Veiling Glare Comparisons (1 Viewer)

[Rotherbirder]

If you think it's worth it, it is very easy to make something yourself that you just shift onto the barrels.

Back in the 80s, when Zeiss Jena 10x50 Jenoptem were de rigeur, it was common for users to cut two lengths of plastic waste pipe of a suitable diameter and split them once along their length. These could then be expanded to slip over each barrel of the binocular, their 'springiness' enough to keep them in place, making effective glare/rain protectors.

RB

 

[rob220]

Wanted to share the result of my experiment with the materials mentioned. The glare was completely eliminated even going into a lowering sun as close as I dared. Got rid of an annoyance and made this binocular exactly what I hoped for.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

einaltman, post 27,
Yes I am shocked, since I seem to something wrong because I did not stumble on glare problems with the Swarovski binoculars here. The question is: what am I doing wrong, since I have come acrosse severe reflections/glare/flare problems in some binoculars, but not in the Zeiss, Leica, Nikon and Swarovski ones I have used and/or investigated.
So what can I do about it: seek for psychological assistance, ask for appropriate brain surgery??
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[rob220]

einaltman, post 27,
Yes I am shocked, since I seem to something wrong because I did not stumble on glare problems with the Swarovski binoculars here. The question is: what am I doing wrong, since I have come acrosse severe reflections/glare/flare problems in some binoculars, but not in the Zeiss, Leica, Nikon and Swarovski ones I have used and/or investigated.
So what can I do about it: seek for psychological assistance, ask for appropriate brain surgery??
Gijs van Ginkel

Hi Gjis
Nice to be able to use the binocular in all types of light now without any loss of quality and to be able see the birds in good contrast under difficult conditions. Wonder why there was no glare in any of the binoculars you mentioned? My Leica UV BN's 8 x 42 have less glare but I can still get it under the pretty extreme conditions mentioned. After 60 years as a professional photographer I can't help being a fusspot about my lenses.

 

[dries1]

This argument about the NLs glare has become, obtuse. I have the NL in 8X42 and after using it for a while now it is the best 8X42 on the market/Optics and construction IMO. And no, I do not stare as close to the sun as I can to check for glare. If you don't want to spend the $$$ on the glass frankly, go find something else.

 

[Maljunulo]

An obsessive and determined search for flaws will always find one or more.

 

[rob220]

Message received loud and clear!

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

rob220, post 44,
I do not know the answer to your question, but generally I avoid looking towards the sun or close to it, since I like my eyes and where it can get difficult is under conditions when the sun rays are reflected over water surfaces, but even then it is very well possible to get undisturbed images without disturbing reflections generated in the binoculars. Binoculars can not filter reflections generated by light reflections on waves of water, which one can also observe with the naked eye. Another difficult situation is when the sun is low in a very bright sky, under that type of conditions some binoculars make observing rather difficult. But as soon as I come across a situation in which one of the binoculars I mentioned in my post 43, I will immediately report it here, since it is of importance to know for users. And I came across some binoculars, as I have mentioned on this forum, which can make observing very difficult or impossible, but I have reported that already on this forum.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[rob220]

Thank you for your interesting reply. I realize that this subject has been beaten to death. I am excited to have found a place to share information about something that I have been interested in for years . I want to make clear (pardon the pun) that I would never normally look anywhere near the sun as I too like to keep my vision in tact and knew that where I was looking was safe but I wanted to see how far I could push it before getting the "dreaded" flare and was pleased to see that it was a lot. Also was not obsessively looking for problems but did notice that there was flare so looked on this forum to see how others felt about it and how they dealt with it and if I could make a wonderful instrument better Shading the lens seemed like a good option hence my experiment and my post. I thought that other birders and binocular enthusiasts might find the materials I used interesting as it is flexible etc, etc. The birds are coming back to Maine and I love sitting by the feeder and watching. I can do it for hours but have lots of other stuff to do. Happy birding!

Rob

 

[GrampaTom]

Am I the only one who wears sunglasses?

 

[Tringa45]

Am I the only one who wears sunglasses?

Tom,
It's not light intensity that's the problem, but a loss of contrast in some backlit conditions. It appears as if there is thin fog between you and the viewed object.

John

 

[Tringa45]

Wanted to share the result of my experiment with the materials mentioned. The glare was completely eliminated even going into a lowering sun as close as I dared. Got rid of an annoyance and made this binocular exactly what I hoped for.

Rob,

That is very similar to what I used in my comparisons in the original post. I also found it to be very effective in eliminating veiling glare.
Canip has come up with a more elegant solution on the Swarovski subforum, but it would hve to be tailored to a specific binocular and objective spacing.

