You could have a point there. There could be a combination of factors including magnification making things "appear" brighter and more detailed.I think the "impression" of brightness is very hard to separate from greater resolved detail due to magnification. This is the basis of the Twighlight Factor = sqrt ( magnification * objective diameter ).
For the 8x56 this works out to be 21.2
Relative Brightness is a function of the EP (squared) = 49
I think Dennis's heart might be all aflutter too much to give an objective view ....... o
Chosun :gh:
-
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.
I have $2K burning a hole in my pocket what binocular should I buy? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
Thanks. I would imagine that is really awesome.
In Yellowstone you'll wish you had the 10X56, especially if you're going to support it. Then again...that scope thingy is what you really want in Hayden and Lamar valleys.
https://www.google.com/search?q=hay...fHZAhWOoFMKHc58DTsQ_AUIDCgD&biw=2560&bih=1275
https://www.google.com/search?q=hay...fHZAhWOoFMKHc58DTsQ_AUIDCgD&biw=2560&bih=1275
I prefer the 8x56's over the 10x56's overall because I shake more with 10x and I like the DOF with the 8x for birding. Plus the 8x56's give you more of that aberration free axial image than the 10x56's that Henry talks about. I have not noticed too much difference seeing detail with an 8x or 10x in the Hayden Valley That Swaro spotting scope would be awesome in the Hayden Valley though. I bet I could spot wolves from a good distance with that. You star getting up to 50x and it is a whole different ball game.
Aberration free axial image was a term Henry Link used to describe the image he get's through his Zeiss 8x56 FL binoculars. Here is a link where he explains what he means. My review is based on the 8x56 SLC which I own. The linked review is a 10x56 SLC which will be similar in performance.
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=840895&postcount=1
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Dennis's bino world comes full circle, for the 10th time...
Well Dennis, I am glad you found them excellent.
My wife and I had some fun sitting on the picnic table looking across the river after sunset one evening with the 10x42Canon turning the IS on and off, watching a heron fishing minnows. To me, the IS on brightened the picture--which of course, it did not. I suspected then the detail recognized when the IS popped on, gave what is left of my brain that impression. It was interesting.
I imagine if I had enough time with the 8x56, I could learn to see what Henry appreciates about the FLs. But it takes me quite a while doing side by side comparisons with peer-type binos to detect the usually minor differences. And I don't have an 8x56 SLC...
We do have a 10x56 which is easier for me to hold steady than some smaller stuff we have. Would guess the 8x56 is going to continue to give you very satisfying views.
My wife and I had some fun sitting on the picnic table looking across the river after sunset one evening with the 10x42Canon turning the IS on and off, watching a heron fishing minnows. To me, the IS on brightened the picture--which of course, it did not. I suspected then the detail recognized when the IS popped on, gave what is left of my brain that impression. It was interesting.
I imagine if I had enough time with the 8x56, I could learn to see what Henry appreciates about the FLs. But it takes me quite a while doing side by side comparisons with peer-type binos to detect the usually minor differences. And I don't have an 8x56 SLC...
We do have a 10x56 which is easier for me to hold steady than some smaller stuff we have. Would guess the 8x56 is going to continue to give you very satisfying views.
I am starting to see what Henry appreciates about the 8x56's. It is simply the lack of aberrations that the smaller apertures tend to have. That big objective lens just gives you an effortless clear sharp view. You really notice the difference when you drop back to a 30mm objective. Here is a Youtube video on the 10x56 HD SLC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1L1BJxMd68
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=matEQLDHTnw
Last edited:
This was from the review on Swarovski 10x56 SLC. Same thing I was seeing.
"With 93% transmission, 56mm objectives and a 5.6mm exit pupil you would expect the 10x56 SLCs to have outstanding dusk performance and they do. These allow you to pull detail out of shadows that have already become black and featureless with night drawing in. Looking at the copse across the fields, the ground under the trees still looks like daytime when all is impenetrable darkness with my naked eyes."
No, I don't see any RBo(Rolling Bowl) in the 8x56 SLC.
Last edited:
tenex
reality-based
Dennis, I'm glad you're loving your 8x56, the one SLC I haven't seen. I'm thrilled with my 10x56, the brightest bino I've ever used also. But I admit I'm curious about the "lack of aberrations" report, apart from CA which I agree is negligible. What do you see that leads you to conclude that other aberrations are better controlled than in top quality binos of more moderate aperture, or that this relates to objective size? Without using test charts, I couldn't say that myself. I do love the view though.
Lee, regarding brightness, I don't understand your argument here. In low light (which Dennis was talking about) any binocular I've ever used is "brighter" than the naked eye, comparing the same field of view. How much light there is in the entire scene strikes me as a different sort of question.
Lee, regarding brightness, I don't understand your argument here. In low light (which Dennis was talking about) any binocular I've ever used is "brighter" than the naked eye, comparing the same field of view. How much light there is in the entire scene strikes me as a different sort of question.
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Agree...Providing there is some residual light (artificial, fading sky, moon, etc.) left in the scene I'm viewing. Even though my POI looks pitch black to my unaided eyes, I find all of my optics enhance the brightness of the FOV and brings out shape, details and resolution that otherwise I can't discern in the darkness.
In extreme low light conditions, the bigger the objective, the brighter the view!
Ted
mooreorless
Well-known member
henry link
Well-known member
At this point Dennis hasn't established whether his 10x56 SLC actually has low aberrations in daylight. That would require a high magnification star-test with the aperture reduced to to around 20mm.
Binoculars are not brighter than the naked eye in low light conditions. An object in an 8x binocular will look about as bright (minus transmission losses) as the same object looks to the naked eye IF the naked eye is moved 7/8 of the distance closer to the object, so that the object appears to be the same size as it appears through the binocular. Try it.
Last edited:
I haven't star tested my 8x56 SLC yet as Henry pointed out but I can sure see a difference in the image when I go back and forth the from the 8x56 SLC and my 8x30 CL. The bigger glass to my eyes seems to have a cleaner more perfect image even though the little 8x30 is very good. The clean sharp image of the 8x56 could be partly attributed to the lack of CA. It is almost apochromatic in that respect. The big glass spoils you. The SLC is the best binocular I have ever used for flare control and CA and low light which makes it a very versatile binocular for different conditions. You can get right next to the sun with no flare. Really it is not that hard to hold the extra weight either of the 8x56. It is so well balanced.
Last edited:
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Great explanation, Henry. Optics simply make our FOV perspective equal to (minus instrument losses) standing at the scene with unaided eye sight! :t:
Glad I got em, much easier than running up to each bird or scenic view!!
3Ted
Three remarkable things about the Swarovski SLC HD 8x56 are the flare control, CA control and the low light performance. You have to watch that you don't look directly into the sun because you have no warning you are getting close to it because you see no flare at all. They must really have good baffling or is it partly due to the big objective lens? I think a lot of the axial clarity and sharpness are due to it's complete absence of CA. I am still dumbfounded by how good it is in low light. I never realized the big eye binoculars were that good at dusk because I have never had one.
Similar threads
