Glare resistance in binoculars (2 Viewers)

[Vespobuteo]

Which are the best bins in this aspect?
Are some makes better then others?
Are larger bins better than smaller?
I have noticed quite a difference in this area between my bins and scopes.
Is this mostly about baffling, blackening inside the tubes or does the
coatings (trasmission) or other factors affect the performance?

 

[mfunnell]

My guess is that coatings have the most effect, followed by baffling. I think larger exit pupils help as they allow you to avoid flare by re-positioning your eyes while maintaining your view. I just did a completely unscientific test with the 4 bins I have on hand, looking into bushland in the direction of the risen sun:

• Nikon Action Naturalist III 7x35 (early 1990s) - flare, flare, everywhere! Barely viewable (the main reason I've bought new bins)
• Clestron Oceana 7x50 - some direct flare (but easily avoided), medium veiling flare causing loss of contrast
• Vortex Diamondback 8x28 - direct flare blocking ~20% of view, medium veiling flare
• Zeiss Terra ED 8x42 - no direct flare, minimal-to-no veiling flare - a really great feature of this binocular

...Mike

 

[OPTIC_NUT]

Nothing beats a long, ribbed front baffle, nice flat black,
and a decent step from front to objective.

Recent multicoatings have powerful secondary reflections from wider off-angles.
It's easy to see: tilting the binoculars a lot in the light generates strong reflection
you can see, and the color varies well off axis. The lore that multicoatings eliminate
glare caused neglect for a while. Some binoculars had hardly any baffling.
The real world lighting, shiny off-axis response, and whiffs of dust or film, ravaged that.
Open chambers, exposed parts, shiny grey linings, shot-peening instead
of matte coating. Reliance on magic.
Then the old baffling came back with a vengeance. The improvement in contrast
from 2012 to 2014 8x32 Diamondbacks is stunning.

I don't know what's the best now, but the Vortex line was swept in the new style
a few years ago, Meopta seems to have never abandonded vigilence, Fujinon
never wavered, and Nikon recovered from just a few mistakes...
though the 90's was scary in many places.

A lot depends on the year, much better now, but this is one area where looking
the horse in the mouth in a showroom is important. Looking at something with
a strong light about 1/2 fov outside the field can reveal things.

Some say a wider exit pupil cuts 'veiling glare', but the light does not have
to hit the EP stops like that if the baffling is good and the fov is not excessive,
across a few dozen models I checked. Big exit pupils do correlate...it's true that almost any 7x50 made is
immune to flaring, but the job of baffling is much easier. You can design well for smaller exit pupils
but you need space and can't go too wide on the view.

I have seen the long tunnel AND an old trick, the prism hat, in a few models recently.
It was worth a chuckle about 'back to the future', but it's scattered enough that
you would need to look in the showroom. That is awesome, in terms of performing
across the years.

 

[CliveP]

Whatever the magic part is my Viking Vistron 8x25 seems to have it.

I first just noticed that I wasn't being bothered by any glare in strong low sun when I'm sure all my other bins would have had at least some kind and so I tried to angle the bin near to the sun at all angles and it still seemed to be immune.

I will check again when I next have the chance but it really does seem to be the most immune of all my bins and I can't see anything special in anything about it by looking down the barrels or whatever and it isn't exactly a 7x42?

I can see it's pretty well darkened and there is an abrupt step baffle (90deg) just before the prism and maybe the coatings aren't the latest as it's discontinued and perhaps a few years old stock but there is no CA either. It's not as good as the Bresser Everest 8x28 or Hawke Frontier 8x25 PC or any of my other bins for sharpness or distant resolution but it's passable. So some things traded off for others.

Whatever it is, nice job, in fact the large view it gives is also pretty remarkable, just wish they had used something better to lubricate the focuser. It actually has a full size focus wheel (biggest I've ever seen on a compact) and I think you need it to turn the focus. No idea what's going on there. It's like they used really sticky treacle as you have no chance of acquiring a fast focus and almost have to wait until the gum or whatever settles down before it actually achieves a focus and it doesn't show any sign of ever loosening up unless I put it in the oven for a while or something.

Absolutely brilliant little bin though just needs some dialectric and ED and an M7 focus and I'd spend £200 on one.

