Holger’s Binocular Book - in English in 2023! (3 Viewers)

[wllmspd]

Back to Holgers book - basically take every book on optics and visual perception and distill down so everything you need is still there. I was a little underwhelmed by the thickness of the book, but I can’t think of anything that’s obviously left out. More information could have been provided, but it would not be needed. After reading you have a much better appreciation of why the tradeoffs in design/performance exist, why we’re not going to suddenly get super wide angle binos that are super light weight with super eye relief.
Thoroughly recommended for those who want to understand more deeply how binos work and how we perceive what we do.

Peter

PS I have a pair that has very pronounced “cardboard effect”!

 

[tenex]

However, getting agreement on the assessment categories and their relative weighing is the problem needing to be overcome in order to get some level of collective conclusion on what the standout bins are.

This is much more than a footnote; it invalidates the whole argument for wide-ranging assessments and scores and graphs. Any systematic reviewer's opinion is still just one more opinion, whose subjectivity has been obscured at the level of methodological details like selecting factors and weights. This point has already been stated in this thread, as it has been repeatedly before, yet never seems to make an impression on fans of these systems, who seem to long for some sort of imaginary clarity.

The simple forum-consensus approach you just derided is in no way inferior, especially as no one can guess what will ultimately turn out to matter most to an individual purchaser. The only real purpose of considering dozens of binoculars is to weed out models so redundant or deficient that no one would actually have recommended them anyway.

 

[Ted Y.]

The simple forum-consensus approach ... is in no way inferior, especially as no one can guess what will ultimately turn out to matter most to an individual purchaser

I think is about relevance for the reader, not about inferior-superior.

When the consensus (of some members) is directed to 3K USD binoculars only, the relevance for 1K USD binoculars is low, low, low. When brand bashing (again, consensus of a few aggressive members) is hapening, the relevance is low, low, low.

 

[tenex]

When the consensus (of some members) is directed to 3K USD binoculars only, the relevance for 1K USD binoculars is low, low, low.

OK, time to figure out what we're really talking about. "Consensus" means more than the opinion of some members. And of course the forum does have true consensus recommendations at the $1K price point (like Conquest), and at still lower ones (Opticron), and regular posts even about some "Svbony" model being good value compared to, well, worse stuff at a similarly low price. If there's less chatter about cheaper bins here, it's surely because there's less to get enthused about.

Price itself is fundamentally uninteresting, even rather arbitrary. Consider MeoStar. It used to be priced even below Conquest as I recall, while many felt its view was alpha quality. Here's a boring video I recently found (from Birdfair 2015) that's of interest only to see how proud Meopta product manager Miloš Slany is of that line, and how stoically he endures this fellow who just keeps parroting "it's great value for money" instead of "it's a great binocular":

Since then, the price of a MeoStar has been raised an astonishing 50-70%... it's still the same binocular, and one may still want one at this price, or may well not, but there isn't really much to say about it. (Whether this pricing is a mistake, time will tell.) I'm not wealthy, but price is seldom my first concern when making purchases I care about, and exceptional value for money is quite rare for all sorts of obvious reasons. How much time and attention need to be devoted to lesser degrees, if they can even be agreed upon?

 

[exup]

Here is an objective measure of optical performance of 3 bins .....

2nd Pair / Upgrade for Birder - Advise Needed

Still, take the Opticron Verano.... assembled in Japan....I would take that over assembled in the US for now. Price wise, better than the Maven..... Optic wise, better than the Maven, the Monarch, etc...as I listed prior. Also, $ wise when compared to the Conquest or the Monarch HG....sure...

www.birdforum.net

If these optics measures are considered in relation to cost on the other axis, then the Canon easily wins as the standout.

If other, non optical/image factors are considered, then these additional personal preferences might change the outcome, for some.

 

[tenex]

Here is an objective measure of optical performance of 3 bins .....

I think you have material for a better argument here that the MHG is not good value for money than that the Canon is; generally "standouts" will tend to be laggards, and there are good reasons for that. Few here appear to find your fudging around the issues of the Canon's FOV, expected lifetime, need for batteries etc convincing. There is no agreement that rectilinear distortion is a problem at all, this is not a complete list of optical factors of potential interest, and valid questions have been raised about testing methods at Allbinos, so this is isn't really an "objective" comparison. But at this point persistence leads only to repetition...

