NL Pures Optically superior? (1 Viewer)

[Binocollector]

Discussions of which instrument is "the best" are never satisfying.

Speak for yourself. If I didn't wanna discuss these things, I wouldn't even be in a forum dedicated (in part -- but really, it's all I'm here for) to binoculars.

 

[Maljunulo]

If saying that you get a better (whatever we think that means) glass when you spend more money is “optical snobbery” please put me firmly in that column.

Exaggerating and dreaming up wild numbers to make a point does not add credence to your argument.

At this point, I’m not even sure what your argument is, but it seems to have something to do with alphas.

 

[tenex]

Speak for yourself.

I didn't say differences can't be discussed. As I suggested previously, of course any single property like transmission can be measured and compared, although methods aren't all standardized or consistent. But weighing their relative importance, especially combining them into some sort of overall score or ranking of instruments, is completely arbitrary (perhaps a better word than subjective) and cannot compel agreement on which is "best" except in cases of quite large differences. And then there are subtler characteristics not so easily measured, whose evaluation becomes more subjective.

But as to alphas, let's be very clear: it's a person with a chip on his shoulder who has to keep arguing that alphas aren't better. It's a reverse snob who complains of "optical snobbery". And that sort of conversation is even less rewarding.