Why are Zeiss so sharp on-axis compared to other binoculars? (2 Viewers)

[Maljunulo]

yes. but the difference I posted can be seen in 1x magnification. boosters are for double checking it by enlarging the tine difference.

Mine was a general statement, not a comment on your posted difference.

 

[Paultricounty]

After 185 post, I think that we explored the topic a lot. We will not gain more information, by just discussing and referencing others reviews.

What we can expect, that allbinos does good reviews. Maybe there test methods are not 100% perfect but they are a good indicator. I think they do it as objective as possible.

It‘s unlikely that someone of the forum members would have all the binos we discussed here, to make proper resolution and CA comparisons. It would be a guy with a lot of high quality binos but with around 10-20k less money. Because they are all pricey. 😂

You talking to me 😉✌. Oh, more like 30+K

 

[OrangeO]

I'll pile on by saying that I think if you need 30X to see a difference between two binoculars, or the two tubes of a single binocular, that difference is insignificant and undetectable.

Fun, but insignificant.

The irony of posting this on a forum dedicated to looking at birds with binoculars is baffling.

 

[Maljunulo]

The irony of posting this on a forum dedicated to looking at birds with binoculars is baffling.

??

 

[Paultricounty]

This is what inevitably happens eventually in most forums, to my utter dismay.

The guys who know what they are talking about about, and from whom everyone can learn, are driven away by this kind of behavior on the part of one or two.

You just described the whole sub forum ruffled feathers 😜

 

[Maljunulo]

You just described the whole sub forum ruffled feathers 😜

I’ve probably only read it two or three times.

It didn’t sustain my interest.

 

[Dennis Mau]

haven't seen 10x42 EDG yet

EDG is the hand down best at comfort of the view but brightness and central sharpness can't compete with the 8x42 list I posted.

NV 10x42 falls lot in terms of colorfidelity, sharpness then 8x42 NV.
but I personally prefer lieca style amber contrast of 10x42 NV more


directly compared 8x32 EL SV fieledpro(new) and new field pro.

new has better color satuation but brightness and sharpness is superior in old SV

old 8x32 ELSV is sharpest 8 power bino I have seen yet.
(have compared it directly with almost every top 8 power in market. such as Razor UHD, opticron aurora, MHG 30/42, EDG 42, E2, CHD, TFL, HT, SF, SFL, UV, NV, New el, NL)

also heard about 8.5x42 new / old are similar.

Thanks, jackjack! Very interesting about the old 8x32 ELSV being the sharpest binocular you have seen yet. It makes me wonder what Swarovski changed in the newer ELSV versus the older ELSV. Have you ever tested the Zeiss FL 7x42 for sharpness, or the Zeiss FL 8x32? How about CA control? I really appreciate your excellent contributions. These are some of the best resolution tests Bird Forum has ever seen.

 

[Dennis Mau]

You talking to me 😉✌. Oh, more like 30+K

You're one of those rich New Yorkers that has way too many binoculars for their own good! But I must admit you are popular. I have never seen such a high reaction score. It is even higher than the moderators!

 

[Dennis Mau]

The irony of posting this on a forum dedicated to looking at birds with binoculars is baffling.

Do you think it is baffling because it is not necessary, and you're better off just comparing the binoculars with your eyes to decide which one you like? Thanks for your comment!

 

[Paultricounty]

Thanks for that, Jackjack! You're correct. I forgot about the additional objective spacing an AK prism binocular has, which creates the 3D effect. Porro prisms aren't real good at close distance, as you say. I really notice the 3D effect in my Zeiss FL 7x42's because of the AK prism, and I think there is an increase in contrast and resolution because of it. Rg548 is probably seeing similar things in his HT 8x42, plus it has the advantage of very high transmission. Nice pictures by the way! It really shows the difference in objective spacing between an AK prism binocular and an SP Prism binocular.

I’m not going to get into the contrast and resolution thing, as it is being beaten like a dead horse. I would like to opine that I don’t believe your seeing 3D effect in the FL7x42, it’s DOF from the 7x.

 

[jackjack]

Thanks, jackjack! Very interesting about the old 8x32 ELSV being the sharpest binocular you have seen yet. It makes me wonder what Swarovski changed in the newer ELSV versus the older ELSV. Have you ever tested the Zeiss FL 7x42 for sharpness, or the Zeiss FL 8x32? How about CA control? I really appreciate your excellent contributions. These are some of the best resolution tests Bird Forum has ever seen.

