Brief comparison between Zeiss 8 power binos (3 Viewers)

[Rg548]

Criticism of experimental methods is not a personal attack.

Let's not act as if it is.

I agree with you that 'criticism of experimental methods' is usually not a personal attack...

However, after someone has put that much effort into a thread, whether you agree with it or not, I think the use of 'PISS POOR' is quite frankly, rude.

Lets not act as if it isn't !!

 

[Maljunulo]

I agree with you that 'criticism of experimental methods' is usually not a personal attack...

However, after someone has put that much effort into a thread, whether you agree with it or not, I think the use of 'PISS POOR' is quite frankly, rude.

Lets not act as if it isn't !!

What is another word for piss-poor? | Piss-poor Synonyms - WordHippo Thesaurus

Synonyms for piss-poor include low-grade, inferior, bad, poor, substandard, lousy, average, cheap, mediocre and paltry. Find more similar words at wordhippo.com!

www.wordhippo.com

 

[GrampaTom]

How are you sure when you are using your binocular that it is coaxial with your eye sockets? It is easier that the optic and the camera are coaxial than the optic and your eye sockets and another reason why digiscoping would be more consistent and reproducible than hand held reviews.

Bino is to be coaxial with eye socket?

Looking at a new pair of eyeglasses and wondering if it was a quality fluke that the two bifocal lens were not in the same place lens to lens. The explanation from the Optician and verified by an Optometrist is that pupils dont always line up perfectly no matter how perfect the eyeglass frames are fit. Getting each pupil lined up as near as possible to the lens optical center is key.

Isn't it human eye pupil to bino exit pupil alignment that matters, Dennis?

 

[Steve]

Dennis you have got to give up this holier than thou attitude, everything you write is sounding like an instruction not an opinion, again your sucking the
energy out of the memberships patience and taking over a thread again. I don't care that you change your mind every sentence but you confuse everybody.

Ever since Lee passed you have gotten back to your old ways, you have no off switch honestly its draining.

I have asked you privately to calm down several times with no effect, please give others a chance without telling them that you know better.

Steve

 

[dorubird]

That is baloney. 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. jackjacks digiscoped shots are more consistent than judging different binoculars with your own eyes and brain because he is using the same camera with the same lenses every time but when you judge a binocular with your eyes everybody's eyes and brain are different so it is like you are using a different camera with different lenses every time.

It's ok to make very good digiscoping photo. But someone's direct eyes experience expressed in words, even subjective as they are, is worth more than these digiscoping in a binoculars comparation. The photos will gives us only the impresion of objectivity.
Digiscoping is very good and useful for photographing birds or other subjects, but not for comparing binoculars. Binoculars are beter compared by everyone with his own eyes!

 

[Ruff-Leg]

Dennis you have got to give up this holier than thou attitude, everything you write is sounding like an instruction not an opinion, again your sucking the
energy out of the memberships patience and taking over a thread again. I don't care that you change your mind every sentence but you confuse everybody.

Ever since Lee passed you have gotten back to your old ways, you have no off switch honestly its draining.

I have asked you privately to calm down several times with no effect, please give others a chance without telling them that you know better.

Steve

Maybe it's time to shut down this thread? The "Brief Comparison..." has run its course, and is generating more heat than light.

Just my idle thought...

 

[Maljunulo]

Maybe it's time to shut down this thread? The "Brief Comparison..." has run its course, and is generating more heat than light.

Just my idle thought...

The thread isn’t the problem.

 

[tenex]

besides, what is the meaning of chime?

Chime is a musical term so to chime in is to harmonize, metaphorically to support or agree with. "Chimes with" must be less common, I'm not sure I'd heard it myself.

I appreciate the effort you put into these posts, and we've learned a thing or two about Korea (and its birds and bins) ourselves. It seems inevitable that some will question the value of digiscoping to evaluate binoculars, but you seem to do it with unusual skill. Also some differences involved are quite subtle and remain so in photos, so one shouldn't assume that you think a clearer difference is demonstrated when you haven't said so.

 

[Maljunulo]

There is a Field Guide to the Birds of Korea, but it was evidently a very small edition, and is out of print.

It now sells for ~$100 US or more.

 

[NDhunter]

Dennis you have got to give up this holier than thou attitude, everything you write is sounding like an instruction not an opinion, again your sucking the
energy out of the memberships patience and taking over a thread again. I don't care that you change your mind every sentence but you confuse everybody.

Ever since Lee passed you have gotten back to your old ways, you have no off switch honestly its draining.

I have asked you privately to calm down several times with no effect, please give others a chance without telling them that you know better.

Steve

Steve:
It is time to give Denco a time out...............for a long time.

 

[jackjack]

There is a Field Guide to the Birds of Korea, but it was evidently a very small edition, and is out of print.

It now sells for ~$100 US or more.

100$ is too much

https://m.yes24.com/Goods/Detail/96086589

you can buy 5 copies of most renowned Guide in Korea instead of it...

 

[Canip]

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!

Thank you. This is all so very true!!!

