• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

The case for the 8x56. (1 Viewer)

As soon as the pupil gets near those 7mm, certainly it will be brighter. I wonder however when our pupils reach those 7mm. A good alternative might be a 7x42.
I have also carried around my 8x56 on hikes sometimes. But it's just too big. I do have a much smaller 10x56 however that I use quite often. Also because of the excellent center sharpness. But I think that is just caused by the stopping down of the exit pupil.
Sometimes even the Fuji HC is too heavy for my taste and I use an 8x32. If I wanna "travel light", I sometimes even just use a skeleton 8x20. Strangely enough that one also rarely shows glare. Maybe because of the tiny FoV of just 5Β°.
It probably is because of the small FOV. It seems WA binoculars are more prone to glare.
 
I like 7x50 for night use on a boat. Much easier to find channel markers in very low light conditions. For day use my 12x50 provide the magnification I need to spot details on birds from a distance. I have far less need for my scope with the addition of the 12x50 binos.
Can you hold your 12x50 steady enough to see details on birds, or do you use a tripod or monopod? A 7x50 is the standard boating binocular. 7x is much easier than 8x to hold steady without IS, especially on a boat. What 12x50 do you use? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Since Swarovski already has the 8x56 SLC, which is arguably the best 8x56 ever made, it would make no sense for them to make a Habicht W. version.
Yes, the SLC 8x56 is very good and one of the best 8x56 roofs, but it would be really nice to have a big 8x56 porro with the high transmission of the Habicht. I have an 8x56 roof, the Meopta Meostar B1 8x56 and an 8x56 porro the Docter Nobilem 8x56 and I enjoy them both, but they are different. The Meopta gives me the big perfect flatter view of a roof and the Docter gives me the more stereoscopic view of a porro. I think Swarovski could make an 8x56 Habicht lighter than the SLC 8x56 also. If the Habicht 7x42 weighs 24 oz. I could see a Habicht 8x56 weighing 32 to 34 oz.
 
Last edited:
Its marginal at best in terms of a useful performance advantages going from a '32 to a '56 in terms of daytime viewing.

Glare can be very well controlled in a '32 and even my SLC 8x56 hd can show glare if eye placement isn't quite right.

The weight and size of a '56 is inhibiting for walking and total pack weight - if I'm taking the scope I generally take my e2 8x30 if I know I'll be walking for a while.

Having said that I've not managed to part with my SLC 8x56, whenever I look through it or compare it to other bino's I can clearly see the view is just better through the '56. Its still my most used bino and now it's getting dark a bit earlier its getting even more use as a companion to my dob - it'll split albireo hand held even though it's only an 8x, long, stable barrels....

Will
 
Convince swarovski to release a 56mm Habicht W and I'm there.
A 56 mm Habicht W would save you the two air/glass surfaces per barrel of an internal focussing lens, but that's about all.
It could no longer use cemented doublets for the objectives and a wide AFoV would demand large and heavy prisms and complex eyepieces with more air/glass surfaces and longer glass paths..
The overall performance and transmission would likely be similar to a 56 mm SLC.
Btw, the Nikon WX is probably the overall best performing binocular ever made, but because of its complex design has a transmission in the upper 80s.

John
 
Its marginal at best in terms of a useful performance advantages going from a '32 to a '56 in terms of daytime viewing.

Glare can be very well controlled in a '32 and even my SLC 8x56 hd can show glare if eye placement isn't quite right.

The weight and size of a '56 is inhibiting for walking and total pack weight - if I'm taking the scope I generally take my e2 8x30 if I know I'll be walking for a while.

Having said that I've not managed to part with my SLC 8x56, whenever I look through it or compare it to other bino's I can clearly see the view is just better through the '56. Its still my most used bino and now it's getting dark a bit earlier its getting even more use as a companion to my dob - it'll split albireo hand held even though it's only an 8x, long, stable barrels....

Will
"Having said that I've not managed to part with my SLC 8x56, whenever I look through it or compare it to other bino's I can clearly see the view is just better through the '56."

That says it all right there.
 
A 56 mm Habicht W would save you the two air/glass surfaces per barrel of an internal focussing lens, but that's about all.
It could no longer use cemented doublets for the objectives and a wide AFoV would demand large and heavy prisms and complex eyepieces with more air/glass surfaces and longer glass paths..
The overall performance and transmission would likely be similar to a 56 mm SLC.
Btw, the Nikon WX is probably the overall best performing binocular ever made, but because of its complex design has a transmission in the upper 80s.

John
You wouldn't need that wide of an AFOV on an 8x56. An 8x56 is about quality, not quantity. Keep the AFOV at about 48 to 52 degrees like the Habicht 7x42 and use simple Kellner eyepieces. It would have higher transmission than the SLC at around 96%, have the great 3D view of a porro and be 10 oz. lighter. It depends upon what you consider high performing. The WX has a huge FOV, but to get that huge FOV you need a complex and heavy optical path which absorbs light and lowers the transmission.
 
"In astronomy, they always say aperture rules, but I am beginning to think it applies to birding also."

Perhaps denco is using them sitting supported in a chair for his twilight viewing? For a specific situation they may be the best for him.

But these 8x56 he mentions are 1200-1400g in weight, so for most birding people, who will be carrying them while walking some distance, they would rarely be a first choice to grab & go.
Aperture does not rule in birding.
 
Aperture still rules, you just hire a porter to carry them around for you :cool:
Exactly!(y)

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top