 

[tenex]

Having had a very brief look at it, I realized it's not just a translation of the 2nd edition in German, but has been rewritten, amended and freshly illustrated in numerous places.

I was looking forward to such revisions. Unfortunately I haven't dug deep enough to discover them yet, but on scanning the contents of the English translation I instantly noticed what should have been obvious already from John's post #1, that entire chapters have actually been omitted, to wit:

2. Ferngläser - der Einstieg [Binoculars - getting started]
2.1 Das Prismenfernglas: Ursprung und Wandlung [Prism binoculars: origin and development]
2.2 Porro- und Dachkantfernglas [Porro and roof prism binoculars]
2.3 Vergrößerung [Magnification]
2.4 Objektivdurchmesser und Austrittspupille [Objective diameter and exit pupil]
2.5 Sehwinkel und Sehfeld [Angle of view and field of view]
2.6 Zur Handhabung von Ferngläsern [On handling binoculars]
2.7 Jedes Fernglas ist ein Kompromiss [Every binocular is a compromise]

11. Anwendungsprofile für Handferngläser [Applications of handheld binoculars]
11.1 Die Generalisten [Generalists]
11.2 Ferngläser für Reise und Wanderung [Binoculars for travel and hiking]
11.3 Ferngläser für Nacht und Dämmerung [Binoculars for night and twilight]
11.4 Handferngläser in der Astronomie [Handheld binoculars in astronomy]
11.5 Militärferngläser [Military binoculars]
11.6 Ferngläser zur See [Binoculars at sea]
11.7 Ferngläser mit Bildstabilisierung [Image-stabilized binoculars]
11.8 Die Kompakten [Compacts]
11.9 Operngläser [Opera glasses]
11.10 Digitalferngläser [Digital binoculars]

13. Kleine Kaufberatung [Brief buying advice]
13.1 Was die Premiumklasse bietet [What the premium class offers]
13.2 Die Mittelklasse: Suche nach dem Kompromiss [The middle class: seeking a compromise]
13.3 Schnäppchenjagd [Bargain-hunting]
13.4 Zehn Gebote zur Fernglaswahl [Ten Commandments for choosing binoculars]

Which is to say that this edition is entirely devoted to optical principles now; discussion and illustration of binocular development, specific models and applications, and choosing among them has been eliminated. (Oddly enough, that happens to be the subject of Neil English's new book, whose title is mentioned in the very first sentence of his introduction to this one...)

 

[Holger Merlitz]

This observation is correct: The German edition had an additional introductory chapter and chapters for 'choosing and using' binoculars. From the very beginning I had decided to discard the chapter 11 because it described binoculars available on the German market but none of the brands that rather are popular in US and UK. When I learned that Neil was writing about binocular selection and application, and when I realized that he was doing it much better than me, I happily omitted these parts and focused on optical principles and testing. Springer supported this decision so that our books would become nicely complementary in contents. All these changes have also made my book rather timeless, since these technical principles are still going to be valid after ten years so that I won't have to worry too much about revisions over revisions.

Compared to the German 2nd edition, the current English edition has been re-arranged in some parts and there are also a couple of minor updates. Obviously, the suggested literature is now of English language unless there is absolutely no replacement for a German source.

Whoever wants it all should consider getting both, Neil's and my book

Cheers,
Holger

 

[Canip]

I learned that Neil was writing about binocular selection and application, and when I realized that he was doing it much better than me

Hmm … that‘s YOUR view, not mine (with all due respect to Neil)

 

[Hermann]

Well, I think it's a shame Holger didn't include Chapter 2 (2. Ferngläser - der Einstieg [Binoculars - getting started]) in the
English edition. It would have made things a lot easier for "beginners".

No comments on Neil's book.

Hermann

 

[Holger Merlitz]

Well, I think it's a shame Holger didn't include Chapter 2 (2. Ferngläser - der Einstieg [Binoculars - getting started]) in the
English edition. It would have made things a lot easier for "beginners".

No comments on Neil's book.

