Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10163
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
All bets are off then !
Sorry Milt and Rich !
It must have been John Finnan who had both the Zeiss and Swarovski ,and perhaps not at the same time .
Regarding Milt's the " missing reviews " since the " great makeover " -- I went back to re -check to the review last night after posting -- but found it absent.
It was very late so I came back to it this morning .
I was surprised to find it missing -- yet other reviews from the same period are still here !
Anyone know WHY this might be ?
Regarding Patric's point about the BRIGHTNESS of the Fujinons 16 x 70 v Zeiss 15 x 60 .
Don't ask ME how we measure BRIGHTNESS , APPARANT BRIGHTNESS , or even IMAGINED BRIGHTNESS :-)
I've written enough on THAT topic that had it been on paper rather than a PC screen , we could have had a great bonfire with that portion of it thrown into the waste bin !
One of the great things about word processors -- they must save whole forests !
However , I digress ( what ME ? - DIGRESS - surely not :-)
Back to Patric's point .
Two models of binoculars , both of which I like very much , to my eyes , exhibit levels of perceived brightness which seem to defy their vital statistics .
One is the Nikon 8 x 32 SE , the other Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT.
Yes I KNOW now that my pupils are probably only dilated to around 3mm in daylight -- but that doesn't stop me from noticing the difference , or more precisely , the rarity of such optical performance .
Most of the new top of the range roof prism birding binos are probably just as impressive in this respect , but I've never seen a 7 x 50 or 7 x ANYTHING that appears to present as bright an image as a Zeiss 7 x 42 .
It must be something to do with Zeiss design and coatings .
I'm not saying that brightness in itself is everything .
Currently , I prefer the Helmsman 7 x 50 to the Zeiss 7 x 42 , for both long - distance terrestrial and astro viewing !
Regards , Kenny
-------------------- If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton
Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
   
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5314
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Hi Kenny,
It seems as if we have four groups of astro binoculars. 1. Hand held 2. IS 3. Mounted 4. Giants
An 18x70 may give fine images when mounted but I don't think most people would find it a good binocular to hand hold.
The Zeiss FLs seem to have very fine light transmission. My Zeiss 10x42 FL. I was surprised how easily I could see people at a dark sky star party with my Zeiss.
The Zeiss 12x56 Victory is a binocular I would like to try. I've tried a friends 10x56 Victory. It holds very well for astro viewing.
Rich
|
JCB
super member
   
Reged: 10/04/04
Posts: 151
Loc: France
|
|
I'm happy to learn that the numerous replies to my original question can be useful for other members. However, as far as I am concerned, I think I will try the Fujinon 16x70 as suggested above.
I will make some comments about the other options : I am very interested in the Nikon SE 12x50, but I prefer using my binoculars only tripod mounted for astronomy, whatever their magnification are. For terrestrial viewing the Nikon 12x50 will be less convenient than my Zeiss 10x42 FLs, and for astronomical viewing they have a narrower AFOV than the Fujis. This doesn't mean that I will never purchase them however. In fact my question is which binocular I will buy FIRST.
The Zeiss 15x60 are very compact, and have a central focusing. These features increase their price, but are not necessary for me. I am ready to pay much more than the Fujinon to have a better image, but I'm not sure there is enough difference to justify the increase in price, especially if the stray light in the Fujinon can be suppressed by long dew shields, as I assume.
For the same reason, I exclude the Nikon 18x70. Its major advantage seems to be its wider AFOV. That's appealing, but not enough. Thanks to the price difference between the Nikon and the Fujinon 16x70, I can almost afford the Nikon SE 12x50.
Among the roof prism binoculars, I'm convinced that Zeiss, Swarovski and Leica offer several excellent models in the 50/56 mm range. I would choose the Ultravid 12x50, because they are the lightest ones, can be hand held thanks to the 12x magnification, and have the wider AFOV. But again they are in competition with the Nikon SE 12x50. It will be a difficult choice for me if I decide to purchase a 12x50 model. But I will examine this question later.
Some have advised me to acquire a binocular with a 7 mm exit pupil, or a wide field binocular. It's a possible solution because my pupils can dilate up to 6.5 mm, and sometimes my sky is very dark. But instead of a 10x70 model, I have already chosen the Zeiss Victory 8x56. They have numerous advantages : they can be hand held, have a large field, and have the widest AFOV among the top 8x50/56 binoculars. Furthermore, they will be useful at dusk on terrestrial viewing. I have looked through an 8x56 Classic long years ago, and was very impressed by the brightness in such a situation. But I will try first the Fujinon 16x70. Thank you to all.
Kenny,
I remember very well the review of the Taks and the 15x56 SLC you mention. It has greatly influenced me to buy the Taks, rather than a pair of 15x56 or 15x60. But now I feel I need something like that.
Jean-Charles
|
KennyJ
   
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10163
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Jean Charles ,
I for one am just genuinely pleased that in however small a way , the various suggestions put forward by members here have helped you make a very difficult decision.
It is rare for one as experienced and knowledgable as yourself to be " modest " and " humble " enough to seek advice at a place such as this .
I follow your reasoning perfectly , and think it might serve others well in the future , providing the thread doesn't end up lost in the ever enlarging jungle !
I'm sure you will keep us informed of your progress and opinions of the Fujinon FMT SX , which as I think I said in a previous post , sounds like a very good choice to me , given your specific requirements .
Best Wishes ,
Kenny
-------------------- If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton
Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera
|
|
12 registered and 17 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: EdZ
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 3754
|
|
|
|
|
|
|