• 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.

NEW Terra ED 32mm Under Armour Edition Binocular (1 Viewer)

It's a shame, that once again we have a potentially attractive bin for women and kids but that has a minimum interpupillary of 57.5 mm. I wish the Chinese would add this to their design considerations.

The non-Chinese bins with the Zeiss brand have minimum IPD of 52 or 54 mm, which makes them best among alphas.

--AP
 
Alexis Powell said:
It's a shame, that once again we have a potentially attractive bin for women and kids but that has a minimum interpupillary of 57.5 mm. I wish the Chinese would add this to their design considerations.

The non-Chinese bins with the Zeiss brand have minimum IPD of 52 or 54 mm, which makes them best among alphas.

--AP
Click to expand...

Thats a good point Alex, especially as Zeiss want this less expensive line to be a 'gateway' into the Zeiss range.

Lee
 
Mike,

I suppose it's possible that the FOV in m/1000m is wrong, but the ft/1000 yrds is just what you would get if you made the mistake of converting meters to yards before multiplying by 3.

In this case the subjective field spec is not much help in deciding whether the metric or English FOV is correct. It's close, but not quite right, for the metric FOV if the naive method of multiplying real field by magnification was used. It's also close, but a little too small, for the English FOV if the ISO method was used. If it's a true measurement that would require a little barrel distortion if the English FOV is correct or a very large amount of pincushion if the metric FOV is correct.

Henry
 
Last edited:
henry link said:
...I suppose it's possible that the FOV in m/1000m is wrong, but the ft/1000 yrds is just what you would get if you made the mistake of converting meters to yards before multiplying by 3...
Click to expand...

I've seen that mistake made in the past, especially with Leica binocs where the FOV in feet were apparently originally given in the non-standard and approximate measure of ft at 1100 yrds (rather than 1000 yards). My bet is that the meters specs are correct so your numbers of 8x32 - 405 ft/1000 yrds and 10x32 - 336 ft/1000 yrds are correct.

--AP
 
Mike ... When at the show, would you please ask if Zeiss will also be offering the new Terra 32mm by itself (and MAP pricing) in addition to the Under Armour package.
 
I noticed that Optics Planet has added the 32mm Under Armour Edition for the 8X and 10X to their site. The 8X is listed at $369.99 and the 10X at $399.99.

Eagle Optics has also listed both, but not as the Under Armour Edition. The 8X is $349.99 and the 10X is $399.99.

Neither site are showing them in stock.
 
Alexis Powell said:
I've seen that mistake made in the past, especially with Leica binocs where the FOV in feet were apparently originally given in the non-standard and approximate measure of ft at 1100 yrds (rather than 1000 yards). My bet is that the meters specs are correct so your numbers of 8x32 - 405 ft/1000 yrds and 10x32 - 336 ft/1000 yrds are correct.

--AP
Click to expand...

"The International System of Units has been adopted as the official system of weights and measures by all nations in the world except for Burma, Liberia and the United States" :-O

(according to Wikipedia)

Cheers,
Holger
 
BruceH said:
I noticed that Optics Planet has added the 32mm Under Armour Edition for the 8X and 10X to their site. The 8X is listed at $369.99 and the 10X at $399.99.

Eagle Optics has also listed both, but not as the Under Armour Edition. The 8X is $349.99 and the 10X is $399.99.

Neither site are showing them in stock.
Click to expand...

Eagle Optics FOV for them is the incorrect 442'@1000 yards and 367'@1000 yards. As noted in comments above it should be 405' an 336.'
 
Holger Merlitz said:
"The International System of Units has been adopted as the official system of weights and measures by all nations in the world except for Burma, Liberia and the United States" :-O

(according to Wikipedia)

Cheers,
Holger
Click to expand...

Ha! You're preaching to the choir. HOWEVER, I don't see how coming from a world that mostly uses the metric system is any excuse for not being able to handle the elementary math involved in doing the conversion properly. Heck, these days you can just type it into the Google search window, don't even have to do the math. How those presumably educated Germans at Leica can engineer the bins but can't handle simple maths is hard to fathom :)

--AP
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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

Troubador
Zeiss Binocular Design: A Personal Overview Part 2
2 3
Replies
47
Views
7K
eronald
E
G
GPO Passion ED Binocular Weekend Sale
Replies
0
Views
1K
gr8fuldoug
G
A
A few days with the Pentax ZD 8x43 ED
2
Replies
20
Views
4K
Swedpat
S
M
Choosing a new pair of 8x42 binoculars: Vortex Vipers vs. Zeiss Terra EDs
Replies
6
Views
4K
tundraswan
T
Troubador
A Review of Opticron Traveller 10x32 BGA ED
Replies
14
Views
9K
Troubador
Troubador

Users who are viewing this thread

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