Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Adjustable Objective VS light transmissio |
Post Reply |
Author | |
spreader
Optics Apprentice Joined: July/31/2007 Status: Offline Points: 77 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: August/06/2007 at 17:11 |
There is a light loss due to reflection and absorption at each glass-to-air transition. This also reduces contrast, which is more significant, since it reduces acuity. For our eyes things look "sharper" due to better contrast. The lower the contrast, the "unsharper" is what we see. Additional parasitic reflections inside the tube further reduce the contrast, which is why correct coating of inside of the tubes with material that absorbs practically 100% of the light is very important and what separates really good scopes from the also-rans and cheap junk made in 3rd World countries. Loss due to absorption is usually more significant in blue/violet spectrum if I recall correctly.
With light transmission calculation is therefore simple. Say it's 99% per surface. If there are 5 lens elements in the scope, it means 10 surfaces. So, ideally the scope would transmit a total of (.99)^10 = 90.4% of light. Which is why most high-end European scopes usually specifically mention that light transmission of the scope is over 90%. Most other manufacturers, especially American companies, play the marketing horn and constantly advertise "99% light tranmission rate!", with small print somewhere indicating they meant "per surface". Hope it helps. |
|
Boneyfreak
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/03/2007 Location: Antarctica Status: Offline Points: 20 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
.0004387 loss. Achromats more loss on inside of tube walls than the lenses. Obj lenses are larger which compensates for loss. you can probably getter a better "light" using a filter to aid in value transmissions. Edited by Boneyfreak |
|
Focus
Optics Master Conquistador!! Joined: June/05/2007 Location: Maine Status: Offline Points: 1006 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Every AO scope I'm aware of contains an extra lens........front
adjustable or side should have another lens for light to pass thru.
focus Edited by Focus |
|
I Can See Clearly Now......<><
If Accurate rifles Are Interesting.....I've Got Some Savages That Are Getting Mighty Interesting...... |
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
yes thats as I understand it. the side focus usually puts a lens in front of the erector set (sounds like a toy). but again a high quality side focus may still be better than a front AO. another note front and side AO aren't really focus however the use of the term focus to describe them is rampant.
|
|
stubewan
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/17/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 38 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks Dale,
So Am I to undertand that a scope like the Nikon Monarch 3.3x10x44 AO, which has the AO mounted in the very front, does not have any more lens for light to be transmitted through? And that, a side focus scope like the Nikon Monarch 2.5 x 10.x 42 30mm SF uses extra lens, because of the positioning of the focusing knob? I am so very sorry if this sounds stupid, but I am trying to become a bit more knowledgable about scopes.
Stubewan
|
|
Stubewan
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
the additional lens chris mentions is side parallex focus, I don't think the front focus have the additional lense as you can watch the lenses move when turning the Ao. its put there because of the distance back to the front lens and the gearing that would be requireed. the method of calculations is say 99% each lenses would then be .99 x 99 or .9801 for the 2nd and .98.01 x .99 or 97.06 for the 3rd and 97.06 x x.99 and so on. why some cheap scopes appear to be "brighter" than some with many more lenses elements say a tasco vs. uso, and why the use of the term brighter is misleading. so--- in your last question affecting clarity not necessarily.
|
|
stubewan
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/17/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 38 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks Chris, That is how I have always understood the AO. If the scope is a Nikon Mon. 3.3x10x44, how much light is really being transmitted to the eye. The 95%, that is advertised? I know that the 95% is per lens, but what is reaching the eye?
Stubewan |
|
Stubewan
|
|
Chris Farris
TEAM SWFA - Admin swfa.com Joined: October/01/2003 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 8024 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Any scope that has a parallax adjustment will have an additional lens. Every time light passes through a lens it loses a small percentage of its original value.......so technically a scope with any type of parallax adjustment will transmit less light. Question is, can the human eye perceive the loss??
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
all things being equal no--the screw only moves the front lens in relation to the rest of the scope, clarity in a way is increased because it allows close focus, which would otherwise be unclear.
|
|
stubewan
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/17/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 38 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
What effect does an adjustable objective have on light transmission?
Will it lessen the amount that is transmitted?
Will it degrade the clarity?
Stubewan |
|
Stubewan
|
|
Post Reply | |
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 |