 

[kkokkolis]

Zeiss Terra and Conquest 8x42 have vastly greater glare control than Nikon Monarch 7 8x30 and Pentax Papilio 6,5x21, with Canons 12x36 and 18x50 close to Zeiss, although in the 50 the objective is unshaded (with option for aftermarket sunshade though), from the few I have tried.

 

[OPTIC_NUT]

I was looking at photos of the Viking Vistron 8x25 ...
the body is very similar to many 8x25s and 10x25s,
but it has a very deep inset to the objectives
and a lot of exposed threads. Those reflect a bit but they
make an optical 'shark's teeth' barrier ahead of the objectives..
light ends up being directed more out than in.
The focusing is of the 'spectacles' type, objectives sliding.
Good opportunity for the diameter to step in and out.

 

[Vespobuteo]

Seems that Zeiss does a good job on glare resistance,
did some testing today in the low autumn sun,
7x42 FL can tolerate extreme "glare provocation",
practically looking right beside the sun, and still the view is almost unaffected,
glare is just not an issue in any real viewing circumstances with the FL.
The 8.5x42 SV I also have in my line-up since a couple of weeks, is not as tolerant and forgiving with glare, unfortunately. Marvelous bin otherwise but even the sun has it's spots...
Owning binoculars is mostly about accepting their shortcomings...

 

[Steve C]

I really do not think there is such a thing as a glare free binocular. To many factors that vary with individual users. However having said that, the Maven B2 is the most glare resistant binocular I have any experience with. It will cut through glare that will destroy other binoculars.

 

[CliveP]

I was looking at photos of the Viking Vistron 8x25 ...
the body is very similar to many 8x25s and 10x25s,
but it has a very deep inset to the objectives
and a lot of exposed threads. Those reflect a bit but they
make an optical 'shark's teeth' barrier ahead of the objectives..
light ends up being directed more out than in.
The focusing is of the 'spectacles' type, objectives sliding.
Good opportunity for the diameter to step in and out.

Maybe just that the bin is so short my hands hang over the end like a shade.

I did manage to get some glare this evening with the Vistron 8x25 and with the sun about an hour off setting but even then it wasn't to bad.

Another brilliant thing I discovered about them is I can use them with thick gloves (getting cold out now in the autumn evenings) because of the overlarge focus wheel which is definitely larger than typical for this style of bin and the gloves then increase the shielding effect. An amazing 8x25.

 

[WJC]

I really do not think there is such a thing as a glare free binocular. To many factors that vary with individual users. However having said that, the Maven B2 is the most glare resistant binocular I have any experience with. It will cut through glare that will destroy other binoculars.

A "glare-resistent binocular"? Steve, have you gone over to the dark side?

I hope you don't mind that I stole your TR quote. It's a goodun and worth the stealing. I use it when I need something just short of, "devising complex solutions for non-existant problems."

I was hoping to see you when I had a chance to come down to see Peter Abrahams. However, the move to Idaho has made that proposition less dooable.

Anyway, have a great day!

Bill

 

[jremmons]

Of the ones I've tried, the 7x42 Victory T*FL is very good, though certainly not perfect. The Kowa Genesis was maybe a bit better in this regard, and is probably the best I've seen.

 

[Rathaus]

The fujinon 7x50 is phenomenal in this regard. So is the Canon 10x42. These bins just slice ruthlessly through glare giving a stunning view. In fact, viewing with these instruments at sunset is a special pleasure in itself. The contrast is just stunning. For reference, A binocular such as the SV8.5 just can't compete, giving a milky hue by comparison. Something strange...the Habicht 8x30 is worse than the SV8.5, but the Habicht 10x40 is better...very very good.

The fact that the current 8x30 and 10x40 Habichts are similar or identical in so many ways (coatings, baffling, certain dimensions etc) and different in a small few known areas may indeed give knowledgeable folk, through deduction, a hint at what's going on in this particular case.

From my experience, there are not many binoculars which deal well with flare and glare. It's not something that bothers me on a day to day basis. I'm no hunter, but If I was hunting it would Irritate me. It matters if you're creature spotting just after sunset too.

