Low light binoculars?

[Beendare]

I had the 8x32 Zeiss many years ago...and my opinion is its a no brainer to go the the 8x42's...that would be a good mix with the 12x you have now.

IMO, my 8x42 Nikon EDG's are the best glass I've seen in that category Zeiss, Leica, Swaro...the only one I haven't compared is the Noctovids.

 

[rileybassman]

I have the SLC HD 10x42 and the Conquest HD 10x42 - I've had Viper HD 10x42 and Nikon Monarch 5 10x42... the SLC's are the only pair that feel like they work better then my eyes in low light... the Zeiss feel about like my eye - ie if it seems almost too dark to see, so are the Zeiss... the SLC's are more of "I doubt I will be able to see anything" and then I look through them and am always surprised that I can see more then I thought I would be able to.

 

[roweraay]

Agreed that Exit Pupil is a big factor in being able to see in low light. Also, the “twilight factor” seems to be another aspect that keeps coming up.

In many of the prior discussions above, I see that folks are comparing objective sizes and exit pupils across different binocular lines. Too many variables there that could muddy the waters.

For instance, I might be interested in a comparison between say the 10x56 SLC HD, being compared with the 15x56 SLC HD for low light viewing. Most of the variables related to different manufacturers or comparing across lines from the same manufacturer etc., are eliminated here, with the only variable being the magnification (that leads to the exit pupil size). The results should be fairly conclusive, I‘d suppose ?

 

[Matt Cashell]

Wow, really raised this thread from the dead!

It was interesting reading through it again, though.

As discussed in the thread, exit pupil affects brightness among binoculars of similar quality.

Of course the 10x56 SLC will be notably brighter than the 15x56 SLC. The exit pupil is much larger (5.6mm vs. 3.7mm) and they are of similar quality.

 

[Xycod]

Gonna hard pressed to outclass your 12x56 for low light, their big exit and 12x is hard to beat. Power is big factor in seeing, my 7 or 8x are brighter than my 10x42s but I see more with the 10’s. My current best, and imo the best overall bin optically is the swaro 10x50 el’s, had the 10x50 Leica hd plus, and a Zeiss 10x54, both great but sold both, also sold a 10x42 nl which was great but liked the el50’s better. I’d go swaro 10/12x50 el or the slc 10x56mm, they’re just a big.

 

[roweraay]

Wow, really raised this thread from the dead!

It was interesting reading through it again, though.

As discussed in the thread, exit pupil affects brightness among binoculars of similar quality.

Of course the 10x56 SLC will be notably brighter than the 15x56 SLC. The exit pupil is much larger (5.6mm vs. 3.7mm) and they are of similar quality.

Yeah, so in low light, once all of the other variables are removed, how does “brightness” (signified by the bigger 5.6mm exit pupil of the 10x56) vs “magnification” (signified by the 15x of the 15x56, alongside the 3.73 exit pupil) fare, when it comes to seeing more details. The total light being let in, is exactly the same, since the objective lens is identical in terms of size, specification, coatings and quality.

Hopefully, that answer should come from a comparison between the 10x56 SLC HD and the 15x56 SLC HD. Wonder if anyone has done this.

 

[Dos Perros]

Yeah, so in low light, once all of the other variables are removed, how does “brightness” (signified by the bigger 5.6mm exit pupil of the 10x56) vs “magnification” (signified by the 15x of the 15x56, alongside the 3.73 exit pupil) fare, when it comes to seeing more details. The total light being let in, is exactly the same, since the objective lens is identical in terms of size, specification, coatings and quality.

Hopefully, that answer should come from a comparison between the 10x56 SLC HD and the 15x56 SLC HD. Wonder if anyone has done this.

One time in the same sit I compared the Maven B1 10x42, Maven B2 9x45, and Maven B2 11x45. They all shined in one thing or another compared to the others.

At last light a buck stepped out, and without a doubt the best optic to render detail was the 11x45.

 

[roweraay]

I’d go swaro 10/12x50 el or the slc 10x56mm, they’re just a big.

I am personally debating between the 10x50EL and the 10x56SLC. The EL has slightly more FOV and slightly better off-axis performance, but the 10x56 lets in more light overall, and is brighter during the day, and also when the light fades vis-a-vis the 10x50 EL.

To muddy the waters a bit, also being considered is the 12x42 NLs (not 10x42 NLs). This is an outlier, due to its massive FOV for a 12x that resembles a typical 10x.

 

[Xycod]

I’ve had most of the ones listed except the 10x56’s slc’s. The NL’s had a bigger fov than the 50 el’s, but for me the 50mm el’s, 10 and 12, were both more transparent than the 10/12 NL’s, also more forgivinb, had a not better dof so I sold the NL’s after a while. Went back and forth on the 10 vs 12 and ended up keeping the 10x.

That said all these glasses are excellent, I still use my old Zeiss fl 10x42’s and Leica 8x32’s a ton. And to your point some don’t care for the flat fields on the el’s, I didn’t at first, but now it’s hard to go back. Another incredible glass if you can find one is the 8/10x56 Zeiss fl, on axis they may be the best I’ve seen, and ca is the lowest I’ve seen in any binocular. It’ll be similar to the slc 56’s, both have AK prisms.

 

[garrett24]

To add another factor into the equation is look at the type of prism before purchasing Abbe-Koenig prisms vs schmidt-pechan, abbe koenig are longer and larger but will allow for more light regardless of size vs the schmidt prism

 

[roweraay]

To add another factor into the equation is look at the type of prism before purchasing Abbe-Koenig prisms vs schmidt-pechan, abbe koenig are longer and larger but will allow for more light regardless of size vs the schmidt prism

This is a great point. However, over the past decade or so, almost all manufacturers have shifted almost the entirety of their research efforts into refining the Schmidt-Pechan designs, while leaving the theoretically better Abbé-Koenig designs to wither on the vine. It’s baffling to me why they are not spending their efforts in developing the AK designs further, with their unquestionably higher light transmission levels.

When Swarovski came out with their 56mm SLC HDs, with the AK prisms, they really played down their benefits, so as to not rock the boat for their more expensive 10x50 and 12x50 EL models. The SLCs were brighter than the ELs, in both daytime (where the 56mm objective size would not hold any advantages over a 50mm) and when the light fades (Where the 56mm will hold an advantage over a comparable 50mm).

And those design investments made by all “Alpha” manufacturers on the SP designs are showing up in the latest SP-based products, that have really moved the needle for top quality binocular designs. The Zeiss SFs, the Swarovski NL Pures and ELs etc are cases in point. I just wish they had spent the same effort in their AK based designs.

 

[Xycod]

Yeah the ak thing seems a bit like how they went away from Porros years back. And you’re right, Swaro barely mentions, much less promotes the ak design in their 56 series, kinda like benielli with their inertia design and being the end all be all, yet their best or most tested shotgun , the m4, is a gasser, love to have that one in a hunting model.