I think Apple could do much better on the weight front, but fear they would think $10,000 is for pikers....
-
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.
Which ones are your dream binoculars? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Swedpat
- Start date
It seems Thalès and other military contractors already have them for special forces, and probably think $100,000 is for pikers. More like 2.5kg:
SOPHIE Hand-Held Thermal Imagers and Target Locators
By combining several technologies into a single, upgradeable and connected lightweight unit, Thales provides dismounted soldiers the ability of fighting and moving smarter, faster and more safely.
crinklystarfish
Well-known member
SFL 8x48 and 12x48
NL Pure 8x56 and 16x56
It would also be rather nice if the Zeiss were subject to good quality control and if Swaovski made a fist of the current NL line's dubious glare issues. If we're really pushing the boat out, I'd also much prefer simple cases, straps and eyepiece guards that can quickly and easily be removed and replaced.
NL Pure 8x56 and 16x56
It would also be rather nice if the Zeiss were subject to good quality control and if Swaovski made a fist of the current NL line's dubious glare issues. If we're really pushing the boat out, I'd also much prefer simple cases, straps and eyepiece guards that can quickly and easily be removed and replaced.
hopster
Well-known member
Leica Noctivid 7x35 with negligible lateral CA in all circumstances.
All Meopta Meostars with more eye relief and MeoLux coatings, and HD glass in all of the models (B2 perhaps?).
Nikon to revamp and reintroduce the EDG with more attention to detail (objective covers, diopter setting, hydrophobic coatings, general build quality) and a better warranty/service situation.
A top quality 15x70 roof with AK prisms in a super-light composite body and with no CA.
All Meopta Meostars with more eye relief and MeoLux coatings, and HD glass in all of the models (B2 perhaps?).
Nikon to revamp and reintroduce the EDG with more attention to detail (objective covers, diopter setting, hydrophobic coatings, general build quality) and a better warranty/service situation.
A top quality 15x70 roof with AK prisms in a super-light composite body and with no CA.
jafritten
Well-known member
A mechanically stabilised 10 or 12x42 not larger than an EL. Preferably Leica or Swarovski.
A 7x Ultravid with an aperture not larger than 35mm.
A Perger porro with no frills. I wonder if they have to be that big, which I don't like. Even the x32s are quite big at 153mm.
A 7x Ultravid with an aperture not larger than 35mm.
A Perger porro with no frills. I wonder if they have to be that big, which I don't like. Even the x32s are quite big at 153mm.
CharleyBird
Well-known member
Zeiss Victory FL 6x32
(with all the qualities of the 7x42 please)
(with all the qualities of the 7x42 please)
Marty Feldman, I presume.
That would give you an IPD around 80 mm, or for a minimum of 56 mm would require about 12 mm offset per barrel - rather a lot for a roof prism!
hopster
Well-known member
Good point, but AK's do allow a significant offset do they not? I'm not sure what the limit is though.
Perhaps then a Perger or another system with TIR that allows this amount of offset.
Please inform us how you are comparing resolution between a pocket camera and binoculars. Do you mean in terms of how the image on the camera display screen compares to what you see through the binoculars? Or are you taking photos through binoculars and comparing the resolution of those photos with shots from the 740?
Here's a small list:
7x30 Nikon Monarch P (as in Porro). The same materials, weight, size of a Monarch P7 8x30, but in a modern, ultralightweight waterproof Porro with twist up eyecups and 8,5 - 9º FOV. Similar idea to a 8x30 Kowa/Leupold, but two steps above in performance, and in "Monarch flavour" with all the Nikon expertise.
7x32 Nikon SE+ WP Updated SE, fully waterproof, twist up eyecups, same weight, same rubber armour, updated coatings, 8,5 - 9º FOV
7x35 Nikon EIII WP. Updated EII, fully waterproof, twist up eyecups, 9,5 - 10º FOV.
8x30 Swarvoski SL (Super Light). 450 g (less than 16 oz) 8,5º FOV. A single bridge roof (slim style, like a Nikon MHG), but hiding inside the guts of a ELSV 8x32.
7x35 Ultravid HD+. Actually this is doable!!!!!! (well, make it 8,5 - 9º FOV, please).
12x32 Canon IS L WP. Between 700 - 650 g (24,5 - 22 oz) 5,5 - 6º FOV. Same image quality as the current 10x42 L IS, but on 32 mm, fully waterproof, top of the range optics, ED, fluorite (you name it, whatever it takes to kill CA and get a sharp view). A true "alpha killer" or überalpha. Alpha view when not in IS... beyond reality when IS enabled.
7x20 CF+ Nikon WP. Updated version of the reverse Porro 7x20: fully waterproof, 7,5 - 8º FOV. 200 g (7 oz) weight.