Cheers
Rathaus

 

[kabsetz]

Rathaus,

I agree with your evaluation of the excellent glare resistance of the Canon 10x42. However, the pre-modification models from 2007-2009 (?) were not quite as good at cutting out glare. I'm now testing a Zeiss 10x42 SF, and this seems thus far to be just as good if not even a tiny bit better than the Canon. I haven't viewed enough sunsets or sunrises with it yet, but last night during a sunset with some random clouds around the sun, the Z showed even less of the very slight and fleeting arcs of color that the Canon can show when viewing very close to the sun. Contrast remained equally fine in both.

Kimmo

 

[arran]

My experience is that the zeiss SF, with leica uv hd have best glare resistance within the alphas
Much better than the swaros I have, especially the 32 ones
My old zeiss fl 10x32 was not so good either

 

[Pileatus]

The fujinon 7x50 is phenomenal in this regard. So is the Canon 10x42. These bins just slice ruthlessly through glare giving a stunning view. In fact, viewing with these instruments at sunset is a special pleasure in itself. The contrast is just stunning. For reference, A binocular such as the SV8.5 just can't compete, giving a milky hue by comparison. Something strange...the Habicht 8x30 is worse than the SV8.5, but the Habicht 10x40 is better...very very good.

The fact that the current 8x30 and 10x40 Habichts are similar or identical in so many ways (coatings, baffling, certain dimensions etc) and different in a small few known areas may indeed give knowledgeable folk, through deduction, a hint at what's going on in this particular case.

From my experience, there are not many binoculars which deal well with flare and glare. It's not something that bothers me on a day to day basis. I'm no hunter, but If I was hunting it would Irritate me. It matters if you're creature spotting just after sunset too.

Cheers
Rathaus

I've been watching ocean sunrises/sunsets for two weeks with 8.5X42 and 10X50 SV's with nothing but stunning effects. Simply gorgeous views.

 

[David in NC]

Sadly, the worst I've seen is the Opticron Oregon 4 LE WP 8x32. I wanted to like it (believe me I wanted to like it) but it is simply the worst I've seen in glare. OTHER than that, it's great but you can't get away from the glare issue even in areas with good hills and tree cover. I started a review on mine but never finished due to an unexpected death in the family and other factors but the glare is so bad I couldn't recommend it.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=302205

 

[jremmons]

I've been watching ocean sunrises/sunsets for two weeks with 8.5X42 and 10X50 SV's with nothing but stunning effects. Simply gorgeous views.

The 10x50's are a beauty to behold. If I were a rich man, they'd be a sure complement to my 7x42 FLs. Alas, I'm merely a poor Reservoir wildlife biologist... I didn't think the 8.5x42 and 8x32 SVs were nearly as good in controlling glare, but I've only used what I assume were earlier production models in the field, as they had excessive RB as well - maybe later productions improved glare performance along with changing the distortion philosophy?

 

[Pileatus]

The 10x50's are a beauty to behold. If I were a rich man, they'd be a sure complement to my 7x42 FLs. Alas, I'm merely a poor Reservoir wildlife biologist... I didn't think the 8.5x42 and 8x32 SVs were nearly as good in controlling glare, but I've only used what I assume were earlier production models in the field, as they had excessive RB as well - maybe later productions improved glare performance along with changing the distortion philosophy?

It must depend on eyeballs. My wife will not put her 8X32 SV down and I have no problems with the 8.5X42 and 10X50. Sunset is approaching...gotta go catch up on local news.

 

[OPTIC_NUT]

...
Another brilliant thing I discovered about them is I can use them with thick gloves (getting cold out now in the autumn evenings) because of the overlarge focus wheel which is definitely larger than typical for this style of bin and the gloves then increase the shielding effect. An amazing 8x25.

I first noticed that with 10x50s gripped at the ends and pulled up
against the eye sockets (to steady) ...

Yes...8x25s without much indent on the end
do incredibly well with dark gloves sticking out front.
In winter I use 2 layers of dark brown cotton work gloves.
Excellent effect on contrast.

 

[Uhu74]

Sadly, the worst I've seen is the Opticron Oregon 4 LE WP 8x32. I wanted to like it (believe me I wanted to like it) but it is simply the worst I've seen in glare. OTHER than that, it's great but you can't get away from the glare issue even in areas with good hills and tree cover. I started a review on mine but never finished due to an unexpected death in the family and other factors but the glare is so bad I couldn't recommend it.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=302205

Oh so true, I gave my 4 months old pair away, I found them to be pretty useless because of the severe glare. Talking of "glare monsters", well, this must be one for sure....