The more expensive glasses are almost always better. The issue is whether or
not they are enough better to justify the cost for your application. Two
things really separate good from bad for me. One is low light performance
and the other is eye fatigue after looking through the lenses for an
extended time. Both of these are difficult to really test in a store. Some
people just like to have nothing but the finest. At least that attitude
creates employment for others. /jmac
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Walt Wayman
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 7:19 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: OT..but Optical
I've stayed away from the binocular discussion because I'm at the low end of
the spectrum, but now that Winsor has so eloquently agreed with my
heretofore unexpessed opinion, I will weigh in. I am completely satisfied
with my $220 Olympus Magellan 8x42 binoculars. They're waterproof, have
great eye relief for those who wear spectacles (or tend to make one of
themselves), and are far better optically than my scratched up eyeglasses
and aging eyes anyway. They may lack the fancy lark spit lens coating, the
dyed baby seal bladder covering, and the musk ox scrotum case, but they get
the job done. And they're OLYMPUS. :-)
Walt
<<< snip
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|