8x32 TFL has Similar CA compared to EL, NL 8x32 at center but better at the edges.
FOV and magnification is smaller then conquest 8x32 but sharpness and brightness is at least half a step above. (but resolution didn't differ much because of smaller magnification.)
distortion is much better on conquest and edge sharpness but better in conquest.

haven't compare 7x42 and 8x32 TFL directly.
but 7x42 TFL seems to be sharper, brighter, less CA then UVHD 7x42. but it have distinctive greenish coloring, so I prefer warmer tone and bit better color fidelity on UVHD more.

I have compared 8x32 and 10x32 TFL.
they are both very nice. really I want to have it for birding since they are so small.
I prefer 8x32's color and bit more forgivable eyerelif more.

additionally, I prefer 8x32 conquest much more then 10x32 but in terms of 32mm TFL, even I still prefer 8x32 but 10x32 stills feel very nice to me.

 

[jackjack]

8x32 TFL has Similar CA compared to EL, NL 8x32 at center but better at the edges.
FOV and magnification is smaller then conquest 8x32 but sharpness and brightness is at least half a step above. (but resolution didn't differ much because of smaller magnification.)
distortion is much better on conquest and edge sharpness but better in conquest.

haven't compare 7x42 and 8x32 TFL directly.
but 7x42 TFL seems to be sharper, brighter, less CA then UVHD 7x42. but it have distinctive greenish coloring, so I prefer warmer tone and bit better color fidelity on UVHD more.

I have compared 8x32 and 10x32 TFL.
they are both very nice. really I want to have it for birding since they are so small.
I prefer 8x32's color and bit more forgivable eyerelif more.

additionally, I prefer 8x32 conquest much more then 10x32 but in terms of 32mm TFL, even I still prefer 8x32 but 10x32 stills feel very nice to me.

top conquest 8x32
bottom tfl 8x32

conquest 8x32 's real FOV is about 8.3
and magnification is bit bigger then 8 power. so those make CHD 8x32's apparent fov bigger then many people thought it to be

 

[rodneyAB]

The irony of posting this on a forum dedicated to looking at birds with binoculars is baffling.

yeh..your funny...the forum overall is about bird watching..., but this is binoculars....where we look at collections of instruments and discuss how well they measure objectively as well as subjectively...now i'm funny. I listen to schiit audio components and don't care whether they measure well or not. For my binoculars, I don't care about measurements, and long as I enjoy the use of.

 

[CharleyBird]

many.
hand held + tripod,
under 100m / 50m / 25m / 10m

if with booster 6 ~ 8 power, under 200 ~ 50m

mainly objects with straight lines. such as resoultion chart, handrail, telephone pole, brick wall, QR code...extra


10x42

NV < HT < SF < NL < EL

8x42

EDG < SF < NV < HT < NL < EL (8.5)

8x30 ~ 32mm

CL Companion = MHG < UV HD, HD+ < Conquest HD < SFL < T*FL < NL < ELSV (fieldpro) < ELSV (pre fieldpro)

Thanks for sharing your testing work, much appreciated especially in such a succinct form.

Like you, I'm a fan of the Nikon E2 8x30 which, if it has any failing, is the slightly awkward way it hangs.
I wondered what binocuar you 'haptically' prefer?
Do you have a compact everyday carry?

 

[jackjack]

Thanks for sharing your testing work, much appreciated especially in such a succinct form.

Like you, I'm a fan of the Nikon E2 8x30 which, if it has any failing, is the slightly awkward way it hangs.
I wondered what binocuar you 'haptically' prefer?
Do you have a compact everyday carry?

I have nikon HGL 8x20 but it feel too small for me so my main carrying bino is 8x32.
I have EL 8x32 and Conquest in upper level 8x32.
if I have to use at harsh situation I go for conquest but I mainly go with EL because it's optics is superior then conquest.

and for the haptics, I love the weight balance of porro prism.
E2 8x30 feel nice but it's tube is bit shorter for my hands.
I prefer larger porros such as ior 7x40 and steiner nighthunter 8x56 between porro prism I have
both also have comfortable winged eyecups.

to choose between which I don't have now, I want to use leica UV 32mm, sfl 30mm for daily.
compact, lightweight with good mechanics.

 

[CharleyBird]

I also prefer 30/32 as the smallest to use... the diminutive UV+ 10x32 is my daily carry(not for birding though).
Steiner built-in-winged folding eyecups are great, I have the Discovery models though they mostly sit on window sills. Why other top brands don't imitate them is a mystery.

