Unless I am misunderstanding you it seems your often repeated statement 'I don't see glare' is hardly accurate and that you simply avoid seeing it which isn't the same thing at all.Well yes, but Im not alone, am I? Lee, as Ive written many times my most frequented birding place is a trail with large open salt marsh on one side and San Francisco Bay on the other. Looking something like do west, most days I can see the Golden Gate Bridge several miles across the Bay. I dont have to go looking for glare as you did, and suggest I should do. I have glare most every day, unless its foggy. I sometimes think the worst glare of the day is coming off cars on the drive to the trail head. This time of year especially, high noonish and/or later in the day, the sun's glare off the Bay is impossible. It doesn't matter if Im viewing through my ELs, Victory Pockets, 35 year ol Zeiss 1040Bs or my birding friend is trying to take pictures. In fact the birders I encounter with whatever bino around their neck, all know, the best viewing at those times is 180 degrees in the other direction over the marsh. We also know there are bends in the trail, places where the angle changes and we can see better out over the Bay. I dont expect Binos to eliminate glare. I dont believe binos create glare. When its at its worst Ill put on polarized sunglasses and look through my binos just fine (ala Roger, though he looks better doing it).
To be candid, I found your review of the SF/ NLs sort of incongruous, given what had already been written by Jan, (who loaned those to you), Gils, Canip, Roger, Holger, Tobias, (even surprisingly Dennis!). All remarked how well the NLs dealt with glare with a bit of adjustment in hold, given the often BF mythologized glare problem with ELs. This I think a quote that sort of summarized from those... (was it Holger or Canip?)...sorry. "Glare is there if you want to go looking for it." The scene you used to demonstrate the NL as glare monsters, (a term not one of these reviewers has used), and the one you suggest I go seek, seems a solution in search of a problem. If the sun is in my eyes, walking down the street I Iook away or put on my sunglasses. When driving, ditto, or use the visor, or change road position. With binos? Welcome to mother nature, deal with it.
Tenex as well seems to agree. Perhaps we've beaten this horse enough?
Bentley03, just above speaks eloquently enough to it and a couple other impressions you had. I'll speak to one more. My Els require 2.5 turns of the focuser to go from 6' to infinity, That may be a different evaluation than you described, but would seem slower than what you reported for the NLs or Zeiss. They are way slower than my Ol Zeiss or the Victory Pockets. In practice they are not slow. Bentley03 covers it. In a place, Bay Trail or dense Redwood forest, rarely am I looking at things spanning those distances, requiring full rotation. I remember worrying about this when I first got the ELs only to be pleasantly surprised in the field over the distances required in a given place, the required movement is way less. The precision of focus is appreciated, as I work to discern bird from cover, stuff fore and aft. It takes seconds to adapt between each of my 3 binos, something I don't fret over.
As for my test for glare being "a solution in search of a problem", this is a nice turn of phrase but the test wasn't a solution but simply a way to establish whether NL8x32 is susceptible to glare. Moreover, with the sun mostly hidden by the building next door I would contend that the test was not severe.
Finally, you stated that binos don't create glare. See Henry's post 72 and the photos he has posted. Glare in binos is caused by the bino's mis-management of light. Ask yourself (or Google) why the insides of binoculars are painted black. It is to prevent reflections and if this is not done thoroughly and carefully enough then there can be areas of bright aluminium or magnesium that reflect bright light causing what we call glare or non-image-forming light. Light reflecting off these bright spots is no different from the light you see reflecting of auto hoods.
I think from what you have posted about this, especially your reply to James's Post 77, that you feel if glare can be avoided, then it doesn't exist or at least it doesn't exist for all practical purposes. Another example is your quoting 'glare is there if you look for it' as if this is confirmation that the glare doesn't exist.
Avoiding glare-producing situations is one solution but from time to time observers find themselves looking up steep mountain sides towards the sky, or following the flight of a hawk, falcon, eagle, gull, tern, heron etc and in these circumstances it is quite possible to encounter glare as indeed it is when scanning over lakes or oceans with sunlight reflecting off it. The point here is that these circumstances arise and different binos handle it with different degrees of success.
Lee
Last edited: