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.

Binoculars Poll - What format do you prefer ( 8x32, 10x50 etc. )

Register to see Poll

There is a poll attached to this thread. You must be a fully registered member and active member of the community to be able to view or vote in this poll.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 17:16   #51
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conndomat View Post
"As discussed elsewhere, binoculars for the dusk should have at least 5mm exit pupils, and night glasses should have exit pupils of more than 6mm."
http://www.eyry.eu/miltec/documents/fernglaspraxis.pdf

What is the exit pupil of a 10x42?

Andreas
The 10x42 has an exit pupil of 4.2mm. Even though the 8x42 has a bigger exit pupil of 5.25mm you will see more under low light with a 10x42.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 17:26   #52
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
I know their sales numbers are interesting aren't they. The SLC 15x56 is popular! For astronomy and tripod use in observation probably.
Yes, very surprising and interesting!

Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 17:56   #53
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
The 10x42 has an exit pupil of 4.2mm. Even though the 8x42 has a bigger exit pupil of 5.25mm you will see more under low light with a 10x42.
That would contradict the contribution of Holger Merlitz and my observations are also clearly 8x42.

Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 18:20   #54
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conndomat View Post
Where is the 8x32?

I think the American colleagues use a different selection than the Europeans, the 15x56 is pretty far behind, only the 12x50 is sold even less.

Andreas
In the UK one of our most prominent dealers reports that his sales of EL32 far outstrip EL42.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 18:29   #55
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
In the UK one of our most prominent dealers reports that his sales of EL32 far outstrip EL42.

Lee
Hi Lee,

I have also seen such a list before, but no longer knows where, there was the 8x32 also at the top and the 12x50 at the bottom, we Europeans just do not have so big countries ...

Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 19:00   #56
typo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 3,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conndomat View Post
That would contradict the contribution of Holger Merlitz and my observations are also clearly 8x42.

Andreas
Many here often comment on perceived brightness, but Leinhos and Köhler (Zeiss) actually studied apparent acuity which gave rise to the Twilight factor. While they didn't didn't have eithr a 8x42 or a 10x42, it seems that over a specific range of twilight light levels the 10x42 would have a slight advantage on level of detail. Berek (Leitz) on the other hand used threshold of detection for his study which showed the 8x42 would have a slight advantage on visibility at a similar light level. I've have seen a situations, usually by moonlight where both would appear to be true. A 10x56 beats both an 8x42 and 10x42 by some margin by both criteria as you might expect.

One thing I have noticed that wasn't investigated in either of those studies is that both the thresholds for detail and detection appear shift considerably when the target is alive and kicking! Unfortunately the local wildlife is rarely sufficiently obliging for a more detailed comparison, but for my eyes at least a 10x56 would take some beating for a bit of badger watching.

David
typo is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 19:14   #57
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 87
Hello David,

I see it in celestial observations, the background is noticeably darker in the 10x42.

Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 19:29   #58
Swissboy
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
Swissboy's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sempach, Switzerland
Posts: 3,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
......….Also, the survey doesn't support multiple inputs, at least on my screen.

Ed
Yes, it might become more representative if more than one option could be entered.
__________________
Robert
--PS: That's a Sooty Falcon on the avatar, photo taken near Sharm el Sheik, Egypt. My highest priority raptor at the time.
What's your species on the avatar? I often have no clue
!
Swissboy is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 22:35   #59
Patudo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: London
Posts: 361
I'm going to have to put my hand up and admit I prefer different formats for different jobs.

8x30/32 - probably the size I use the most (8x32 FL, various 8x30 porros). Love their light weight, compactness and excellent field of view. Probably all that's really needed for 80% or more of the birding most birders do. Good ones have great optical quality.

8x40/42 - preferred where 8x magnification is used in more demanding situations (poorer light, longer distance, long duration). 8.5x mag works really well in these situations and the 8.5x42 Swarovski is probably the best all rounder optically I've found. It's probably not a coincidence that the 8.5x44 Audubon is/was also highly regarded.

