What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
New review items
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Reviews
New items
Latest content
Latest reviews
Latest questions
Brands
Search reviews
Opus
Birds & Bird Song
Locations
Resources
Contribute
Recent changes
Blogs
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
ZEISS
ZEISS Nature Observation
The Most Important Optical Parameters
Innovative Technologies
Conservation Projects
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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.
Forums
Binoculars & Spotting Scopes
Binoculars
Evaluating Binoculars at High Magnification
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="edz" data-source="post: 1265762" data-attributes="member: 44073"><p>When binoculars were tested at boosted power powers, I see considerably wider differences in resolution between models of same power. Once again, generally I bring out one or two used previously to benchmark the current batch. I have a variety of powers used for boosted testing, but for sake of this list all of these here were tested with a 6.2x booster. Also once again, about half of all the binoculars actual magnification is not what is stated as nominal. For instance, of the 14 8x40/42s, 5 were greater than 8x and 4 were lower than 8x. The normal power range in the 8x binocs tested is 8.3x to 7.5x, so the boosted powers actually range from 46x to 51x. Of the 12x50s, three are 12.0x, one is 12.2x and one is 12.5x.</p><p></p><p></p><p>14 - 8x40/42s ranged from 6.8” to 3.8”, 5 of them 4.8” or less</p><p>4 -10x42s ranged from 6.1” to 3.6”, 2 of them at 3.6”</p><p>12 – 10x50s ranged from 6.1” to 3.0”, 6 of them 4.1” or less</p><p>1 – 10x60 was 4.8”</p><p>1 – 10x70 was 3.0”</p><p>2 – 12x50s were 2.7” and 2.56”</p><p>2 – 15x70s were 3.0” to 2.56”</p><p>1 - 16x70 was 2.4”</p><p></p><p>FWIW, out of 48 binoculars (16x70 or smaller) that were tested, 10 of them are premium binoculars and another 7 are near premium. 9 more Chinese branded binoculars are among the best measured for resolution. This represents more than half of all the binoculars tested. There are some poor quality binoculars in my group, however there are only few in my test group that are really cheap or very poor quality. Out of all 60+, there are at least nine that I wouldn't recommend to anyone.</p><p></p><p>You can't really assume what maximum apparent resolution you are seeing in my values, because as I stated several times now, the actual magnification of most of these binoculars is not what is stated nominally. For instance, after multiplied by the real power, the best apparent res in three of my 20x binocs is 86, 87 and 88 arcseconds. 5 out of 7 20x80s tested were less than 20x, two of those being less than 18x.</p><p></p><p>edz</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="edz, post: 1265762, member: 44073"] When binoculars were tested at boosted power powers, I see considerably wider differences in resolution between models of same power. Once again, generally I bring out one or two used previously to benchmark the current batch. I have a variety of powers used for boosted testing, but for sake of this list all of these here were tested with a 6.2x booster. Also once again, about half of all the binoculars actual magnification is not what is stated as nominal. For instance, of the 14 8x40/42s, 5 were greater than 8x and 4 were lower than 8x. The normal power range in the 8x binocs tested is 8.3x to 7.5x, so the boosted powers actually range from 46x to 51x. Of the 12x50s, three are 12.0x, one is 12.2x and one is 12.5x. 14 - 8x40/42s ranged from 6.8” to 3.8”, 5 of them 4.8” or less 4 -10x42s ranged from 6.1” to 3.6”, 2 of them at 3.6” 12 – 10x50s ranged from 6.1” to 3.0”, 6 of them 4.1” or less 1 – 10x60 was 4.8” 1 – 10x70 was 3.0” 2 – 12x50s were 2.7” and 2.56” 2 – 15x70s were 3.0” to 2.56” 1 - 16x70 was 2.4” FWIW, out of 48 binoculars (16x70 or smaller) that were tested, 10 of them are premium binoculars and another 7 are near premium. 9 more Chinese branded binoculars are among the best measured for resolution. This represents more than half of all the binoculars tested. There are some poor quality binoculars in my group, however there are only few in my test group that are really cheap or very poor quality. Out of all 60+, there are at least nine that I wouldn't recommend to anyone. You can't really assume what maximum apparent resolution you are seeing in my values, because as I stated several times now, the actual magnification of most of these binoculars is not what is stated nominally. For instance, after multiplied by the real power, the best apparent res in three of my 20x binocs is 86, 87 and 88 arcseconds. 5 out of 7 20x80s tested were less than 20x, two of those being less than 18x. edz [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes...
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Binoculars & Spotting Scopes
Binoculars
Evaluating Binoculars at High Magnification
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more...
Top