hooray for binoculars

[fmeireso]

I wonder if bigger binos show more abberations, meaning one sees it better. In the 22x85 the stars are not pinpricks like in the 15x70. Stars are nice and round and even very bright stars don't show much flares but clearly the 15x70 shows finer stars.

Strange because just the opposite should be expected (following Edz from CN) but in reality it's the other way around.Maybe SA is more apparent in the 22x85 model

I am starting to believe the 15x70 is really the best of the BA8 series.

However the 22x85 still excells for deepsky.Views are bright and contrast is amazing just like in the 15x70. Objects are better seen.

The 28x110 must give awesome views. But it's so heavy and with straight through viewing probably difficult to handle.For that reason i don't want it. The 10x50 i don't want either. For that model IF is not preferred at 10x50,IMO.

[argonaut]

You can't argue with EdZ

Yes,I agree that the 15x70 is one of the best on the market today. Clean,crisp,pinpoint stars. I do own a pair of the 10x50. These again are a stunning binocular. I see very little CA in these,and the SA is very good. I usually use these mounted though because of the IF. This series is one of the best series I've looked through.

I went for the 100/45° for weight and comfort reasons over the huge 110's. I wouldn't mind a look through them.

[Pete Presland]

i would love a 22 x 85 or bigger but the price is too much

[fmeireso]

You can't argue with EdZ

Well, somebody, (GlenLedrew) mentioned that by a given F/rate but in using bigger optics , abberations become more noticable.(There is thread on CN about it wich i started)

I can agree because it's in big binoculars you allways see CA (to name one abberation)best. Even in a cheap 8x30 you have a hard time notice it, and you really have to look for it to see it. In a even better 20x80 you won't miss it , i can assure you!

also, i can't really explain, i see my abbertions of my eye better too. I have astigmatisme (mild) and i sure see it better in the 22x85. When i use my glasses the image betters considerably as if my glasses do a better job in the 85 then in the 70.

This may be the reason that you think your 100mm bino does less good but perhaps for a part it's because it's just bigger.

For that one should compare the 28x110 with it. I for one would like a peek too...through that one.

I went for the 100/45° for weight and comfort reasons over the huge 110's. I wouldn't mind a look through them.

I agree. There too big and too heavy to handle for looking high up. I have a mount that can hold up at least a load of 22 lbs. The 22x85 sits rocksteady (no vibratio ns)but when looking high up it has the tendency to flip down. I can cope with it but with the 110 mm i am sure this will pose a problem. Once clamped ,again it is no problem but one tends to pan around and then the weight really becomes an issue.

[fmeireso]

i would love a 22 x 85 or bigger but the price is too much

I you really like it and want, try to save up. The 22x85(Apollo) is expensive,OTOH it is a fine binocular and worth it IMO.

Also the BA8 series have 'true aperture' meaning a 22x85 is truly what is stated. Most other bino are less. A 20x80 is mostly between 70 and 75 mm aperture. Therefore the difference between a 22x85 and a 25x100 is small or even non existent especially if the 100mm is of a lesser quality.

Less expensive but still good is the Quantum 4 series 25x100. A good alternative.

Also of course a bino is one thing, the mount another, and the one does not work without the other...

[argonaut]

I like GlennLeDrews posts,he just explains it so well. I find that EdZ is a little too technical,although I am used to him after nearly three years.

Like you Freddie I can only post what I see with my eyes from my backyard. I've not used the 100/45° from a dark site yet. No excuse,lazy amateur:)

I have .25 diopter astigmatism in my right eye,but it doesn't seem the affect the seeing much.

There are quite a few binoculars out there that are not full aperture.