Is there any real alternatives to swaro binos?

[callumity]

Some odd ideas emerging about bins and light transmission. The mechanical approach divides objective lens by magnification to achieve a figure as near to 7 (mm) as you can because this is the maximum dilation of a healthy human eye; you can't put any more light through it to create an image on the retina. One you age much past 50 you are lucky to achieve 5+mm anyway. So 42mm divided by 8 gives you 5.25 and 8x56 gives you the magic 7mm. Next is the whole question of lens coatings and blemish free glass i.e. micro bubble free, perfect shape and polish. Finally comes build quality and other materials. There is little doubt that the names you mention make the best bins but at a very considerable price premium. Put it this way - a pair of top end Chinese 'quality' bins like Barr & Stroud 8x42 ED (sadly the Glasgow connection is long dead) will cost you £220 delivered from Microglobe wheareas the others...... but at least you have the bragging rights about what you pay for your passion. And you need a rangefinder under 300m??
In practice you get 97.5% of the performance for 20% of the price and you won't cry if you drive over them. See Bestbinocularsreviews.com - the work of some SA Safari guide.

 

[parastalker]

I tried all manner of bins and settled on the 7x42 SLC's. i found them to be more sturdy and to have better eye relief than the EL. My advice would be to try all the brands (if you know people that have them) at last light or in dark woodland. I can almost see in the dark with the SLC's, they are fantastic at last light. When you spend that sort of money on glass you wont be disappointed on whichever brand you choose, but you may regret not having Swarovskis legendary customer services.

 

[caorach]

thats kind of what i'm getting at i think. it's the difference between 8x and 10x that is variable in this case but the objective diameter is the same. on that thought a 2/3/4x56mm would always be brighter than say a 8x56mm.

I think there are a few things getting mixed up - as callumity has pointed out the exit pupil is one factor in how much light gets to your eye.

However, magnification is also a factor in another way in the sense that objects at a greater magnification will always look brighter. Think of it in terms of moving closer to the object you are viewing - 10 times magnification moves you 10 times closer to the object so in effect you are viewing it from 10 yards away if you started at 100 yards. If you go to two times magnification then you are effectively viewing it from 50 yards away. In a situation where the 10 times mag gives you enough light for a 5mm pupil opening at your eye and the 2 times mag is giving you a considerably larger exit pupil the 10 times mag will look brighter because, effectively, you are standing 40 yards closer to the object you are viewing.

You can demonstrate this quite easily in low light by walking towards an object - you find it gets much easier to make out detail etc. the closer you get.

So, the magnification thing sort of works both ways in that it increases your ability to see the object you are looking at by "moving" you closer to it but if your objective lens is not large enough it may reduce the exit pupil and so reduce the amount of light reaching your eye. The optics we carry in the field tend to be a bit of a trade off but the 8X56 scopes, for example, are pretty close to practical optimum. With binos most people prefer something a little smaller and lighter as many people will use their binos for hours on a stalking day while they will use their scope for a few seconds or minutes.

I personally am a big fan of Minox, I have a pair of 8.5X43 HGs, as I could never justify £2k on a set of binos. I have lay in the heather watching a wee red stag at last light with a friend with swaros and all I can say is that we could see his antlers with the Minox after we could see the antlers with the swaros. This doesn't mean Minox are better than swaro, only that they did a little better under those precise circumstances, however I think it does illustrate that they are certainly not a bad buy.

 

[Simjim33]

Myths about Birding Optics #1 - That Higher Power Lets You See More

Interesting site on the myths of binoculars. It seems that a persons eyes are the major factor in the results seen as eirc the red sugested. the quality of the lens coatings make a difference in the end product. I still think I can test the actual diffence of light transmition between different brands. I will post the design later when I get a chance to scetch it. The experiment at least would able to give a numeric value between brands/price brackets. Maybe this is all a bit anal but then if it's of value to one other person thinking about a purchase it could be called worth it. I bet the results will be an eye opener.

 

[Simjim33]

"I think there are a few things getting mixed up - as callumity has pointed out the exit pupil is one factor in how much light gets to your eye.

However, magnification is also a factor in another way in the sense that objects at a greater magnification will always look brighter. Think of it in terms of moving closer to the object you are viewing - 10 times magnification moves you 10 times closer to the object so in effect you are viewing it from 10 yards away if you started at 100 yards. If you go to two times magnification then you are effectively viewing it from 50 yards away. In a situation where the 10 times mag gives you enough light for a 5mm pupil opening at your eye and the 2 times mag is giving you a considerably larger exit pupil the 10 times mag will look brighter because, effectively, you are standing 40 yards closer to the object you are viewing.

You can demonstrate this quite easily in low light by walking towards an object - you find it gets much easier to make out detail etc. the closer you get.

So, the magnification thing sort of works both ways in that it increases your ability to see the object you are looking at by "moving" you closer to it but if your objective lens is not large enough it may reduce the exit pupil and so reduce the amount of light reaching your eye. The optics we carry in the field tend to be a bit of a trade off but the 8X56 scopes, for example, are pretty close to practical optimum. With binos most people prefer something a little smaller and lighter as many people will use their binos for hours on a stalking day while they will use their scope for a few seconds or minutes."

thats a good point there caorach as we only use binoculars to give us a safe id of the target to keep us within the confines of the law.

 

[bogtrotter]

Some odd ideas emerging about bins and light transmission. The mechanical approach divides objective lens by magnification to achieve a figure as near to 7 (mm) as you can because this is the maximum dilation of a healthy human eye; you can't put any more light through it to create an image on the retina. One you age much past 50 you are lucky to achieve 5+mm anyway. So 42mm divided by 8 gives you 5.25 and 8x56 gives you the magic 7mm. Next is the whole question of lens coatings and blemish free glass i.e. micro bubble free, perfect shape and polish. Finally comes build quality and other materials. There is little doubt that the names you mention make the best bins but at a very considerable price premium. Put it this way - a pair of top end Chinese 'quality' bins like Barr & Stroud 8x42 ED (sadly the Glasgow connection is long dead) will cost you £220 delivered from Microglobe wheareas the others...... but at least you have the bragging rights about what you pay for your passion. And you need a rangefinder under 300m??
In practice you get 97.5% of the performance for 20% of the price and you won't cry if you drive over them. See Bestbinocularsreviews.com - the work of some SA Safari guide.

+ 1 on the 7 factor.

 

[Simjim33]

ok heres a rough idea of the experiment i have in mind any ideas on how to improve it please feel free

 

[tom308w]

hi slimjim i have swaro 8.5 42 and last week i bought a pair of minox 8 x44 cost 53o euros from the minox online shop paid for them saturday got delivered thiursday had them out sat morning and they seem nice and light very good loking yhrough them
atb tom

 

[Simjim33]

hi slimjim i have swaro 8.5 42 and last week i bought a pair of minox 8 x44 cost 53o euros from the minox online shop paid for them saturday got delivered thiursday had them out sat morning and they seem nice and light very good loking yhrough them
atb tom

that's not a bad price Tom. why did you decide yo buy another pair of binos if you already had swaro's?

 

[pierred]

I have used both swaro and leica, I currently own leica 8x42 HD's.

+ 1 in Geovid

 

[alaskagray]

Theres only one swaro 8.5x42 el u wonder just how much more your eyes can take

 

[Simjim33]

Ok is there anyone that would like to participate in my experiment I would need to borrow different makes of binos to test the amount of light is transmited to our electronic eye local people would be best as I could do the test while you wait so if your interested in participating and you live in the hants,wilts,Dorset and west susex area please let me know I should be ready in about two weeks to start testing. The reason I ask for your involvement is that I don't think manufactures are going to be that helpful in the suplie of test units what do you guys think? Pm me if you are interested.There will be tea/ coffee and biscuits maybe even lunch if we plan it right.

 

[widows son]

Leica are on the same par as swarofski I traded in my leicas to buy my ELs wish, I had kept the leicas Much better in low light because of the 50mm objective lens.

 

[User00014]

i use 10x50 lecia bino's and i would not be with out them , they are bang on par with my 8x56 schmidt and bender scope !

i have used swaro's and zeiss and to tell the truth there is bugger all in them !

but you deffinately do get what you pay for .

cheers lee

 

[Simjim33]

i use 10x50 lecia bino's and i would not be with out them , they are bang on par with my 8x56 schmidt and bender scope !

i have used swaro's and zeiss and to tell the truth there is bugger all in them !

but you deffinately do get what you pay for .


cheers lee

Well that's what I hoping to disprove/ prove with the test. I think there will be quite some shocking results, numerically anyway. If my hypothesis is proven, it will be just as in the tackle trade, in that you get what they tell you to pay. But I hope I'm wrong.I'm sure manufactures would not think that some of claims they make would be attempted to be put to the test. I can't test for individuals preference, but I can test the hard wear to see if it stands up to claims made. In reality I doubt the retailers would alter the prices in light of my little test and they can always claims the the price is set by the manufactures (" we don't make a lot on these binos sob sob"). If it's anything like the fishing tackle trade they do very well out of it trust me.

 

[monarman]

One thing to bear in mind here and it's one that has been overlooked by many and that is this..........You will always find that bino's will alow you to see a deer better than a scope in low light.....so in reality you should think about what scope you're using and at what point it fails in low light (by fail i mean when it gets to the point at which ou are finding it difficult to ascertain your EXACT point of aim and what Exactly is in the background beyond the deer), Then you go look through bino's of differing makes and magnifications and establish which of those tested gives you the same quality of view as the scope you are using. There is no point spending stupid amounts of money on bino's.... they simply aren't worth the money, just set yourself a bugdet and not a brand and go buy what you can afford.

For the record.... i've had Swarovski slc, El's ... leicas.....pentax.....and currently still using my old zeiss dialyt 7x42s. I have compared other bino's as well and i find the minox hg and the steiners to be well worth a look for the price. The best bino's i've ever had and used for lowlight and overall quality were the Zeiss 7x45 night owls!!...a bit heavy though.

 

[Orion]

Then you go look through bino's of differing makes and magnifications and establish which of those tested gives you the same quality of view as the scope you are using.

I'd want the binos to provide a better 'quality of view' than my 'scope. It's not just shooting at the end of the day that will matter, being able to identify your quarry before it's viable to take a shot at the beginning of the day can be vitally important to success.

 

[Simjim33]

I'd want the binos to provide a better 'quality of view' than my 'scope. It's not just shooting at the end of the day that will matter, being able to identify your quarry before it's viable to take a shot at the beginning of the day can be vitally important to success.

+1 to that the idea of binoculars is to give you a safe idea of what your looking at.

 

[tom308w]

hi slimjim my son goes out with me so i needed a second pair also bought as back up incase swaros ever have to go back will not be stuck
atb tom

 

[monarman]

Read through my post again........and have a think about what i was saying with regards to the low light scenario!!.....then go test it for yourself!.....
All i was saying is that the extra 5 or 10 mins of being able to see the deer through the bino's when you can't see the same through your scope are not worth paying extortionate amounts of pound notes for.
As for being able to identify your quarry before it's viable at the beginning of the day...... forgive me if i'm wrong but as the daybreaks it gets lighter....so fair enough being able to utilise those extra minutes of being able to see the deer before it gets to the point of being able to see them and the safe backstop through the scope are nice... but are they worth that extra 500 quid or more? It is those vital seconds before the trigger is pulled that are the most important with regards to safety and a humane shot....are those the seconds that are spent peering through bino's or are they when you're cheek is snuggling the butt of the stock and you are peering through a scope??