It seems I have opened a can of worms with this thread. Perhaps we could agree that veiling glare can be induced to a greater or lesser extent in any unshielded binocular under certain (rare) circumstances, and that users' sensibilities are different.
I don't think it could be seen as a killer argument against any premium binocular.

John

 

[rob220]

Hi John
Thanks for your response. Yes any controversial issue such as glare will probably open the can of worms. I think we who are into optics want them to be as good as they can be at least that is how I feel. It is so satisfying to find a simple solutions that while not a deal breaking issue, my FL's certainly work better.

Rob

 

[rob220]

Just want to add to this amazing group that I am fully aware that I did not reinvent the wheel but appreciated all the inventiveness here and took off from there with materials that I am familiar with.

 

[Stephen Prower]

I realize that this subject has been beaten to death.

Rob

I apologise that I add my twopennyworth to a long thread. The excuse is that I add to the possible means of alleviating glare problems that other posters have contributed, rather than the discussion of the nature and causes of the problems.

--------
In case it helps anyone, I attach a photo of a Bushnell Custom Elite 7x26 appropriately further 'customised', using bicycle inner tube, with what I shall neutrally call a 'light shield'.

The outer section of inner tube has an edge that I found uncomfortable. So I added an inner section of doubled over tube, and adjusted it until it made first contact with the skin of the eye socket.

I have recently found it easier than it used to be to find inner tubes to fit a 2.3 inch maximum section mountain bike tyre in the gash bin of a British bike shop. They are probably a good starter for trying to find the best section of inner tube to fit, with just a little amount of stretch, say a 35mm diameter binocular eyecup.

I use discarded inner tubes for binocular customisation because it is easier to work with a selection of tubes of different section and thickness of rubber. The cost of new tubes would soon mount up. The recycler in me would also disapprove.

--------
An alternative approach how to use bicycle inner tube to shield binocular eyecups was described last year by Wllmspd at post #15 of the following thread:

widening eye-cups

Has anyone found a way to widen rubber eye-cups. I have seen lots of information on eye-relief but little on actually widening the eye cup itself. Given that everyone has different sizes of eye-sockets, it would stand to reason that binocular companies would recognize that and provide some...

www.birdforum.net

'[Bicycle inner tube] labelling is a load of hurt, I bought what I [thought] would fit but failed. So I bought one super ultra huge fat-bike tube and slice bits off as I need. You can then cut it so you have a long strip, then you can use contact adhesive to tune the exact diameter you want. ...'

I agree about bicycle inner tube labelling!

But as above, I have been able to stock up conveniently with a selection of tubes of different sizes because I am lucky enough to live a mile away from a helpful bicycle shop, .


Stephen

The 2.3 inch example is approximate. I have tried out a 2.3 inch sample piece of tube on a 35mm diameter eyecup, but eg the thickness, and so stretch, of the tube will vary between different models of tube

On looking at the second photo I remind myself that I used a third, inner, section of tube to adjust the diameter of the outer section exactly to fit comfortably

 

[Hermann]

einaltman, post 27,
Yes I am shocked, since I seem to something wrong because I did not stumble on glare problems with the Swarovski binoculars here. The question is: what am I doing wrong, since I have come acrosse severe reflections/glare/flare problems in some binoculars, but not in the Zeiss, Leica, Nikon and Swarovski ones I have used and/or investigated.

If you don't see veiling glare in e.g. the SV 8x32, you must be wearing Swaro-tinted spectacles!

Hermann

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Herman, post 56,
I am not the only one who does not see glare in the 8x32 SV, read Jan van Daalens posts for example. We are both experienced binocular users.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Hermann]

It seems I have opened a can of worms with this thread. Perhaps we could agree that veiling glare can be induced to a greater or lesser extent in any unshielded binocular under certain (rare) circumstances, and that users' sensibilities are different.

I don't quite agree. Some binoculars are far more susceptible than others to veiling glare. The Habicht 8x30 is a glaring example (pun intended). And some companies place more emphasis on avoiding veiling glare than others, for instance Leica. Of course there may be some individual differences between different users, but many of the arguments seem me to arise when users defend "their" binoculars (or, indeed, "their" favourite brand) no matter what, especially if they just shelled out a large amount of money for a new pair. This has happened here numerous times, only for the same users to switch binoculars not long after.

I don't think it could be seen as a killer argument against any premium binocular.

Depends on your own preferences and your observing habits. I've got several binoculars that aren't exactly great WRT veiling glare, including some vintage binoculars. That's alright. But no way would I pay a large amount of money for a new alpha that isn't up to scratch.

Veiling glare is one of my pet peeves and definitely a killer argument as far as I'm concerned.

Hermann

 

[Hermann]

Herman, post 56,
I am not the only one who does not see glare in the 8x32 SV, read Jan van Daalens posts for example. We are both experienced binocular users.

So am I.

Hermann

 

[dries1]

Are you a scientist?