（翻译）评测：7x42 Habicht vs. 7x42 Dialyt vs. 8x42 Docter

footway

原文来自http://www.holgermerlitz.de/swaro7x42.html
Review: 7x42 Swarovski Habicht vs. 7x42 Zeiss B/GA Dialyt vs. 8x42 Docter B/CF
by Holger Merlitz  翻译 北旅论坛footway

The 7x42 represents an interesting species of binoculars, combining excellent low light performance with a reasonable degree of mobility. In fact, they are much less bulky than typical glasses of 7x50 or 8x56 size, and with 6mm exit pupil vs. 7mm they perform almost equally well under dim light.
7x42规格是一个有趣的望远镜种类，结合了低亮度表现和合理程度的携带性。实际上，它们比典型的7x50或者8x56规格的镜子要小的多，6mm的出瞳直径在暗淡光线下的表现和7mm的几乎一样。

Some binoculars users go even further and adopt the 7x42 as their all-around glass, an alternative to the more conventional 8x42. Among the benefits are its wider field of view and the easy-going way of observation which comes along with the steady image and the large depth of field of 7x binoculars. This review compares the Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt, a classic high-end binocular made around 1990, with two current representatives of the upper middle class, Swarovski Habicht and Docter B/CF. The latter is of 8x42, and hence this test is also addressing the question of how far the 7x42 could replace the 8-power glass as an all-around binocular. All three candidates are currently available for 600-700 Euro (the Zeiss, of course, is discontinued and found only second hand), making this test a fair competition of two recent generations of optical instruments.
某些望远镜使用者甚至更进一步，使用7x42作为他们的全能镜，代替了更常规的8x42。它的好处有宽扩的视野，伴随图像稳定和7倍镜子的大景深而来的放松的观测方式。这次评测对象有，Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt，大约1990年产的经典的高档望远镜；还有两个当前高档望远镜的代表，Swarovski Habicht 和 Docter B/CF，后者是8x42规格，因此这次评测也留下问题，即在多大程度上7x42能代替8倍镜子作为全能望远镜。这三款镜子都能以600-700欧元买到（当然Zeiss已经停产了，只能找到二手的），本次测试是属于两个相近时代的光学设备的公平竞争。

Fig. 1: The Swarovski 7x42 Habicht, current production
1号：Swarovski Habicht 7x42, 当前产品
The 7x42 Habicht is made by the Austrian manufacturer Swarovski. With its magnesium body, sealed to be fully water proof and nitrogen filled, and coated with the help of latest technologies, this binocular is among the few representatives of state of the art Porro-prism designs on the market. The designer's choice to restrict its field of view to a minimum may be disputable, but it allows to keep the prisms slim and leads to an amazingly low weight of this instrument. There exists also a rubberized ('GA') version for particularly rugged applications. This binocular was already tested in an earlier review, and costs about 600 Euro (GA version: 700 Euro).
7x42 Habicht是奥地利施华洛世奇（Swarovski）工厂生产的。镁合金镜身，密封充氮防水，最新科技的镀膜。这镜子是市场上少数最高科技保罗棱镜产品的代表。设计师将视野缩小到极限的抉择应该有待讨论，但这样能保持棱镜的苗条，使镜子的达到令人惊讶的低重量。也有包胶版本('GA')供特别粗暴的应用情况。这镜子在早期评测中测过。价格大约600欧元（包胶版700欧元）。

Fig. 2: The Zeiss 7x42 B/GA Dialyt, made in 1988
2号：Zeiss 7x42 B/GA Dialyt，1988年生产
This binocular was introduced by Zeiss in 1981 and quickly gained the reputation of being an outstanding performer, even when compared to other members of the Zeiss line. Its body appears tall for a 42mm binocular, a result of Abbe-Koenig type prisms which build long, but, in contrast to the more compact Schmidt-Pechan type, fold the light-cone by total internal reflection only. Consequently, they do not require any mirror-coating at which light would get lost, making an exceptionally bright image when compared to other roof-prism designs of that time. Since 1988, the phase-correction coating (also called P-coating) was implemented, which shifted the level of contrast to that of the better Porro prism binoculars. The present sample was made around that time and already contains the P-coating. Later versions were called 'ClassiC', and finally discontinued in 2004, when the Victory FL emerged. Nowadays, the Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt is found second hand for typically 600-700 Euro (in its later, P-coated version).
这镜子1981年由Zeiss宣传的，即使当时有其它的Zeiss镜子，它很快就得到了户外明星的名誉。对于42mm口径的镜子，它的身材显的高了，这是制作的很长的Abbe-Koenig棱镜的结果，与更紧凑的Schmidt-Pechan比较，只有它能通过全内反射能包起锥形光束。因此，它不需要任何能让光线损失的反射镀层，与当时其它屋脊镜比较，它得到极明亮的图像。从1988年起，phase-correction 镀膜(又称作 P镀膜)被应用，相对更好的保罗棱镜望远镜的镀膜，它拉近了等级，当前样品就是那时生产的并且使用了P镀膜。后来的版本叫做'ClassiC'，最后当Victory FL出现，于2004年停产。现在二手Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt价格通常是600-700欧元（后来的P镀膜版本）。