 

[Viraj]

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.

I have seen many criticisms from several members about @jackjack’s reviews and his digiscoping photos. @jackjack also clarified several times he is using digiscoping photos only as a reference. He use his own eyes to look through binoculars and write reviews with his own experience. Please don’t confuse that with using only digiscoping photos to make the comparison and write the review. I believe the digiscoping photos brings life to the reviews. I also believe all the intelligent members in the BF could understand the difference in using photos as a reference and using only photos to make reviews.

I really enjoy reading @jackjack’s reviews. I firmly believe his viewpoint is more close to the reality. Thank you @jackjack for your time and effort. I hope you will post many more reviews in the future.

 

[[email protected]]

I have seen many criticisms from several members about @jackjack’s reviews and his digiscoping photos. @jackjack also clarified several times he is using digiscoping photos only as a reference. He use his own eyes to look through binoculars and write reviews with his own experience. Please don’t confuse that with using only digiscoping photos to make the comparison and write the review. I believe the digiscoping photos brings life to the reviews. I also believe all the intelligent members in the BF could understand the difference in using photos as a reference and using only photos to make reviews.

I really enjoy reading @jackjack’s reviews. I firmly believe his viewpoint is more close to the reality. Thank you @jackjack for your time and effort. I hope you will post many more reviews in the future.

That is a good point. I think a lot of members are confused that jackjack is using only the digiscoping photos to make comparisons and write his review because he posts so many photos. The photos are only used as a reference, and he still uses his own eyes to judge the binoculars and he is very good at it.

 

[Owlbarred]

I have seen many criticisms from several members about @jackjack’s reviews and his digiscoping photos. @jackjack also clarified several times he is using digiscoping photos only as a reference. He use his own eyes to look through binoculars and write reviews with his own experience. Please don’t confuse that with using only digiscoping photos to make the comparison and write the review. I believe the digiscoping photos brings life to the reviews. I also believe all the intelligent members in the BF could understand the difference in using photos as a reference and using only photos to make reviews.

I really enjoy reading @jackjack’s reviews. I firmly believe his viewpoint is more close to the reality. Thank you @jackjack for your time and effort. I hope you will post many more reviews in the future.

Well said. Sadly, a couple nameless individuals invariably offer nothing but pettifogging criticisms or takedowns while offering nothing constructive themselves.

 

[Patudo]

@jackjack - you are the grand master of binoscoping sir. It's tricky enough to get a good binoscope of a passerine in a tree (BTW what month of the year did you shoot that waxwing? - They only visit the UK in winter). But to freezeframe those T-50s with a cameraphone behind a 12x50 binocular is something that I'd not have thought possible. Amazing stuff.

I still think what you see through binoculars is somewhat different to what a camera shows (normally much better, as not all of us are CA sensitive, etc). But other well respected reviewers (scopeviews, Tobias formerly) have used binoscopes to illustrate their points but seem to have received little criticism for it.

As for this gem:

Jack:
You are quite opinionated, and that does not mean you know it all. Much of it is subjective personal opinion.

So what? You have opinions, so do I, so do lots of others. What are forums like this mainly for, but to let folks like us mouth off with our opinions? I certainly know whose opinions I'd rather read...

 

[jackjack]

@jackjack - you are the grand master of binoscoping sir. It's tricky enough to get a good binoscope of a passerine in a tree (BTW what month of the year did you shoot that waxwing? - They only visit the UK in winter). But to freezeframe those T-50s with a cameraphone behind a 12x50 binocular is something that I'd not have thought possible. Amazing stuff.

I still think what you see through binoculars is somewhat different to what a camera shows (normally much better, as not all of us are CA sensitive, etc). But other well respected reviewers (scopeviews, Tobias formerly) have used binoscopes to illustrate their points but seem to have received little criticism for it.

As for this gem:


So what? You have opinions, so do I, so do lots of others. What are forums like this mainly for, but to let folks like us mouth off with our opinions? I certainly know whose opinions I'd rather read...

all from atx are taken at late January this year in Korean national arboretum

which is a meka to Korean winter birders should have to visit at least one time in winter if one wnat to see birds in Korea

 

[jackjack]

I agree with you that 'criticism of experimental methods' is usually not a personal attack...

However, after someone has put that much effort into a thread, whether you agree with it or not, I think the use of 'PISS POOR' is quite frankly, rude.

Lets not act as if it isn't !!

maybe luckly, one Korean that learned english by boring school books
didn't fully understand enough to felt insulted by that specific phrase.
after all, I have heard worse in Korean even directly at my face when I started my review so I'm somewhat immuned to it

but, anyway, thanks for the comment!

 

[tenex]

Whether the crudeness of a phrase makes it insulting depends on whether the speaker used it with that intention, which frankly is not obvious.

 

[Maljunulo]

Whether the crudeness of a phrase makes it insulting depends on whether the speaker used it with that intention, which frankly is not obvious.

I think you’re right.

The term is simply an adjective, less acceptable than some, but just an adjective nonetheless.

(I think)