• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Nikon Monarch 10x42... chromatic aberration? (2 Viewers)

D

Detrusor

Member
Hello

I'm pretty confused...
After a long long hesitation, i decided to purchase those monarch 10x42.
I received them recently, but I have been able to test them out only today (I had to ship them to another address than the one I was), and I must say that my very very first feeling is a little disappointment, because of.... chromatic aberrations(?)
i don't know if it was because the sky was very grey, but when my eyes aren't exactly in the center of the image, i have the feeling that what i look at has some pinky shadow (my poor english doesn't allow me to explain more precisely... but you must know what i'm talking about... it's the same chromatic aberration you can see on photos done with lousy lenses)

if it's "normal", then i'm ok, and will try to get used to, but it's pretty surprising for a pair of bins that everyone say they're happy with it

if it's a flaw of the copy i received, then i'm lost... since i've been able to try them more than one week after receiving them, i guess the shop won't take them back

anyway, i'll try to reach them (it's www.technikdirekt.de ), but i'd like to know if ever any of you already noticed that on those binoculars

thanks
 
Detrusor said:
Hello

I'm pretty confused...
After a long long hesitation, i decided to purchase those monarch 10x42.
I received them recently, but I have been able to test them out only today (I had to ship them to another address than the one I was), and I must say that my very very first feeling is a little disappointment, because of.... chromatic aberrations(?)
i don't know if it was because the sky was very grey, but when my eyes aren't exactly in the center of the image, i have the feeling that what i look at has some pinky shadow (my poor english doesn't allow me to explain more precisely... but you must know what i'm talking about... it's the same chromatic aberration you can see on photos done with lousy lenses)

if it's "normal", then i'm ok, and will try to get used to, but it's pretty surprising for a pair of bins that everyone say they're happy with it

if it's a flaw of the copy i received, then i'm lost... since i've been able to try them more than one week after receiving them, i guess the shop won't take them back

anyway, i'll try to reach them (it's www.technikdirekt.de ), but i'd like to know if ever any of you already noticed that on those binoculars

thanks
Click to expand...

Hi,

I don't own these particular binoculars, but I do have a Swift 828 HHS Audubon that has certain similarities. In general, I'd say that CA is more difficult/expensive to correct that other optical aberrations, hence, it seems to be the hallmark of mid-level roof types. My 828 HHS certainly displays more than I'd like to see in high contrast situations, so I'm not surprised at what you're reporting. In addition, the CA in a 10x will be more evident due to magnification.

Knowing that it has this property, however, my approach is simply to accept it and not fret. Your binocular is a very competent tool in other respects, and when you buy a more expensive one in the future this aspect will be a basis of selection. But keep in mind that CA is present in all binoculars, it's just a matter of degree. In fact, the human eye produces CA in normal vision that the brain learns to disregard (just like the "blind spot"), hence, some degree of CA in binoculars can also be adapted to or accepted.

Enjoy the new binoculars, and welcome to the world of binocular reality.

ED
 
Hi Grégoire
Don't despair. Chromatic abberation can be seen in a lot of binoculars, especially if you don't have your eyes completely lined up with the centre of the field of view. It's likely you'll soon get used to it and it'll stop bothering you. Looking at dark objects against a grey overcast sky is a sure way to see CA. The Monarch is a well respected binocular and I'm sure you'll become comfortable with it over time.
Good luck
John
 
As others already stated, some CA is always there. But try to adjust the IPD (inter-pupillary distance) to minimize it.
Marko
 
You already have good advice here. I am currently using 2 binoculars for birding: Swarovski EL 8x32 and Leica Ultravid 10x42. I don't see any CA in the Leicas, but there is quite a bit in the Swaro when i look up towards a grey sky. Setting the IPD correctly, looking at the center of the field of view, and looking at the bird rather than CA helps.
 
elkcub said:
Hi,
But keep in mind that CA is present in all binoculars, it's just a matter of degree. In fact, the human eye produces CA in normal vision that the brain learns to disregard (just like the "blind spot"), hence, some degree of CA in binoculars can also be adapted to or accepted.

Enjoy the new binoculars, and welcome to the world of binocular reality.

ED
Click to expand...

Ed,
Interesting observation on normal vision CA. When I had my cataract surgery I saw CA at the edge of my vision in the eye that was operated on for a couple of weeks or so after which it went away. At least I don't see it any more.
Bob :cool:
 
Thank you all for your answers

Now that I've been able to test the bins a little more deeply, I must say that I'm very satisfied. Indeed, when you look to a bird, or when you simply focus on something instead of just watching through the bins, you don't notice the CA anymore...
The weight is nice, and the brightness is just great!
The previous bins i had were poor 8x25 minolta... It was worth the upgrade!
 
I still have my 10x25 Minoltas..and also the same in 8x25. The ease you get with bigger bins is when you pull them up to look, you see things quicker. No adjusting where to place them.

I have a hard time seeing CA, but I did test the Monarchs on a white piece of paper on my desk, from a cross the room. The edges had greenish CA. My 8x40 porros did not have the same or any CA that I could see.
 
Last edited:
In general, I'd say that CA is more difficult/expensive to correct that other optical aberrations, hence, it seems to be the hallmark of mid-level roof types. My 828 HHS certainly displays more than I'd like to see in high contrast situations, so I'm not surprised at what you're reporting. In addition, the CA in a 10x will be more evident due to magnification.

