Next message: Bill: "Re: Binoculars: a Russian View"
Hi:
I have some information about binoculars including a figure of merit
based on how well you can hold them, see:
http://www.pacificsites.com/~brooke/Bino.shtml
Have Fun,
Brooke Clarke, N6GCE
--
w/Java http://www.PRC68.com
w/o Java http://www.pacificsites.com/~brooke/PRC68COM.shtml
http://www.precisionclock.com
Peter Fogg wrote:
>Perceived image sharpness is made up of resolution and contrast. The
>European tradition of fine lens making, from firms like Leica and Rodenstock
>and Schneider, has emphasized resolving power over contrast. There is a good
>reason for this; a low contrast image retains more information (tonal range)
>which is lost as the contrast is increased. Increasing the contrast is
>usually possible later on, eg, when reproducing the image on paper or in
>print, although transparency film is an exception here (a compensating
>factor is the higher contrast of transparency film over negative stock).
>
>The Japanese trend has been to go for higher contrast optics. This offers an
>increase in perceived sharpness. I don't want to imply that they are lacking
>in resolution as generally their overall quality is excellent.
>
>I too have been very impressed with some of the images offered by modern
>binoculars - not just Leica. Some do seem particularly crisp and bright. As
>always, if you're in the market shop around. The biggest problem with using
>binoculars seems to be holding the things steady, especially at sea, and so
>I've been intrigued by models with image stabilizers built-in, although they
>do seem to be expensive - and possibly more prone to damage from shock and
>salt air.
>
>
>
>>From: Dan Allen
>>I owned both a Leica R3 SLR and a Leica M2 rangefinder camera for several
>>years. Both are works of art but optically they were actually not as good
>>as my Canon or Nikon optics, at least in my opinion
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
