• 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.

STOP glaring at me! (1 Viewer)

D

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
There has been a lot of discussion on glare and flare in binocular's lately. What do you think causes it and what binoculars have you had that show a lot of glare and which one's are resistant to glare in your opinion? I have a new pair of Swarovski SLC's 8x56 that have no glare so I am thinking the bigger aperture along with the 8x magnification helps with glare control. What do you think?

Alternate title for the thread was " Glare, Flare it's everywhere. How do you keep it out of your hair?"
 
Last edited:
I think you should send them to me so I can verify this.

I have an 11x56 porro that doesn't seem to have any glare issues. My Meopro 10x32 is not good imo. However I'm still working out what glare and flare and such actually mean and look like. When I look anywhere towards the direction of the sun my Meopro get a half circle of bright glare or reflected light at the bottom of the view. If I move my eye position I can reduce it but never get rid of it completely. Is this what you are referring to?
 
Last edited:
By glare I guess you mean 'non-image-forming' light, in other words light that not only doesn't form any part of the image but pollutes the view to the extent that part of it or a lot of it or all of it is obscured.

Its hard to see how a large objective would help this at all. Isn't it more likely that the SLC simply has good blackening and baffling and that this could be done with any bino with any objective size? All credit to Swaro for achieving this but it makes you wonder why they didn't do it with the EL SV 8x32.

Lee

Lee
 
Gijs van Ginkel said:
Dennis, post 1,
Have you already looked at mountain goats, that is an excellent object to observe glare.
Gijs van Ginkel
Click to expand...

There are feral goats on the Isle of Islay off the south west coast of Scotland and they definitely glare at you no matter what size of objective lens you have.

Lee
 
Glare come in two types to me.

Veiling glare, light coming through trees in the line of vision, sort of a milky color cast over the entire image. (optical glass quality lacking/baffling of tubes?)

Distinct bright (line glare at the field stop), (edge of view) likely caused by improper baffling in the bino tube?.

Andy W.
 
black crow said:
I think you should send them to me so I can verify this.

I have an 11x56 porro that doesn't seem to have any glare issues. My Meopro 10x32 is not good imo. However I'm still working out what glare and flare and such actually mean and look like. When I look anywhere towards the direction of the sun my Meopro get a half circle of bright glare or reflected light at the bottom of the view. If I move my eye position I can reduce it but never get rid of it completely. Is this what you are referring to?
Click to expand...
Yes, that is glare. Without getting scientific I describe it as anytime light or reflections mess up your FOV. Your lack of glare in your 56mm correlates with mine.
 
Troubador said:
There are feral goats on the Isle of Islay off the south west coast of Scotland and they definitely glare at you no matter what size of objective lens you have.

Lee
Click to expand...
Maybe they are trying to get friendly with you.;)
 

Attachments

  • y324586829908954.jpg
    y324586829908954.jpg
    41.3 KB · Views: 37
Last edited:
Troubador said:
By glare I guess you mean 'non-image-forming' light, in other words light that not only doesn't form any part of the image but pollutes the view to the extent that part of it or a lot of it or all of it is obscured.

Its hard to see how a large objective would help this at all. Isn't it more likely that the SLC simply has good blackening and baffling and that this could be done with any bino with any objective size? All credit to Swaro for achieving this but it makes you wonder why they didn't do it with the EL SV 8x32.

Lee

Lee
Click to expand...
Henry, explains how a larger objective eliminates glare from his 8x56 FL post.

"The 7mm exit pupil also has a benefit in daylight. There is virtually complete freedom from “flare”. When bright reflections from the edge of the objective reach the eye they are out at the edge of a 7mm circle of light, so the flare tends to fall invisibly on the iris rather than entering the eye."
 
[email protected] said:
Henry, explains how a larger objective eliminates glare from his 8x56 FL post.

"The 7mm exit pupil also has a benefit in daylight. There is virtually complete freedom from “flare”. When bright reflections from the edge of the objective reach the eye they are out at the edge of a 7mm circle of light, so the flare tends to fall invisibly on the iris rather than entering the eye."
Click to expand...

Dennis, You've posted this exact same quote in multiple threads in the last week or so.
What do you hope to accomplish by repeating the same information over and over? In addition, though what Henry says is a reasonable explanation, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is absolute fact, or wholly explains the absence of glare.

If it was true, then I imagine one could, by de-centering their entrance pupils, find the edge of the circle and see the glare. No one has made such a claim yet.

Edit: It makes me wonder if that's what the 'molcet' technique accomplishes.. moving the eye off-axis, away from visible glare, or is it just tilting the binocular to prevent light from hitting the optics at a certain angle?

-Bill
 
Last edited:
Dennis is just pumping his latest love before selling it. I'll give the 8x56 SLC three months max in his stable. After that, his arms will grow tired of holding them up to his eyes in spite of him now claiming that a six ounce weight differential to an 8x50 is peanuts, after emphasising the importance of one or two ounce weight difference when talking about his favourite 8x30.

