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="xenophobe" data-source="post: 412111" data-attributes="member: 24887">If that's true, none of the opinions by anyone would ultimately matter, nor that of any subjective review of any particularly well-designed binocular.What I think is necessary is a definition of terms.  Obviously some people have different ideas of what one word or term may mean alongside someone else's.resolution <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite23" alt="(n)" title="Thumbs down    (n)" loading="lazy" data-shortname="(n)" /> The fineness of detail that can be distinguished in an imageacuity <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite23" alt="(n)" title="Thumbs down    (n)" loading="lazy" data-shortname="(n)" />  Sharpness, clearness, and distinctness of perception or visionObviously the commonly accepted definitions of the word has no solid meaning here on this forum with arguments based on semantical insanity.  If in fact they do, obviously these are not the same.  Sharpness, clearness and distinctness can be had at low or high resolution.  Just as in an arguement spawned by Wehr on another thread, he's confusing the definition of the two as well.Example: My Zeiss 10x40b Classics; They are extremely sharp, clear, crisp and distinct through their field of view, although, compared to the Ultravid 10x42 at long ranges, do not resolve as fine a detail as the Ultravids do.  WITHOUT the aide of extra magnification, which shouldn't be needed to determine if there is a loss in resolution when it is visually apparent.  Where, why or how this occurs does not change the fact that, ultimately, there IS less visible resolution and subjecting the optics to tests if the molecular alignment of the optical glass is/isn't in alignment with Pluto on a rainy day does not for one minute change the fact that one pair of binoculars may well indeed visulally resolve better than another, regardless of whomever may be viewing.In case I have it completely wrong, I am misunderstanding the English language (hardly) and am just not clued in to some grand elitist conspiracy to re-write the dictionary based on their optical expertise, then please school me.  If neither is the case, then there should be some solid, agreeable definition of terms so that nit-picking can be done on actual comments instead of peoples' use of specific words..</blockquote>

Verification