Fig. 3: The Docter 8x42 B/CF, pre-2008 version
3号：Docter 8x42 B/CF，2008年以前
The B/CF series, which also contains the 10x42 B/CF, was designed around 2000 by Docter in Eisfeld. Although it is sometimes claimed to be a successor of the famous Zeiss Jena Notarem, the similarities are few and I suspect that these binoculars were actually designed from scratch. The 42mm objective is a quadruplet, i.e. made of no less than four lens elements. Further features include spectacle-friendly oculars (B), twist-up eye-cups and a central focuser (CF). This binocular is nitrogen filled, fully sealed with internal focuser, and specified to be submersible up to 3m. Its extra-rugged rubber armor makes this binocular feel like a Mil. spec. device and no doubt it is made for applications under most demanding conditions. The price tag in Europe is between 600 and 700 Euro, but I have occasionally seen considerably lower off-sale prices in US. Remark: In late 2007, an upgraded version of the Docter B/CF was introduced which is featuring improved coatings on lenses and prisms. In this test, I was using the old version of this binocular.
B/CF系类，其中也包括10x42 B/CF，是2000年Docter在Eisfeld设计的。虽然有时声称是著名的Zeiss Jena Notarem的继承者，但相似点很少，我猜测这些镜子实际上是从零做起的。42mm的物镜是4组的，就是说，由不少于4片镜片构成。更多的特点包括能适合眼镜的的目镜（B），旋升眼罩，中心调焦(CF)。这镜子内部充氮，完全密封的内部调焦，能耐3米深水。格外粗壮的外包橡胶使得这镜子像是军用的，不用怀疑它可用于大部分恶劣情况下的使用。在欧洲市场的价格是600-700欧元，但我在美国偶然见过相当低的成交价。注意：在2007年末，升级版的Docter B/CF出现了，改进了棱镜和透镜的镀膜。在本评测中，我使用了老版本的镜子。

Fig. 4: The Swarovski Habicht, Zeiss Dialyt and Docter B/CF
The following table summarizes some of the specifications of the contenders.
下表中是被评测对象的各项指标

Optical performance 光学性能
Angle of view: Both the Docter and Zeiss can be regarded as moderate wide-angle binoculars. A 60 degs. apparent field of view is not frequently found with 8x42 binoculars, and very rare with 7x42. Since today's trend goes towards low weight and compact binoculars, optical designers have become reluctant to offer wide fields of view which require larger prisms and expensive oculars with additional lens elements (but: Check the No. 9 of the collected wisdoms). The Habicht is an example for this trend: With only 45 degs. field, it merely offers a tunnel-view, but the binocular, despite of being a Porro-design, is significantly less heavy than its two competitors.
视角：Docter 和 Zeiss可看做中等宽视野镜子，60度表现视场在8x42镜子中可不常见，在7x42中更稀少。当前的趋势是低重量更紧凑的镜子，光学设计师不愿意提供大视场，这需要需要更大棱镜和更贵的需要增加镜片个数的目镜（但，核对collected wisdoms的第九条）。Habicht就是这个趋势的例子：只有45度表现视场，虽然只是提供了隧道视野，但这个镜子即使是保罗棱镜设计，也明显的比其它两个的重量低。

