oldtimer88
Active member
I have read through the threads on this topic but I am unfortunately still at an elementary knowledge level when it comes to the intricacies different glass and how they are built and packaged. So apologies in advance if some of this is found elsewhere, many posts are several hundreds of words. I am hoping for a short answer or simplified response...
Is the absence of a field flattener noticeable? Maybe the better way to frame the question - Is the absence most noticeable when the viewer is used to a bin with a quality field flattener like the SV? and do some binoculars have a higher quality level of flattened field vs. some that do a poor job of flattening the field? (i.e. it is only noticeable on a relative basis, and varies based on field flattening technology that the viewer is used to)
Eye box forgiveness is probably the most important consideration for me given the high quality. Which of these is expected to have a more foregiving eyebox? Is there any rule of thumb to determine this without actually looking through the two binoculars? i.e. any quantitative spec that determines eye box forgiveness. I am worried that I will just accept some minor blackouts as a compromise. No compromises should be made imo.
After overall forgiveness, depth of field or focusing speed (same as DoF?) is most important. Does the AK prism imply a more sensitive focus? I enjoy a slow focus but not so slow its tiresome getting from infinity to close focus. I thought the Nikon focus was fine. Any insight here is appreciated! I
Lastly, the category these both fail in is size and weight...as I have a B2 9x45 Maven and I continue to tell myself I will buy a smaller 8x32 binocular but seem to just gravitate toward standard 8x42. Is the 8x32 Victory SF a contender if you can pick from either of the three choices?
I swear this will be my last purchase. A true one and done. I swear.
Thanks in advance.
Is the absence of a field flattener noticeable? Maybe the better way to frame the question - Is the absence most noticeable when the viewer is used to a bin with a quality field flattener like the SV? and do some binoculars have a higher quality level of flattened field vs. some that do a poor job of flattening the field? (i.e. it is only noticeable on a relative basis, and varies based on field flattening technology that the viewer is used to)
Eye box forgiveness is probably the most important consideration for me given the high quality. Which of these is expected to have a more foregiving eyebox? Is there any rule of thumb to determine this without actually looking through the two binoculars? i.e. any quantitative spec that determines eye box forgiveness. I am worried that I will just accept some minor blackouts as a compromise. No compromises should be made imo.
After overall forgiveness, depth of field or focusing speed (same as DoF?) is most important. Does the AK prism imply a more sensitive focus? I enjoy a slow focus but not so slow its tiresome getting from infinity to close focus. I thought the Nikon focus was fine. Any insight here is appreciated! I
Lastly, the category these both fail in is size and weight...as I have a B2 9x45 Maven and I continue to tell myself I will buy a smaller 8x32 binocular but seem to just gravitate toward standard 8x42. Is the 8x32 Victory SF a contender if you can pick from either of the three choices?
I swear this will be my last purchase. A true one and done. I swear.
Thanks in advance.
The one thing about your post that jumps out at me is the eye placement thing. The SF's are known to have difficult eye placement. I've got the 8x42 SF and that is the one thing I do not like about them. I would expect the eye placement difficulty to be worse at 8x32 because of the smaller exit pupil but I haven't tested it. Don't know if it's any better in the HT's. My best binos for eye placement are Nikon EDG and Swaro SLC 56mm, FWIW.
