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="FrankD" data-source="post: 3178528" data-attributes="member: 18544">A couple of thoughts after reading the thread up until this point.....1. It is funny how the direction of this thread has now become all CA-oriented. This stemming from the linked review on Rokslide primarily. Anything else worth discussing about this binocular? Light transmission maybe? Sweet spot size?, etc...?2. If memory serves me correctly there was some discussion about CA being notably present in AK prism binoculars. I think that originally came up with one of the pre-FL Zeiss Victory models and possibly also the original Zeiss Conquest 40 mm models...both of which had AK prisms but did not use ED glass in the objectives. Well, the Mavens have ED glass with the AK prisms (in the 45 mm models that is) so is it possible that less CA is present in the 45 mm models versus the 42 mm models? That could possibly be another explanation for the difference in reviewers opinions beyond the issue of how sensitive one is to CA.3. Speaking of CA, folks have been sort of discussing the issue without really being specific. Are we talking longitudinal or lateral CA? I am assuming longitudinal since the 42 mm review specified resolution charts which are typically centered in the field of view. However it should be mentioned in discussion because pretty much every binocular I have looked through displays some lateral CA but not necessarily longitudinal CA. I think it is a fair point to make the some folks don't differentiate between the two when commenting on the issue.</blockquote>

Verification