The trouble with that comparision is it has only so much image clarity due to the limits of the internet posted picture. I'd bet real money that, in the field, the image clarity differences wouldn't be that great.
In the field, at long range, the sharpest binocular will show you the most provided the magnification differences aren't extreme and the image shake between the two aren't much different.
Try reading about the 12X50 Leica Ultravid vs. the 15X58 Swaro SLC on the home page. E

Then how come I had to show Rick those deer thru my tripod mounted bins in order for him to make them out and see them? With his little bins I think they were Zeiss he couldn't see them or make them out.
The computer may limit image clarity, but I think it's a reliable comparision based on what we seen in the field when those pics were taken. I think I glassed up over 50 deer that day from the same point at different ranges with the tripod set up. Rick maybe found a handful, but not at the distances I did even when he tried a rest.

I'd wager you're wrong, especially when the poster I was responding to was asking how much difference one would notice between 8x and 15x. Please show me a better illustration of that than the pictures Rick Bin posted in the thread I linked to.

I've read the "Big Eyes" article several times, and to me, 12x is neither fish nor fowl as one of the testers said. Also, if you've read the article, you read the part where it talked about "looking way out there" with the 12x50 Ultravid and one tester asked if Leica made a 15x? Wonder why that was? You'll also notice the 12x50 Ultravid received four stars as "Big Eyes", whereas the 15x56 Swarovski received five. What do you make of that?

Magnification makes a significant difference is what we found, and that was clearly related in the article in quoting reviewer comments in comparing 12x to 15x.

I personally, directly compared a Swaro 15x and a Leica 12x. Stacked 'em myself on a tripod on Kodiak Island, head-to-head.

The Swaro was better at resolving detail at the two extremes of fading light and extreme distance, both judged independently and in tandem. As in, in fading light, the Swaro was better (which is where I thought the Leica would be better due to the slightly larger exit pupil, but the Swaro's extra mag nullified the Leica's brightness, and then some). At extreme distance, the Swaro was better. At extreme distance in fading light, the Swaro was even "mo' betta."

It just was. If the 12X Leica was a better tripod-mounted bino, I'd own it instead of the Swaro.

For tripod-mounted "Big Eyes" work, make mine 15x, and at the moment, my head-to-head research shows the 15x Swaro rules the pack.

rb

Just like Rick said in his above post. In fading light, the extra magnification of the Swaro allowed him to see further. Which is to be expected until the Swaro quits due to lack of light. After that, The Leica will still work a bit longer due to it's larger exit pupil.
The Swaro sees more detail at extreme ranges. But how about at the shorter ranges ? I'll bet the difference is extremely small.
Anybody want to explain why Enrique thinks the 13X58 Minox is sharper than the 15X58 Swaro ? I'm not surprised. Binoculars with lower magnifications and the same size objectives often are.
No, I don't have anything that I can post that shows the differences more accurately.
I'd just point out that comparing an 8X to a 15X is pointless. E

It's NOT pointless at all E. The reason hunters pack binos is for spotting game. Every hunter has his own priorities and theories on what makes the "best" pair for their style of hunting. Comparing them (power, brand, and method of use) is the only logical means of sorting out what works "best" for finding game.

Enrique
I to have heared of several people put together a pair of spotting scopes and using them as big eyes. Mostly they were the Bushnell's spacemasters variables 15-45, these ones are 20xw fixed model.
[img]http://6mmbr.websitetoolbox.com/file?id=601755[/img]

Well, yall've just about made my mind up. I think I'll get much more use out of the binos and I'll prolly go that way.

I'm doing some carpentry work on the side and will hopefully be done right before my trip north, so the money ought to be available just in time.

Thanks again for all the help.

I have followed this topic with great interest. And while I am by no means any type of expert on hunting or optics, I just can't seem to wrap my mind and experience around the assertion that 15x binoculars are better than a good spotting scope. I currently use a pair of 10x42 SLC binoculars and a 65mm ATS with 20-60x eye piece. I have been out on one scouting trip and one bow hunt, both for mules in Utah up high, while this thread has been going on. I simply cannot see where a pair of 15x binoculars would have been of greater benifit than my spotter for my particular type and style of hunting. In fact, everytime I had to crank the scope up to 40x or 60x to see if that root or branch was a horn, I considered it my good fortune to have that ability. A 15x binocular simply could not have made that distinction.

One talking point I will partially concede is the eye strain when using a scope. I say partially because having used my scope on average once a week for the last 4 months I suffer no noticeable eye strain, even when glassing for hours at a time. Due to my practice I am able to leave both eyes open with my dominant eye on the scope.

For my type and style of hunting, I'll stick with the scope.

All of this discussion has provided some excellent information. "Big Eyes" aren't my cup of tea but I find the discussion extremely interesting. The closest I would probably get to what you gentlemen are referring to would be a 10x50 or an 8x56. Not true "big eyes" but what I would probably prefer.

On the other hand I have been contemplating a different approach to some of my earlier comments on spotting scopes vs. "Big Eyes".

What do you gentlemen know of binoviewers?

You can google it if you like but basically it is taking a spotting scope and putting a rather unique "splitter" on the eyepiece end so you can actually place two eyepieces side by side to create a "binocular" viewing experience out of a spotting scope. That would pretty much eliminate the argument about having a more relaxed image from a binocular because you use both eyes. You use both eyes with the binoviewer...just one objective.

This is just my thinking out loud. I have only done some cursory reading on the subject but it would prove an interesting avenue to explore.