Is there any real alternatives to swaro binos?

[Simjim33]

Stephen

thats fair comment mate and in that respect i agree with you. i just read your post and it sounded to me like you meant it was better to look though your scope to identify a target, my bad sorry.

No offers of test units of my experiment yet. see post*32. is no one interested to see if there is a numerical difference of light transmission between high end and low end price binos? This could serve as a guide to purchasing for new buyers or at lest give some type of impartial information. you will not have to be apart from binos i could even travel to you to conduct the test.

 

[monarman]

you should of already of identified your target before removing the rifle from your shoulder....... i'm starting to wonder wether this forum is getting over-run with armchair stalkers and techno-geeks!!!

I'll leave this one alone.

 

[caorach]

you should of already of identified your target before removing the rifle from your shoulder....... i'm starting to wonder wether this forum is getting over-run with armchair stalkers and techno-geeks!!!

I'll leave this one alone.

Well a lot of us are unwilling armchair stalkers until about September time as we don't have roe and so are depending on red or sika stags to kick off our season again. So, all we can do is work up loads and discuss the latest gadgets until it comes time to get out at the deer again.

 

[JabaliHunter]

I value the ability to use my binoculars even before or after it is possible to see clearly enough through the scope to shoot. It all helps identifying and patterning deer that move in and out of cover at the break of dawn and at dusk.

 

[Simjim33]

you should of already of identified your target before removing the rifle from your shoulder....... i'm starting to wonder wether this forum is getting over-run with armchair stalkers and techno-geeks!!!

I'll leave this one alone.

ok thank you for your input.

very constructive.
i have never been called a armchair stalking teckno-geek before.

 

[Orion]

I value the ability to use my binoculars even before or after it is possible to see clearly enough through the scope to shoot. It all helps identifying and patterning deer that move in and out of cover at the break of dawn and at dusk.

My point exactly.

Maybe my stalking area(s) or style differ from Stephen's, as they contain some quite heavy woodland, (broadleaf not just conifers), but I'll be looking for and at deer way before it would be viable to take a shot and the rifle 'scope comes into play. For that reason - and the 101 other times that I use binos, and not just for stalking - I went for Swarovski in 8x56 and they've served me very well over the years. The next pair I invest in will probably be 8.5x42 as my eyes are getting to the stage where the 7mm output isn't so important.

Just my experience and opinion, yours may of course differ.

 

[JabaliHunter]

Exactly...

Just a thought, can an optician measure your maximum pupil dilation? That would be useful to know when choosing a binocular...

 

[Simjim33]

Ok I think that maybe we are getting off thread here. my OP question was "is there any real alternatives to swaros?"
Now last weekend when I was out stalking on Saturday morning ( not sat in my arm chair ) I borrowed a pair of swaros And i was impresed with there performance in making light. My pair of cheap (£15 delivered ) binos were as expectedly no were near the same solar system than the swaros. I came home thinking about my next perchace and about trying to get some swaros. I then sent some time in my arm chair at my key board looking for the best price. I won't spend the better part of a months wages on them so they are out. Then the teckno geek/physicist in me asked the above question. Now apart from coating quality the design is pretty much the same. So let's test to find out if the high enders are worth the price tag.

Now maybe I should have asked if there was any provable difference bettween bino makes over the the price range of £100-£1000?

I have a workable experiment and I am in the process of constructing the aperators to get the results. I will even bring the experiment to you (with in reason ).

What ever the results wether my hypothesis is proved or not I will post the results for your scrutiny ( this is part of the scientific process. To put your results and conclusions out for reviue.)

So any body want to help it should be a bit of fun.

 

[Simjim33]

Exactly...

Just a thought, can an optician measure your maximum pupil dilation? That would be useful to know when choosing a binocular...

Yes they can. And in addition It would be a good idea of what value in lux low light is then ask the optician to test your eyes at that illumination.

 

[Orion]

Slimjim,

Ebay can very occasionally throw up some bargains on Swarovski optics - I bought a new STM80 HD spotting 'scope with 20x60 eyepiece for a fraction of retail simply because the seller had a crap rating and I went and collected before handing over my hard earned

Regarding comparison testing. AFAIK the only tests I've seen have related to rifle 'scopes in continental magazines. These weren't very scientific and simply consited of lining the similar mag x size 'scopes up in batches and discarding them one-by-one as they failed in falling light. Probably needless to say but the usual suspects came out on top - Swarovski, Zeiss, Schmidt & Bender etc.

I'm not personally aware of any similar ad-hoc tests for binos although the birding fraternity do go in for some form of side-by-side comparision - their requirements are obviously largely different from our own. Here's an example:

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html

 

[Simjim33]

Slimjim,

Ebay can very occasionally throw up some bargains on Swarovski optics - I bought a new STM80 HD spotting 'scope with 20x60 eyepiece for a fraction of retail simply because the seller had a crap rating and I went and collected before handing over my hard earned

Regarding comparison testing. AFAIK the only tests I've seen have related to rifle 'scopes in continental magazines. These weren't very scientific and simply consited of lining the similar mag x size 'scopes up in batches and discarding them one-by-one as they failed in falling light. Probably needless to say but the usual suspects came out on top - Swarovski, Zeiss, Schmidt & Bender etc.

I'm not personally aware of any similar ad-hoc tests for binos although the birding fraternity do go in for some form of side-by-side comparision - their requirements are obviously largely different from our own. Here's an example:

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html

yes side by side comparison test's are not very scientific, in that there is no numerical value attached to the results and far to many uncontrolled variables. i ran this idea past my pal he has a degree in particle physics he thinks if the experiment if assembled correctly, and a mean result is obtained for a non testing base line, than the results should be quite good. i only want fixed mag binos for the experiment please.

