Why is Alpha better than high grade. (1 Viewer)

[Trinovid]

Are you saying that all points of view have equal validity?

Are you saying that mistaken beliefs carry more weight than fact based ones?
Seems that way since you brought up belief in the sun rotating around the earth even though it was already known to be the opposite in many different cultures.
If you disagree with anything I say, at least try to do so based on a normal reading of what I've said.

 

[Maljunulo]

Are you saying that mistaken beliefs carry more weight than fact based ones?
Seems that way since you brought up belief in the sun rotating around the earth even though it was already known to be the opposite in many different cultures.
If you disagree with anything I say, at least try to do so based on a normal reading of what I've said.

Okay.

 

[henry link]

My statement was based on the fact that only a very few people know how to objectively measure the resolution of their binoculars or scopes.

There are homemade objective tests for most other optical characteristics as well, but they are also only done by a few of us. Once you know the unvarnished truth about the optical quality of the so called "alpha" brands an unquestioned faith in their superiority, like what is being expressed in this thread, is no longer supportable.

 

[[email protected]]

My statement was based on the fact that only a very few people know how to objectively measure the resolution of their binoculars or scopes.

There are homemade objective tests for most other optical characteristics as well, but they are also only done by a few of us. Once you know the unvarnished truth about the optical quality of the so called "alpha" brands an unquestioned faith in their superiority, like what is being expressed in this thread, is no longer supportable.

Henry. I agree with you about resolution, but I think Lee has a valid point when he says, "Of course Henry is dead right if we are only considering binocular resolution, but the differences between binoculars and what elevates the performance of a model above that of others is more than resolution. Resolution isn't useful without contrast and the view isn't realistic without the right balance of colors, and the best of optical performances can be ruined by a stiff or uneven focuser etc., etc." There are many things besides resolution when judging a binocular that are difficult to measure or test objectively, like contrast, color balance and glare resistance, but your eyes can see the difference and of course there is the better build quality of the alphas and I think this is why many people feel they are superior. For me, I really like good contrast, and it seems the alphas tend to excel in that area, probably because of better glass and coatings. I don't think most birders have an unquestioned faith in the superiority of an alpha. It is based on using them and what they can see with their eyes. People notice a difference, or they wouldn't pay the difference in price for an alpha.

 

[Trinovid]

So....what factors are they that lead one model to be considered alpha and the next one beta? I believe that's more in line with the original intent of the thread.

 

[henry link]

Of course Henry is dead right if we are only considering binocular resolution, but the differences between binoculars and what elevates the performance of a model above that of others is more than resolution. Resolution isn't useful without contrast and the view isn't realistic without the right balance of colours and the best of optical performances can be ruined by a stiff or uneven focuser etc., etc.

Lee

Don't forget the aberrations and defects that reduce resolution (spherical aberration, longitudinal chromatic aberration, astigmatism, coma, pinching, etc.) also reduce contrast, and the accuracy of color balance can be measured and photographed. These things should not be left to the subjective judgements of brand enthusiasts.

 

[takitam]

Don't forget the aberrations and defects that reduce resolution (spherical aberration, longitudinal chromatic aberration, astigmatism, coma, pinching, etc.) also reduce contrast, and the accuracy of color balance can be measured and photographed. These things should not be left to the subjective judgements of brand enthusiasts.

The audacity and disdain for others in the second sentence of this post is amusing. 'I am the only one qualified to tell you what this is and what you can see. You are not qualified to decide yourself'. And we are only talking about binoculars. Imagine what happens when people with this attitude do politics. Oh wait...

'Sad laughter in the background'...

It's funny how after many years of experience with binoculars and buying and selling and testing some models, I now consider the most 'scientific' website, allbinos, to be almost useless for me. All the 'scientific' measurements are missing one tiny but kind of important element - my eyes and preferences. You shouldn't need a lot of empathy or experience to understand that. And people who think that bino tests can be objective and can tell others what the 'facts' are, lol.

Besides, if you were ever into how science is made, you might have learned how ugly this business can be.

I have a suggestion - Let's just discuss our favourite binoculars instead of flexing our egos. Apologies if I'm guilty of the latter myself.

 

[WJC]

The audacity and disdain for others in the second sentence of this post is amusing. 'I am the only one qualified to tell you what this is and what you can see. You are not qualified to decide yourself'. And we are only talking about binoculars. Imagine what happens when people with this attitude do politics. Oh wait...