footway

Image sharpness: As usual with binoculars of decent quality, sharpness is a non-issue within the central part of the image, since any of them is doing perfectly well here. Towards the edge, the Dialyt, with its large true field of view, has to carry a heavy burden, but this problem has been masterly solved by the optical designer: A star image, being point-like close to the center, develops some blur when shifted to the edge, but very gradually. In fact, it is quite difficult to fix a point from which onwards the star might be called 'blurred', it happens somewhere between 60% and 70% towards the edge. This implies that during daylight observations, the aberrations remain almost unnoticed except near the edge. The Docter is able to keep any image blur outside the 75% radius, beyond that, the star image is degrading more rapidly. This is an excellent performance for a wide angle 8x42 binocular, and for sure the investment into sophisticated quadruplet objectives is paying off here. The Swarovski provides an even better edge sharpness: Up to about 80% the stars remain point-like and at the edge they are still of tolerable shape. Of course, one has to recall that the Swarovski's field is so narrow that critical areas of the field were excluded from the very beginning, and it is likely that the optical design did not require anything more than ordinary 3-lens-element reverse Kellner oculars. The Docter, if cut down to 45 degs., were sharp to the edge, and the Zeiss almost so.
图像清晰度：像往常一样，一个拥有说的过去的质量的望远镜，图像中部的清晰度是不成问题的，这三个镜子这方面都很完美。移向边缘，拥有大的实际视场的Dialyt，就很吃力了，但这个问题被光学设计者技艺高超的解决了：一个在中心部位是点状的星像，当移到边缘就变得有些模糊，是个渐变过程。实际上，很难确定分界点，从此点向边星像可称作模糊，分界在在60%-70%之间某处。这暗示着白天观测时，非边缘处的偏差也不被注意。Docter能将图片模糊控制在半径75%以外，越过后，星像迅速变差，这在8x42的广角望远镜里表现极其优秀，可以确信那复杂的4组结构物镜的投资就在这里体现了。Swarovski提供了甚至更好的边缘清晰度：到80%星像还保持点状，即使到了边缘也是说得过去的。当然，联想起Swarovski的视场是如此的狭窄，视场的临界面积从一开始就被排除掉了，并且看起来它的设计只需要3片普通镜片的 Kellner目镜。Docter和Zeiss如果将视场减为45度，图像到边缘也是清楚的。

Image color: All three binoculars deliver a neutral image color. There are some minor differences: Both Zeiss and Docter produce a somewhat warmer tone, a little towards yellow, while the Habicht appears to be absolutely white, if not a tad bluish. None of them has got any objectionable color tint, however. The Zeiss does in fact produce an excellent bright image, but the more recently built competitors are able to deliver the same level of brightness and contrast.
图像颜色:所有三款镜子都提供了不偏色的图片颜色。有一些小区别：Zeiss和Docter有些偏暖色，稍微偏黄；Habicht如果不是一点的偏蓝，显示的是绝对的白色。但没有哪个镜子的颜色能让人不快。Zeiss事实上有优秀的明亮图像，但竞争者的更年轻在亮度和对比上处于相同水平。

Rectilinear distortion: All three binoculars show a moderate amount of pincushion distortion as it is commonly employed to compensate for the globe effect and to provide a smooth panning of the image.
直线畸变：所有三款镜子表现了中等程度的枕形畸变，作为补偿滚球效应的普通措施，并且能提供平滑的视场盘。

Stray light: Under difficult viewing conditions, especially at twilight, light from sources outside the field can enter the objective lenses through a large angle to illuminate the tube walls and is, partially, scattered into the optical path. The prevention of such a diffuse stray light is a particular strong side of the Dialyt, achieved with an array of perfectly placed internal baffles and prism shields. The Habicht is doing almost equally well, especially if stray light from above is involved, usually the most notorious cause of trouble, when the sky-glow interferes with observations of shadowed areas on the ground. The Habicht is, however, a little sensitive to stray light from the side, which can be easily confirmed when observing areas of the night-sky around the moon. The Docter can develop a faint diffuse ring in the outer areas of the field, particularly after sunset when the eye-pupils begin to expand and to touch the edge of the exit pupil. However, the level of stray light remains very low and does not compromise the contrast within the central area of the image.
漫射光：在困难观测条件下，特别是黄昏黎明，视场外的光线能以大角度穿过物镜，照亮了镜筒内壁，部分混入了主光路，进入观测者眼镜，使得图像弥漫着杂光。Dialyt在防止漫射光方面特别强，是棱镜遮挡和一系列完美的内部遮光板的结果。Habicht做的几乎一样好，特别是处理来自上方的漫射光——当天空照明干扰地面阴影区域的观察者，这通常是麻烦的来源。Habicht对来自侧面的漫射光有一点敏感，当在月光照明区观测时容易察觉到。Docter能显现微弱的漫射环，特别是太阳落下后眼睛瞳孔开始扩展到最大时，当然，漫射光保持在非常低的水平，不会影响中央区域图像的对比度。