Knowing that it has this property, however, my approach is simply to accept it and not fret.
Click to expand...

Great comments. My feelings on the subject exactly. I have the 10x42 Monarch and it does exhibit more CA than my 8x42 Venturers for two obvious reasons..the magnification and the difference in quality/quantity of glass/coatings. I have found it only really noticeable/annoying in high contrast situations. Not enough though to make me want to get rid of the bins. The rest of their "experience" is too gratifying.
 
ceasar said:
Ed,
Interesting observation on normal vision CA. When I had my cataract surgery I saw CA at the edge of my vision in the eye that was operated on for a couple of weeks or so after which it went away. At least I don't see it any more.
Bob :cool:
Click to expand...

Right, you didn't "see" it any more, because your brain supressed it from consciousness, which is what the brain does with useless sensory data. It's like the ticking of a clock. Generally speaking, somewhere around 60% of the normal point spread on the fovea is due to CA within the eye itself. We used to say that consciousness "adapts out," but the important point is that the CA is still a limiting factor in perceptual acuity even though we are not conscious of it. The physics doesn't change.

Ed
 
elkcub said:
Generally speaking, somewhere around 60% of the normal point spread on the fovea is due to CA within the eye itself. .

Ed
Click to expand...

Hi again Ed,
Now I know where Dr. Carver Mead got the name Foveon for his revolutionary photographic chip which is used in Sigma SLR Cameras. Are you acquainted with it? See www.foveon.com. for more info. Fascinating, but it came out too late to catch the wave of everyday digital photogrophy. Too bad. It seems clearly suiperior to the chips in use now.
Bob
 
ceasar said:
Now I know where Dr. Carver Mead got the name Foveon for his revolutionary photographic chip which is used in Sigma SLR Cameras.
Click to expand...
Sorry about OT...

Bob,

I am not sure the analogy in the name of the chip works correctly here. IMO the eye (retina) is more like a Bayer mask + CCD with separate pixels for each colour. The Foveon chip works rather like a colour film with separate layers for each colour.

Ilkka :t:


ps. My Nikon 10x32HGs produce very clear lateral chromatic aberration if my eyes are not perfectly centered & aligned. It feels quite restricting even after some years of practice, but I have learnt to live with it as I dislike CA even more ;)
 
CA and power

Ilkka and Frank noted more CA in their ten power glasses, but Luca's Leica ten power had less than his Swarovski eight power. I wonder if, in general, and ceteris paribus, the higher the power the more noticeable is CA. Perhaps ED and FL glass becomes more useful and worthwhile at ten power rather than a lower power.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood
 
Ilkka and Frank noted more CA in their ten power glasses, but Luca's Leica ten power had less than his Swarovski eight power. I wonder if, in general, and ceteris paribus, the higher the power the more noticeable is CA. Perhaps ED and FL glass becomes more useful and worthwhile at ten power rather than a lower power.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind though that the 8 and 10 powers being compared in my case were of two different quality levels. I think it would be interesting if I could get a hold of a pair of 8x Monarchs, assuming they are a representative sample, and compare them to my 10xs.
 
CA will drive you nuts if you let it. Ignore it and as Ed says your brain will ignore it for you. Although I doubt if it is that easy in the worst cases. If you can see it without looking for it then it's really bad. If you have to look for it, it's not important. If my memory is correct Henry Link said recently that it's inherent in all refractors that have short focal length ratios to the diameters of their objective lenses. Binoculars usually have an F4 ratio, I'm told. That's probably the major reason for it's prevalence. It makes it costly and difficult to get rid of it.
Bob
 
Last edited:
If CA is mainly due to the short focal length of binocular objectives, why is it so much worse in roof-prisms than in porro-prism designs? There can't be much (if any) difference in the focal length of the objectives in the different designs. Anyone got any ideas ?

Also, CA would be much reduced if we accepted longer binoculars (to allow for longer focal length lenses) but I doubt they'd be successful commercially. There are a lot of compromises in binocular design and compactness is obviously a constraint (although I think it often goes too far).
 
Pinewood said:
I wonder if, in general, and ceteris paribus, the higher the power the more noticeable is CA. Perhaps ED and FL glass becomes more useful and worthwhile at ten power rather than a lower power.
Click to expand...
I agree that longitudinal CA which originates in the objective becomes more magnified in a 10x eyepiece than in an 8x, but "the other" CA (lateral, transverse etc. which to me is often more disturbing) may depend more on the focal length and field-of-view of the eyepiece (which may or may not always be related to magnification). I have sometimes wondered why the bino makers don't use ED/lanthanum or whatever exotic eyepieces.

Ilkka :t:

ps. The Zeiss FLs are physically much longer than the earlier Victories. I wonder how much of this CA reduction comes just from their longer focal length.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 18 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

Emily Taylor
Found a used Monarch X for a cool $90 (10.5x45)
Replies
6
Views
864
Emily Taylor
Emily Taylor
N
Monarch HG 8x42 vs Save for NL Pure
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ratal
Ratal
M
new (to me) Nikon 7x35 binoculars
Replies
8
Views
919
jan van daalen
J
K
MHG Help
Replies
19
Views
2K
Binocollector
B
M
Nikon Monarch HG 8x42 vs Zeiss SFL 8x40
Replies
4
Views
4K
AlphaFan
A

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top