'Sad laughter in the background'...

It's funny how after many years of experience with binoculars and buying and selling and testing some models, I now consider the most 'scientific' website, allbinos, to be almost useless for me. All the 'scientific' measurements are missing one tiny but kind of important element - my eyes and preferences. You shouldn't need a lot of empathy or experience to understand that. And people who think that bino tests can be objective and can tell others what the 'facts' are, lol.

Besides, if you were ever into how science is made, you might have learned how ugly this business can be.

I have a suggestion - Let's just discuss our favourite binoculars instead of flexing our egos. Apologies if I'm guilty of the latter myself.

You need not apologize for the truth!

 

[Ted Y.]

All the 'scientific' measurements are missing one tiny but kind of important element - my eyes and preferences.

True. But irrelevant.
The scope of the measurements does not contain the preferences, nor specifics of any individual user. The measuremnets are about the tool.
Measurements of your specifics concern only you, I do not need this ones on binoculars sites.
I will add a third element, not mentioned, the way one use a binocular. One can declare a binocular as having lower quality just because one does not know how to use it.
Can a binocular be best than high-grade (aka alpha in this thread) because of preferences?

 

[Ted Y.]

And people who think that bino tests can be objective and can tell others what the 'facts' are, lol.

Please elaborate, maybe with examples.
But not hearsay, please.

 

[Paultricounty]

The audacity and disdain for others in the second sentence of this post is amusing. 'I am the only one qualified to tell you what this is and what you can see. You are not qualified to decide yourself'. And we are only talking about binoculars. Imagine what happens when people with this attitude do politics. Oh wait...

'Sad laughter in the background'...

It's funny how after many years of experience with binoculars and buying and selling and testing some models, I now consider the most 'scientific' website, allbinos, to be almost useless for me. All the 'scientific' measurements are missing one tiny but kind of important element - my eyes and preferences. You shouldn't need a lot of empathy or experience to understand that. And people who think that bino tests can be objective and can tell others what the 'facts' are, lol.

Besides, if you were ever into how science is made, you might have learned how ugly this business can be.

I have a suggestion - Let's just discuss our favourite binoculars instead of flexing our egos. Apologies if I'm guilty of the latter myself.

I don’t think it was audacity , maybe could’ve of been worded differently.

I couldn’t agree with you more about Allbinos reviews. They are very interesting and informative, but leave a gaping whole in reality to the user, not to mention when measuring and scoring you have to be real careful because there are so many variations from sample to sample. Many binos I tested had completely different outcomes. And I noted this is other posts about these Allbino tests. I either got ignored or attacked, it was like I insulted the gods.

Politics , don’t go there , I’m in the states. It’s not pretty right now😵‍💫

Paul

 

[Patudo]

To my eyes the best binoculars today (alphas or whatever you want to call them) have a combination of brightness, sharpness, cleanness of image and colour rendition that as a total package makes for a more pleasing image, albeit sometimes only by just a little, than the level just below - though I personally think the Conquest HD/Meostar/Monarch HG all have excellent image quality in their own right (and are certainly fully competitive with top-line binoculars in terms of actual effectiveness in the field). The best ones give you not only a great looking image but more of it (wider field of view and/or excellent edge performance). I suppose perceived build quality also feels more refined - although no doubt things like the Conquest HD and Meostar are built more than well enough for probably 99% of the birders out there. Then again, at the price one pays for alphas, they certainly ought to offer more.

As to whether that slightly nicer image is worth paying for - that's down to your individual circumstances and priorities. I don't own a NL/SF/SV myself.

 

[Paultricounty]

To my eyes the best binoculars today (alphas or whatever you want to call them) have a combination of brightness, sharpness, cleanness of image and colour rendition that as a total package makes for a more pleasing image, albeit sometimes only by just a little, than the level just below - though I personally think the Conquest HD/Meostar/Monarch HG all have excellent image quality in their own right (and are certainly fully competitive with top-line binoculars in terms of actual effectiveness in the field). The best ones give you not only a great looking image but more of it (wider field of view and/or excellent edge performance). I suppose perceived build quality also feels more refined - although no doubt things like the Conquest HD and Meostar are built more than well enough for probably 99% of the birders out there. Then again, at the price one pays for alphas, they certainly ought to offer more.

