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="Tobias Mennle" data-source="post: 3335229" data-attributes="member: 117315">Again, thanks for all your input. Good to see some sample images from Henry so I am more entitled to feel that stopping down to a 2.5mm pupil will not solve the issues discussed by Ed and Chosun.About my photographic brightness comparison, I measured the focus distances to the field stop/aperture, they were identical for Zeiss HT, SF and Ultravid 8x42 as well as Zeiss West 8x30 MK2 pro (just below 60cm), but shorter for the Ultravid 8x32, below 40cm, so there should be some light loss due to higher magnification/macro mode. I admit I am not convinced though why the 32s generally should be so much darker. Ed, comparing binoculars´ brightness with regards to our visual spectral responses can very simply be started with by looking at the colour photographs. It might be another issue to convert them to black and white and then judging brightness.I plan to further compare the 8x32 and 8x42 Ultravids in brightness by stopping them down to the same 3.5mm pupil size. But there is no way around it, the 8x32 is quite a bit darker even in bright conditions. It is a bit brighter than the Nikon 8x42 EDG though. To be honest, I will not have sleepless nights, the 8x32 is a great package in the field. Today I had a kingfisher 10 meters in front of me and it was sheer beauty...Generally, flare brightening up the image is now one of my main concerns in comparing brightness. I suspect the 8x42 has higher flare levels than the 8x32, that might be a real issue affecting brightness.Chosun, these truncated exit pupil may not be nice, but they are certainly not a bit thing, especially as they affect the peripheries only. Compare with the Nikon EDG 8x32, it is way bigger and 90g heavier than the Ultravid, enough space for round pupils, but size and weight could be a real deal breaker for many buyers. About the HT glass issue, the Leica description clearly says that Plus models feature new coatings AND best lenses AND HT glass prisms, so this is unambiguous. This makes it a bit hard to ask Leica about the truth of this statement. I hope Gijs can shed more light on this when repeating his transmission measurements. About the Leica PR infos, one quote: "the perfect balance between transmission and contrast ensures rich colours, clear vision and the sharpest detail resolution." In the video linked by vespobuteo, what I tend to call macro contrast (which depends on good flare suppression) is called "dynamic range". Well, contrast (both macro- and micro-) should of course be as high as possible, but I do really believe lower transmission/less brightness makes images look more crisp and colors definitely more saturated. Again, the Nikon EDG 8x42 is a good example for that and the 8x32 Ultravid may well follow the same philosophy.</blockquote>

Verification