Ghost images: If, at night, a bright object (street lantern, moon) is positioned into the field, reflections on the air-to-glass surfaces take place, which can lead to multiple 'ghost' images of the light source. At this point, the age of the Zeiss Dialyt (made in 1988) comes into play: Once a sufficiently bright lantern is observed, a colorful array of faint ghost images is produced. The number of these ghosts reflects the sophisticated and complex ocular construction of the Dialyt. A similar effect shows up through the Docter, but it requires a somewhat brighter light source to achieve the same ghosting experience. This is a nice demonstration of the advance in coating techniques over the last 10+ years: While assuming that the Dialyt's T* coating was state of the art in 1988, we may claim the upper middle class of the early 2000s to be coated even better. This is all the more true for the Swarovski, delivering a perfect image of the same lantern which causes trouble with the Docter and, more so, with the Dialyt. I also assume that later samples of the Dialyt are likely to offer further improved coatings and therefore perform better in such a test. To be fair, it should be pointed out that the level of ghosting displayed by the Dialyt is low - in real life applications, these effects are not likely to create any objectionable degradation of contrast.
鬼影：如果，在晚上，一个命令物体（路灯，月亮）进入了视野，在玻璃表面发生反射，能产生光源的多个鬼魂般的影像。在这点上，Zeiss Dialyt(产于1988)的高年龄就表现出来：一旦观察到十分明亮的灯塔，就产生了一系列模糊的彩色的鬼影。这些鬼影反映了Dialyt的复杂精密的目镜结构。Docter也表现了类似效果，但它需要更明亮的灯光才能产生相同程度的鬼影。这是最近10年来镀膜技术进步的典型示范：如果Dialyt的T镀膜代表了1988年的最高水平，我们可以宣布2000年早期的中高档产品的镀膜更好。在同样的能给Docter和Dialyt带来麻烦的灯塔下，Swarovski更加能提供完美图像。我猜测较晚的Dialyt样品可能改进镀膜并且在本测试中能表现更好。为了公平，需要指出的是Dialyt的鬼影水平很低——在现实生活的应用中，这不会产生令人烦恼的对比度降低。

Low light performance: The Zeiss and the Swarovski are performing equally well here. With 6mm exit pupils, these are specialists for low light, and they are also well protected against stray light, delivering maximum contrast under most difficult light conditions. The Docter, with 5.25mm exit pupil, is naturally a little behind in this discipline, but nevertheless an excellent performer for such a type of binocular. The combination of excellent coatings, good stray light protection, and its wide and bright image allow the Docter to perform well even under deep twilight conditions.
低照明表现：这里Zeiss 和 Swarovski势均力敌。因有6mm出瞳直径，它们在低照明下表现优秀，并且能很好的避免漫射光捣乱，在最暗的环境下提供了最大对比度。有5.25mm出瞳直径的Docter，自然稍微落后一些，但对这规格来说仍然表现优秀。综合了优秀的镀膜、良好的漫射光抑制能力、宽视野、明亮视场的Docter甚至在很暗的环境下依然表现良好。

