Yes, I agree. I didn't mean to generalize that all Zeiss had exceptional CA control. You're right on with your summations. You have compared a lot of binoculars.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Why do Zeiss's alpha level binoculars like the FL and SF have some of the best CA control of any binoculars? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
Yes. I usually use 10x32 / 8x32 EL for reference, so. got lot of result not only by test bino itself but also comparison of EL
Kowa BD2 10x42 / EL 10x32
center ca
edge ca
Leica UVHD+ 8x32 / EL 8x32
center
edge
in this comparison, you can see the gap between Center / Edge CA of Swaro EL.
Crushing UVHD+ in center but almost same at edge.
EL 8x32 have strongest gap among ELs (maybe because of largest real FOV)
but this is the CA machanism of Swaro EL & NL & AX VISIO
It feels that they push the central CA to the edge in order to hide it... 😉
Last edited:
Yes! It's strange, isn't it? Very frustrating in winter snow & sun. The 8x42 SF have lots of purple around the edge, the 8x32 SF don't but have the prism spikes. So hard to find the "perfect" binocular, regardless of cost it seems. For me the 8x42 SF would have been perfect if they just shrunk the FOV down by 5-10%. I guess there's room for improvement with the next iteration of Zeiss models.
How do they eliminate CA? By using the best glass types in the objective and oculars, by using optical designs that eliminate the CA. Very difficult to get peripheral (lateral) CA out with wide-field oculars. Difficult to get central CA out without the most expensive glasses in the objective
and what story are they telling? Don't leave us hanging
totally Agree with you.
NL & SRBC 8x42 didn't show that amount of CA with wider FOV...
to eliminate CA to the limitation, bino have to be dark, narrow view and long 😀
but many people (include me) are more likely to prefer the opposite 😉
That’s because there is none.
Yes! ....unless there was some way to personally design our own binoculars....that's not happenng anytime soon
I believe he only has eyes for Swaros.and what story are they telling? Don't leave us hanging
Please tell more.....
Well, I think i'm pretty much there.
The Zeiss HT8x42 is the only binocular that has stopped my shopping around. I am no longer looking for the next best bino!!!
It's good at everything, maybe not the best at everything, but for me has no real weak spots.
Works in all light conditions, good at glare control, good control of CA, incredible brightness on dull days, superb quality build and warranty.
I'm left wanting nothing more.
I am done
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Only once? 🤣✌🏼🙏🏼You're correct, for once!
PS I like the way you changed the discussion heading, bravo.
Last edited:
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Always enjoy your posts Jack, very well done. This is perfect example though of what I’ve noticed many times, the camera is adding or detracting from what the eyes are actually seeing. There is no way way, no how the difference in color hue between these two bins is that drastic to the eyes.
The Kingfisher
Well-known member
I am as many else sensitive to CA, but my latest buy was a Leica Noctivid 8x42. Leica is known for show more CA than some other brands like Swarovski, Zeiss, Nikon and Kowa. But I have to say that in "normal" birding situations CA is not prominent at all in the Noctivid. Not more than in my Nikon EDG 8x42. But when it"s cloudy and there is a bright soft light from the sun I can clearly see CA. I do not like that at all. This is not only a Leica issue though. In such weather and lighting even my Nikon EDG gets a prominent CA. If I remember correctly my old Swarovski SLC 8x42 also struggle with CA in such weather and lighting conditions. I have had a Kowa Prominar 8,5x44 which is one of the best when it comes to handle CA, but even this one is not CA free in certain weather/lights. I hate when my new Noctivid shows prominent CA in some specific situations, but all the other time I use it is a very very nice binocular (as the Nikon EDG is). I have tried a Zeiss Victory SF 8x42. Maybe it show less CA than a Leica Noctivid, but instead it does not have good colours (white is dirty yellow 100% of the time). With much better colour rendition, contrast, flare/glare control..and to me also a sharper centre I choose the Leica Noctivid over the Zeiss SF anyday (even if CA is more prominent in certain situations). With this I will say..even if I do not like prominent CA in a binocular CA is just one thing among others when choosing a binocular.
Why do Zeiss alpha level binoculars like the FL and SF have some of the best CA control of any binoculars? Zeiss alpha binoculars like the FL and SF have some of the best CA control of any binoculars. Swarovski's have good CA control, but Zeiss FL'and SF's are usually a little better. They must be using similar grades of Schott glass in these alpha level binoculars, so why do Zeiss seem to edge out most of the competition when it comes to CA?
The Zeiss SF 8x32 and SF 10x32 are particularly good at controlling CA because I see almost no CA in the center or on the edge in either of them, and I have never seen that before in the dozens of binoculars that I have tested for CA. I use a similar subjective method of testing for CA that Allbinos uses, so it is not perfect, but it should give you an idea of how well a particular binocular controls CA. Allbinos also agrees that some Zeiss models like the SF 8x32 have the best CA control they have ever seen, so is it the glass or something in the optical design of the binocular, like more ED lenses in the optical train?
From Allbinos
"Also chromatic aberration correction result, one of the best in the whole history of our tests, is achieved despite such a wide field of view. If you don't like CA effects, the Victory SF 8x32 is definitely your pair of binoculars because it fares distinctly better than all binoculars produced by its main rival, Swarovski. Swarovski binoculars have noticeable problems with chromatic aberration on the edge of the field, which is often narrower than the field of the Zeiss."
Binoculars rankings - AllBinos.com
The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.www.allbinos.com
How do we test binoculars? - Description of test methods and categories.
Binoculars tests, published on Optyczne.pl/Allbinos.com are conducted by a group of great optics enthusiasts with a lot of experience under their belts. We’ve handled about 500 pairs of binoculars so far plus several dozen of spotting scopes, telescopes, many eyepieces and plenty of other...
Last edited:
If you want good CA for the price, leica is least to find out.
CA doesn't have a significant improvement since 01 made trinovid BN to recent Noctivid
The Kingfisher
Well-known member
You clearly did not read what I wrote. CA is only one thing among others when choosing/buying a binocular. I have used and tried many different binoculars (mostly alpha), so I know what I like and not like. I do not like CA, but I do not like bad colour rendition either that Zeiss has.
The Kingfisher
Well-known member
Noctivid is not the same binocular than a Trinovid or an Ultravid. The Noctivid is on another level (and handles CA better). At least when I compared them side by side for some days ago.
NV is better bino. but compared to Zeiss and Swarovski's improvement During the same timelength and price(Swaro EL -> ELSV -> NL), (Zeiss TFL -> HT -> SF) Leica didn't have that much improvement in diversity and optically.
amd 10x42 NV's CA and brightness, sharpness is worse then 8x42 even regarding the magnification difference.
so If you have your result in 8x42 NV, 10x42 NV's comparison result is different.
