What binoculars do you think have the most WOW factor! (1 Viewer)

[Leif]

That explains it, I have a faulty brain. :brains:

No. Elkcub can I am sure tell us a lot about how the brain reconstructs what we call reality. There is a famous experiment, whereby people are asked to count the number of goals scored in a basketball game shown on a TV. At one point a man in a gorilla suit comes onto centre stage. Many of the subjects do not notice the gorilla. This tells is that there is a lot of filtering going on. There are many other experiments too. Present a yellow dot at the top left corner of a TV, then a red dot at the bottom right, and we see a dot move from the top left to the bottom right, and change colour mid way. Anyway, I am going somewhat off topic, but the conclusion is that we see a reconstruction of 'reality'.

Either that, or can you reserve me a room in the funny farm? :t:

 

[bh46118]

I would say so.

It looks like we agree on what we see. |=)|

 

[bh46118]

Kind of like how the brain has to fill in the blanks on what is missing in digital audio.

No. Elkcub can I am sure tell us a lot about how the brain reconstructs what we call reality. There is a famous experiment, whereby people are asked to count the number of goals scored in a basketball game shown on a TV. At one point a man in a gorilla suit comes onto centre stage. Many of the subjects do not notice the gorilla. This tells is that there is a lot of filtering going on. There are many other experiments too. Present a yellow dot at the top left corner of a TV, then a red dot at the bottom right, and we see a dot move from the top left to the bottom right, and change colour mid way. Anyway, I am going somewhat off topic, but the conclusion is that we see a reconstruction of 'reality'.

Either that, or can you reserve me a room in the funny farm? :t:

 

[bh46118]

Room 327. Across the hallway and two doors down.||

Either that, or can you reserve me a room in the funny farm? :t:

 

[[email protected]]

Room 327. Across the hallway and two doors down.||

Ok. I had all five of my binoculatrs out today testing for CA. My binoculars are Nikon 8x32 SE, Swarovski Habicht 8x30, Nikon 8x30 EII, Bresser 8x42 ED and the Leupold Cascade 8x42 porro. All porro's except for Frank's Bresser. It is overcast here and it just snowed so the sky is white and I was looking at a black smoke stack on a house across the street. All my binoculars were CA free on-axis but they all exhibited CA at the edge. At the top of the black smoke stack was a purple fringe on all the binoculars except for the Bresser which exhibited an orangish-red fringe at the top of the stack. The CA on all the binoculars was right at the edge and no where else. It is not really bothersome because it is only at the edge. Of all my binoculars the least CA or narrowest fringe was shown by the SE and probably the worst or thickest fringe was shown by the EII. It was interesting that the Bresser's CA was a different color but it was there. I think you have to look for CA to see it or know what it is when it appears. I think most binoculars are going to have some at the very edge unless they are a true APO and most are not.

 

[bh46118]

You must not be very sensitive to it. That's a good thing.

I think you have to look for CA to see it or know what it is when it appears.

 

[[email protected]]

You must not be very sensitive to it. That's a good thing.

I spent some time over at Allbinos looking at their ratings on binoculars CA. Every binocular they have tested has some CA at the edge and most have little or none in the center although there is some that do. The best binocular for CA control at the edge is the Zeiss FL followed by the Zen Rays EDII's. The Swarovision isn't much better than the porro's like the SE which is pretty good. The Kowa is fairly good but really not exceptional. The point being ALL binoculars exhibited some CA at the edge ,whereas, most are good in the center. If CA really bothers you buy the FL it is the best in that area but it has other weak areas like the edges so it is your call.

 

[Torview]

I have tried several copies of the Swarovski 8.5x42 SV, and in overcast light, purple fringing is significant from about 2/3 of the way to the edge of the field. I find it very off putting

I`v always seen same, most people I`v talked to think I`m potty !

 

[Leif]

Ok. I had all five of my binoculatrs out today testing for CA. My binoculars are Nikon 8x32 SE, Swarovski Habicht 8x30, Nikon 8x30 EII, Bresser 8x42 ED and the Leupold Cascade 8x42 porro. All porro's except for Frank's Bresser. It is overcast here and it just snowed so the sky is white and I was looking at a black smoke stack on a house across the street. All my binoculars were CA free on-axis but they all exhibited CA at the edge. At the top of the black smoke stack was a purple fringe on all the binoculars except for the Bresser which exhibited an orangish-red fringe at the top of the stack. The CA on all the binoculars was right at the edge and no where else. It is not really bothersome because it is only at the edge. Of all my binoculars the least CA or narrowest fringe was shown by the SE and probably the worst or thickest fringe was shown by the EII. It was interesting that the Bresser's CA was a different color but it was there. I think you have to look for CA to see it or know what it is when it appears. I think most binoculars are going to have some at the very edge unless they are a true APO and most are not.

Dennis: What I am referring to is not subtle fringing, it is a very obvious broad purple fringing, and I only see it with some roof prism binoculars, and only in certain light with certain subjects, very high contrast scenes I think. It is far worse with non ED types. I have never seen it with porros, and some roofs such as the Zeiss 8x42 FL do not show it. My Hawke Frontier ED 8x43 does not show it. That is one reason I like the Hawke.

 

[kroeny]

I spent some time over at Allbinos looking at their ratings on binoculars CA. Every binocular they have tested has some CA at the edge and most have little or none in the center although there is some that do. The best binocular for CA control at the edge is the Zeiss FL followed by the Zen Rays EDII's. The Swarovision isn't much better than the porro's like the SE which is pretty good. The Kowa is fairly good but really not exceptional. The point being ALL binoculars exhibited some CA at the edge ,whereas, most are good in the center. If CA really bothers you buy the FL it is the best in that area but it has other weak areas like the edges so it is your call.