footway

Mechanical construction 机械结构
At this price, the mechanical construction of a binocular is naturally on a very high quality level. The Zeiss and Docter both feel like bomb-proof machines, and there is no doubt that any of them would take decades of intense usage without producing any flaws. The Habicht feels very light and almost fragile, but this is a deception since it applies a magnesium-alloy for its body, which is of low weight but high strength. The Habicht is nitrogen filled and submersible, rare enough for a Porro binocular with central focuser. The Zeiss is splash-waterproof (or rainproof), but not submersible. As a compensation, it is protected with a tough rubber armor, which is missing with the Habicht (but available for the 'GA' version). The Docter has got both, water resistance up to 3m, and a thick neoprene armor which should effectively absorb considerable mechanical impacts. This binocular has also got a very comfortable and precise focusing mechanism, and offers twist-up eye-cups, although I am not too happy with them: When fully extended, I cannot see the entire field. If pushed half way down, however, they won't stay there for long so that I have to frequently adjust the eye cups again, which can be annoying at times. Fortunately, the rubber cups of the Dialyt extend just far enough for a convenient observation of the entire field. With the Habicht this aspect is not so critical, since its narrow field can be seen over anyway, and, if the eye-cups are folded, even when using eye-glasses, despite of its short eye-relief of 14mm. The Docter's (16mm) and Dialyt's (18mm) eye-reliefs are also long enough for use with spectacles.
在这个价位上的望远镜自然都有很高水平的机械结构。Zeiss 和 Docter 让人感觉能防弹，毫无疑问它们能被用几十年粗暴使用也不会产生任何破损。Habicht非常轻，几乎让人感觉脆弱，但这是错觉，因为它是镁合金制造的，重量轻并且很坚固。Habicht充了氮能潜水，对于中调保罗镜这是很罕见的。Zeiss是防溅水的（防雨水），但不能潜水。作为补偿，它有Habicht所欠缺的坚韧的橡胶外套（GA版本的有包胶）。这两个长处Docter都有，能抗3m水深，外包有厚厚的氯丁橡胶，能有效吸收相当大的机械冲击，它还有非常舒适和精确的调焦装置，配有旋升眼罩，虽然我对此并不很满意：当完全伸展时，我不能看到整个视场；当伸展一半时，又不够长了，我不得不频繁调节眼罩，有时很恼人。幸运的是，Dialyt的橡胶眼罩长度正合适，即能看到整个视场又观测舒适。Habicht的这方面没问题，由于它的狭窄视场怎么样都能看全，只要眼罩折叠，尽管出瞳距离只有短短14mm，也能戴眼镜看。Docter的16mm 和 Dialyt的 18mm对戴眼镜使用足够长了。
Summary 总结
The following table is supposed to summarize the above observations. The best performing binocular gets three points, the following contenders two and one, respectively. In case several binoculars are ranking equally, their scores are averaged.
下表是上述各性能的总结。表现最好的镜子得3分，后面的分别得2和1。如果几个镜子的排名同样，它们的分数取平均。

The 'final score' is the sum of the individual scores and is intended to serve as an orientation only.
Final score是各项得分的和，仅供参考。

The above 'warning' not to take the scores too seriously is particularly true for this review. I would go so far to claim the optical performance of all three contenders being equally excellent, and most of the apparent differences mentioned above are of little, if any, relevance for practical applications. These are good binoculars, and the task to distinguish their stray light, ghost images and edge sharpness is running the risk of becoming an exercise in hair-splitting rather than being a field test of practical relevance (check also the No. 6 of the collected wisdoms). As an example, imagine the lens-coating being further improved, then it would just require a lantern of higher intensity to produce the ghost images. If further improved, we had to come closer to generate the same effect. But does it matter for those applications in which we are not interested in studying the internals of a light bulb during nighttime? Most likely, not.
上面的警告说在本评测中不要将分数看的太认真在某种程度上是对的。我再次强调这三个镜子的光学性能同样优秀，大部分上面所说的不同之处相差很小，任何一个对于实际使用都很合适。它们是好望远镜，这些辨别的测试，诸如漫射光、鬼影、边缘像质，使得本文变成了一个过于讲究细节的评测而不是去实地进行适当的试验（参看collected wisdoms的第6条）。举个例子，假设镜片镀膜技术有了极大的进步，这将需要有更亮的光源才能产生鬼影，如果镀膜再进步，我们要更靠近光源才能产生同样的鬼影。但这对没兴趣在灯光照明的夜间使用镜子的人是个问题吗？似乎是，但不是。

The good thing is: Instead of being forced to study the optical merits of these binoculars, the potential buyer may peacefully focus on practical questions: Am I willing to carry around 800g? If not, the Habicht is the right choice, and in fact it could turn very difficult to find a night glass of less than 620g. Am I willing to live with a tiny field of view of 45 degs.? If not, the Habicht is out. Do I need it for marine use? If yes, the Zeiss is out. Do I need particularly high low light performance? If yes, the Docter is out. Further criteria might include the type of eye cups, the focuser, usability with eye-glasses, the manufacturer's warranties or simply the look and feel of the instrument. My personal impression? I respect the level of perfection realized with the Habicht, and I admire the high level of engineering put into the Docter, and, somehow, I love the Dialyt - don't ask why! If there existed a discipline called 'ease of view': The Zeiss would score high there.
幸运的是：若不被强迫去研究这些镜子的光学价值，潜在买主或许在冷静的注意实际问题：我愿意带大约800g负重？如果不是，Habicht是恰当选择，事实上寻找一个轻于620g的夜用镜子非常困难。我愿意和45度的小视场相处？如果不是，Habicht落选了。我要航海使用吗？如果是，Zeiss出局了。我需要在特别暗的条件下使用吗？如果是，Docter出局了。更多的标准有可能包括眼罩、调焦、能否戴眼镜使用、厂家保修服务或者是很简单——使用并去找感觉。我的个人印象？我尊重Habicht的完美的实现水平。我敬佩Docter的人机工程的高水平。并且，不知何故，我喜欢Dialyt——不要问为什么。如果存在一个活动叫“休闲观测”，Zeiss将在那得到最高分。

A question stated above was addressing the suitability of 7x42 binoculars as substitute for the all-around 8x42 size. I don't see any obstacles, but I would choose the 7-power if and only if it delivered a wider field than the 8x binocular of interest. Since I can hold 8x binoculars steadily enough, image stability won't be a reason for me to sacrifice magnification. One has to consider that the 7x binocular will usually show more aberrations, at the same apparent angle, than its 8x counterpart, a result of its wider (true) angle of view. On the positive side, its superior low-light performance may turn out to be an important feature under certain conditions.
前面问过一个问题，性能合适的7x42代替全面的8x42是否恰当。我没感觉有问题，但只有当7倍镜子能比8倍镜子提供更宽视野带来更多乐趣，我才会选择7倍镜，因为我能足够稳定的握持8倍镜，图像的稳定性不是我牺牲放大率的原因。有人会认为7倍镜子在相同表现视场比8倍镜子能显示更多偏差，因为它有更大的视角，积极的一面是，在某种情况下，它的优秀的低光性能会是一个重要的优点。

This review indicates that recently made binoculars continue to benefit from technical improvements. As a result, today's second line of binoculars, represented by the Docter B/CF and the Swarowski Habicht, is fully competitive with the high-end of the late 1980s, as represented by the Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt, and in some aspects, like lens coating or water resistance, they are even a bit ahead. In turn, this Zeiss is by far superior to another Zeiss 10x40 Dialyt of the 1970s, which again was a high performer of its time, but only singly coated and without the P-layer.
本评测显示出最近制造的望远镜继续从技术进步中得到好处。结果是，现在的二流望远镜，Docter B/CF和Swarowski Habicht的表现，能完全和1980年代后期产的高端镜子Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt竞争，在某些方面，如镀膜和防水，甚至有一点更好。反过来，这个Zeiss镜子比另外一个1970年代产的Zeiss 10x40 Dialyt要优秀的多，那也是当年的高端产品，但只有单层镀膜并且没有P镀膜。

Links
A review of the Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt, by Kenny Jones

Disclaimer
The information given in this report reflects the personal impression and opinion of the author only. I cannot guarantee for the accuracy of any given specification. I have neither been payed nor have I been supported in any other way to write this review. I thank Mr. Wang who left his Swarowski Habicht with me for testing.
声明：
在本报告中的资料反映了个人的印象和作者的见解而已。我不能保证任何特定规格的准确性。写这个报告我没有得到任何付费和任何支持。感谢Wang先生给我留下Swarowski Habicht进行测试。

Holger Merlitz:merlitz@gmx.de
Back Home
Last updated: Oct. 2006
最后更新：2006.10

siliang

我很想买个Docter的8X42

我爱baby

Fritz

侯博士06年带了这具 Docter 8x42到上海参加镜友聚会，感觉这镜子做工还可以，光学也还行。

hotleopard

很客观的测评。进行分项对比，然后得出总分，所得出的结论无疑更加让人信服。
通过对比可以看出，尽管若干年来各大顶级镜在光学上的新进步越来越小，但是即便按照蜗牛怕的速度进展着，多年下来还是会积累成相当明显的优势——越新镜子光学性能相对来说会更好。有一天像现在zeiss fl这样的镜子也会被全面超越——所谓光学最优的镜子不会是绝对的。

sw的海白菜系列无疑代表了保罗镜的最高水平，而且这种情况甚至有可能是绝对的——除非sw打算继续对其进行大的改进；但我想不会，这样的镜子不够popular，市场反应不会太好，sw仅仅是维持着它的生产，类似防水镀膜这样小的改进，在海白菜系列上都没有看到，所以搞不好海白菜将是保罗镜最后的绝唱。

对于国内镜友来说，很幸运的一点是可以用远低于600-700欧元的价格去买到海白菜这样好的镜子，大陆这点市场也许将是海白菜这位老兵坚守的最后一块阵地了。

最后感谢楼主费心翻译一篇这样好的文章，谢谢。

zgy5718

好文，辛苦了

19501025

SW, 强劲呢.......

gjc777

7x42，我心目中的平衡之选，最经典的通用镜规格