The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

Been there · October 29, 2013, 01:36 AM

''The net is, at this price level, I'll bet that there is NO OBSERVABLE DIFFERENCE in low-light performance among these scopes.
For a constant price, if low-light performance is paramount, and as others in this thread have cited, look for a bigger objective, eyepiece and tube''

There is quite a difference, the Zeiss has measurably better light transmission , is better coated, less refractive & has much better contrast, that is observable to anyone prepared to compare the Leupold to it, side by side.
I used to think that my Nikon bino's were good until I tried some Steiners.
While I have some top end camera lenses from Canon & Nikon, they fall short in comparison to my Zeiss T* lenses.
You are right about the size of the objective lens being irrelivent, in most cases more of the same can be a hinderence rather than a benefit.

October 29, 2013, 01:36 AM	#33
Been there Senior Member Join Date: October 1, 2013 Location: New Zealand Posts: 110	''The net is, at this price level, I'll bet that there is NO OBSERVABLE DIFFERENCE in low-light performance among these scopes. For a constant price, if low-light performance is paramount, and as others in this thread have cited, look for a bigger objective, eyepiece and tube'' There is quite a difference, the Zeiss has measurably better light transmission , is better coated, less refractive & has much better contrast, that is observable to anyone prepared to compare the Leupold to it, side by side. I used to think that my Nikon bino's were good until I tried some Steiners. While I have some top end camera lenses from Canon & Nikon, they fall short in comparison to my Zeiss T* lenses. You are right about the size of the objective lens being irrelivent, in most cases more of the same can be a hinderence rather than a benefit.