Glare Monsters! (1 Viewer)

[CharleyBird]

I used to walk our dog in the evenings as the sun was setting and always got flare using my 10x32 UV+ when viewing over a glittering lake with low sun.
Only in that situation though.

Canip found similar veiling glare using the 8x32UV in a similar situation.

 

[Ted Y.]

https://www.juelich-bonn.com/jForum/file.php?9,file=1467,filename=streulicht8x30.pdf

View attachment 1535901

Swarowsky has wenige glare. But why Leica has mittel and viel? Must be oder, right?

 

[CharleyBird]

Somewhere in between I guess, but definitely a problem in that specific 'low sun over water' situation.

 

[[email protected]]

I used to walk our dog in the evenings as the sun was setting and always got flare using my 10x32 UV+ when viewing over a glittering lake with low sun.
Only in that situation though.

Canip found similar veiling glare using the 8x32UV in a similar situation.

That is a glaringly tough scenario! Only an 8x56 will handle that kind of glare.

 

[CharleyBird]

That is a glaringly tough scenario! Only an 8x56 will handle that kind of glare.

Really? Only an 8x56? 😄

 

[[email protected]]

Really? Only an 8x56? 😄

Maybe a Noctivid 8x42. 😁

 

[CharleyBird]

Maybe a Noctivid 8x42. 😁

At least you'd be able to carry them to the lake to test 😇

 

[Ted Y.]

Hi @[email protected]

Do you consider the list of binoculars is in hierarhical glare order?

 

[[email protected]]

Hi @[email protected]

Do you consider the list of binoculars in hierarhical glare order?

No, they are just random.

 

[Paultricounty]

Hi @[email protected]

Do you consider the list of binoculars in hierarhical glare order?

It’s a nonsense list and most everybody with a modicum of knowledge knows it, we’re just hearing from the few vocal members who call out garbage like this.

 

[Ted Y.]

It’s a nonsense list and most everybody with a modicum of knowledge knows it, we’re just hearing from the few vocal members who call out garbage like this.

I will not buy/recommand binoculars based on it.

... I think this thread is about "be aware, glare exists, here are some opinions" ...

 

[jgraider]

It’s a nonsense list and most everybody with a modicum of knowledge knows it, we’re just hearing from the few vocal members who call out garbage like this.

Yessir. You can take Denco's list and wipe your keester with it. That's how much it's worth.

 

[PeterPS]

To lighten up the discussion a bit here is a clear example of a bino with (internal) glare.

 

[Paultricounty]

To lighten up the discussion a bit here is a clear example of a bino with (internal) glare.View attachment 1536023

Definitely I can see that, that should be on the Denco glare monster list for sure. And I think it’s a 56 😂.

 

[[email protected]]

At this point in the thread, let's summarize what to look for in a binocular to avoid glare and list some of the binoculars members have found to be glare resistant and glare prone. We will add to this list as more glare resistant and glare prone binoculars are noted. Remember, even though a binocular is on the Glare Resistant or Glare Prone list does not mean it will be 100% glare resistant or glare prone for you. The Allbinos website can also be helpful in determining if a binocular handles glare well because they test for I/R (Internal Reflection) and a higher number means less reflections, which will probably mean the binocular will have less glare than one with a lower number.

Binoculars rankings - AllBinos.com​

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

Glare Resistant Binoculars

1) Most Zeiss FL's, especially the 8x56 and 10x56
2) Most Swarovski SLC's, especially the 8x56 and 10x56
3) Most 8x56's (Big EP)
4) Most Leica's (Well Baffled)
5) Most Zeiss SF's 42 mm, especially the 10x42 (Some people with shallow eye sockets will see reflections beyond the eyepiece diaphragm) (SF 32 mm are NOT as glare resistant)
6) Fujinon HC 8x42
7) Opticron Aurora 8x42
8) Most EDG's especially the 7x42
9) Canon 10x42 IS-L
10) Swarovski Habicht 7x42
11) Meopta Meostar 7x42 SLC
12) Nikon EII 8x30
13) Swarovski Habicht 10x40
14) Leica Noctivid's
15) Most Zeiss Conquest HD's, especially the 8x56 and 10x56
16) Leica Trinovid HD 8x32
17) Steiner HX 8x42.

Glare Prone Binoculars

1) Nikon M7 8x30
2) Swarovski Habicht 8x30
3) Hawk Frontier EDX 8x32
4) Swarovski EL 8x32
5) Kowa 8x25 SVII
6) Swarovski NL's
7) Zeiss 10x42 HT
8) Nikon HG 8x30

Important things that control glare in Binoculars

1) Good Baffling (Leicas are known to be well baffled and blackened inside)
2) WA can be worse than narrower FOV binoculars because of the binocular design
3) Large EP aids glare control because it never reaches your eyes
4) Binocular design failures, especially reflective surfaces in the light path

 

[tenex]

https://www.juelich-bonn.com/jForum/file.php?9,file=1467,filename=streulicht8x30.pdf

Note that in Canip's table we have:

• Distinction between veiling vs specular glare (some models do better at one than the other)
• Well specified test conditions for comparison (by which one can also guess whether or how often they may encounter these)

Now diverging performance in various models becomes more meaningful, and a user can evaluate how much it's likely to matter. I seldom find glare an issue myself but did once in recent years -- with a Leica, in sun over water. Bingo. (And it's no "disservice" to Leica to say so, even though many buyers may never see it.)

