BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="brocknroller" data-source="post: 1611374" data-attributes="member: 665">From Holger's explanation of the infamous gray crescents, it would appear the reason why some users see them and some don't, or some are bothered by them and some aren't, is that their differing entrance pupil size affects how severely this phenomenon is visible, because it occurs mostly at the edge of the exit pupil. So for someone who is either older or for some other reason can't open his entrance pupil to 5mm, he wouldn't see the stray light, or at least not as distinctly, as those with larger entrance pupils. I don't know the ages or entrance pupil sizes of all the ZR 7x36 ED2 owners who posted their comments, yea or nay, about this stray light problem. However, my guess is that people's perception of the severity of this phenomenon is probably not as simple as the differences in their maximum entrance pupil size.  Perception is a tricky beast that is not easily "dissected under the microscope" as I learned from the fact that most people who own full sized Nikon LX/LX L bins apparently do not see their excessive "rolling ball," or see it but quickly adapt to it, while to me, it's as obvious as Michael Jordan standing in a group of pygmies and as persistent as gnats buzzing my face on a hot, humid day.Yet, see it or not, as Henry objectively measured, the "rolling ball" in the LX/LX L is actually there, just as Holger's detailed drawing shows the "gray crescent" is really there. I haven't tried a ZR 7x36 ED2, however, given my sensitivity to basically anything that detracts from an otherwise natural view, I would likely see the stray light and then not be able to ignore it. Also, Holger's comment about the 7x36's pincushion "distortion is somewhat high" would probably also bother me (yes, as Steve says, I'm "picky" for a Klingon). I even notice that "moderate amount" of pincushion in the 8x30 EII that Holger uses as his traveling bin, though it's tolerable, and no more noticeable than the moderate amount of "rolling ball" in the 8x32 LX (which, unlike its bigger brothers, does have pincushion). But "moderate" is my limit, so if the ZR 7x36 has more pincushion visible while panning than the EII, it would be a deal killer. In my experience, bins with a wide FOV (8*+) generally show more pincushion than bins with a smaller FOV, though this isn't always the case. For example, the 6.5* 8x44 Swift ED had more pincushion than my 8x30 EII. One of the bad side effects of having owned excellent binoculars -----8x/12xSE, 8x/10xEII, 8x32LX, 6x30 FujiFMT,CZJ Octarem, 804 Audubons, Celestron 9.5x44 & 10x50 EDs, Nikon 8-16x40 XL Zoom, Pentax 20x60 PCF V, 8x23 Venturer IIand the others I will remember 10 seconds after posting this message <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> and having the pleasure of trying my friends' excellent bins10xSE, 8x/10x42LX, 7x30Swaro, Fuji 7x50& 10x50 FMTs8x42 Promaster ED10x42 EDG ------- is that it spoils you rotten. Except for the EDG, none of these bins carried an alpha bin price tag. So it's possible to own and enjoy high quality optics without paying through the proboscis (hey, first time I ever spelled that word correctly without a spell check!). Knowing this, I would have "high apple pie in the sky hopes" for a bin that is reportedly 90% as good as an alpha class bin despite it being only 25% the cost.Even though none of the other bins I listed above cost over $1,000, all of them produce high quality images, with excellent contrast, sharpness, and color depth. And even though most of those bins are gone, the persistence of memory remains like a Dali painting, and when I try a new bin, it is very difficult not to compare it to "all the bins I've loved before". With experience comes wisdom, or so they say. But with it, also comes the loss of innocence. While I still am in awe at the view of Saturn through a telescope when its rings are at an oblique angle, it's not the same "WOW!" as the first time I saw the planet through a telescope. To get that same "WOW!," I would need a very large telescope pointed at something even more amazing (e.g., the half dollar coin sized view of M 13 through a 24" Starmaster). Hence, the term "aperture fever".With birding bins, it's not "size," but "quality" that provides the "WOW" effect. I haven't tried a Zeiss FL, an Ultravid HD, or a Swaro EL, so perhaps there are still some thrills left for me, but I can't afford any of them, so the thrills will be short lived. The pursuit of quality optics is a moving target, and folks, it's getting more and more expensive to keep up with the Joneses (even Kenny Jones since he bought his Zeiss Diascope 85 <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />So my über goal (and yes, I realize that I have wandered off off Broadway, that happens late at night/early in the morning) is to see the world through whatever bin happens to be in my hands at the time-- be it a classic porro or the latest and greatest roof -- with fresh eyes.</blockquote>

Verification