Optical Realities (1 Viewer)

[Maljunulo]

"Ideopathic" is a sophisticated medical term, which translates as "We don't have a clue."

A refreshing bit of honesty.

 

[tenex]

“Coal workers' pneumoconiosis (CWP), commonly known as "black lung disease," occurs when coal dust is inhaled. Over time, continued exposure to the coal dust causes scarring in the lungs, impairing your ability to breathe. Considered an occupational lung disease, it is most common among coal miners.”

Essentially the same thing happened in Western silver and gold mines in the 1880s-90s, when dust generated by the pneumatic rock drill that replaced slow manual "double-jacking" caused silicosis in drillers and muckers. It became known as the "widow-maker", until the introduction of the Leyner drill which kept the dust down with water, which is the eventual bright side of the story. Is there one for black lung?

 

[Troubador]

Bearing in mind that I am more interested in whether binos can deliver enjoyable and informative nature observations rather than come up with high marks after a forensic technical assessment of their optical performance I would place the MeoStar on an equal level with Conquest HD but its focus speed is almost half as slow as the Conquest so it may be best suited to different habitats and different users. By the way my remarks shouldn't be taking as damning the MeoStar with faint praise, I have mine with me now on Islay.

Lee

Update: I used the MeoStars all day today on Islay and what delightful binos they are. The focus action is a little uneven in its 'feel' (not its speed) but the view is excellent and imaged a flock of around 500 Barnacle Geese beautifully, not to mention a Buzzard that stayed perched on a dry-stone wall outside our cottage for over an hour.

Lee

 

[Paultricounty]

I've acquired a few more binos than I need the past two years. I have found discernible differences between the non-alpha, near-alpha, and alpha. E.g. My Trinovids were distinctly better than my Terras. The Ultravids better than the Trinnies (but not the Retros). But when comparing same-tier binos, even after having read the countless threads regarding all the qualities and failings, I often simply cannot see noticeable differences in-the-field. I suppose if was looking at views simultaneously side-by-side (e.g. a photo of the views showing color bias), I would see it. But even sitting on patio swapping binos back and forth, my brain just can't retain the critical info and I can only react with a 'gut' feeling of 'wow these are sharp/crisp/lovely' vs 'dunno why they don't inspire'. Perhaps its aging eyes?

I have been going back and forth between UV8x42's and 8x40SFL since yesterday midday, trying to decide if I need/want the SFL's and frankly I can tell no substantive OPTICAL difference. Not saying they aren't different (flat field, FOV, etc.) but nothing that is more important than just which package I prefer.


Truth.
I've found that price does (at least ballpark) correlate to quality tier (mid, almost-alpha, alpha, etc.). And within a tier, the discussions while true, are VERY fine nuances. I found a huge leap from 60's Trinovid to Terra and from there another step up to modern Trinovid HD. Then came Ultravids, again noticeably better than the Trinovids. When I say noticeable, I mean something my wife - not an optics nerd! - could see when asked to 'pick which one you think is a better view'. But when I compare my new-to-me SFL's to the UV's (8x40 vs 8x42), I really have to struggle to characterize what differences I see. Yes, I can sort of speak to the color, eye-box, flat or pincushion field, sharpness, etc. but overall it's just an impression that they are in the same league and both have superb IQ.
OTOH, what DOES seem VERY apparent is the different mfg's philosophy and style. The haptics and ergos, the build, the location of focus knob, weight, center of gravity, etc. seem quite distinct and it's that 'personality' which ultimately leads me to pick one bino over the other. That a handful of folks occasionally see a ring/glare/whatever, seems of academic interest but FOR ME of little practical importance. Not saying it's not real - just that unless I suffer it, it makes no difference and clearly it's not the norm. Even CA, seems something that unless I look for it, I'm just not thinking about much. yes, I've looked at dark birds on a dark skyline and wished for more mag, less CA, etc. but it doesn't DRIVE my birding or choice of optics.

I think your spot on with your description of the differences in each quality tier. In the last few years I’ve gone through each one of those tiers with the top five in each grouping. The multiple options in each price level all are about the same. One might better at one thing and another slightly better inan other area. When you look at the $1000 (almost alpha) Nikon MHG, Zeiss Conquest, Leica Trinovid HD etc. etc. there is no clear winner optically, it’s more which one you prefer and which feels better in the hand. I cringe when I hear someone say, this one or that one is clearly superior or the best of the bunch when comparing like priced glass. I think that goes for every price tier. This just my own opinion.

As far as not being able to discern the image quality gap your looking for in the UV and SFL, its most likely because theyre both in the same optical category. It’s like wheres the gap in the SF and NL, there is none, it’s all about preference once your comparing like quality binoculars.

For me it’s not always which one I think I’m seeing a quality gap, it’s more about the differences in optical personality of each optic. Those characteristics that separate now, of course assuming they’re all high-quality Optics.

Paul

 

[RandyBo]

Essentially the same thing happened in Western silver and gold mines in the 1880s-90s, when dust generated by the pneumatic rock drill that replaced slow manual "double-jacking" caused silicosis in drillers and muckers. It became known as the "widow-maker", until the introduction of the Leyner drill which kept the dust down with water, which is the eventual bright side of the story. Is there one for black lung?

The use of water sprays and proper ventilation certainly helps but, unfortunately, does not eliminate all of the dust (as shown in the first 25 seconds of this video:

). Also, none of the mining companies in my area offer any type of retirement. So, most coal miners work until social security retirement age or until they become disabled 25-40 years.