• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

The case for the 8x56. (2 Viewers)

Binocollector said:
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 5°.
Click to expand...
It probably is because of the small FOV. It seems WA binoculars are more prone to glare.
 
Elkhornsun said:
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.
Click to expand...
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:
kabsetz said:
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.
Click to expand...
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
 
iseegeorgesstar said:
Convince swarovski to release a 56mm Habicht W and I'm there.
Click to expand...
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
 
William Lewis said:
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
Click to expand...
"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.
 
Tringa45 said:
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
Click to expand...
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.
 
Scott98 said:
Aperture still rules, you just hire a porter to carry them around for you :cool:
Click to expand...
Exactly!(y)

www.birdforum.net

How to carry heavy binoculars in the field and on long hikes

Heavy bins can be a pain on long hikes. I don't mind the neck strap so much when I'm wearing a big coat but I hate heavy bins around my neck in summer. I always carry a rucksack and I just don't fancy a harness under the rucksack. So, I cut a regular neck strap and fitted it with Peak Design...
www.birdforum.net www.birdforum.net
 
Warning! This thread is more than 1 year ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Glare Monsters!
21 22 23
Replies
445
Views
33K
Jos Stratford
Jos Stratford
P
8x56 & 8x54 Brand Comparisons
2
Replies
24
Views
3K
William Lewis
W
O
Meopta Meopro Air 8x42 or GPO Passion HD 8x42?
Replies
0
Views
178
Ouroboros
O
T
Resolution and the Irrelevance of MTF
Replies
6
Views
586
Tringa45
T
D
  • Locked
Is the Zeiss SFL 8x40 worth the difference in price over the Nikon MHG 8x42?
4 5 6
Replies
106
Views
15K
Jos Stratford
Jos Stratford

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top