You are not logged in. [Login] Entrance · Main Index · Search · New user · Who's Online FAQ · Calendar

Equipment Discussions >> Binoculars

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)
JKoelman
professor emeritus

Reged: 05/16/11

Loc: Bangalore, India
Re: \$\$ per mm of aperture - where is the plateau? [Re: rdandrea]
#4998230 - 01/02/12 08:47 PM

Quote:

If you were really a nerd, you wouldn't fit a third-order polynomial to data that can adequately be explained by a straight line.

Isn't that the definition of a nerd: making things more complicated than they are?

Joking aside, do you mean that a straight line can be fitted through the data in the above plot?

Sure, you can fit whatever function you like, but that particular choice would be meaningless. (It would imply Garrett could sell an ultra-small aperture Signature Series bino for nothing, and even more amazing, that it could sell a Signature Series LBT (D = 8,400 mm binocular) for \$75k...).

 Post Extras:
BillC
on a new path

Reged: 06/04/04

Loc: Lake Stevens, WA, USA
Re: \$\$ per mm of aperture - where is the plateau? [Re: JKoelman]
#4998314 - 01/02/12 09:36 PM

Hi Bieyed

I know; I’m gonna get yelled at. But, I’m used to it.

I didn’t read EVERY post in the thread, but those I didn’t read all the way, I scanned pretty well. To my knowledge, not one word was said about QUALITY. The fact is, the cost per square millimeter of aperture is going to cost less for a piece of junk than it is going to cost for a higher quality instrument; substantially less for something from the Big Three.

A binocular is the SUM of all its parts. Some people get fixated on SOME aspect of a binocular and go weak in the knees—BaK4 Prisms, Aspheric Lenses, Ruby Coatings, Etc.—they should not. At least, if one wants to fully appreciate the VIEW more than the GEAR!

Take, for example, discussions of R.B.I., R.L.E. and Twilight Factor. They sound so technical, but they’re worth SO much more to the freelancer than the observer! The calculations ARE straightforward enough, but what they represent is often misunderstood and is ambiguous to say the least.

For example, the exit pupils for 7x35, 8x40 and 10x50 are all 5mm. This means they all have an R.B.I. rating of 25. However, the 50mm instrument has greater light grasp and clarity despite the increase in magnification. The calculations also presuppose equal quality of material, design, and production.

Let's face it, the specifications for the best Zeiss 8x40 is going to be the same as for any low-end drug store special of the same aperture and magnification. Barring concerns of cost, would you need to perform any R.B.I., R.L.E., or TF calculations to choose the one you wanted to take home?

Quality is a value of the thought process that begs not to be ignored!

Cheers,

BillC

PS Welcome to Cloudy Nights!

 Post Extras:
Andresin150
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 08/14/07

Loc: Bogotá - La Calera / Colombia
Re: \$\$ per mm of aperture - where is the plateau? [Re: BillC]
#4998407 - 01/02/12 10:24 PM

Bill, you are right about quality, but my guess with the original question is that calculations are fair to be made considering this particular line of binoculars are of the same quality (the apples to apples comparison), just scale aperture and magnification.
In practice, even that the 110mm seems an excellent deal
(\$ per mm of aperture), considering the necessary mounting options, those are actually more expensive per mm of aperture.
For the ones that want to save, those 85mm and 110mm come with a neck strap!

 Post Extras:
BillC
on a new path

Reged: 06/04/04

Loc: Lake Stevens, WA, USA
Re: \$\$ per mm of aperture - where is the plateau? [Re: Andresin150]
#4998498 - 01/02/12 11:24 PM

IF the same mode and manufacturer, it is totally valid. Perhaps I "jumped the gun, again," but there have been other times when such comparisons came up . . . when I didn't!

Cheers,

BillC

 Post Extras:
JKoelman
professor emeritus

Reged: 05/16/11

Loc: Bangalore, India
Re: \$\$ per mm of aperture - where is the plateau? [Re: BillC]
#4998534 - 01/03/12 12:01 AM

Quote:

IF the same mode and manufacturer, it is totally valid.

Ahhh... I forgot to mention: where the GO SS line plateaus out a level of 27 square millimeters of light gathering per dollar spent (that is about one additional eye of light gathering for each dollar...), the 15x70 Celestron Skymasters dwarf this figure by delivering a whopping 83 square millimeters per dollar spent (and that is taking into account the clean aperture).

Just joking... My Skymaster is gathering dust since I purchased some decent binos.

 Post Extras:
edwincjones
Close Enough

Reged: 04/10/04

Re: \$\$ per mm of aperture - where is the plateau? [Re: JKoelman]
#4998718 - 01/03/12 05:30 AM

back to Bill's point

fuji 25x150 MT is about 3mm square / \$1 US
fuji 70mm binoculars are 6mm sq/ \$1 US

edj

 Post Extras:
Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)

Extra information
7 registered and 37 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  knuklhdastnmr, panhard

Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics