I wear glasses and tried all the top makes a year ago before the Ultravids appeared i.e. Leica 8x42 Trinovid, Zeiss 8x40 Victory, Swaro 8.5x42 EL and Nikon 8x42 HG. I found that the Nikons had the best eye relief though all were excellent and gave me a full field of view. The actual eye relief required will depend on the shape of the users eyeglass frames, the thickness of the lenses, the shape of their face (which determines how they sit on the face), and how their eyes are set in their face. I have small frames, thin lenses and do not have deep set eyes. I certainly find that I need at least 15mm of eye relief. I prefer 17mm, though the Zeiss Victory with 16mm were excellent.
As suggested what matters is the effective eye relief measured from the point where eyeglasses would make contact with the binocular. I am not sure if this is the figure given by manufacturers. I suspect they quote the eye relief relative to the rear surface of the rear eyepiece lens element. Certainly that is true of the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 which are notorious for having little eye relief despite a high quoted value.
As always, the message is that someone who is planning to fork out a small fortune on some nice bins should try them for themselves, or at least seek out as many viewpoints as possible.
As suggested what matters is the effective eye relief measured from the point where eyeglasses would make contact with the binocular. I am not sure if this is the figure given by manufacturers. I suspect they quote the eye relief relative to the rear surface of the rear eyepiece lens element. Certainly that is true of the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 which are notorious for having little eye relief despite a high quoted value.
As always, the message is that someone who is planning to fork out a small fortune on some nice bins should try them for themselves, or at least seek out as many viewpoints as possible.