As to whether that slightly nicer image is worth paying for - that's down to your individual circumstances and priorities. I don't own a NL/SF/SV myself.

Excellent, that is very well presented and really does cover a lot here. That was the best ( one of the best , don’t want to hurt anybody feelings) post and explanation of this topic so far.

I like the way you categorized the level just below , because that’s what it is, just below the best of the best, and that’s damn close. Yet you hit it, when you said the top are a total package. Even though you don’t own one, this is a well balanced, unbiased opinion with good facts, IMO.

And you left out the Leica Nocs. 😏

Paul

 

[Troubador]

To my eyes the best binoculars today (alphas or whatever you want to call them) have a combination of brightness, sharpness, cleanness of image and colour rendition that as a total package makes for a more pleasing image, albeit sometimes only by just a little, than the level just below - though I personally think the Conquest HD/Meostar/Monarch HG all have excellent image quality in their own right (and are certainly fully competitive with top-line binoculars in terms of actual effectiveness in the field). The best ones give you not only a great looking image but more of it (wider field of view and/or excellent edge performance). I suppose perceived build quality also feels more refined - although no doubt things like the Conquest HD and Meostar are built more than well enough for probably 99% of the birders out there. Then again, at the price one pays for alphas, they certainly ought to offer more.

As to whether that slightly nicer image is worth paying for - that's down to your individual circumstances and priorities. I don't own a NL/SF/SV myself.

I agree with Paul that your summary is the best we have seen on this thread.

Lee

 

[Pileatus]

Read between the lines...

First Person: Encounters with birds and 'Alpha Birders'

First Person: Encounters with birds and 'Alpha Birders'

www.worcestermag.com

PS
There's no such thing as an "alpha" binocular.

 

[Paultricounty]

I don’t think it was audacity , maybe could’ve of been worded differently.

I couldn’t agree with you more about Allbinos reviews. They are very interesting and informative, but leave a gaping whole in reality to the user, not to mention when measuring and scoring you have to be real careful because there are so many variations from sample to sample. Many binos I tested had completely different outcomes. And I noted this is other posts about these Allbino tests. I either got ignored or attacked, it was like I insulted the gods.

Politics , don’t go there , I’m in the states. It’s not pretty right now😵‍💫

Paul

Crickets

 

[Troubador]

Crickets

Bats

 

[henry link]

I

I don’t think it was audacity , maybe could’ve of been worded differently.

I couldn’t agree with you more about Allbinos reviews. They are very interesting and informative, but leave a gaping whole in reality to the user, not to mention when measuring and scoring you have to be real careful because there are so many variations from sample to sample. Many binos I tested had completely different outcomes. And I noted this is other posts about these Allbino tests. I either got ignored or attacked, it was like I insulted the gods.

Politics , don’t go there , I’m in the states. It’s not pretty right now😵‍💫

Paul

Allbinos is certainly doing us a service, but it could be much better. I've complained about many of their methods for years. I think almost anyone can see what's wrong just by reading their article on how they conduct their tests. Many "measurements" turn out to be nothing more than subjective impressions with numbers attached and some of their techniques are clearly incapable of measuring what they claim to measure.

I've also complained about the many reviews (Allbinos included) that don't bother to test for sample defects before a specimen is reviewed as representative. For binoculars that means at a minimum testing for miscollimation and star testing at high magnification to identify defects like astigmatism, coma, pinching and poorly made roof edges that may be limited to one side only, indicating sample rather than design defects.

 

[Paultricounty]

I

Allbinos is certainly doing us a service, but it could be much better. I've complained about many of their methods for years. I think almost anyone can see what's wrong just by reading their article on how they conduct their tests. Many "measurements" turn out to be nothing more than subjective impressions with numbers attached and some of their techniques are clearly incapable of measuring what they claim to measure.

I've also complained about the many reviews (Allbinos included) that don't bother to test for sample defects before a specimen is reviewed as representative. For binoculars that means at a minimum testing for miscollimation and star testing at high magnification to identify defects like astigmatism, coma, pinching and poorly made roof edges that may be limited to one side only, indicating sample rather than design defects.

I couldn’t agree more. But the Allbino mob is coming for you now. 🤫

Paul

 

[tenex]

Then again, at the price one pays for alphas, they certainly ought to offer more.

They do: a (usually) amazing level of service, even to the point of a complete rebuild to current standards, normally at no further cost.