BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="brocknroller" data-source="post: 1630370" data-attributes="member: 665">Lies, dripping off your ads like dirt Lies, lies in every spec you makeLies, whispered sweetly in my earLies, how do I get out of here? When the 820s first came out, Swift (which makes some very good bins, the 804 Audubons, for instance) listed the ER for the 820 Audubons as 18mm. I guess there was a backlash (me, calling the company and writing about the false advertising on bin forums might have been part of that <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> So a few years later, they changed that spec to 16mm.The way that most companies list ER is the focal point above the EP where the rays converge (as much as achromatic optics rays will converge) and not the actual usable ER for eyeglass wearers. You need some recession in the EP (~2-3mm) or else your glasses might hit the EP lenses, depending on the curve of your glasses). So whatever the list is, you usually have to take away ~3-2 mm (Nikon is pretty good at listing usable ER, but most companies aren't). So that leaves you with 13-14 mm usable ER in the case of the 820s. But wait! The oversized, hard, twist-up eyecups on the 820 also puts you back 1 or 2mm, so figure on 12-13mm usable ER. I think its 12mm. Someone measured this once, but I can't remember the source.Jay excepted (and perhaps some other users with flat facial features and thin polycarbonate glasses) can make due with that much ER, but most eyeglass wearers can't. IMO, the 820 Audubons, which were advertised as being "suitable for eyeglass wearers" should have read "not suitable for most eyeglass wearers". They are also not good for humanoids with deep-set eyes and/or high-bridged noses. If you have the facial features of a Klingon, you will not be able to see the entire FOV with your glasses off. Partly because of the supersized eyecups and partly because of the protruding focuser, which can give you a pain in the ajna (brow) chakra. The bridge also flexes, and the paint on the metal on the 820 I had started to peel off within a few days. That all said, the optics were very good, but the package, not so good, particularly for a company's "flagship" bin.I prefer the 804 model. Better ER, more comfortable eyecups, no protruding focuser, and a very sturdy bridge.And I'm not just saying this to plug the 804 Audubon I plan on selling on BF Classifieds. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification