Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New Swarovski 8 to 12x zoom binoculars?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 09:14   #51
Holger Merlitz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Xiamen
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
Not an expert, but is this problem not equally applicable in camera optics?
Canon offers 24-720mm equivalent zoom in pocket format, wide angle to about 15x, Nikon even more, 24-2000mm equivalent in a rather larger package. The wide to long angular equivalents go from 70* down to about 1* for the Nikon. So there seem to be good technical solutions available, even if the manufacturers have not focused on the scope market.
Possibly the camera lenses are stuffed with so many pieces of glass to achieve their zoom performance that light transmission is poor, something which an electronic sensor can adjust for, whereas the human eye cannot.
Those cameras usually have rather tiny sensor-areas, so - in some sense - a small apparent field of view ...

Cheers,
Holger
Holger Merlitz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 09:16   #52
Holger Merlitz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Xiamen
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gijs van Ginkel View Post
Bob and Dennis, post 48 and 49,
I would not be suprised if somebody with evil intentions would have inserted a virus in your questionaire......
Gijs van Ginkel
Holger Merlitz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 09:19   #53
iveljay
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wiltshire, England
Posts: 881
I wanted to go back and read the thing again to get the exact wording, but probably correctly it points out that I have already completed it and bounces me.
iveljay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 13:57   #54
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gijs van Ginkel View Post
Bob and Dennis, post 48 and 49,
I would not be suprised if somebody with evil intentions would have inserted a virus in your questionaire......
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs,

It looked legitimate.

The questions were specific and the binoculars to be compared were described properly. Based on my memory, FWIW most of them were 10 x 42 binoculars with differing weights given which were to be compared with Zoom binoculars of 8x-12x by 42 of differing weights. (Note: I am sure I have oversimplified the questions somewhat. I think FOV was also mentioned but I could be wrong.) You were asked to pick the one you would choose. In my case I always went with the lowest weight 10x42 over the others.

The last question asked you to give your thoughts on why you made your choices.

Bob

Last edited by ceasar : Tuesday 19th April 2016 at 14:05.
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 15:41   #55
[email protected]
Forum Member

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gijs van Ginkel View Post
Bob and Dennis, post 48 and 49,
I would not be suprised if somebody with evil intentions would have inserted a virus in your questionaire......
Gijs van Ginkel
An employee of Zeiss perhaps?
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 16:10   #56
iveljay
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wiltshire, England
Posts: 881
Bob, I think you are right and I gave similar answers. My problem is that my usual 10x is the Nikon 10x35 EII which is about half the weight of their various options from memory. I can't remember anything about field of view, but it was early in the morning!
iveljay is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 19:24   #57
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 734
I wouldn't buy a zoom binocular, even if made by Swarovski.

A classic solution looking for a problem.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Intellectual curiosity is as rare as common sense.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 19:31   #58
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,613
A top class zoom binocular would make a splendid collectors item, so I keep hoping.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th April 2016, 20:32   #59
DRodrigues
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Coimbra
Posts: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
I wouldn't buy a zoom binocular, ...
I would buy a zoom binocular if it would have large AFOVs...
If nowadays there are large AFOV zooms on Spotting Scopes, why not on binoculars?...
__________________
David
_____________________

http://www.pt-ducks.com
DRodrigues is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 20th April 2016, 16:10   #60
gunut
Registered Offender
 
gunut's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Sussex Wisconsin
Posts: 454
I bought one about 55 years ago....think it was a big brand name also...."Mattel"....I think It lasted a week or so....warranty sucked...

Almost bought one back in the 90s...a Pentax...but settled on the fixed power Pentax 16x24 reverse porro....almost as useless but still works .. ..
gunut is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 20th April 2016, 16:53   #61
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 8,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRodrigues View Post
I would buy a zoom binocular if it would have large AFOVs...
If nowadays there are large AFOV zooms on Spotting Scopes, why not on binoculars?...
Hi David

Have you seen the size of the eyepieces on scopes?
They can be 300 grams or more in weight.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 20th April 2016, 16:59   #62
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,613
Lee, post 61,
That helps to bring the balance of the binocular towards the eyepiece, excellent solution of the balance problem.
Gijs
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 20th April 2016, 17:04   #63
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 8,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gijs van Ginkel View Post
Lee, post 61,
That helps to bring the balance of the binocular towards the eyepiece, excellent solution of the balance problem.
Gijs
Gijs
You could be right but I suspect that the air in Utrecht, which is a giddy and vertigo-inducing 5 metres above sea level has affected your judgement due to oxygen deprivation since, like most Dutch people, you spend most of your time below sea level.