Hermann

This is a valid point and it is going to be considered. I found it somewhat inappropriate for a book of the Springer Physics series to have such an intro, but it may not be impossible. We are receiving user's feedback and we do collect reviews and are going to discuss implications when time for the second edition has come.

I think that Neil's book is primarily targeting a readership that is less experienced than you or Canip. There are Millions of birders worldwide, a small fraction of them spending their time on discussion boards like this one. Yet, they need binoculars, and the Internet can be a tough place to find information when you are not really interested in all the details. For such people, Neil's book is providing invaluable guidance. He is not among those who claim that you need a Zeiss/Swaro/Leica to get an effective observation tool, and he has put great efforts in offering plenty of alternatives, in many cases also in combination with first hand experience. I am firmly convinced that this book is going to be useful to many happy readers.

Cheers,
Holger

 

[wllmspd]

If there are any errata or additional bits you might include in a second edition, I’d be glad to have them as a pdf to add to my 1st edition. Some of us are interested “in the details”!

Peter

 

[Thotmosis]

Whoever wants it all should consider getting both, Neil's and my book

I have both and in IMHO they are complementary.

 

[Holger Merlitz]

If there are any errata or additional bits you might include in a second edition, I’d be glad to have them as a pdf to add to my 1st edition. Some of us are interested “in the details”!

Peter

Hello Peter, we will do that!

Cheers,
Holger

 

[tenex]

Well, I think it's a shame Holger didn't include Chapter 2 (2. Ferngläser - der Einstieg [Binoculars - getting started]) in the
English edition. It would have made things a lot easier for "beginners".

I think so too. This preface briefly states how fascinating binoculars are, but the reader (whether "beginner" or not, but who has surely picked up this book because he too likes binoculars) turns the page to begin with a lecture on optics and refraction, and had better be sure of his interest because there won't even be a photo of an actual binocular until page 49.

All these changes have also made my book rather timeless, since these technical principles are still going to be valid after ten years so that I won't have to worry too much about revisions over revisions.

I can see the attraction of that, but not all the deleted material was obsolescent, especially chapter 2. Here's one little missing tidbit I liked: your mention of the shift from largely military to broader consumer use after WW2 (would birding exist without bins?), and the ironic exception of occupied Germany itself, the birthplace of the prismatic binocular, where civilian possession was prohibited on penalty of a large fine. (By the way, I was curious whether that was only in the Russian zone?) This and other bits of history, along with brief remarks on the advantages of two-eyed vision and so on, had the effect of setting a context and introducing you as an appreciator of binoculars who got interested in the details of their workings just as your reader might. And getting him interested in you as the author and your own perspective on things, besides just being the technical expert, which can seem a bit impersonal.

 

[Holger Merlitz]

I think so too. This preface briefly states how fascinating binoculars are, but the reader (whether "beginner" or not, but who has surely picked up this book because he too likes binoculars) turns the page to begin with a lecture on optics and refraction, and had better be sure of his interest because there won't even be a photo of an actual binocular until page 49.


I can see the attraction of that, but not all the deleted material was obsolescent, especially chapter 2. Here's one little missing tidbit I liked: your mention of the shift from largely military to broader consumer use after WW2 (would birding exist without bins?), and the ironic exception of occupied Germany itself, the birthplace of the prismatic binocular, where civilian possession was prohibited on penalty of a large fine. (By the way, I was curious whether that was only in the Russian zone?) This and other bits of history, along with brief remarks on the advantages of two-eyed vision and so on, had the effect of setting a context and introducing you as an appreciator of binoculars who got interested in the details of their workings just as your reader might. And getting him interested in you as the author and your own perspective on things, besides just being the technical expert, which can seem a bit impersonal.

Yes, this makes sense. I will prepare a concise introductory chapter similar to the one existing in chapter 2 of the German edition. Then I will convince Springer that such an addition is needed for the next edition. Thanks for your suggestions!

The prohibition of binoculars (and other military gear) for civilians had been installed right after WWII throughout the country. By 1950, however, both Zeiss (Jena and the newly established plant in Oberkochen) were already beginning to make new binoculars for the civilian market.

Cheers,
Holger