-
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.
Steiner 8 x 56 Nighthunter/Shadow Quest (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Anansi
- Start date
Anansi,
I got one of those and like it a lot (I have mixed feelings about Steiner in general, they sure know how to make good binos, and some of them are very good, but some are really not convincing; the new Nighthunter belongs to the first group).
There are some recent threads on CloudyNights about the ShadowQuest / Nighthunter, see e.g.
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/631953-steiner-shadowquest-8x56-early-impressions/
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/...s-fujinon-16x70/?hl=+shadowquest#entry8829419
Overall, Steiner seems to have done a good job with the Nighthunter.
Canip
I got one of those and like it a lot (I have mixed feelings about Steiner in general, they sure know how to make good binos, and some of them are very good, but some are really not convincing; the new Nighthunter belongs to the first group).
There are some recent threads on CloudyNights about the ShadowQuest / Nighthunter, see e.g.
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/631953-steiner-shadowquest-8x56-early-impressions/
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/...s-fujinon-16x70/?hl=+shadowquest#entry8829419
Overall, Steiner seems to have done a good job with the Nighthunter.
Canip
Last edited:
Thanks for this information. Albinos also gave them (same binocular, only named Nighthunter instead of Shadow Quest), a very good review also.
From Question section, ShadowQuest 8x56 page, Steiner website (copying):
[Question:] Is the 8x56 shadowquest the same as the 8x56 nighthunter of recent vintage?
["Steiner Rep":] They are similar in design and function. They are both Porro prism binoculars with sport auto focus. The new Shadowquest have completely different glass that allows greater light transmission.
[Question:] Is the 8x56 shadowquest the same as the 8x56 nighthunter of recent vintage?
["Steiner Rep":] They are similar in design and function. They are both Porro prism binoculars with sport auto focus. The new Shadowquest have completely different glass that allows greater light transmission.
WJC
Well-known member
That is the very concept that pushed me over the edge into writing about optics and kept Steiner out of my shop for 15 years. There is no non-electronic AUTO-FOCUS binocular. AUTO-BOGUS is more to the point.:storm: :cat:
Bill
From what I wrote on the ShadowQuest 8x56 in another thread:
- - -
Yet reviews somehow back the claim. One in Steiner's (own) website comments: "...with Sports-Auto-Focus make it much easier to use This lets you pick up moving objects faster. Excellent focus free that I have been wanting for years...", and another review in a leading online retailer's site says: "I love the AutoFocus".
- - -
Somewhere I read that this model is sharp from 20 m to infinity when the focus is set (separately for left and right) for the user. Can anyone comment on this lesser distance figure from experience? It seems to me to be on the low side.
Bill, could you please expand a bit on "kept Steiner out of my shop", if you can do so without the stress of going into:storm:mode again? Sorry if it has been mentioned and I have forgotten that you were involved with sales as well as repair and restoring of binoculars.
- - -
Yet reviews somehow back the claim. One in Steiner's (own) website comments: "...with Sports-Auto-Focus make it much easier to use This lets you pick up moving objects faster. Excellent focus free that I have been wanting for years...", and another review in a leading online retailer's site says: "I love the AutoFocus".
- - -
Somewhere I read that this model is sharp from 20 m to infinity when the focus is set (separately for left and right) for the user. Can anyone comment on this lesser distance figure from experience? It seems to me to be on the low side.
Bill, could you please expand a bit on "kept Steiner out of my shop", if you can do so without the stress of going into:storm:mode again? Sorry if it has been mentioned and I have forgotten that you were involved with sales as well as repair and restoring of binoculars.
Last edited:
The way I see it, the Sports-Auto-Focus is just more hype individual eye focus, some baloney sales talk. I disregard most of the Co. sales pitch. Steiner can even make a good binocular.
From Steiner's Shadow Quest page: (Steiner Statement),
The Shadow Quest is not US exclusive per se, just the name. In Europe they are called Nighthunters. Otherwise, they are identical
From Steiner's Shadow Quest page: (Steiner Statement),
The Shadow Quest is not US exclusive per se, just the name. In Europe they are called Nighthunters. Otherwise, they are identical
That answer is by "Steiner Tech Support" who are presumably more correct on technical matters than "Steiner Rep". It is "2 months ago". The "Steiner Rep" answer is "a year ago". I had saved it some time back, but before copying it above checked and confirmed that it is still there on the website. I missed that particular later posting. Perhaps "recent vintage" was taken to mean an earlier version of NightHunter.
Last edited:
Fantastic transmission graph
https://www.allbinos.com/320-binoculars_review-Steiner_Nighthunter_8x56_(2016).html
For a 16 year old with large eye accommodation of many dioptres these would have a large apparent depth of field. This shrinks with age though and individual eye focus turns into a real pain for someone of middle age like me.
The large exit pupil diameter of 7mm is nice to have but on average the maximum pupil diameter of the dark adapted eye dips bellow 7mm from 30 years old, and generally around 5mm at 50
https://www.allbinos.com/320-binoculars_review-Steiner_Nighthunter_8x56_(2016).html
For a 16 year old with large eye accommodation of many dioptres these would have a large apparent depth of field. This shrinks with age though and individual eye focus turns into a real pain for someone of middle age like me.
The large exit pupil diameter of 7mm is nice to have but on average the maximum pupil diameter of the dark adapted eye dips bellow 7mm from 30 years old, and generally around 5mm at 50
Last edited:
IMO the claim of "Sports-Auto-Focus" is blatant BS and has probably done Steiner more harm than good.
The depth of field of a binocular is inversely proportional to the square of its magnification. i.e. under the same circumstances and distance of a focussed object, a 7x bin would have double the depth of field as a 10x bin.
This can be vsiualized if one considers point sources in the field in front of and behind the focussed object. These show as circles of confusion in the focused plane of the objective, which are then magnified by the eyepiece. For a given objective the magnification is inversely proportional to the focal length of the eyepiece and so the diameters of the circles of confusion increase linearly with magnification, and their apparent areas with the square of magnification.
Of course, DOF decreases at shorter focussed distances and there are other factors affecting the perceived DOF, such as light levels (eye pupil diameter) and the gearing of the focusser, in which a slow focusser will give the impression of greater DOF.
John
The depth of field of a binocular is inversely proportional to the square of its magnification. i.e. under the same circumstances and distance of a focussed object, a 7x bin would have double the depth of field as a 10x bin.
This can be vsiualized if one considers point sources in the field in front of and behind the focussed object. These show as circles of confusion in the focused plane of the objective, which are then magnified by the eyepiece. For a given objective the magnification is inversely proportional to the focal length of the eyepiece and so the diameters of the circles of confusion increase linearly with magnification, and their apparent areas with the square of magnification.
Of course, DOF decreases at shorter focussed distances and there are other factors affecting the perceived DOF, such as light levels (eye pupil diameter) and the gearing of the focusser, in which a slow focusser will give the impression of greater DOF.
John
WJC
Well-known member
Hey, I don't think I ever used that graphic, before. For today—I'm heading out the door in 5 minutes—but I will send you more, tomorrow. For now, let me quote Tringa45 ... "IMO the claim of 'Sports-Auto-Focus is blatant BS." :cat:
Bill
Thanks John. Yesterday in another thread I commented on this model and a basic fact about depth of field implied above, that it is pretty much the same in all 8xs of very good optical quality. The users' remarks I quote above here surprise me. I would guess that they have had experience with binoculars because if someone spends $900 on an unwieldy model it is not their first. Maybe they used only 10x before. Else it seems they were going by the ad/s!
Last edited:
WJC
Well-known member
Steiner was kept out of the shop because of dubious ad campaigns and the shuck-and-jive way they had of promoting their products. Only when Swen Harms of Pioneer Marketing (then the Steiner importer) promised to let me sell them MY way did I agree to take on the line.
Their primary market is mariners and Captain’s was a goto store for mariners, especially commercial fishermen, in the Northwest. And ANYTHING with a German-sounding name HAD to be the best ... right? But, popular or not, my gig was to TEACH ... not take advantage of all they didn’t know.
But although I contracted with the best optical companies in the world, Captain’s Nautical Supplies sold in 2014, changed its name in 2016 (now just Captain’s Supplies), and is supplanting everything in optics I fought so hard to establish. Thus, the waters have closed over my head and the mariners can now buy plenty of Asian Steiners, there.
Anyway, the attached 3 screenshots will tell the other part of the story you queried about. :cat:
Bill
PS Yes, I know some reviews back them. But, I also know 100% of the binocular "collimation tips" I have seen so far—and that's several—ARE WRONG! Some experts ... AREN'T!
Attachments
Last edited:
Thank you Bill!
From those pages of (I assume) your book I finally understand why those users I quoted wrote what they did. Also I had forgotten about dioptric accommodation in younger users, and was not aware that it was so much.
From the outset I did know that it is not possible for this model to have a greater distance back from infinity in focus than other 8xs of very good optical quality. But I thought maybe Steiner provided guidance, in the user manual, to more easily find a setting where an impressive range seems to be in focus (as I said, about this model, in a thread on the new Minox 8x56).
The history in your post above is so interesting, and in the book should be even more so of course.
Congratulations on the book. I had put off buying it but will do so soon.
From those pages of (I assume) your book I finally understand why those users I quoted wrote what they did. Also I had forgotten about dioptric accommodation in younger users, and was not aware that it was so much.
From the outset I did know that it is not possible for this model to have a greater distance back from infinity in focus than other 8xs of very good optical quality. But I thought maybe Steiner provided guidance, in the user manual, to more easily find a setting where an impressive range seems to be in focus (as I said, about this model, in a thread on the new Minox 8x56).
The history in your post above is so interesting, and in the book should be even more so of course.
Congratulations on the book. I had put off buying it but will do so soon.
Last edited:
Adhoc, Binastro,
In retrospect I think I approached this from the wrong direction in relating different circles of confusion to a specific distance instead of different distances to specific circles of confusion.
Holger Merlitz offers an explanation for the inverse square law with a diagram and the mathematical calculations on pages 28-30 of his book, "Hand-Ferngläser", but AFAIK it's not available in English. If and when I have inwardly digested this, I think it is beyond my capabilities to condense it into a forum post
.
John
In retrospect I think I approached this from the wrong direction in relating different circles of confusion to a specific distance instead of different distances to specific circles of confusion.
Holger Merlitz offers an explanation for the inverse square law with a diagram and the mathematical calculations on pages 28-30 of his book, "Hand-Ferngläser", but AFAIK it's not available in English. If and when I have inwardly digested this, I think it is beyond my capabilities to condense it into a forum post
.John
WJC
Well-known member
WJC
Well-known member
It was a joke? It's 196 pages. My latest LARGE book purchase was The Bully Pulpit. It's about TR and Taft. I like small books for the same reason I like quotes; you can get a lot into a small space. I feel I may have The Bully Pulpit read before I die. :cat:
Last edited:
Similar threads
