Telescope Reviews: Compact roof binoculars: $500-$700 range?

The 32s should arrive later today by UPS.

Last night my friend from the engineering company sent me a USAF Color Test chart as an e-mail attachment. I briefly looked at the chart on the screen through the 20s. Although the chart is designed to be viewed at 25 meters, I viewed it on my laptop screen at approximately 10 feet. I noticed some differences between the 20s. I want to come back to this color chart after the 32s arrive.

My friend also told me how different field surveyors prefer one of the 20s over the others. He said the different preference seemed to be size, eye cups, and color rendition. He said he preferred the Swarovskis in winter (because of their slightly yellow cast) and the Leicas in the fall. He said my preference for the Swarvoskis and Nikons over the Ultravids in the tomato and rose gardens, may have been my preference for the slight coloring added. In his opinion, the Ultravids do not add color and are more true to what is seen, only magnified. He also said the slight color leanings should be seen as a distortion, even though they added esthetically to the scene. I will have to come back to this at another time.

8:00 a.m. One of my dogs, a white spaniel with brown spots, is laying on the grass in the backyard. The sky is overcast and the sun, what there is of it, has not risen above the tree line yet. So I went for another test. The result of the spaniel test was different than the tomato or rose test on the previous evening. The Ultravids were clearly number one. The fur on the dog's neck was so clear and full of detail. The grass was cut a few days ago and the tops of the grass had a layer of yellow-brown from the cutting. The grass also looked the best through the Ultravids. The depth of field was deeper with the Ultravids, very noticeable by the spaniel's fur and the grass.

The Nikon's came in second, with the Swarovskis trailing. The Swarovskis last place appeared to be due to lack of detail. The spaniel's fur and the grass tops just did not stand out as much as they did with the Ultravids. So the results of the spaniel test with the 20s are as follows:

10:00 a.m. I repeated the spaniel test with the Leica Ultravid 8x20s and the Swift Audubon 820ED 8.5x44s. The view through the Audubon EDs was definitely superior to the view through the Ultravids. I must bear in mind one of the reasons for the quest is to duplicate the view of the Audubon EDs in smaller binoculars. The other reason is to walk around with quality optics in my pocket. Although the Ultravid 20s can be carried in my pocket (but not as easily as the Swarovskis 20s), the Ultravid view is inferior to the Audubon ED. This is an important point to test. It will be interesting to see if any of the 32s I have coming beat the views of the Audubon EDs.

Another thing--I dislike the straps of the Ultravids and the Nikons. I dislike the Nikon strap the most. The eye cup covers are attached to the straps of the Ultravids and the Nikons. They get in the way from time to time. There are no eye cup covers with the Swarovskis. I will have to ask my friend about that. I clearly prefer the strap of the Swarovskis. So , I can record my preference for strap and case among the 20s as follows:

I am looking forward to the arrival of the 32s later today. I must confess I truly enjoy field testing binoculars.

More to come. . .

--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA

Edited by BobinKy (08/16/07 08:20 PM)