Why are binos better?

[crackerbacks]

So I purchased a set of meopta 15x binos last year and I absolutely love them! Problem is that now I am totally unhappy with the clarity of my vortex 4.5-27….

Is there a scope out there that can match it? A buddy of mine says it’s not possible do to more lenses in a scope, just thought I would ask.

 

[acudaowner]

delta stryker 5x50x56 ?

 

[Birddog6424]

The amount of lenses in a scope isn't really the issue. Though Lord knows there are plenty in the Razor.

Obviously amazing clarity can be had if you're willing to pay for it. But the optical clarity of a nice set of binos is hard for a scope to compare with. Theres a reason your optometrist has you read the eye chart with one or the other eye covered. Then you'll notice you always do way better with both eyes.

 

[GrumpyOleFart]

Two eyes are better than one.
Meopta scopes do seem to have good clarity.
I've met a few shooters that have bought Meopta scopes, and had issues with them.

 

[carbonbased]

@koshkin Related: The Dark Lord himself recently talked on his YT channel about how pure optical performance of a system is one thing, and how you eyes interact with that system is another thing.

For example, you see better out of a spotter than a riflescope because your eye is much closer to the spotter’s eyepiece. Why?

He says that when your eye is close to the eyepiece, there is less room for visual clutter to distract your brain (i.e. the hot chick next to you bending over to collect brass-my example, not his lol). So, said brain can put more resources towards the actual image you are interested in and therefore, it appears sharper to you.

Of course, compared to a smoking babes butt, I am only nominally interested in the riflescope image. So, in theory, said ass will appear to me in razor-sharp UHD 100k cinema-scope while my riflescope image will appear to my juiced-up brain as but a 8-bit Atari toadstool of a target.

So, your brain is the reason binos look sharper, both by combining/interpretating two images vs one PLUS the close-to-eyepiece phenomenon above.

Other tidbits from his excellent show: March (and other scope manufacturers, it’s hard to tell unless you have insider knowledge) tend/tended to build scopes that are optimized for the scope’s max magnification. In March’s case, this was because their scopes were often used for benchrest or f-class sort of events where people mainly used the max mag.

There is a downside of this ”optimize for the max” strategy. The combo of how your brain works + the scope’s exit pupil + your eye’s “entrance pupil” in differing light = it’s actually usually better to optimize the optic at a lower mag because said optimization is more effective (noticeable to the eye) there.

There may be more to it, but because I don’t have time to re-listen right now to really understand and let it sink into the mush that is my brain, I’ll let you watch the vid yourself.