• 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.

Rolling ball effect - 8x , 8.5x and 10x (1 Viewer)

A

AlbertoJ

Well-known member
Hello, I´ve been using at the exit of several hunting and optical stores these binoculars:
-Zeiss SF 8x42 and 10x42.
-Swarovski SV 8x32, 8.5x42 and 10x42.

I noticed rolling ball effect was much more pronounced in 8x and 8.5x than 10x, not matter if it was zeiss or Swarovski, 32 or 42 mm.
I could live with 10x rolling ball effect, but the 8x, 8.5x is annoying for me.

Is it posible to make a 8x binocular with the 10x rolling ball effect?
 
I have a Nikon EDG-II 8X32 and I do not notice rolling ball with it. I thought I saw it for about one second the very first time I used, but then, never again. I do see it strongly in the Swaro 8.5X42 EL SV and slightly in my Zeiss SF 8X42.

I do not recall reading much, if anything of rolling ball in the Nikon EDG-II 8X42 or the Nikon SE 8X32 Porro. The SE line and EDG line use lens flatteners.
 
AlbertoJ said:
Hello, I´ve been using at the exit of several hunting and optical stores these binoculars:
-Zeiss SF 8x42 and 10x42.
-Swarovski SV 8x32, 8.5x42 and 10x42.

I noticed rolling ball effect was much more pronounced in 8x and 8.5x than 10x, not matter if it was zeiss or Swarovski, 32 or 42 mm.
I could live with 10x rolling ball effect, but the 8x, 8.5x is annoying for me.

Is it posible to make a 8x binocular with the 10x rolling ball effect?
Click to expand...

Yes it is. When the optics of a bino are calculated, one of the important parameters in designing the amount of rolling ball effect is the distortion curve over the width of the fov. In the 10x SF, Zeiss seems to have worked this out better than in the 8x. Of course, whatever you do will have an effect on other aspects of the image.
Maybe you try once the new Nikon Monarch HG 8x42 - relatively flat field of view with (for my eyes) almost no rolling ball effect.

Not me, but Holger Merlitz is really the expert on this subject, see
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/newk/newk.html

Canip
 
It's the distortion coefficient, profile, and edge parameters in concert with the fov, and a myriad other lesser parameters, along with importantly, the distortion profile characteristics of your eyes, and your physiological and neural processing and interpretation quirks. If your normal bin you use is a high pincushion distortion design (ie. 'circle of condition or greater), then the RB effects you are noticing are likely to be exaggerated. If you see the RB phenomena, and don't like it, or feel that you will not be able to adjust and live with it under your normal usage conditions, then you would seem to fall in the less than 5~20% category of those who are affected. Follow the above link to Holger Merlitz's site for plenty of great factual information, and there's even a visual test you can do to determine the amount of barrel distortion in your vision.

No option then but to look at less distorting designs (ie. have more pincushion). Full size Alpha models to try in an 8x would be the Nikon EDG II 8x42, Leica NoctiVid 8x42, Zeiss HT 8x42, or Swarovski SLC HD 8x42. All excellent. One of those is sure to tickle your fancy and meet your needs. :t:


Chosun :gh:
 
After trying and comparing all alpha binoculars, and several times each one, these are only 3 ones (6 ones) able to upgrade my Zeiss FL 7x42:
-Swarovski SV 8x32, 8.5x42.
-Zeiss SF 8x32, 8x42.
-Leica Noctivid 8x32, 8x42.

I like too Ultravid HD+ , but I preffer Noctivid.

If Swarovski and Zeiss go on with such huge rolling ball effect in their 8x, 8.5x binoculars, instead changing it like their 10x ones, my next binocular choice will be reduced to Noctivid 8x32 or 8x42.
That some people were unable to see rolling ball, like happens with CA, or spherical aberration, it doesn't mean it isn't an important thing to correct and minimize.
And it's possible a distortion-rolling ball balance: 10x SV, SF.
 
AlbertoJ said:
After trying and comparing all alpha binoculars, and several times each one, these are only 3 ones (6 ones) able to upgrade my Zeiss FL 7x42:
-Swarovski SV 8x32, 8.5x42.
-Zeiss SF 8x32, 8x42.
-Leica Noctivid 8x32, 8x42.
Click to expand...

Neither a Zeiss SF 8x32 nor a Leica Noctivid 8x32 have been announced yet, and at least with the Leica I think it may well take quite some time. After all, they only introduced the 8x42/10x42 last year. Zeiss should be faster, but once again: No 8x32 has been announced yet. However, given that their current model, the FL 8x32, sort of "disappeared" from their website a couple of times already, I think the writing is on the wall they'll do something at some stage.

The Swarovisions - no comment. I'm not going to buy one, for a variety of reasons. However, one binocular that's missing from your list, is the Zeiss HT 8x42. That's IMO an interesting binocular, especially if you prefer a traditional design, i.e. one that doesn't have a flat field. I'm leaning more and more to the HT, even though I don't like the weight much. But there won't be an 8x32 HT with AK prisms, I think. I also find the Swarovski SLC quite interesting, even though I'm not convinced the focuser is to my liking.

The Nikon Monarch HG may well be an alternative as well, however, it's so far an essentially unknown entity. Nobody knows for sure how it will perform in the field, and, importantly, how well it will stand up to hard use in the field.

Hermann
 
Last edited:
Yes, I know Zeiss and Leica haven't any 32 nor 50 mm SF, Noctivid. But they should make them if they want compete with Swarovski.
It happened the same when some people said Ultravid was the final Leica binocular to face SV and SF. Then, Noctivid came in.

I'll replace my current binocular in a future, when all cards will be on the table.
My doubt is 32 or 42 mm, but I know others are between 42 and 50 mm.

Zeiss HT has similar optic as FL, 3% more light transmission, so I don't see any true upgrade.
Ídem with SLC, and even with my favourite of these 3, Ultravid HD+.
 
Last edited:
james holdsworth said:
Actually try the HT before dismissing it...
Click to expand...

Hi James, I've tried it against Swarovision and Zeiss SF in 2 different days and stores.
I liked more SV and SF than HT, even in center of field. 10x.
Other day, I tried, in 2 different days and stores, 8x42 HT against my Zeiss FL. Similar optics.
 
The optics and ergonomics as well as the build quality of the HT is an clear improvement over the FL.

Optically most notably in low light conditions.

The HT as well as the SV have much better contrast and sharpness in low light IMO. The FL is bright but seems washed out and lacks as good of sharpness.

I owned all three models at the same time and extensively tested them.

I would place the current SLC over the FL also. At least in 10x.
 
AlbertoJ said:
Hi James, I've tried it against Swarovision and Zeiss SF in 2 different days and stores.
I liked more SV and SF than HT, even in center of field. 10x.
Other day, I tried, in 2 different days and stores, 8x42 HT against my Zeiss FL. Similar optics.
Click to expand...

Similar optics but not the same. Directly comparing HT8x42 with FL8x42 HT has in my opinion somewhat better colours, is sharper and more contrasty and certainly performs better than FL in dull conditions. This is not to say FL is not a very fine instrument but HT is for me a definite step upwards and the handling is greatly improved compared with FL. In fact I would say the handling improvement is as important as the optical.

Lee
 
Yes, if I'd have to choose now between these binoculars, I'd buy HT or Ultravid HD+, instead FL. But for me it isn't an improvement enough to pay off the change.

My choice: Swarovski EL, Zeiss SF and Leica Noctivid. But I can't stand pronounced rolling ball effect, so for the moment, Noctivid.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 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

K
Confused: Swarovski, Zeiss, 8x, 10x
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
8K
Dutchbirder64
D
N
SF 42 & 32 Brief Comparisons
Replies
8
Views
2K
Scott98
S
J
My First Experience Purchasing Birding Binoculars
Replies
11
Views
2K
tenex
tenex
D
A Zeiss Conquest HD on steroids.
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
12K
ArchStanton
A
mgp13
Zeiss SFL 8x40 review from Australia
Replies
7
Views
3K
GrampaTom
G

Users who are viewing this thread

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