• 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.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

Why is Alpha better than high grade. (1 Viewer)

WJC

Well-known member
Canon L WP are water proof and gas filled, Canon will not disclose if nitrogen or argon gas is used. All the other canon I S binoculars are not gas filled and only water resistant. Canon explains that water resistant does it mean water won’t get in , it just means the construction materials can withstand certain weather conditions. This is according to reputable knowledgeable sources at Canon.

I know for some waterproofing is very important and of course it’s a nice little insurance policy. Last week I got caught in a wall of water in the Florida Everglades raining down on me out of nowhere with my SF’s. But even when you’re not in the potential position to get a waterfall on you they are still extremely useful in cold and or damp humid conditions.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-07-22 at 11.34.10 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-07-22 at 11.34.10 AM.png
    264.8 KB · Views: 44

exup

Well-known member
United Kingdom
will not disclose if nitrogen or argon gas is used. All the other canon I S binoculars are not gas filled and only water resistant
Be careful..... 3 levels I believe.

10x42L fully immersible, JIS 7..
18x50 AW and 15x50 AW JIS 4 as discussed.
12x36 and others (I believe without checking) not rated, so same as normal porros i.e. not water resistant.
 

dorubird

Well-known member
Romania
I think that the coating is the only thing that cannot be copied by a manufacturer without tradition. Anyone can buy quality glass from SCHOTT or HOYA, but anti-reflective coatings cannot be bought. Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski, Nikon, Fujinon, Docter each have their own very effective coating recipe. In vain, a company will have the same number of dielectric layers on the prism if the quality of the anti-reflective layers is poorer. Practically, the big companies initially used and invented the coating and it is logical that they also take it to perfection in their top models (Alpha)
 

Hermann

Well-known member
I think that the coating is the only thing that cannot be copied by a manufacturer without tradition. Anyone can buy quality glass from SCHOTT or HOYA, but anti-reflective coatings cannot be bought. Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski, Nikon, Fujinon, Docter each have their own very effective coating recipe. In vain, a company will have the same number of dielectric layers on the prism if the quality of the anti-reflective layers is poorer. Practically, the big companies initially used and invented the coating and it is logical that they also take it to perfection in their top models (Alpha)
Zeiss invented both the dielectric coatings and, much more importantly, the phase coatings. All the other manufacturers copied their invention.

Now, what does that mean for your theory?

Hermann
 

WJC

Well-known member
"Alpha" binoculars only exist between the ears of the novices who need something to confuse, waste time, and, perhaps create an ego stroke. Professionals only sparingly use the term and then only when talking to the untutored.

It's like sharp, tack sharp, clear, crystal clear, hazy, muted, blurry, bright, shadowy, grainy, etc. They are terms used by the masses but never in a scientific or engineering sense.
 

Paultricounty

Well-known member
United States
"Alpha" binoculars only exist between the ears of the novices who need something to confuse, waste time, and, perhaps create an ego stroke. Professionals only sparingly use the term and then only when talking to the untutored.

It's like sharp, tack sharp, clear, crystal clear, hazy, muted, blurry, bright, shadowy, grainy, etc. They are terms used by the masses but never in a scientific or engineering sense.
You got sucked into the vortex again I guess.
 

Ted Y.

Forum member
Supporter
Canada
I think that the coating is the only thing that cannot be copied by a manufacturer without tradition. Anyone can buy quality glass from SCHOTT or HOYA, but anti-reflective coatings cannot be bought. Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski, Nikon, Fujinon, Docter each have their own very effective coating recipe. In vain, a company will have the same number of dielectric layers on the prism if the quality of the anti-reflective layers is poorer. Practically, the big companies initially used and invented the coating and it is logical that they also take it to perfection in their top models (Alpha)

About premium binoculars manufacturers:
Each one apply the coatings in his one facilities or use a shared provider of such services?
Each one is engaged in R&D for coatings? It is not the same to invent a new coating and to apply coatings in production.

A manufacturer produces binoculars with transmission between 88% and 93%, depending on the model. Are the coatings the only factor to improve transmission? Or all the models have the same coating but the glass is different and the system has more or less optical elements? In other words, how important is the coating in binocular performance?
 
Last edited:

Richard D

what was that...
Supporter
United Kingdom
About premium binoculars manufacturers:
Each one apply the coatings in his one facilities or use a shared provider of such services?
Each one is engaged in R&D for coatings? It is not the same to invent a new coating and to apply very coatings in production.

A manufacturer produces binoculars with transmission between 88% and 93%, depending on the model. Are the coatings the only factor to improve transmission? Or all the models have the same coating but the glass is different and the system has more or less optical elements? In other words, how important is the coating in binocular performance?
Swarovski and Leica do their own coating, with Zeiss outsourcing some production to Asia they presumably have different arrangements, but they design and specify the coating.

Yes they have their own R&D.

Coatings make a huge difference to transmission - 1980's Habicht 7x42s have been measured at 86% transmission compared to 96% for current coatings. Other factors in design do influence transmission too.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top