However, it would be fun trying out 8 - 30x zoom bins, but possibly not much fun with it hanging around your neck for 6-8 hours.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 29th April 2016, 21:43   #64
DRodrigues
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Coimbra
Posts: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Hi David

Have you seen the size of the eyepieces on scopes?
They can be 300 grams or more in weight.

Lee
For binos 1.5x zoom might be good enough, so reducing weight and size. After your post, I looked for the Duovid details and, if I had no binocular, the 10-15x version would be my purchase... I remember that I looked some years ago for the details of the 8-12x version and found them not good in terms of FOV. Don't know if specs improved over the years...
If Swaro will produce a sort of duovid with more >5 AFOV, a bit better eye-relief and lower weight, it might be a winner...
__________________
David
_____________________

http://www.pt-ducks.com
DRodrigues is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 30th April 2016, 17:30   #65
Omid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by soloflyfisher View Post
I'm not a big game hunter, but it seems to me that range finding binoculars would be much more useful than a range finding rifle scope. I assume the binoculars are the tool you'd use to locate your quarry and judge its distance. The scope is a tool for aiming the gun. I don't think you'd ever scan for game with your rifle scope. And by the time you're ready to shoot, I think you'd want to have already assessed distance and wouldn't want anything like distance data to distract you from the actual process of aiming and shooting. At least that's what I'd assume.
Very well said. I am a hunter and I fully agree with your comments. Now, this is a bid watching forum so lets go back to the topic of zoom binoculars. Zoom is a very useful feature in binoculars but it is very hard to provide for several technical reasons. On the other hand, zoom is not the most desirable feature in a rifle scope (which is an "aiming device" not an observation device) but it has been included in rifle-scopes and it has been pushed to insane extremes (Swarovski just introduced their 8X zoom-ratio scopes in IWA this March).

The reason riflescopes have zoom is because it is easy to do: Rifle scopes (mostly) use lens based erector systems. This makes it very easy to provide zoom: the erector lenses are moved back and forth in a coordinated way and this changes magnification.

There are two main reasons that making zoom binoculars is very difficult:

a) Binoculars use prism erectors and the only way to make zoom is to make some of the eyepiece lens elements movable. This doesn't provide much zoom (1.5X to 2X at best) and correcting optical aberrations are also difficult.

b) The second, and perhaps more challenging, problem is that both barrels should provide exactly the same magnification during zoom and this is not easy to achieve. Even a very small magnification mismatch (or alignment mismatch) can cause eyestrain and headache.

That's why Leica made their Duovid binoculars 8+12X42 not 8-12X42. I have a pair and they are great. You can see me wearing them on my website:

www.omidjahromi.com

Cheers,
-Omid
Omid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 30th April 2016, 19:33   #66
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,205
What about switchable 2x barlows within the binocular, giving 8x and 16x?
Is this difficult?
Maybe for waterproof retention.

There are of course large binocular rotating turret 2 and 3 eyepiece systems.
Also some old small ones.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 1st May 2016, 03:37   #67
Holger Merlitz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Xiamen
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binastro View Post
What about switchable 2x barlows within the binocular, giving 8x and 16x?
Is this difficult?
Maybe for waterproof retention.

There are of course large binocular rotating turret 2 and 3 eyepiece systems.
Also some old small ones.
Only with Porros there would be sufficient space to swing a lens in- and out of the light path.

In principle, an objective zoom would be possible, too, using a floating group of lens elements. It could be operated via a single central wheel just like the focuser. However, these lenses would be quite heavy, and there has to be enough space for them to float, plus space for the focusing lens, so I fear that the central objective zoom would be impracticable because it would lead to fairly long and heavy binoculars.

Cheers,
Holger
Holger Merlitz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 1st May 2016, 14:41   #68
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,205
Thanks Holger.

Then Porros it is.
Fine for me.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd May 2016, 01:09   #69
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,196
Would it not be lighter and cheaper to fit a single zoom lens with a binoviewer?
Ideally the same optics could serve both the camera as well as the (monolens) binocular markets.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Swarovski Ats 80 20-60 zoom Swarovski DCA Camera jason stannage Digiscoping cameras 3 Tuesday 3rd February 2015 16:52

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.23984098 seconds with 31 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:08.