7x30 Nikon Monarch P (as in Porro). The same materials, weight, size of a Monarch P7 8x30, but in a modern, ultralightweight waterproof Porro with twist up eyecups and 8,5 - 9º FOV. Similar idea to a 8x30 Kowa/Leupold, but two steps above in performance, and in "Monarch flavour" with all the Nikon expertise.
7x32 Nikon SE+ WP Updated SE, fully waterproof, twist up eyecups, same weight, same rubber armour, updated coatings, 8,5 - 9º FOV
7x35 Nikon EIII WP. Updated EII, fully waterproof, twist up eyecups, 9,5 - 10º FOV.
8x30 Swarvoski SL (Super Light). 450 g (less than 16 oz) 8,5º FOV. A single bridge roof (slim style, like a Nikon MHG), but hiding inside the guts of a ELSV 8x32.
7x35 Ultravid HD+. Actually this is doable!!!!!! (well, make it 8,5 - 9º FOV, please).
12x32 Canon IS L WP. Between 700 - 650 g (24,5 - 22 oz) 5,5 - 6º FOV. Same image quality as the current 10x42 L IS, but on 32 mm, fully waterproof, top of the range optics, ED, fluorite (you name it, whatever it takes to kill CA and get a sharp view). A true "alpha killer" or überalpha. Alpha view when not in IS... beyond reality when IS enabled.
7x20 CF+ Nikon WP. Updated version of the reverse Porro 7x20: fully waterproof, 7,5 - 8º FOV. 200 g (7 oz) weight.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I read through every post , getting ready to suggest new SE’s and light weight Swaros. You stole my suggestions 🤣✌🏼.
Actually it is the Canon 730HS.
When I try to read small print at a distance with the Canon 18x50 IS with 20/15 eyesight I can't read it.
When I take a photo or look at the camera screen at 40x optical zoom I can easily read it.
The same applies to detail on a chimney pot at 124 metres or a crow sitting on the chimney pot.
Somebody with 20/10 eyesight might equal the resolution of the camera using the 18x50 IS.
The camera does not depend on a person's eyesight.
A fine 50mm refractor would easily outresolve the camera at high magnification.
The camera resolves to the theoretical limit of the lens front aperture.
The Canon 18x50 IS gets nowhere near the resolution limit for a 50mm objective.
There is also the fact that one benefits with the binocular by using two eyes.
Whereas the camera only uses one lens.
However, the camera benefits from inbuilt digital processing.
At night the camera doesn't perform so well.
However, the pocket Canon G16 shows many stars just braced on the window frame with no tripod on Programme with an automatic exposure of 1 second at f/1.8 at 3200 ISO.
With my unaided eyes I see no stars at all.
For instance Cassiopeia shows beautifully down to magnitude 5, whereas it is totally invisible to my unaided eyes, and I even have trouble with an 8x32 BA binocular.
The newer Canon pocket camera I have does better at 6400 ISO, but is actually too sensitive in light pollution and I also get an image of my own face reflected in the window.
The Sony A7S with 85mm f/1.4 Samyang manual focus lens shows magnitude 8 stars on the screen at 102.000 ISO, where no stars are seen with unaided eyes in very bad light pollution.
It has a 28 degree diagonal field.
With the Sony A7S I use a Finnish Ergo mount, which is multipurpose.
I also use a special black material shade that fits to the window with suction caps to avoid reflections.
At 102,000 ISO this is essential.
I get 7th and 8th magnitude stars with single exposures of 1/13th second at f/1.5. I use lenses wide open for astro photos.
I don't stack photos and never use any enhancement programmes or RAW. I only use straight JPEGs from the camera for all my photos with all my digital cameras.
I have around 1.7 million digital photos, which I rarely see a second time.
With film I have all my prints, negatives or diapositives.
I do not take photos through binoculars, although I used to take planetary photos with the 317mm Dall Kirkham at 23,000mm f/72 1 second exposures on Saturn and Jupiter with 160 ASA or 400 ASA film. 111 photos on a roll of 35mm film, as the Minolta SRT 303B has the ability to advance one third of a frame at a time.
About 5 exposures were top quality out of 111.
Cable release or self timer release.
B.
When I try to read small print at a distance with the Canon 18x50 IS with 20/15 eyesight I can't read it.
When I take a photo or look at the camera screen at 40x optical zoom I can easily read it.
The same applies to detail on a chimney pot at 124 metres or a crow sitting on the chimney pot.
Somebody with 20/10 eyesight might equal the resolution of the camera using the 18x50 IS.
The camera does not depend on a person's eyesight.
A fine 50mm refractor would easily outresolve the camera at high magnification.
The camera resolves to the theoretical limit of the lens front aperture.
The Canon 18x50 IS gets nowhere near the resolution limit for a 50mm objective.
There is also the fact that one benefits with the binocular by using two eyes.
Whereas the camera only uses one lens.
However, the camera benefits from inbuilt digital processing.
At night the camera doesn't perform so well.
However, the pocket Canon G16 shows many stars just braced on the window frame with no tripod on Programme with an automatic exposure of 1 second at f/1.8 at 3200 ISO.
With my unaided eyes I see no stars at all.
For instance Cassiopeia shows beautifully down to magnitude 5, whereas it is totally invisible to my unaided eyes, and I even have trouble with an 8x32 BA binocular.
The newer Canon pocket camera I have does better at 6400 ISO, but is actually too sensitive in light pollution and I also get an image of my own face reflected in the window.
The Sony A7S with 85mm f/1.4 Samyang manual focus lens shows magnitude 8 stars on the screen at 102.000 ISO, where no stars are seen with unaided eyes in very bad light pollution.
It has a 28 degree diagonal field.
With the Sony A7S I use a Finnish Ergo mount, which is multipurpose.
I also use a special black material shade that fits to the window with suction caps to avoid reflections.
At 102,000 ISO this is essential.
I get 7th and 8th magnitude stars with single exposures of 1/13th second at f/1.5. I use lenses wide open for astro photos.
I don't stack photos and never use any enhancement programmes or RAW. I only use straight JPEGs from the camera for all my photos with all my digital cameras.
I have around 1.7 million digital photos, which I rarely see a second time.
With film I have all my prints, negatives or diapositives.
I do not take photos through binoculars, although I used to take planetary photos with the 317mm Dall Kirkham at 23,000mm f/72 1 second exposures on Saturn and Jupiter with 160 ASA or 400 ASA film. 111 photos on a roll of 35mm film, as the Minolta SRT 303B has the ability to advance one third of a frame at a time.
About 5 exposures were top quality out of 111.
Cable release or self timer release.
B.
Last edited:
As to the original post.
My Foton 5x25 has superb resolution despite probably having no phase coating etc. It has an oversize 30mm objective stopped down internally. It may be that the longer focal length and very high quality optics help.
When I need a 12 degree plus field I use the Foton and not the 6x24 Amplivid or 6x24 Komz.
A good example of the VisionKing 5x25 should do well, but I think one needs to buy six to get a good one.
It has a 15 degree field. Pity it isn't higher quality.
There are several quite good 12x56 roof prism binoculars and may be a high quality 12x60 Porro.
There are good quality 100mm binoculars.
Regards,
B.
My Foton 5x25 has superb resolution despite probably having no phase coating etc. It has an oversize 30mm objective stopped down internally. It may be that the longer focal length and very high quality optics help.
When I need a 12 degree plus field I use the Foton and not the 6x24 Amplivid or 6x24 Komz.
A good example of the VisionKing 5x25 should do well, but I think one needs to buy six to get a good one.
It has a 15 degree field. Pity it isn't higher quality.
There are several quite good 12x56 roof prism binoculars and may be a high quality 12x60 Porro.
There are good quality 100mm binoculars.
Regards,
B.
"8x30 Swarovski SL (Super Light). 450 g (less than 16 oz) 8,5º FOV. A single bridge roof (slim style, like a Nikon MHG), but hiding inside the guts of a ELSV 8x32."
I like that one. I would like to see Swarovski come out with some binoculars to compete with the SFL, but I wonder if they could it without glare. Furthermore, I would like to Swarovski come out with lighter, smaller EL's like the old EL 8x32. The new NL's are too big, heavy and bulky.
If that is how you use your optics, and wish to perceive what you are trying to see - then fair enough. Sometimes I slightly envy the astro brigade, in that what they are looking for doesn't flit away at a second's notice. But those pinpoints of light from stars that might have perished years ago seem very distant and cold compared to the quicksilver vitality and yes, sometimes frustrating elusiveness of what I observe.
I have Visionking 5x25, it replaced Bushnell X-wide 5x25 which was water damaged.
Visionking actually exceeded my expectation with very good on axis sharpness, better than Bushnell. But the eye relief is shorter.
The sweet spot is very small with only ~25% of the field area sharp. Such a configuration with same FOV but larger sweet spot and longer ER would be awesome.
Last edited:
By the way: I want to add some high grade binocular eyeglasses like 4x20 with 20 deg TFOV. They would really be a great binocular for theater, sport or airshows. Because of the wide FOV you could have such a binocular more or less constantly attached to your eyes without the need of taking them of at the same time you have free hands. And hardly need at all to refocus with the long depth of field.
I would like an NL 8x32 without any glare.A NL 10x40 around 600 g and without any glare.
Both SPs and AKs can be designed with offset. It's just that AKs take up a lot of space in the longitudinal axis, so they are usually used in binoculars with large objectives and correspondingly long focal length, and it's there that offset is required.
I just measured my 56 mm SLCs, which have an IPD range of 56-75 mm and an objective spacing of 68-87 mm. That's 12 mm difference or 6 mm offset per barrel.
A 70 mm roof prism binocular requiring 12 mm offset per barrel would probably need very large and heavy prisms.
So what's wrong with Porros in this size? No prism edge in the light path, no need for phase coatings and cheaper too.
John