10x40/42 - where more magnification (10x) is needed/desired in a not too big binocular.

10x50 - for demanding (long distance and long duration) observation where the 5mm exit pupil and optical performance are more important than weight and bulk.
Patudo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 22:39   #60
IAN JAMES THOMPSON
Registered User
 
IAN JAMES THOMPSON's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tyne and Wear
Posts: 766
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Bright View Post
Another fun poll, this time which binocular format do you prefer.
With a limited number of options there will be a few omissions, but if you have a format not in the poll, please share it in the thread below.
I can’t see the poll.
Ian.
IAN JAMES THOMPSON is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 23:55   #61
Hauksen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Germany
Posts: 816
Hi Chosun,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chosun Juan View Post
Jeez, with exactly 100 votes even I The breakdown of the majority (~7/8ths overall) of bin formats so far:-
Thanks for the breakdown!

I tried to reformat the table to be a bit easier to read ... hoping Birdforum will preserve the formatting and use a monospace font if I use the customary "code" tag ... so this is going to be a bit experimental:

Code:
     30 32 40.42.43
7×    .  1  .  .  . 7x32
7×    .  .  .  .  . 7x42
8×    5  .  .  .  . 8x30
8×    . 30  .  .  . 8x32
8×    .  .  1  .  . 8x40
8×    .  .  . 16  . 8x42
8×    .  .  .  .  1 8x43
8.5x  .  .  .  7  . 8.5x42
10x.  .  4  .  .  . 10x32
10×   .  .  1  .  . 10x40
10×   .  .  . 14  . 10x42
Regards,

Henning
__________________
3D Printable Objects for Bird Watching: https://www.thingiverse.com/groups/bird-watching/things
Hauksen is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 22nd May 2019, 23:57   #62
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
BF Supporter 2019
 
Kevin Conville's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: State of Chaos
Posts: 2,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patudo View Post
I'm going to have to put my hand up and admit I prefer different formats for different jobs.
You can put your hand back down, everybody does
__________________
my bird pics

Scott's Miracle Grow KILLING Birds, for Years!
read this: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=226714
Kevin Conville is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 00:30   #63
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by typo View Post
Many here often comment on perceived brightness, but Leinhos and Köhler (Zeiss) actually studied apparent acuity which gave rise to the Twilight factor. While they didn't didn't have eithr a 8x42 or a 10x42, it seems that over a specific range of twilight light levels the 10x42 would have a slight advantage on level of detail. Berek (Leitz) on the other hand used threshold of detection for his study which showed the 8x42 would have a slight advantage on visibility at a similar light level. I've have seen a situations, usually by moonlight where both would appear to be true. A 10x56 beats both an 8x42 and 10x42 by some margin by both criteria as you might expect.

One thing I have noticed that wasn't investigated in either of those studies is that both the thresholds for detail and detection appear shift considerably when the target is alive and kicking! Unfortunately the local wildlife is rarely sufficiently obliging for a more detailed comparison, but for my eyes at least a 10x56 would take some beating for a bit of badger watching.

David
Try a 12x50.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 00:32   #64
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conndomat View Post
Hello David,

I see it in celestial observations, the background is noticeably darker in the 10x42.

Andreas
My 10x40 Habicht porro kills my 8.5x42 SV roof in low light. Part of it is probably the high transmission of the Habicht though.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 00:40   #65
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
 
Chosun Juan's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central West NSW, Australia
Posts: 5,633
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hauksen View Post
Hi Chosun,

Thanks for the breakdown!

I tried to reformat the table to be a bit easier to read ... hoping Birdforum will preserve the formatting and use a monospace font if I use the customary "code" tag ... so this is going to be a bit experimental:

Code:
     30 32 40.42.43
7×    .  1  .  .  . 7x32
7×    .  .  .  .  . 7x42
8×    5  .  .  .  . 8x30
8×    . 30  .  .  . 8x32
8×    .  .  1  .  . 8x40
8×    .  .  . 16  . 8x42
8×    .  .  .  .  1 8x43
8.5x  .  .  .  7  . 8.5x42
10x.  .  4  .  .  . 10x32
10×   .  .  1  .  . 10x40
10×   .  .  . 14  . 10x42
Regards,

Henning
Hi Henning - hey that's neat - thanks !

