Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Steiner Peregine 8.5X44 XP |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | ||||
Narrow Gap
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/16/2006 Location: Afghanistan Status: Offline Points: 135 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: July/09/2007 at 18:39 |
|||
How good are these binoculars? I have a pair of the Zeiss Victory 8X56 T*P* and are the binos I mentioned in the same class as the Zeiss? Thanks Ahead for the feedback!
|
||||
lucznik
Optics Master Joined: November/27/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1436 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I think you would probably be better off sticking with the Zeiss.
|
||||
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
|
||||
ND2000
Optics Journeyman Joined: January/29/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Narrow -
+1 on Lucznik's comment. Most poeple would not confuse Steiner with Zeiss (or Leica and Swarovski for that matter).
ND2000 |
||||
You either get what you pay for or what you deserve.
|
||||
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
heres what I want to know
steiner advertises using indexed matched lenses
1) are they the same index matched lenses used by leo?? 2) do they use the same method of measurement (as leo) to classify indexed match ?? 3) are they riding on an advertising coattail? 4) does indexed matched mean anything?? |
||||
koshkin
MODERATOR Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13181 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I do not know anything about Steiner's versoin of "index matched" lenses, but as far as Leupold's version goes, it is a marketing term, nothing more.
ILya |
||||
lucznik
Optics Master Joined: November/27/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1436 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Edited by lucznik |
||||
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
|
||||
Narrow Gap
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/16/2006 Location: Afghanistan Status: Offline Points: 135 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Thanks for the replies! I might just sell my Zeiss Victory 8X56 and use that money toward the Zeiss FL 8X56. I have been watning the FL's since I found out Zeiss was going to introduce the FL 8X56's.
|
||||
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
lucznik, if we could ever get a straight answer on what "index matched" meanings according to Leupold, then I want to know what "Total Light Throughput" means as well.
FWIW, Burris has been using "index matched" as well for a couple of years in their ad campaigns. |
||||
anweis
Optics Master Joined: January/29/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1148 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
1) and 2) most likely not. 3) yes. 4) probably not.
I have not looked through that new Peregrine, they could be a very good binocular. I have looked through many other Steiner binoculars. They never convinced me. You would be better off with lucznick's advice.
|
||||
Bird Watcher
Optics Master Joined: August/30/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
"Leupold's exclusive DiamondCoat and Index Matched Lens System matches lens coatings to each lens for superior performance and optimal light management. DiamondCoat on exterior lens surfaces provides superior scratch resistance". (www.leupold.com)
Edited by Bird Watcher |
||||
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
BW, you are probably right, but this question was asked by ILya directly to a Leupold rep on another site and never got a straight answer. ILya seemed to be leading him into some follow-up Q's which I saw coming (and was amused) such as If the VX-3 and VX7 are "Index matched only, does this mean no other previous Leupold products were matched. I guess the guy started to realize he was not talking to an idiot. I just asked my friend Sven Harms (President of Steiner USA) what they mean by Index Matched? I will post if allowed.
Roy |
||||
Bird Watcher
Optics Master Joined: August/30/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
That's nothing new! I talked with some customer service technicians on the phone and got the impression that "the less said the better". It was like pulling teeth!
Edited by Bird Watcher |
||||
lucznik
Optics Master Joined: November/27/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1436 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
This one's fairly easy, actually. Bird Watcher began explaining it:
I don't know about Fujinon's claims (they sound a bit like advertising hype to me) but, the basic idea is that no glass surface can allow for the pass through of 100% of the light that hits it. Therefore, if we accept that an optic's lens coatings have been optimized to allow each lens surface to permit 99.9% of the light through then, after the first pass through a glass surface, you have 99.9% of the total amount of light remaining. The next lens surface that the light hits will also allow 99.9% of light to pass but, it's 99.9% of the light remaining after the light has passed through that first glass surface. This continues for every glass surface in the optic (of which there can be many,) each one reducing the total light by a bit more. The final amount of light to reach your eye after it has passed through all of the glass is the "Total Light Throughput" This final quantity of light-loss can be quite significant. In the best cases you end up with about 95% of the total, initial, ambient light passing through to your eyes. In the worst cases, this phenomenon can ammount to as much as a 20% loss of light.
This principle of light loss for each glass surface encountered is, by the way, also why no scene through an optic can ever be as bright (let alone brighter) than the same scene viewed through the naked eye - no matter what your brain (or the "expert" author of some magazine article) is trying to tell you. When things appear this way, it's just another optical illusion. Edited by lucznik |
||||
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
|
||||
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Is this like ordering a military sporter from Century arms and getting a hand picked one for $20 more??
|
||||
Bird Watcher
Optics Master Joined: August/30/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
The hand that picked it, also picked your pocket!
|
||||
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I wanna know how it got in the UPS box if they aren't all hand picked.
|
||||
lucznik
Optics Master Joined: November/27/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1436 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
This is true and this "scale" gets quoted quite often, especially in the various magazines but, there are some severe limitations to its applicability.
For example, if I manufacture a "cheap" binocular and decide that, as a part of the build process, I am going to coat every air-to-glass surface with exactly two coatings of magnesium flouride, then (according to this scale) I have produced a "fully multi-coated" optic. However, there is nothing to identify the quality of my work nor can it be reasonably asserted that my two coatings are going to be as good as the 30 - 60+ layers of coatings applied by the more mid to high-end optics manufacturers. Yet, I still get to claim "fully multi-coated lenses," just like they do.
This same need to recognize that quality of workmanship is at least as important as the materials and/or processes utilized, applies to the addition of phase correction coatings, hydrophobic coatings, usage of "Bak 4" glass, etc., etc., etc.
Like Bird Watcher said:
I would add that this is true no matter what their spec sheets say they have. Edited by lucznik |
||||
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
|
||||
Bird Watcher
Optics Master Joined: August/30/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
lucznik
Your comments remind me of the posting done by Chirs Farris on JIS water-proof standards. Ain't it fun trying to keep up with all the "little secrets" that are hidden within the optics industry? |
||||
lucznik
Optics Master Joined: November/27/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1436 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Yes, I remember that thread as well.
To be fair, we should point out that the optics industry is not the only guilty party here. Almost all industries engage in more advertising hype than they do legitimate informing of consumers. It's only natural to want to make your product look at least as good, if not better than anything else available. Advertising is BIG business and it takes a very wary and ambitious consumer to dig through the crap to find the few nuggets of truth.
You're right though. It is fun trying to uncover all those "little secrets."
Edited by lucznik |
||||
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
|
||||
Roy Finn
MODERATOR Steiner Junkie Joined: April/05/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 4856 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
lucznik, your explanation of " index matching" is the closest to the description i just got from Steiner with regard to their advertising. It was explained that the "index" was referring to the various types of glass used in the Peregrine XP to optimize light and image quality transfer. My typing stinks so that's the short version from the horses mouth.
Roy |
||||
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |