alpha shoot-out, complete with photos, but I lack the technical skills nor do I have access to enough specimens to test. Maybe someone here could take up this challenge, in the manner of Franks' great 8x32 comparison.
These sorts of threads were usually great fodder for discussion and would often lead to alternate discussions involving different binoculars. I would love to do a mega alpha and near alpha shoot-out, complete with photos, but I lack the technical skills nor do I have access to enough specimens to test. Maybe someone here could take up this challenge, in the manner of Franks' great 8x32 comparison.
perterra
Well-known member
I'm guessing you aint one to sit around a virtual type bar and make small talk. :-O
David Swain
Well-known member
It is mostly long lulls of knowledgeable posters trading deep experience and extensive knowledge punctuated by Dennis' threads, each of which develops with all the predictability (and entertainment value) of a train wreck.
brocknroller
porromaniac
brocknroller
porromaniac
CSG,
Discussions tend to come about on BF when a new model arrives, even more so when it's from the BIG FOUR. First, you get the SPECULATION thread like we had recently when someone made a nip slip that Leica is coming out with a new Uberbin.
Then when someone who has an "in" with manufacturers like Steve C. or Frank D. or a professional reviewer like Arek or Pier get their hands on a new model few have seen yet, there comes the NEW BIN thread -- people start pumping the reviewers for more information.
In the third wave of the discussion comes as the bins get into more people's hands, there will arise conflicting reports about the said bin or what I call the HE SAID/SHE SAID thread. It's "sharp." No, it's not. It has RB. Not it doesn't. And the beat goes on. After a while, there's either a consensus of opinion or the forum divides into two camps, the thumb uppers and the thumb downers.
Finally, when each side has fired as many arrows as their quivers can hold, a cease fire is called, and there's a lull in the discussions, and we go back to "The Best," "The Best for Under x Dollars," "Your Dream Bin," etc.
Right now, we're starting the HE SAID/SHE SAID phase on the CL Pockets, and we'll hear more about those as they get into more deep pocketed hands. Sharp or not sharp? Pocket or too big for pockets? Ridiculously overpriced or well worth the money?
As far as the technical discussions, we just had one recently with Ed, Surveyor, and Henry and/or Holger about something or another, with measurements and charts. It was over my head. In fact, so far over my head that it achieved escape velocity and is now heading toward Mars, after which, it will be picked up on Google Mars.
After about 5,300 posts (don't ask), I've not only said it all, I've said it over and over and over and over and over and over again.
That's mainly because I have trouble finding old stuff in the BF archives (I find Cloudy Night's archives easier to navigate), so I generally use search engines to look for my old or others' old posts/threads. However, the Internet has grown into a MEGAverse over the past 10 years since I registered such that stuff I wrote just three years ago may not come up on a search engine, but what I wrote three minutes ago will.
So when a newbie comes on BF (or Bob forgets what I wrote, I have to rewrite some old material, which I would have otherwise just posted a link to, though I do try to make it fresh with a new joke or more current cultural reference.
I think the gist of what I've written on these forums is succinctly summarized by Stephen Ingraham in my signature except I would add EIIs to the SEs.
But enough about me, let's talk about you... considering that you've been registered since 2006, you haven't had much to say, more of a lurker than a poster.
Even though it's all been said already, it hasn't all been said by you, and each person brings his or her unique perspective to the forums, so how about boosting your post/thread count with some new OPs? This one doesn't count, because its self-referential.
RBP
Discussions tend to come about on BF when a new model arrives, even more so when it's from the BIG FOUR. First, you get the SPECULATION thread like we had recently when someone made a nip slip that Leica is coming out with a new Uberbin.
Then when someone who has an "in" with manufacturers like Steve C. or Frank D. or a professional reviewer like Arek or Pier get their hands on a new model few have seen yet, there comes the NEW BIN thread -- people start pumping the reviewers for more information.
In the third wave of the discussion comes as the bins get into more people's hands, there will arise conflicting reports about the said bin or what I call the HE SAID/SHE SAID thread. It's "sharp." No, it's not. It has RB. Not it doesn't. And the beat goes on. After a while, there's either a consensus of opinion or the forum divides into two camps, the thumb uppers and the thumb downers.
Finally, when each side has fired as many arrows as their quivers can hold, a cease fire is called, and there's a lull in the discussions, and we go back to "The Best," "The Best for Under x Dollars," "Your Dream Bin," etc.
Right now, we're starting the HE SAID/SHE SAID phase on the CL Pockets, and we'll hear more about those as they get into more deep pocketed hands. Sharp or not sharp? Pocket or too big for pockets? Ridiculously overpriced or well worth the money?
As far as the technical discussions, we just had one recently with Ed, Surveyor, and Henry and/or Holger about something or another, with measurements and charts. It was over my head. In fact, so far over my head that it achieved escape velocity and is now heading toward Mars, after which, it will be picked up on Google Mars.
After about 5,300 posts (don't ask), I've not only said it all, I've said it over and over and over and over and over and over again.
That's mainly because I have trouble finding old stuff in the BF archives (I find Cloudy Night's archives easier to navigate), so I generally use search engines to look for my old or others' old posts/threads. However, the Internet has grown into a MEGAverse over the past 10 years since I registered such that stuff I wrote just three years ago may not come up on a search engine, but what I wrote three minutes ago will.
So when a newbie comes on BF (or Bob forgets what I wrote
, I have to rewrite some old material, which I would have otherwise just posted a link to, though I do try to make it fresh with a new joke or more current cultural reference. I think the gist of what I've written on these forums is succinctly summarized by Stephen Ingraham in my signature except I would add EIIs to the SEs.
But enough about me, let's talk about you... considering that you've been registered since 2006, you haven't had much to say, more of a lurker than a poster.
Even though it's all been said already, it hasn't all been said by you, and each person brings his or her unique perspective to the forums, so how about boosting your post/thread count with some new OPs? This one doesn't count, because its self-referential.
RBP
Last edited:
FrankD
Well-known member
Nice synopsis Brock. I think you did a ver nice job of summarizing one of the general trends of behavior here. Now I think I need to head over to the Swaro booth to check out the CL pockets.
On another note my timing in reading your comments was perfect. As soon as I finished reading your post I looked to my left and there was Stephen. I read him your quote and he laughed at the fact that his quote is in your signature line. A very humble man.
On another note my timing in reading your comments was perfect. As soon as I finished reading your post I looked to my left and there was Stephen. I read him your quote and he laughed at the fact that his quote is in your signature line. A very humble man.