Has Canip done similar testing on a wider range of models?

 

[Ted Y.]

Now diverging performance in various models becomes more meaningful, and a user can evaluate how much it's likely to matter.

It is not clear for me the meaning of:
Sun +25 <
Water -25 <

 

[[email protected]]

Note that in Canip's table we have:

• Distinction between veiling vs specular glare (some models do better at one than the other)
• Well specified test conditions for comparison (by which one can also guess whether or how often they may encounter these)

Now diverging performance in various models becomes more meaningful, and a user can evaluate how much it's likely to matter. I seldom find glare an issue myself but did once in recent years -- with a Leica, in sun over water. Bingo. (And it's no "disservice" to Leica to say so, even though many buyers may never see it.)

Has Canip done similar testing on a wider range of models?

Canips glare chart is helpful, but unfortunately doesn't cover many of the commonly used birding binoculars. I disagree on his rating of poor veiling glare control on the Zeiss FL 8x32. The Zeiss FL 8x32 was excellent In controlling veiling glare and glare in general based on my field tests. It has excellent, well-placed baffling in the optical tube.

The FL 8x32 has perfect blackening inside the optical tubes. All the FL's are excellent at controlling glare that I tested. There are differences in how much glare some people see in different binoculars because of eye socket depth and diameter, so no one field test by one person can predict with 100% accuracy if you are going to see glare in that binocular.

Everybody's eyes and brain interpret things differently, and that includes glare. That is probably why Canip and I differ on how much glare we see in the 8x32 FL. Neither him nor I are wrong. We are just interpreting the light coming from the binocular differently.

Every Zeiss SF 8x42 that I have tried, and I have tried 4 of them, I see a crescent shape ring of glare at the bottom right of the FOV. Recently I was trying one again with a friend and I saw the same crescent shaped ring, and then I let him try them, and he did not see the ring.

My eye sockets are shallow, but I looked at my friend's eye sockets and his were much deeper, so I feel that that is what made the difference in if you see the crescent shaped glare or not and possibly how his brain and eyes were interpreting the signal coming from the binocular.

As I have said, my chart or anybodies rating of glare is just an approximation and are just intended to predict if you might see glare or not. From Allbinos on the Zeiss FL 8x32.

Internal reflections	Left: Right: Nice pupils on black background with only few lighter areas.	4.6/5.0

Carl Zeiss Victory 8x32 T* FL - binoculars review - AllBinos.com

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

 

[Ted Y.]

doesn't cover many of the commonly used birding binoculars

So is allbinos

Canips glare chart is confusing and totally wrong on many of the binoculars

Really? For me is not confusing at all.
"totally wrong"? How so? "totally".

Reviews, Canip vs allbinos:
I appreciate allbinos, and I trust Canip. I am not implying something about allbinos. Nor Canip. Do not read something is not in the text.
I did not buy binoculars based on allbinos, but I bought based on Canip evaluation. And I "checked" a few ones, just to "audit" Canip evaluations and, man, he was right for every one. In my opinion, sure.

I think Canip is legend.
I think Denco is also legend. Just a different one.
I respect both legends.
Allbinos is also a kind of external legend.

P.S. Do not think some words here minimize the importance of advices/reviews of other members. Right now, it is about this legends.

 

[has530]

Canips glare chart is confusing and totally wrong on many of the binoculars, and it doesn't cover many of the commonly used birding binoculars. One glaring mistake is giving the Zeiss FL 8x32 a bad rating on veiling glare. That is totally wrong. The Zeiss FL 8x32 is excellent In controlling veiling glare and glare in general. It has perfect blackening inside the optical tubes. All the FL's are excellent at controlling glare. From Allbinos on the Zeiss FL 8x32.

Internal reflections	Left: Right:

But I thought 8x32 couldn't control glare because their exit pupil is too small (as you have repeatedly stated). But I guess if allbinos took a picture of the exit pupil that must mean there is no glare in the 32 FL... Except allbinos never evaluated for glare in field use. Canip conducted a field test and saw glare. Are you asserting that they are wrong because allbinos didn't see anything around the exit pupil? Maybe they weren't lit from the right angle, maybe the glare comes from something in the light cone rather than stray light, it could be inadequate edge blackening catching light at just the right angle... any number of things. To assert that what a respected member saw is wrong because of a picture of an exit pupil you saw on the internet is daft.