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="kabsetz" data-source="post: 3312804" data-attributes="member: 10167">Concerning the color casts.I've compared the SF to SV pretty extensively in the 8x and 8.5x versions, and now the SF to a Canon in 10x. Based on these, my experience is that the color cast of the SF is only very slightly on the yellow-green side, certainly not anything I'd call pronounced, but of course these are just words and we all use them differently.In the SV comparison, the 8.5x42 SV has in my view a slight blue cast, and taken on their own, both the SV and the SF are plenty neutral enough. However, since their color biases are on the opposite sides of neutral, when switching back and forth the difference between the two is surprisingly large, and this difference I would call pronounced. So, if I'd been used to the color cast of the SF I'd say the SV had a pronounced blue cast and if I were used to the SV I'd say the SF had a pronounced yellow cast.The Canon I have has a color cast that is more neutral than either, although very slightly less bright. Comparing the SF to the Canon, my eyes see both as neutral, with the SF ever so slightly less so.As has been noted often on other threads, a slightly yellow cast comes from coatings that filter out a tiny (or sometimes not so tiny) amount of the blue-violet-ultraviolet end of the spectrum, and as this is the end of the visible spectrum that scatters most, contrast over large distances is enhanced with this type of filtration. At short distances, there is so much less scatter that it doesn't matter, and a stronger blue end gives a stronger experience of contrast.I agree with SD on the sharper edges of the 10x50 SV (which I have tested earlier but do not have at hand to compare to the SF now). The 10x50 has the sharpest edges and least sharpness drop-off outside of the center field of any binocular I have ever tested. The Canon and the 10x42 SV come second, and the 10x42 SF, although quite good, is some ways behind these two.The 10x42 SF does exhibit a rather large amount of AMD in the outer edges of the field, and consequently I see fairly pronounced rolling ball in it. But as I have said before, this does not bother me much and if I were to use these binoculars regularly I would get used to it and pretty much ignore it.Kimmo</blockquote>

Verification