Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Low light performance of a scope vs binos

Last night, I was comparing the viewing performance of a 3.3-10x42 Swaro scope with an EL 8.5x42 pair of binoculars. I was viewing the undergrowth of a distant tree under moon light. Even though I thought the scope (set anywhere from 6x to 10x) was bright and clear, it was after I compared it to the binos that I started wondering what makes a good image to my eyes.
The 'brightness' of both seemed to be similar. The scope seems to have excellent resolution (at least at daylight). What was striking to me was that the binos would give me a much clearer image. With both I could see the same highlight intensity. What the binos gave me was a deeper differentiation between the highlights and the lowlights of the leaves. I don't know if that was the reason, but that made all the difference in being able to distinguish things. The scope was bright but the image was not well defined. Both instruments seem to have similar coatings etc.
What is what makes the difference in image quality under low light conditions? Why the binos gave me such a better clarity? Is it the extra numbers of lenses in a scope? Is it better resolution in the binos? I don't know if that helped, but I had the impression that the binos gave an almost 3-D image which was easier to view. The scope gave an equally bright image, but pretty flat and with less 'resolution' I would say.
Any thoughts/comment?

Thanks

Aic

I did a similar comparison using my swarovski 10x42 slc binoculars to a Schmidt & Bender 2.5x10x56 scope. My results were similar, the binos without a doubt were brighter and offered more resolution than the scope. My comparison was done out of a shooting house over a greenfield at night with about a half moon. It suprised me a bit, I certainly expected the scope with it's 56mm objective to be at least as good as the 42mm binos but it wasn't even close. My best guess on the reason is the loss in light transmission due to the scopes extra lens.

I posted what I saw about a year ago on an internet board and I was essentially called a liar by a frequent poster who's a devout Schmidt & Bender fan. This same poster also stated that he didn't carry binos hunting because his scopes accomplished the same job. I sluffed off the insult because the guy struck me as an internet expert who probably hadn't ever been able to compare a set of top quality binos to a top quality scope in field conditions, he was just repeating conventional thinking he's read on the internet. I like Schmidt & Bender scopes myself, I don't think the results would have been any different if I'd been using a Zeiss or Swarovski. Whatever the reason, from what I've seen even the best scopes don't offer the brightness and resolution of a good pair of binos.

I've got two fixed power 6X42 Leupolds. I've also got an 8X42 Leica BA. Theorectically, according to those that think exit pupil and magnification are every thing, the rifle scopes would be better. But, they aren't, even in full darkness. The bino is just as bright and distngushes detail better.
Why ? Because you brain gets two images to work with, one from each eye. That gives you the depth and detail you want. In other words, my experience parallels your's. E