 

[JabaliHunter]

I think you'll find that even with your scientific test, it will still come down to a subjective assessment of the what for you is the best picture. Things like colour emphasis etc that each manufacturer has a different perspective on will all come into it and that I am sure in part is why some poeple prefer the image of a zeiss/swar/leica/nikon etc.

I would just spend a few days wading through a place like this Binoculars - BirdForum then get out and actually look through a few to see which suits you best.

At the end of the day, if there was a £500 bin which would kick ass and be measurably better than all the £1500 - £2000 glass, the world would know about it by now.

Fear you may be flogging a dead horse, but 'break a leg' !

 

[Simjim33]

I think you'll find that even with your scientific test, it will still come down to a subjective assessment of the what for you is the best picture. Things like colour emphasis etc that each manufacturer has a different perspective on will all come into it and that I am sure in part is why some poeple prefer the image of a zeiss/swar/leica/nikon etc.

I would just spend a few days wading through a place like this Binoculars - BirdForum then get out and actually look through a few to see which suits you best.

At the end of the day, if there was a £500 bin which would kick ass and be measurably better than all the £1500 - £2000 glass, the world would know about it by now.

Fear you may be flogging a dead horse, but 'break a leg' !

i am not suggesting that numerical fact will replace personal perspective in any shape or form, as for flogging a dead horse well maybe, but the attainment of knowledge should be fun, and have a value. i dont think that people are to free thinking when they go to spend £2000 on their pair of binos for good or bad most of us will let there ego dictate how much we spend and the sales man depends on that i knowi had to do that when i was in the fishing tackle trade.

 

[JabaliHunter]

Sorry - I didn't mean to be disparaging in my post - research always has value and you are right, it should be fun. Some people might get a buzz from spending cash without knowing why, but not me and I am guessing not you either! If I am going to spend it, I will make damn sure that I know exactly what I'm getting and why I am spending the money! As with fishing tackle, there's no point in spending £600+ on a fly rod if you still can't shoot a full line from your feet with only one or two false casts (most can't, despite what they tell themselves!)!

One thing that I worry about with your test is that it is not all about glass quality, which is measured in labs. The field of view, depth of field, edge sharpness, magnification, exit pupil, twighlight factor, etc. will all affect the results. The cost of high-end binoculars reflects the design philosophy in controlling all these aspects for a specific purpose (which like it or not, is mainly birdwatching, not hunting) and you will find that each company has a slightly different take on which set of compromises makes the best binocular for that particular purpose. Unfortunately, that doesn't make them comparable, except for your specific purpose.

Going back to the original question though, the Nikon 10x42 HG L DCF have a very good reputation.

 

[bogtrotter]

Sorry - I didn't mean to be disparaging in my post - research always has value and you are right, it should be fun. Some people might get a buzz from spending cash without knowing why, but not me and I am guessing not you either! If I am going to spend it, I will make damn sure that I know exactly what I'm getting and why I am spending the money! As with fishing tackle, there's no point in spending £600+ on a fly rod if you still can't shoot a full line from your feet with only one or two false casts (most can't, despite what they tell themselves!)!

One thing that I worry about with your test is that it is not all about glass quality, which is measured in labs. The field of view, depth of field, edge sharpness, magnification, exit pupil, twighlight factor, etc. will all affect the results. The cost of high-end binoculars reflects the design philosophy in controlling all these aspects for a specific purpose (which like it or not, is mainly birdwatching, not hunting) and you will find that each company has a slightly different take on which set of compromises makes the best binocular for that particular purpose. Unfortunately, that doesn't make them comparable, except for your specific purpose.

Going back to the original question though, the Nikon 10x42 HG L DCF have a very good reputation.

Exactly, however not everyone can afford top of the range glass, cut your cloth according to your means.

 

[Simjim33]

One thing that I worry about with your test is that it is not all about glass quality, which is measured in labs. The field of view, depth of field, edge sharpness, magnification, exit pupil, twighlight factor, etc. will all affect the results. The cost of high-end binoculars reflects the design philosophy in controlling all these aspects for a specific purpose (which like it or not, is mainly birdwatching, not hunting) and you will find that each company has a slightly different take on which set of compromises makes the best binocular for that particular purpose. Unfortunately, that doesn't make them comparable, except for your specific purpose.

yes i agree. but a numerical base line of comparison is a good starting point. the point of my research is to see if the end results of the manufactures design philosophy has any real time value. the purpose of the test is not to determine if the quality of the components as all manufacturers will claim to use the best components. but to test if there is difference across the range offered to us the paying public. i now have one pledge of a test unit many thanks to Eric the Red for your willingness to explore this subject and the use of your minox'es it is very appreciated see you next week mate.

 

[bogtrotter]

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??

Th. law one hour before sunrise one hour after sunset, check he times .

 

[Simjim33]

Th. law one hour before sunrise one hour after sunset, check he times .

carefull there that could sound a little "teckno-geek" to some people

 

[JabaliHunter]

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.

This is where the twighlight factor number in the technical specs comes in. An 8.5x42 and a 10x50 Swarovski have the same (ok 4.94 v 5.0mm) exit pupil, but the 10x50 will have the edge in low light because it has a higher magnification and therefore higher twighlight factor (18.9 v 22.4). Using a different example, the 8x56 Zeiss has a bigger exit pupil than the 10x56 (7.0 v 5.6mm), but the 8x56 will actually have worse performance the dark because of its lower twighlight factor (21.2 v 23.7).

The trade-off for the low light performance, however is nearly always a narrower field of view and depth of field, as well as more lens elements and weight, and more I am sure!

 

[JabaliHunter]

I can tell I am going to regret posting that!