vc1111

I would agree that lens coatings can make a difference, especially when comparing a coated to an uncoated lens surface. I am not certain that I would agree with you that Zeiss optical coating processes are that much better than say the better Nikon stuff for example.

I am very familiar with lens quality and can tell you that the differences between two high-end lenses (not lens coatings) are microscopic and totally undiscernable in most practical applications.

I am aware that Zeiss is one of the top manufacturers of optics, as are Leica and Swarovski. However, it is my opinion that the prices they charge are an exercise in diminishing returns........you may pay 250 to 300% more but get only a 15% rise in quality. Many hunters and other sports enthusiasts couldn't tell the difference if you covered the names on a pair of Zeiss and a pair of high-end Nikons of the same power.

If you hunt out West or Alaska or some other area where you're going to spend a vast amount of time glassing large expanses under difficult conditions and you'll be doing this year after year, then I'd go along with the purchase of a $800 or $1200 pair of glasses. Some can cost even more than that.

Is it really worth that much extra? That's a personal decision, I guess.


Just my opinion.

vc1111

I stand corrected as to the desired exit pupil size for low light conditions. Here's some of the info I tried to recall from memory:

<font color=maroon>The diameter, in millimeters, of the beam of light that leaves the eyepiece of a pair of binoculars is the &quot;exit pupil&quot;. The larger the exit pupil, the brighter the image obtained will be. Having a large exit pupil is advantageous under low light conditions and at night. For astronomical applications, the exit pupil of the binocular should correspond with the amount of dilation of your eye's pupil after it has adapted to the dark. This number will be between 5mm and 9mm. 9mm of dilation is the maximum amount for the human eye, and this number tends to decrease with age.

To calculate the exit pupil, divide the size of the objective lens by the magnification of the binocular. For example, the exit pupil of 7x42 binoculars is 42 ÷ 7 = 6mm.

</font id=maroon>

tealboy

I started this post and it began as a question regarding power but has turned into a discussion of quality and low light--all interesting dialogue. Though I wasn't sure about which power I wanted, I do know quite a lot about the quality of optics.

VC1111, I don't know where you found the information on the dialation, but you are correct, 9mm is the maximum, though not everyone can dialate to 9mm. Still, the more power you get the larger the objective needs to be if you care about low light, which is very important to me. I purchased a Swarovski scope and can hunt a full five to six minutes beyond legal hunting time (this may start an argument) which I occassionally do when hog hunting. So, I also want similiar optical quality from my binocs.

I disagree with your comment that most people could not tell the difference between a Zeiss and a good quality Nikon, b/c you absolutely can. I don't disagree, you pay big money for a small amount of improvement, but the improvement is definately noticable. Admittedly, it often requires you have the two binocs side by side, but I guarantee, if you did a test like this, in low light conditions, the difference is amazing.

I have performed many side by side comparisons, with both scopes and binocs, which is how I really know. I do not have the budget for Swarovski or Zeiss, but if i can prove to myself one is that much better than the next, I will save my money and get one. With that said, I have the Swar scope but 8x42 Simmons Presidential binocs, with fully multi coated optics and bak4 lenses that cost $300 (a lot for Simmons products). They are awesome, probably like your Nikons, but they are not Swar/zeiss.