OK, what is this I see in the Bushnell Legend M's? (1 Viewer)

Here's a post from Sancho in the Bushnell forum, that kind of echoes what I am seeing from my Legend M's, both 8x & 10x:

Sancho said:

I bought a pair of Legend M 10x42, arrived yesterday, from an English seller. Paid a lot more than the US discounted prices. But I am stunned by how much the 'mid-range' (i.e. sub 350-euro) binos now perform. Compared them to my beloved Swaro WGA 10x40, and they are a tad darker in evening light, but handle glare better. Comfy in my hands, love the diopter, massive 'sweet spot' and wide FOV for a 10x. Strongly recommended.

Click to expand...

Recently I found the 10x42 on sale and bought them too, after liking the 8x42 Legend M so much, myself. It took me a little longer to warm up to them (smaller oculars than the 8x, 10x shake in a long barrel), but I am finding the same good things in the 10 that I did in the 8, especially something that I don't know what you would call it, but it makes them different from my other bins under certain lighting conditions.

Objects that reflect sunlight like metal objects (diamondplate silver trailer trim, new silver locks on a drug dealer's house and garage) and sunlit dry leaved trees (still with their leaves on after Autumn) just reflect light much brighter in the Legend M's, that they really stand out in the view compared to my others. I don't have any Swaros or the like, but I do have a Meopta B1 10x32 that gives an excellent view, and a Tract Toric 10x42 that does too, but I don't think they have that same standout reflective quality I see in the Bushnell (though the Meopta comes close, I believe). And, a couple of other 10's, including an Nikon EII 10x35 that I added not long ago to the herd (excuse me, I meant flock)!

I imagine there are other viewing situations that you can also see differences with the Bush's, but I haven't used them much either to notice yet. Is this all primarily due to the excellent up to date coatings (according to Albinos), I wonder, or what? I find it hard to believe, that these recently deep discounted bins show this remarkable difference, and it leaves me wondering.

So, what do you think this is, you optic gurus? I am certainly not a scientificly minded person, though I wish I were, and I try to understand some things on a more detailed level related to my interests. But my mind works on a different frequency it seems, more artistic than analytical, and can use the help here if you have the time. I'm probably not alone here, either! (For all you guys saying right about now, huh?!).

OK, slay me, but keep it kind, and keep it simple (as possible) please! Us old guys can be pretty touchy and cranky at times, imagine that~! ; )

Here's the Albinos link if it helps:
https://www.allbinos.com/315-binoculars_review-Bushnell_Legend_M_10x42.html

I own the Legend 10x25s (not the same thing but just to emphasize the quality that Bushnell seems to put into low cost binos) and I think they are the most perfect compact binocular I've ever looked through. Very sharp image and to me that image seems to extend almost to the edge and for a 10x25 they seem very bright. Very lightweight and easy to look through. They are one of my prize optical possessions. If I had to sell all my bins off they would be about the last to go.

What's great about your feelings on this binocular to me is that in the end all that counts is if you feel they are outstanding. The actual statistics come second to that. IMO there are a lot of binoculars in the Legend price range that can make an having a pair of binoculars a great experience. They come close enough to the alpha binoculars IMO that the difference for the average user is not that much. Which is great when you don't have or want to spend a grand or two on a single pair of optics.

What a great find. Do you feel that the advantage of a 42mm over something less is worth the weight and size? You make me want to try one but I've resisted owning such a large binocular.

Barry,
I got a Legend-M 8x42 recently but this was soon after a Zeiss Victory 8x25 and I had been spoiled by that wonderful little instrument. The Bushnell seemed to me to practically equal it in all aspects optically with richer yellows being the major difference. The field of view seems to be the stated 8.1 deg. The Zeiss is stated to be 7.4 deg. but in actual use these seem pretty close. Dim light and night performance was better of course but not dramatically. So the Bushnell (from Rogers for $160) I gave away to a crack young(er) observer of birds who has already contributed much to the species+sspp. list in this part of the world but had only a Nikon Action 10x50--with 6.5 deg. FOV, optically not quite as good, and a porro.

For nature observation a friend on scrutiny found the Legend-M 8x42 optically very close to a Swarovski SLC 8x42! In a quick read for nature observers the most relevant part of the AllBinos report is the last part below the heading "Summary".

Black Crow,
A few years back I would have bought the Legend 10x25 if I already did not have an optically even better pocket 10x25. That was heavier though so I was thinking of replacing it with this. There were glowing reviews, mostly among the user reports of online retailers (which do need to be filtered). Your question to Barry I am happy to have partly answered for you going by your post in another thread!

black crow said:

I own the Legend 10x25s (not the same thing but just to emphasize the quality that Bushnell seems to put into low cost binos) and I think they are the most perfect compact binocular I've ever looked through. Very sharp image and to me that image seems to extend almost to the edge and for a 10x25 they seem very bright. Very lightweight and easy to look through. They are one of my prize optical possessions. If I had to sell all my bins off they would be about the last to go.

What's great about your feelings on this binocular to me is that in the end all that counts is if you feel they are outstanding. The actual statistics come second to that. IMO there are a lot of binoculars in the Legend price range that can make an having a pair of binoculars a great experience. They come close enough to the alpha binoculars IMO that the difference for the average user is not that much. Which is great when you don't have or want to spend a grand or two on a single pair of optics.

What a great find. Do you feel that the advantage of a 42mm over something less is worth the weight and size? You make me want to try one but I've resisted owning such a large binocular.

Click to expand...

No, I don't think you'd be comfortable with these big things, from what you say, BC. It's not that they weigh that much, it's just the physical size, esp the length. Hang on to those Little Legends you have-it sounds like you wouldn't be happy to lose them! Yes, I think Bushnell is putting out some good modern optics, it would seem, for a decent price, or great price if you get a bargain like these were. You make me want to check out the 10x25's now! ; )

And thanks adhoc for your comparison. Yes, I like the summary part of Albinos!

You should do a search of the customer reviews on the 10x25s. I think you'll find them rated way above their cost by many users and even compared to some alpha's of that size. My favorite thing is the ease of view in such a small size, the clarity edge to edge compared to many bins I own, the weight which is about 8oz. and a fov of about 284ft. I like to carry them in a side pocket along with a larger pair in a 7 or 8x but often they are the only thing I carry because the views are so darn good IMO.

8 ounces!!! I haven't seen any bino weights in the single digits! Sure, I can see why you take them everywhere now. Don't hold it against the Meoptas, but they are going to feel a might heavier!

OK, what model are your Bush's?

Here ya go and it's a great price for them. I paid $169 several years ago. I've gotten a lot of use out of mine and they've held up well. I don't expect them to be as lite as the Meopro which I'll use with a harness. The Legends are so lite that they are really difficult to notice around your neck even hiking all day. They close up into a very small package and could easily go in a shirt or even a tee shirt pocket.

https://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-Leg...0125+Legend+Ultra+HD+10x+25mm+Binoculars+++Fo

bluespiderweb said:

8 ounces!!! I haven't seen any bino weights in the single digits!...

Click to expand...

Barry, welcome to our world. At that time the Leica, Nikon, Swarovski, and Zeiss pockets weighed as follows respectively in their higher/highest-tier compact models.

8x20: 8.5, 9.5, 7.6, 7.9 oz. 10x25: 9.3, 10.6 ;-(, 8.1, 8.8 oz.

That was Ultravid with Leica, who also had Trinovid in these configurations; Victory with Zeiss, who had Conquest; Premier/HG with Nikon, who had many other compact model ranges; Swaro. had only this one compact range, whose name (if any) I have not recorded. Those lower-tier models were lighter than these!

bluespiderweb said:

.........that I added not long ago to the herd (excuse me, I meant flock)!
]

Click to expand...

If it's a gaggle of geese and a murder of crows, what is the collective noun for binoculars? But BSW, I'm delighted you're enjoying the Legend M. I don't 'do' the science bits either, I've no idea how to read a transmission graph, or what an arcsecond is. But I have been round the block with scores of high-and-mid range binos, and am still curious as to what's going on with the Legend M's. When going for a stroll anywhere that doesn't require the closer capabilities of an 8x, i.e. searching through bushes and undergrowth for LBJ's, I find myself (and this my sound like sacrilege) reaching for my Legends rather than my SE 8x32!

Edit: Caveat for potential buyers....don't take my word for it, I don't trust my own eyes enough to advise others, and I think some users have complained of sloppy focussers etc.

"...what is the collective noun for binoculars?"
Folly.
(For 3 or more. I am currently aiming at 2. If I get to 3 it shall be 4 or more.)

Barry I suspect that your Bushnells are pushing very personal buttons that tickle your perceptions in the same way as maybe one piece of music lifts your spirits more than other similarly impressive pieces. So much of what we see is manipulated by our brains that the reason why you always pick up one bino more than the others doesn't always have to be down to some deep technical difference.

I have two binos that push similar buttons for me and they are Zeiss HT 8x42 and Meopta MeoStar 8x32.

Lee

bluespiderweb said:

....... Objects that reflect sunlight like metal objects (diamondplate silver trailer trim, new silver locks on a drug dealer's house and garage) and sunlit dry leaved trees (still with their leaves on after Autumn) just reflect light much brighter in the Legend M's, that they really stand out in the view compared to my others. I don't have any Swaros or the like, but I do have a Meopta B1 10x32 that gives an excellent view, and a Tract Toric 10x42 that does too, but I don't think they have that same standout reflective quality I see in the Bushnell (though the Meopta comes close, I believe). And, a couple of other 10's, including an Nikon EII 10x35 that I added not long ago to the herd (excuse me, I meant flock)!
.....

Click to expand...

Barry,

It's quite a while since I last tried the Bushnell, and while I know I've seen binoculars which do something similar, I'm really not sure now if it the Legend M was one of them. I personally thought the seemingly enhanced reflectivity was a negative. Some sort of light scattering phenomenon. I guess others would see it differently. I really don't know with any confidence what the explaination might be. I have read that some Chinese glasses have been criticised for their QC standards on particulate inclusions. Just speculation, but I guess that might do it I guess? If you like it, don't wory about it, just enjoy them.