One day I'll upgrade from my dodgy Vista system ! lol




Chosun
Chosun Juan is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 01:25   #66
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,363
I really don't know why only 116 have voted in this poll. I bet there are WAY more visitors to this forum.

I'm actually kind of surprised that 8X32 is very close to double the 8X42 popularity. I AM glad there are 12 of us 7X42 users!
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 01:34   #67
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,755
"I'm actually kind of surprised that 8X32 is very close to double the 8X42 popularity." Not me.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 03:21   #68
mwhogue
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Friendswood
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Try a 12x50.
Hope I'm on the right TF factor page here, never did understand arithmetic. Been casually comparing terrestrial views between Zeiss 8x56 Night Owl with 15x56 Vortex Kaibab after dark on tripods for the last two nights.

Night Owl EP 7.0, TF 21.2
Kaibab EP 3.7, TF 28.9

Kaibab clearly shows more/sharper detail and easier to id targets when used on tripods after dark.

Mike
mwhogue is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 04:19   #69
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conndomat View Post
Hi Dennis,

So would a 15x30 glass (21.2) be better for the dark than your 10x42?

The power of a glass at night, as in the daytime, is a matter of object size. A higher magnification may even be counterproductive in perception. Finally, the twilight number standing alone is a bad advice.
The exit pupil should definitely be considered as a priority.

Andreas
"So would a 15x30 glass (21.2) be better for the dark than your 10x42?"

The twilight factor works on normal format binoculars. I have never heard of a 15x30 and I don't think anybody would want one. You can come up with a bunch of weird formats to try and discount the twilight factor but in most circumstances it has a lot of relevance. Remember the twilight factor is not how BRIGHT the binocular is but how much DETAIL you can see in low light.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 04:26   #70
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
 
Chosun Juan's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central West NSW, Australia
Posts: 5,633
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
I really don't know why only 116 have voted in this poll. I bet there are WAY more visitors to this forum.

I'm actually kind of surprised that 8X32 is very close to double the 8X42 popularity. I AM glad there are 12 of us 7X42 users!
Chuck, the poll is only able to be completed and/or viewed by signed in BF members.

I think as far as 8×32 vs 8×42 popularity goes it's fair enough to include the lone 8×40, what are probably all Swaro 8.5×42's and of course my lone ambitious 8×43 in the '8×42' grouping. Also, it is probably fair NOT to include the 8×30's in with the 8×32's as they tend to be different beasts. Although no doubt someone will feel riled enough to argue the point ! :)

Currently with 116 total votes those counts sit at:
8×32 = 35
'8×42' = 29

So 8×32's about ~20% more at this stage.

Like you I find this a bit surprising, especially considering the market data that various industry peeps here have generously provided. Then again as has been mentioned, perhaps there are those with both (or more - this seems to be THE gathering place for bino nutters ! :) who voted for their 8×32 first fully expecting to vote for another selection down the list, only to then find that they were locked out from doing so. If my vague recollection of statistics has any merit, this effect should reduce over time provided people RTFM ! first It may be a case of damn lies and statistics though ! :)

Honestly, I'm just glad that the resident Professor of Statistics hasn't crucified my number crunching thus far ! Phew ! lol




Chosun

Last edited by Chosun Juan : Thursday 23rd May 2019 at 07:12. Reason: Bl**dy spell checker !
Chosun Juan is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 05:00   #71
eronald
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Paris
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Edmund
We are talking about different things here. You mentioned a list of folks that you suspect are not represented in the poll (marine, hunting, travel and safari, law enforcement and military) and I have been trying to say that actually Birdforum members are a diverse bunch of folks including some in the categories you mention, and in other categories too. Thats all.

