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="BruceH" data-source="post: 3364932" data-attributes="member: 106398">Basically, I have found them to be just about identical other than differences that come about from the different magnifications.  Color balance, relative sharpness, contrast, seems the same to me.  The magnification differences impact depth of field and field of view along with the size of the image.  Swaro lists a slightly larger apparent fov of 63 degrees for the 12X50 compared to 62 degrees for the 10X50.  The difference is not significant.  Actually, the 10X gives the impression of having a slightly larger afov I think due to the larger true fov.  My 10X weighs .2 (note the "point") of an ounce more.  The size, feel, and balance along with the mechanics are the same between the two.  The 10X has a slightly smoother focus mechanism, but that is the luck of the draw.  I am unable to tell them apart by feel (other than the focus).  They are big heavy binoculars with noticeable forward weight balance.  There is no getting around the laws of physics when using them unbraced.  The 12X does have more shake so it does take a little more effort and concentration to hold it steady.  I can hold the 12X, but for shorter periods of time as compared to the 10X.  The extra effort to control the 12X is more fatiguing over a long day. What is considered acceptable is dependent on the individual, but there is a difference.  I did about a 2 1/2 hour bird walk last month at the local riparian with the 12X and it was an interesting experience with many fantasic views.  However I was thinking at the end that it would be nice to have the 10X.  I will do it again, but definitely not on a regular basis!I consider the 10X to be more along the lines of a general purpose binocular (but not like a 10X42) and the 12X to be more of a special purpose binocular.   Unless the user has a special need or desire for that extra 2X of magnification, the 10X is a more practical way to go.  The FOV is larger, it is easier to hold steady, and the depth of field is deeper requiring less refocusing when moving about the view.  In truth, the 10X50 is a special purpose binocular for me.  I have it primarily for the larger exit pupil for early morning and late evening game spotting.  My most used and general purpose binocular is a 10X42 Zeiss SF.  The primary role of the 12X for me is long range (4,000 or more yards) game spotting from the truck during the day where I can usually brace the binocular.  The objectives seem to be set about the same distance from the housing rim on both.  See the attached picture.  Glare handling seems the same.  Both will sometimes display a very slight hazed look under certain lighting conditions, but it is very minor and I do not consider it a significant problem.   Most would have to consciously look for it and then might not see it.  I think many would only notice it during a side by side with a binocular like the Zeiss SF or HT to pick it up.  The Zeiss SF does handle these lighting conditions slightly better.  I am not sure why.  It may be the difference in color balance.  Also, the Zeiss SF objectives are set deeper in the housing.  Hope that helps until Chilli gets back on.In the attached photo, the 10X is on top of the 12X.</blockquote>

Verification