Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Zen-Ray vs Bushnell

He just started a new thread asking about "wow" factor. I get the "wow" factor everytime I read one of his dumbazz posts, as is in "wow", how can anyone be so dense?!..

FOsteology,

Thanks, I finally realized that!

I'm going to publish a new hunting optics book next year. Though I've 'em, optics aren't usually very amusing. Might have to include chapter with some funny stuff in it, and the Campfire optics forum would sure be a good source....

Please also provide a comparison between 15x56 Minox vs 8x30 Swarovski. I want to know if image looks bigger and Wow'er with 15x binoculars.

Hang tight, I'm working on a comparison between a Tasco 7x monocular, Swarovski 10x42 EL's, and a Nikon digital camera.

Some folks are hard up for finding good entertainment as the apparently have to create their own here. And I'd say they have poor taste in it...

And I'd say, GFY

Plese throw in an opera glass in your test to be comprehensive. Many thanks.

Boy, it's a good thing we're all friends here or this could get downright ugly.

WeePeePee:

You have sure been grumpy lately, go out, and get in the outdoors.
Go hunting, and enjoy things.

Think about it !

Thanks for your concern. I just got back fron 10-days hunting elk. What have you been up to other than catching the Midnight Twilight release?

I've been hunting this week, Whitetail, got my buck on Tues. Today, I was out with my Brittany, hunting pheasants.

Good to see, you can post something other than negative.

The discrepancy lies simply in the fact of comparing an 8x binocular to a 7x model. The 8x should resolve finer detail simply because it is a higher magnification . I am surprised it only resolved one line higher though. The easier way to resolve this is simply to walk a few feet closer to the target to compensate for the lower magnification.

The comparison criteria seems to have been simply on apparent resolution. What about the other optical characteristics of each bin? What about apparent brightness? Color fringing control? Size of sweet spot? Contrast?

I would agree that the comparison would have been more valid if the 8x43 ED3 would have been used in the comparison. It still has a very impressive 426 foot field of view....the equivalent of the Legend Ultra. You won't find many, if any, 8x roof prism models that better that....maybe the Kruger Caldera at 438 feet.

I don't fancy myself an optics conuseur (Spelling?), just a guy trying to find something better than what I now use.



Over the years I often tell my wife I have trouble with communication. Here's the thing about the 8X and the 7X. I couldn't care less what magnification the second one is to start with. I was looking for something with a larger field of view that was at least equal in image to the one I already have. Why would I look at an 8X43ED3 when it has the same field of view? I would not mind if the binocular is a 10X of equal quality if it had the field of view I was looking for.

Yes, that sounds correct ?

Quote: and the Campfire optics forum would sure be a good source.... UnQuote

Laffin..........

Ring,

If you fancied a wider field of view then the 7x makes more sense. However, then your comparison should have been done strictly on that criteria and not apparent resolution.

You could have compared a $1700 7x42 Zeiss FL and it would not have faired any better if apparent resolution was your only comparison criteria to determine which was "better"."

Now that I understand your reasoning I can offer reassurance that your current choice of binoculars cannot be bettered even by the likes of $2400 binoculars.

FrankD,



Why do you say that? I want resolution as good as the Bushnell gives me with something offering a wider field of view.



You mean a $1700 7X42 Zeiss FL does not show any better resolution than a Bushnell binocular. I'm not surprised. Beyond a doubt my 4200 4-16X40's match my Swarovski z5 5-25X52 up to 16X for resolving detail.



This reassurance might explain why I have made about a dozen wildcat cartridges. But alas I can't modify optics.

I happen to disagree with the notion that a 8x will always show more/better resolution than 7x. Perhaps I'm not understanding the definition of "apparent resolution".

RDFinn,



I absolutely, positively, indubitably, heartily and completely agree. To modify a statement made by someone here about objective size, A brightly lit blob is still a brightly lit blob. This same concept can be stated about magnification.

By the way I checked the field of view of the 7x42 Zeiss FL. It is only 450 feet so I wouldn't even have considered it. My original goal the other day was something in the neighborhood of 500 feet.

Roy,

Of course just any 8x will not always show better resolution than any 7x.

But there is a limit to how much an optic of any magnfication can resolve, and it has to do with the limits of the human eye. A person with 20/20 vision (average) can resolve about 1" at 100 yards with their naked eyes. A 7x binocular can help 20/20 eyes 1/7th (.143) of an inch, and an 8x binocular can help resolve 1/8th (.125) of an inch.

Yes, quality of optics and individual eyesight makes a difference, but there s no 7x binocular on earth that will help resolve as much detail as a really good 8x--and an 8x will not resolve as much detail as a 10x.

Of course, objective size also makes a difference. The larger the objective, the more a binocular of a given magnification can resolve. Quality does matter, but only up to a certain point. Twenty years ago I was guiding on a ranch in central Montana, and the outfitter was really proud of a Zeiss compact binocular a client had given him as a tip. I can't remember the exact objective size, but it certainly wasn't over 28mm. I was field-testing a very "affordable" 10x50 some company had sent for me to try out, and the outfitter was quite dismayed to find I could see more detail through cheap 10x50 than he could through his Zeiss.

All of this is why the only valid comparisoin between various binoculars is between models of the same magnification and approximate objective diameter. It's also why I run my night-time brightness tests for riflescopes with each scope set on 6x. Otherwise you're not testing pure optical quality, because magnification and/or objective size throws everything off. As I said earlier in this thread, you're not comparing apples to apples.