As for the poll results so far, these results are a reflection not only of what format of binos folks own/prefer, but also a reflection of which members feel motivated enough to vote.

Lee
Lee,

Apologies, of course you know your membership well.

BTW, since I bought binoculars, I have found them extremely useful, but the sheer weight and bulk mostly means they get left at home. For someone on foot with a sketchpad, transporting a 7x42 is not difficult, but it is a conscious decision. I can understand why so many people are downsizing to 8x32, and am thinking of buying a Nikon Micron.

Edmund
eronald is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 05:19   #72
typo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 3,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Try a 12x50.
I did.
https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=333798
In a moonlight comparison I spotted something moving in the shadow of a hedge about 150 yards away with an 8x42. With the Meopta 12x50 I could clearly see it was a fox (improved apparent acuity?) but with the 10x50 I could clearly see the rat it was hunting (threshold of detection?).

I would suppose those Zeiss and Leitz test subjects were rather younger than I am, but has Holger tried to illustrate the potential changes with age in his paperI, but I suspect "live and kicking" might shift some of the thresholds.


David

Last edited by typo : Thursday 23rd May 2019 at 05:24.
typo is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 06:28   #73
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by eronald View Post
Lee,

Apologies, of course you know your membership well.

BTW, since I bought binoculars, I have found them extremely useful, but the sheer weight and bulk mostly means they get left at home. For someone on foot with a sketchpad, transporting a 7x42 is not difficult, but it is a conscious decision. I can understand why so many people are downsizing to 8x32, and am thinking of buying a Nikon Micron.

Edmund
I can also imagine there are parts of Paris where it would be unwise to be seen openly carrying an expensive-looking pair of binoculars. Something more discrete that can be tucked away inside your jacket might be better.

I have fond memories of exploring Montmarte many years ago.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 07:10   #74
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by typo View Post
I did.
https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=333798
In a moonlight comparison I spotted something moving in the shadow of a hedge about 150 yards away with an 8x42. With the Meopta 12x50 I could clearly see it was a fox (improved apparent acuity?) but with the 10x50 I could clearly see the rat it was hunting (threshold of detection?).

I would suppose those Zeiss and Leitz test subjects were rather younger than I am, but has Holger tried to illustrate the potential changes with age in his paperI, but I suspect "live and kicking" might shift some of the thresholds.


David
Also, the binocular coatings make a huge difference in low light performance and of course transmission. If that 10x50 was a Swarovski SV the coatings might have helped you see the rat when you couldn't with the Meopta.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd May 2019, 07:15   #75
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
 
Chosun Juan's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central West NSW, Australia
Posts: 5,633
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by eronald View Post
Lee,

Apologies, of course you know your membership well.

BTW, since I bought binoculars, I have found them extremely useful, but the sheer weight and bulk mostly means they get left at home. For someone on foot with a sketchpad, transporting a 7x42 is not difficult, but it is a conscious decision. I can understand why so many people are downsizing to 8x32, and am thinking of buying a Nikon Micron.

Edmund
Edmund - have you tried the Nikon MHG 8×42 .... ??
It's 42mm performance in virtually a 32mm package !
Very nice



Chosun
Chosun Juan is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 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
Is 8x32 or 8x42 the best Birding format? [email protected] Binoculars 205 Thursday 19th February 2015 18:57
Shallow depth of field in the 8x32 format lulubelle Binoculars 49 Tuesday 26th April 2011 18:47
Which 8x32 Alpha's do you prefer? [email protected] Others 28 Sunday 28th December 2008 04:20
What prefer? Burris, Leupold, Bushnell (all 8x32) Vadimka Binoculars 15 Tuesday 27th February 2007 11:41
Poll:which binocular do you prefer? [email protected] Binoculars 56 Wednesday 24th August 2005 13:07

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.36376905 seconds with 41 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:40.