Though I like Allbinos very much, this might be misleading, as pointed out. Measurements can be done in different ways and in the field it can show up deviating again.
As already written in this thread, I could compare several bins on a Birdshow and the KOWA Genesis 8x33 was the best of all! Zeiss FL 8x32 was second and all others unusable for me. Among those were Leica Ultravid HD 8x32, Meopta 8x32 (B1), Minox HG 8x33 MiG, some Swaros EL.
Nikon was missing. So all the expensive ones...unfortunately )
The non-existing CA of the KOWA 8x33 is also confirmed by Holger Merlitz - I was in mail contact with him and what he wrote in his report about 8x32 bins exactly reflects my findings on the show.

Mostly I look to neighbors black chimney against the sky or on the white window-frames and then you have CA in all "nice colours" )

I have to add that most bins show this purple and/or greenish/yellow CA even in the middle of the FOV and that is really annoying for me, as sharpness suffers. For me thats a muddy image, like bad lenses.

Its really interesting however, that obviously only a minority is sensible for CA's. Means, we rare species have to try ourselves!

Rainer​

 

[[email protected]]

I wouldn't rush out and buy the Kowa just because of lack of CA
. They are weak in a lot of other areas.

 

[henry link]

I've been out today experimenting with the dark wire/chimney/branch against a bright sky test for CA. At the risk of giving offense I have to say that I don't find this method to be an effective way to analyze off-axis color fringes. You can certainly see color, but the true nature of the aberration can be lost for two reasons. First, the fringes mostly form in the bright areas and are therefore obscured by the bright background, some colors more than others, and a narrow dark line, like a wire, tends to blend together the outward facing and inward facing components of transverse CA, causing lateral color to sometimes resemble longitudinal color.

So, once again I'll plead for the use of white bands against a black background. Believe me, the color fringes stand out much better against a dark background and the white bands are wide enough to fully separate the the inward and outward facing fringes.

I made the photos below in sunlight using the "high contrast" shadow box I improvised yesterday. The left one shows the lateral color near the field edge (fieldstop at the top) of a Nikon 8x32 SE. The right one is a Zeiss 8x42 FL. I tried to reach best focus with both, but good focus is not really possible with the astigmatic Zeiss. The white band looks wider in the Zeiss mostly because of more pincushion distortion in it vs more angular magnification distortion in the Nikon. The photos faithfully show the larger amount of lateral color in the Zeiss and the true color components of the inward and outward facing edges in each binocular.

Believe me, guys, I'm making this plea as a public service to CA haters. I really believe that the life of a CA-phobe can be made easier if you'll just adopt a target for your evaluations that gives you better information about what you're seeing.

 

[FrankD]

Henry,

Would you then be kind enough to show similar pictures depicting longitudinal CA?

Thank you.

 

[henry link]

Frank,

The crosses in the first post of this thread show almost entirely longitudinal CA.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=134310

The same purple fringes radiate from every edge regardless of orientation, particularly strongly in the case of the 8x32 SE in the middle. It looks so bad because it's a highly magnified full aperture image.

Henry

 

[FrankD]

Oh my. I think I just had an optical epiphany.

Thank you for referring back to that original post. I totally forgot our original discussion.

On a pleasant note, it would seem I am longitudinally-CA deficient. Lateral is another matter.

 

[eitanaltman]

Henry -- is it accurate to say that if the color fringe is differently colored in either direction (e.g. purple on one side, green on the other) then it's *lateral* CA?

I find this very easy to see in nearly every binocular I've ever tried. I can see it easily on any high contrast edge, e.g. a street sign against the sky, a roof of a building, a dark telephone pole against the sky, etc. In my subjective experience it's typically absent in the center axis of nearly every binocular, but the difference seems to be in how far off axis it starts appearing, and how severe it is when it does appear. The Vortex Viper 8x32 HD and the Zen ED's are the best performing among those I've tried to critically test for this aspect.

 

[kroeny]

I wouldn't rush out and buy the Kowa just because of lack of CA
. They are weak in a lot of other areas.

Why change, if you don't see CA's ?
Then I would be happy with your ´very nice collection )

I pulled the trigger today and will get the Kowa within next days - then I can report. FWIK, there are no weak areas, but lets see.

Rainer

 

[eitanaltman]

I'm curious what "weak areas" Dennis thinks they have. Besides his sensitivity to "rolling ball" with flat fields. I've found the Kowa Genesis models to be just lovely optically and ergonomically. The 42mm versions are too heavy for my tastes but the 8x33 is one of my favorites compact roofs. Wide field, very bright, very sharp, low CA, very comfy to hold and use.

 

[Leif]

I've been out today experimenting with the dark wire/chimney/branch against a bright sky test for CA. At the risk of giving offense I have to say that I don't find this method to be an effective way to analyze off-axis color fringes.

Yes, I find your blunt and patonising style extremely annoying. I have never liked being lectured to in an emotion free tone. It comes acoss as very arrogant. :C You are welcome to propose your own method, but you will need to quantify it with a range of aperture stops, and at a range of off axis distances, otherwise it is misleading.

 

[Sancho]

In defence of Henry, and without wishing to cause any offence to other posters, I see no arrogance in his post (he even specifies that he is referring to what he finds, not lecturing on what others should find), and far from being patronising, Henry is always keen to be helpful and take his time to take and post photos, write helpful explanations of technical aspects, etc., when he doubtlessly has better ways to spend his time. Just thought I´d mention it, as Henry is one of the most supportive and reasoned posters on BF.