Very interesting that your tests have the EL models sharper than NL. Is that because if the latter's wide FOV, or are they actually sharper middle to edge?

Andy

 

[Dennis Mau]

I’m not going to get into the contrast and resolution thing, as it is being beaten like a dead horse. I would like to opine that I don’t believe your seeing 3D effect in the FL7x42, it’s DOF from the 7x.

It is a combination of DOF from the 7x and 3D stereoscopic effect from the AK prisms, as jackjack point out. it is surprising how just a little offset of the objectives as he shows in his pictures will create the 3D effect in roofs, and it is very noticeable. As rg548 points out with his HT 8x42's there are a lot of advantages to an AK prism that are apparent in the view once you compare them with an SP.

3D in roof prism binoculars

When someone describes a pronounced 3D view in a roof, the Zeiss HT and SF most recently, what combination of optical traits would be the reason for what they see. It's always been my understanding that 3D is exclusive to the Porro binocular due to the wider objective spacing. Robert

www.birdforum.net

 

[Paultricounty]

It is a combination of DOF from the 7x and 3D stereoscopic effect from the AK prisms, as jackjack point out. it is surprising how just a little offset of the objectives as he shows in his pictures will create the 3D effect in roofs, and it is very noticeable. As rg548 points out with his HT 8x42's there are a lot of advantages to an AK prism that are apparent in the view once you compare them with an SP.

3D in roof prism binoculars

When someone describes a pronounced 3D view in a roof, the Zeiss HT and SF most recently, what combination of optical traits would be the reason for what they see. It's always been my understanding that 3D is exclusive to the Porro binocular due to the wider objective spacing. Robert

www.birdforum.net

Idk, it might be more prevalent when combining the 7x DOF with the AK prisms that make it seem more apparent. I’ve compared the FL and Vortex UHD (both with AK) in 8x42 with Noctivids, EDG’s and a few other roofs with SP prisms, and we didn’t see much 3D effect difference , maybe in the UHD slightly.

 

[Dennis Mau]

8x32 TFL has Similar CA compared to EL, NL 8x32 at center but better at the edges.
FOV and magnification is smaller then conquest 8x32 but sharpness and brightness is at least half a step above. (but resolution didn't differ much because of smaller magnification.)
distortion is much better on conquest and edge sharpness but better in conquest.

haven't compare 7x42 and 8x32 TFL directly.
but 7x42 TFL seems to be sharper, brighter, less CA then UVHD 7x42. but it have distinctive greenish coloring, so I prefer warmer tone and bit better color fidelity on UVHD more.

I have compared 8x32 and 10x32 TFL.
they are both very nice. really I want to have it for birding since they are so small.
I prefer 8x32's color and bit more forgivable eyerelif more.

additionally, I prefer 8x32 conquest much more then 10x32 but in terms of 32mm TFL, even I still prefer 8x32 but 10x32 stills feel very nice to me.

"8x32 TFL has Similar CA compared to EL, NL 8x32 at center but better at the edges. FOV and magnification is smaller than conquest 8x32, but sharpness and brightness is at least half a step above. The 7x42 TFL seems to be sharper, brighter, less CA then UVHD 7x42. but it does have distinctive greenish coloring"

I agree 100%. You have tested and compared a lot of binoculars to understand them so well. Keep the information coming!

 

[hopster]

I honestly cannot see the difference between Abbe-Koenig prisms (or porros for that matter) vs. Schmidt-Pechan myself - but can certainly believe others do, as my brother believes he sees a little more contrast with Abbe-Koenigs (but not porros). I mainly use porros myself, and my brother almost exclusively uses a Swaro 8.5x42 Fieldpro, so we really ought to talk up our own gear in approved Birdforum fashion. But try though I might, I just can't see the difference. Some of the very best binoculars I have ever tried - Swaro NLs, the 10x50 and 8.5x42 SVs, the 8x42 Noctivid - have been Schmidt-Pechan. (I don't really perceive "3D" in porros either!)

I truly wonder if some kind of blind test (the same chassis with S-P vs A-K prisms) could be arranged for our "discerning" readership, what the results would be.

I would be interested in that too. I am going against the 'approved trend' of talking up my own gear here (e.g. the NV 8x42 which I still love because of its many excellent qualities) but I can't ignore what my eyes have told me a number of times even if it's subtle and potentially unimportant in the overall scheme of things.