Brief comparison between Zeiss 8 power binos (4 Viewers)

[jackjack]

for the other small question,

what time is you guys at?

it's 8 at morning in Korea ans I figured out replys and observation of my post are hightes during 3 ~ 7 AM in Korean time.
so nowdays, it has become my first daily routine to reply the quotion when I woke up 😀

I usually post the post around 5 ~ 9 PM in Korean time
maybe many of the members are sleeping then

I know thet America have diffrent timelines even between some states

just curious about the time difference thing 🤔

 

[Maljunulo]

Camera shots are a piss-poor way to evaluate optical ability of binoculars and/or spotting scopes IME.

I’m glad someone finally had the stones to say that right out loud.

I didn’t.

 

[Maljunulo]

1945 Eastern Daylight Time, in the US state of Connecticut, on Monday, 30 September, 2024.

 

[Hermann]

Camera shots are a piss-poor way to evaluate optical ability of binoculars and/or spotting scopes IME.

Well, yes and no. Camera shots do show e.g. differences between different binoculars and scopes better than any lengthy description if they're well taken. And jackjack's shots are very well taken. How these differences translate to what you see in the field may be a different matter.

Then again, maybe I suck at picture taking.

So do I, at least when it comes to digiscoping.

Hermann

 

[dorubird]

We are discussing optics here and how one optical system can influence another (binocular eyepiece vs photo lens and sensor) It depends a lot if the optical system of the certain given binocular eyepieces are compatible/match with the certain given camera lenses. Binoculars are afocal instruments and because that must be compared by looking through them. Of course, a picture can make it easier to compare the sizes of two FOVs. But what happens in FOV will be affected by the optical formula of the camera's lenses. The camera can accentuate/diminish or induce certain optical aberrations that would not have been seen with the naked eye. For example:
-Geometric distortions can be accentuated by the photo lens, or can also be diminished (depending on how the optical formula of the photo lens interacts/ match with the optical formula of the binocular eyepiece).
-Another example is the chromatic aberrations that can be induced very easily when only one lens is slightly slightly slightly off-center from the optical axis.
-Clarity on the edges and center is another example of failing the photo test because the camera comes with its field curvature and with its astigmatism, which can amplify or even cancel the binocular astigmatism...
So,
Binoculars are best judged directly with the eyes, exactly under the conditions for they were designed. There is no need to complicate and add a new optical system (photo lens/sensor) to an afocal optical equation that is designed for human eyes, not for sensors. They are two completely different things (sensor and our eyes) and the binoculars are judged best with our eyes!

 

[Rg548]

vortex retail price seems too expensive for their optics(Like nikon in Korea). Razor UHD series are nice 1500$ not up to 2200

Rolling ball with this Razor UHD 8x32.... I had a look through one recently. Sharp and bright though.

 

[Rg548]

I’m glad someone finally had the stones to say that right out loud.

I didn’t.

That might explain why I rate my HT's above SFL's ..... even thought he SFL's came out well in this test.
I thought SFL's were a really good optic to be fair.... but the HT's... well I bought them there and then!!!!

 

[PatR]

We are discussing optics here and how one optical system can influence another (binocular eyepiece vs photo lens and sensor) It depends a lot if the optical system of the certain given binocular eyepieces are compatible/match with the certain given camera lenses. Binoculars are afocal instruments and because that must be compared by looking through them. Of course, a picture can make it easier to compare the sizes of two FOVs. But what happens in FOV will be affected by the optical formula of the camera's lenses. The camera can accentuate/diminish or induce certain optical aberrations that would not have been seen with the naked eye. For example:
-Geometric distortions can be accentuated by the photo lens, or can also be diminished (depending on how the optical formula of the photo lens interacts/ match with the optical formula of the binocular eyepiece).
-Another example is the chromatic aberrations that can be induced very easily when only one lens is slightly slightly slightly off-center from the optical axis.
-Clarity on the edges and center is another example of failing the photo test because the camera comes with its field curvature and with its astigmatism, which can amplify or even cancel the binocular astigmatism...
So,
Binoculars are best judged directly with the eyes, exactly under the conditions for they were designed. There is no need to complicate and add a new optical system (photo lens/sensor) to an afocal optical equation that is designed for human eyes, not for sensors. They are two completely different things (sensor and our eyes) and the binoculars are judged best with our eyes!

As Leonard Cohen oft warbled, "Hallelujah".

 

[jgraider]

What do you think of this digiscoped shot denco?

 

[limonabe]

Yes, digiscoping can be a good way to evaluate binoculars and optics, as it allows you to capture images through the optics, providing a visual representation of the image quality, sharpness, color rendition, and magnification capabilities, which can help you compare different models side-by-side when considering a purchase; however, it's important to be aware of limitations like camera sensor quality and proper technique to get accurate results.

...

Has Denco been replaced by ChatGPT?

 

[jackjack]

What do you think of this digiscoped shot denco?

View attachment 1605310

the camera is not alligned in proper position.
I think it is put bit far then proper position
and there are light leakage between camera and ocular especially at left side.