David

Troubador IMO you are spot on. Life is hard and facts are cold and we need to create meaning to get by day to day so we create rich colorful stories that give our lives meaning. These stories don't have to be entirely accurate in the material sense. This is really at the core of our personal psychology and the reason for philosophy.

Someones going to read this and think. "What a bunch of Bull!" LOL. (and they'd be right)

Oh, my mistake Lee for not explaining it well. It's not that I pick the Bushnell up more, I don't. I was switching back and forth between bins to see the differences, and that reflectivity stood out every time, and only with the Bushnells while I was comparing them side by side, in rotation.

I do understand what you are saying about why you would favor one binocular over another, even unconsciously, having a certain connection with one over others. I don't really like the Bushnell for looks, feel, or ease of use-quite the opposite, in fact. I didn't want to like them, but I do. At times I like the more neutral colors they display, and other times not, depending on what I am viewing, and the lighting.

But this seems like it is something different, because I've seen it in both the 8x and 10x Legend M's now, at different times, but also when comparing others with the same scene at that moment I saw it in each Bushnell, because it was so surprising to see when I noticed it. I also didn't go looking for anything in particular, it was just there, and I couldn't ignore it!

What I often times get stuck on is the view with different ones-like the Meostar B1 10x32, which just appealed to me as being a walk-in view that I love to look through them, along with the quality of the view. Or how certain ones enhance different things-like how the Sightron BSII 8x32's enhance dry field grasses-because of the slight color cast they have, or how the Torics do the same with a sunlit brick wall of an old house-when they bring those things to life, it makes me smile. I guess it's no different with the Bushnells either-I just seem to have found their apparent tendency in bringing those objects alive, it seems to me, compared to the others that just don't.

Would Tom, Dick or Harry see the same thing through them? Good question, and I have no idea! Perception certainly is an individual thing between people, no doubt about a lot of things we see and hear, taste or smell.

Maybe there isn't an answer anyone can offer to explain it, or even know what in the world I am carrying on about! ; )

black crow said:

Troubador IMO you are spot on. Life is hard and facts are cold and we need to create meaning to get by day to day so we create rich colorful stories that give our lives meaning. These stories don't have to be entirely accurate in the material sense. This is really at the core of our personal psychology and the reason for philosophy.

Someones going to read this and think. "What a bunch of Bull!" LOL. (and they'd be right)

Click to expand...

Funny, in college, I sat through too many mornings of Philosophy saying the same thing, and then when I couldn't take it anymore, I dropped the course and moved on! I was never sorry another day after that, as my brain just isn't wired that way. Same goes with very technical stuff, or the thought of trying to memorize the whole Zoological encylopedia of names for the wild kingdom-and why I never became a scientist on any level!

I'm not nocking anyone who gets it, or lives it, etc, just saying how it worked for me. LOL indeed!

typo said:

Barry,

It's quite a while since I last tried the Bushnell, and while I know I've seen binoculars which do something similar, I'm really not sure now if it the Legend M was one of them. I personally thought the seemingly enhanced reflectivity was a negative. Some sort of light scattering phenomenon. I guess others would see it differently. I really don't know with any confidence what the explaination might be. I have read that some Chinese glasses have been criticised for their QC standards on particulate inclusions. Just speculation, but I guess that might do it I guess? If you like it, don't wory about it, just enjoy them.

David

Click to expand...

Thanks David, interesting. One thing though, especially with the metal objects-they were sharp as any too-no degradation at all, just enhanced. Maybe it's just me!

...no degradation at all, just enhanced. Maybe it's just me!

Click to expand...

No me too and discerning users who viewed through my 8x42. David if the optics indeed do what you describe still the sharpness is impressive. On the 10x42 Arek Olech of AllBinos, who normally avoids sharpness, says: "...sharp images already from 1.85 metres...the...binoculars made a very positive impression on me. It was obvious the producer did what they can to provide all the best...a wide field of view, a very comfortable eye relief, and really good quality coatings of every type (antireflection, dielectric, phase correction...)...the transmission graph and colour rendering are looking uncommonly good..."

Barry, adhoc,

My wife has cortical cataracts. Micro fibrils have infiltrated the lens of her eye. She can still set 20/20, and has no difficulty in low light. However, the apparent width of an oncoming car headlight expands to obscure a large part of her view. The effect is present, but less pronounced with bright spots in daylight.

The small glass inclusions I mentioned would have have very little effect on transmission and probably no discernable affect on sharpness. I'm guessing just glare like a cortical cataract, which would make point reflected sources bigger and possibly seem brighter. Also remember that when Arek evaluated image sharpness, it is likely that something like half the light from the objective would be blocked by the iris of his eye, and typically the effective instrument resolution would have decreased significantly. Specs of dust or bubbles in a lens would do nothing by comparison, just add random scatter.

David

Here's something to try. Place a single cotton thread across the front of one objective of some binocular, other than your legend M, and hold in place with an elastic band. I just used a small ball bearing to reflect sunlight as a target but anything else would do. Compare one barrel to the other using the same eye and see if you can spot any difference in the apparent size of the reflection.

David

PS. I've noted a finger print doing something similar.