There's not been a completely glare-free binocular made yet, and the 8x56 SLC is not one either. It has very good glare suppression, but not perfect. It would be good if BF moderators would take a stand on this kind of behaviour. It is unfortunate that quotes such as Henry's above are hi-jacked to serve purposes other than genuine curiosity and will to learn. Knowing that there's a high likelihood of disingenuous quoting on this forum does things to one's willingness to contribute to otherwise interesting discussions.

Kimmo
 
kabsetz said:
It would be good if BF moderators would take a stand on this kind of behaviour. It is unfortunate that quotes such as Henry's above are hi-jacked to serve purposes other than genuine curiosity and will to learn. Knowing that there's a high likelihood of disingenuous quoting on this forum does things to one's willingness to contribute to otherwise interesting discussions.

Kimmo
Click to expand...

Agreed on all counts. I suppose the next place Henry's quote will be appearing is eBay. ;-)

Cheers,

Bill
 
kabsetz said:
Dennis is just pumping his latest love before selling it. I'll give the 8x56 SLC three months max in his stable. After that, his arms will grow tired of holding them up to his eyes in spite of him now claiming that a six ounce weight differential to an 8x50 is peanuts, after emphasising the importance of one or two ounce weight difference when talking about his favourite 8x30.

There's not been a completely glare-free binocular made yet, and the 8x56 SLC is not one either. It has very good glare suppression, but not perfect. It would be good if BF moderators would take a stand on this kind of behaviour. It is unfortunate that quotes such as Henry's above are hi-jacked to serve purposes other than genuine curiosity and will to learn. Knowing that there's a high likelihood of disingenuous quoting on this forum does things to one's willingness to contribute to otherwise interesting discussions.

Kimmo
Click to expand...

:t::t:
 
wdc said:
Dennis, You've posted this exact same quote in multiple threads in the last week or so.
What do you hope to accomplish by repeating the same information over and over? In addition, though what Henry says is a reasonable explanation, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is absolute fact, or wholly explains the absence of glare.

If it was true, then I imagine one could, by de-centering their entrance pupils, find the edge of the circle and see the glare. No one has made such a claim yet.

Edit: It makes me wonder if that's what the 'molcet' technique accomplishes.. moving the eye off-axis, away from visible glare, or is it just tilting the binocular to prevent light from hitting the optics at a certain angle?

-Bill
Click to expand...
I am using Henry's quote to answer Lee's question. He obviously didn't read it. It may not be an absolute fact but it is a possible explanation of why bigger aperture binoculars seem to have less glare than smaller ones. Good point on the Molcet Technique and how it could affect glare. I have noticed when you use it it does reduce glare.
 
Last edited:
kabsetz said:
Dennis is just pumping his latest love before selling it. I'll give the 8x56 SLC three months max in his stable. After that, his arms will grow tired of holding them up to his eyes in spite of him now claiming that a six ounce weight differential to an 8x50 is peanuts, after emphasising the importance of one or two ounce weight difference when talking about his favourite 8x30.

There's not been a completely glare-free binocular made yet, and the 8x56 SLC is not one either. It has very good glare suppression, but not perfect. It would be good if BF moderators would take a stand on this kind of behaviour. It is unfortunate that quotes such as Henry's above are hi-jacked to serve purposes other than genuine curiosity and will to learn. Knowing that there's a high likelihood of disingenuous quoting on this forum does things to one's willingness to contribute to otherwise interesting discussions.

Kimmo
Click to expand...
I am not pumping my 8x56 SLC in hopes of selling it for it a profit if that is what you mean. If I did sell it eventually it is never to somebody on Bird Forum. After using the 8x56 SLC it is the most glare free binocular I have used and I have not seen any glare in any viewing situations so far. We have a difference of opinion on what we are seeing which is subjective anyway. You can't tell me what I see nor can I tell you. Both of our opinions are valuable but they are just that. Subjective opinions. There is nothing inherently wrong with quoting somebody who explains technical points better than I can as long as there are quotation marks and I am crediting him with saying it. Many people use quotes on Bird Forum to help explain points and many writers use quotes in their articles. I am very sincere in using these quotes and I must say I give Henry a lot of credit for explaining things that we see through our binoculars in a mathematical and scientific way and he proves his methodology with tests and pictures. It is so much more meaningful than all the subjective opinions.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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

D
  • Locked
Glare Monsters!
21 22 23
Replies
445
Views
24K
Jos Stratford
Jos Stratford
D
The case for the 8x56.
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
Scott98
S
D
Zeiss SFL 8x40 This Year's Best New Birding Binocular!
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
AlphaFan
A
T
Which binoculars are less stressfull for the eyes?
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
5K
Maljunulo
M
kimmik
Swarovski glare/flare is deliberate by design? A comparison with Leica
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
8K
tenex
tenex

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top