I saw it happened some time when phone scope adaptor don't fit properly

so there could be a significant contrast and edge sharpness degradance

is this a field scope with a phone adapter? just guessing 🤔

 

[jgraider]

Yeah, that's the point. That's a Meopta S2 spotting scope, one of the finest spotters on the planet, and a hand held Google Pixel 4 cell phone taking the pic. I'll continue to never judge glass by a camera pic.

 

[jgraider]

I disagree. If digiscoping is done well with care taken to avoid these variables, it can be a very accurate and valuable method of evaluating optics and binoculars. In reality, it can be more consistent than the human eye and brain. What you are forgetting is everybody's eyes and most importantly their brains which interpret the optical signal are different, so what one person sees through a binocular might be totally different from what somebody else sees through a binocular. Just consider the differences in people's quality of vision between a young person and an older person. This is especially true with CA and glare, where one person sees CA and glare and somebody else might not even see them. A camera and its sensors will present a more consistent image that can be used to compare binoculars better than different people's eyes and brains because it presents an unbiased photo of what it is seeing, and it is not dependent on a brain to interpret the signal similar to the way a computer interprets a signal.

This tells me I'm on the right track......

 

[jackjack]

Yeah, that's the point. That's a Meopta S2 spotting scope, one of the finest spotters on the planet, and a hand held Google Pixel 4 cell phone taking the pic. I'll continue to never judge glass by a camera pic.

yeah I won't even try to post that amount of mis colimated binoscope.

In terms of optical comparison that amout of miscolimation is enough to make ELSV in to prostaff

swaro ATX handheld (ofcouse it is mounted in tripod. because it is 85mm chunk of glass 😀)





Skyrover 85mm (1000$ around)
handheld






so, as there is a difference between binos, difference between samples, individual's perspective of looking at the binos,
individual diffrence of eyes, and also diffrence of climate ant observation place,.

there is also difference of individual's ability to take digiscope.

and I'm not a scope guy. only use scope about a month in year.
I take 100times more digiscope one bino then scope

SRBC 12x50 hand held



Nikon monarch 20x56 hand held




25$ 7x20 bin

 

[Maljunulo]

yeah I won't even try to post that amount of mis colimated binoscope.

In terms of optical comparison that amout of miscolimation is enough to make ELSV in to prostaff

swaro ATX handheld (ofcouse it is mounted in tripod. because it is 85mm chunk of glass 😀)
View attachment 1605316
View attachment 1605318
View attachment 1605320
View attachment 1605326

Skyrover 85mm (1000$ around)
handheld

View attachment 1605321View attachment 1605322
View attachment 1605324
View attachment 1605329


so, as there is a difference between binos, difference between samples, individual's perspective of looking at the binos,
individual diffrence of eyes, and also diffrence of climate ant observation place,.

there is also difference of individual's ability to take digiscope.

and I'm not a scope guy. only use scope about a month in year.
I take 100times more digiscope one bino then scope

SRBC 12x50 hand held
View attachment 1605343
View attachment 1605344

Nikon monarch 20x56 hand held
View attachment 1605345
View attachment 1605346
View attachment 1605347

What exactly, do all of these photographs purport to show/prove?

 

[jackjack]

What exactly, do all of these photographs purport to show/prove?

at least to prove I don't suck at digiscope...

 

[GrampaTom]

Jack jack trying to understand,

Could you explain your use of the term "hand held" please? What/which is hand held? The bino? The camera? Both? How could you do that?

Also when you post several pics, the optic involved is listed, but do to spacing and placement, hard to know whether its the pics above or below that described optic...

 

[jackjack]

I'm saying this for many times.

Binoculare has Two lenses which make them BI.

so view through real bino have to be deffrent in real view.

I agree viewing bino for real is the best way to feel it.

but none of us can view EVERY bino in this planet. and there is why reviewers are for.

what I say again, is judgement using my eyes are always priority when I write my reivew like all other reviewers do.

digiscope is just a reference.
even my best shot can't show all then bino has.

but a reference is better then none with just verbal discription about how specific bino just feel good to owners eyes.

 

[jackjack]

Jack jack trying to understand,

Could you explain your use of the term "hand held" please? What/which is hand held? The bino? The camera? Both? How could you do that?

Also when you post several pics, the optic involved is listed, but do to spacing and placement, hard to know whether its the pics above or below that described optic...

Scope os always tripod mounted.phone is always hand held. bino is always hand held
(can be leaned against the tree when birding and always fix my other body except my right hands which taking photo when I take photo for review)

the binoscope I put above is all non leaned total hand helded

I have mounted my bino and use adapter but I came back to original way immediately I saw the result.

for the last question, I'll keep posting bino's name right ABOVE the photo.


+ plus the reason how.....hmm

maybe having done service in Korean militery special force? 😆

 

[jgraider]

For the record, I was using the tripod mounted Meopta S2 @ 50x zoom, phone/camera was handheld. By contrast, this was taken at a distance of 1350 yards.....tripod mounted and digiscope mounted camera: