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="Dean L" data-source="post: 1761314" data-attributes="member: 83386">John, as an audiophile for over 30 years, can I ever relate to your comments regarding measurement vs. sound; and I, too, have been seeing a high correlation between audio gear and binoculars as it relates to measurement vs. perception.  That said, I do feel measurement of optical parameters in binos correlates more highly to perception than measurement of audio parameters correlates to sound, but still...While I am really a novice with respect to birding and binoculars, I have quickly learned that, as in audio, there is no perfection, but rather tradeoffs.  I presently own a pair of Nikon 8X32 SEs, a pair of Canon 10X42Ls, and most recently (this past weekend) acquired a pair of Leica 12X50 Ultravids (non-HD).  To my eyes (so far), both the Nikons and the Canons have lower distortion, and I suspect this perception relates to the edge sharpness that both embody.  However, the Leicas mesmerize with their fantastic contrast, color rendition, and center sharpness.  While they have more CA than I would have preferred (hey, I can't afford the HD version), I have found that I can always, in any situation, eliminate the CA by repositioning the object of my affections within the field of view--something that I couldn't always do with the two pairs of Nikon 12X50 SEs that I had tried.A principal measurement vs. perception area that I am confused by relates to resolution measurements vs. the perception of sharpness.  I do know that greater power, all other things being equal, will yield greater resolution.  But from the standpoint of perception, I've felt that my Nikon 8X32 SEs had greater sharpness than either pair of 12X50 SEs that I tried (perhaps they were both duds) despite the fact that on far away objects I could resolve the letters and numbers on a license plate more easily with the 12X50s.  On closer objects, however, the definition of fine detail was superior on the 8X32s.  Can anyone help me to understand this perceptual conflict?I've also been confused by the techies procedure of taking a group of different manufacturer's binoculars of, let's say 10 power, measuring the resolution of each, and then doing the same thing at 6 times the power.  Lo and behold, certain brands resolution increases more at 60 power than other brands.  I know I'm showing my ignorance, but why would I care what happens at 6 times the native power of the binocular under test when I will always use it at its given power?  Will this difference at 60 power actually be observable at 10 power?  Aren't most modern optics capable of greater resolution than the human eye?  Just asking:h?:Dean</blockquote>

Verification