Contrast/"Punchiness" is an Underrated Spec

[Ken Swenson]

I'm curious to hear what some of the seasoned glassers on this forum would have to say to this idea. It seems like when we see optic reviews, it's all about specs like low light performance, resolution, etc...

I have recently made substantial overhauls to my optics setup, and have been surprised by one factor that has stood out against others in comparing different binoculars: color contrast and what I call "punchiness" from my photography days. At first, I was over-fixated on brightness, edge-to-edge clarity, resolving power, etc... But for the sake of finding game, I think color contrast and dynamic range is now very high on my list.

What I'm trying to describe with these terms is how deer and other game pops from the background through color contrast. The more I look at varying tiers of glass quality, the more I see drastic differences in this area. Cheaper binos seem to cast a monocolored hue over the entire image, making it very difficult to distinguish the gray from a mule deer coat from the surrounding landscape which is shades of similar colors.

One moment where this really hit me was glassing some winter range near my home in a sage valley about 3 miles wide. I put some SLC 15's on a tripod next to EL12x50's on another tripod. To my surprise, I spotted deer on hillsides two miles away at a higher rate with the EL glass than I did with the 15's. At first, I was shocked, as the 15's clearly had more resolution and detail at distance. However, they gave up just a hair in color contrast to my eyes when I compared them to the 12's. Because of this, those gray-ish dots on the hill showed a slightly different color against the rocks and sagebrush behind them, and my eyes were able to spot deer with ease. I was surprised considering the distance.

Have any of you experienced this in comparing glass, or noticed color contrast as a help in spotting more game? I think it may be overlooked in a lot of optics reviews due to the subjective nature of it. I would imagine everybody having slightly different experiences with how they see color contrast in different glass.

 

[squid-freshprints]

I wish they made earth tone specific coatings on screw in filters for this, with generous enough light or objective size, it could work? ( I like a low percentage lunar filter on snowy terrain. Depth and color contrast both seem enhanced, obviously light transmission is reduced but overall view is unquestionably better. I left one barrel of my nocs unfiltered, and the filter side made antler visible in what was a washed out stick pile in the unfiltered barrel.)

 

[TaperPin]

I think you are right about the importance of color contrast, and it seems to be different to different people.

A client and I were talking about welding filters and he likes his lens so much he bought me one and it has changed my enjoyment of welding over night, but others online saw no improvement. I told him these must be the easiest filters to sell because they seem so superior to anything else, but they have been out for a decade and aren’t taking over the market - better for some, but not for all.

Another client at the time was an eye surgeon so I picked his brain about how some people see a gigantic improvement in color contrast, while others with the exact same filter saw no change. Basically, he said no two people have the same sight. Small variations in lenses, receptors, transmitters and mental processing are essentially tolerance stacking resulting in the wide variances.

Recently I bought a secondhand optic and from the moment I picked it up something about it seemed as good as anything I’ve ever looked through. It seems more clear, bright and has better contrast than it should at it’s price point. It’s too early to tell, but if this company simply has lens glass and coatings that just work extra good with my type of eyes, I’ll stock up on their products.

 

[RockAndSage]

Another client at the time was an eye surgeon so I picked his brain about how some people see a gigantic improvement in color contrast, while others with the exact same filter saw no change. Basically, he said no two people have the same sight. Small variations in lenses, receptors, transmitters and mental processing are essentially tolerance stacking resulting in the wide variances.

That's extremely interesting...reminds me of a conversation I had with my daughter when she was little, where she asked "but how does anyone really know that what they see green as is actually the same green I see? What if what they see is brown but they don't know that's what I'd call brown?"

 

[prairieboy]

i was in a gopher patch once upon a time with 2 different scopes on the rifles. A burris fullfield 2 6.5-20x50 and a bushnell elite 6500 tactical 2.5-16x44 or 42. The difference in both at 14x was shocking, and got worse the longer you shot. A dull yellow gopher through the cheaper burris just popped from the dull green grass. The couldnt hide and were easy to see. The elite 6500 on the other hand the yellows didnt pop from the green grass at all. Very hard to find them at distance even with directions from the spotter.

 

[Boarmaster]

I learned it was important 30 years ago when I was hunting deer in dark big timber. I had purchased a Bushnell trophy scope. It was very dark and overcast day and I had a deer standing behind a blow down tree. I could clearly see him with my bare eyes but couldnt see him thru my scope. This was short range maybe 30 yards. I could not see the deer. He was blended in with the small limbs of the blow down. Same scope I would have trouble seeing deer standing behind small understory.
I upgraded my scope after that year and the next year the deer just popped out in the woods. It was important to be able to shoot between branches for clean shot. I'm learned then that quality trumped magnification.
I know a scope is different from binos as you can adjust binos but when I bought binos I used what I learned from my earlier scope experience.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Contrast is a big deal in low-light situations. Contrast is what makes the Leica Magnus the top dog for low light scopes, not light transmission.

 

[OrangeMan73]

Contrast is a big deal in low-light situations. Contrast is what makes the Leica Magnus the top dog for low light scopes, not light transmission.

Bingo, this is why Leica is so underrated, and in general why I lean towards their glass. It's not a matter of clarity, it's a matter of fur popping out while scanning.

 

[RockAndSage]

learned then that quality trumped magnification

^^^ this, big time.

I think a lot of people use magnification range as a proxy for quality, but there's just no replacement for being able to take some glass out into dim light and/or shadows to see what it's capable of. I don't hunt inside deep timber much, but where quality differences really blew me away the first time was glassing into shadows during bright high-desert sunlight conditions. Price seems to be a much better proxy for optical quality than power or mag range. Unfortunately, especially with rifle scopes, it seems price does not generally match up with ruggedness.