In diesem Forum wird ja überwiegend den etwas kleineren Objektivdurchmessern (32mm statt 42 mm) das Wort geredet.
Andererseits scheinen 42mm Objektive durchaus auch bei hellstem Sonnenschein besser zu sein als die mittleren Größen.
Zu diesem Thema habe ich einen interessanten Ansatz auf www.betterviewdesired.com gefunden:
"... when looking into deep shadow, especially when portions of the view are brightly lighted, large objectives will penetrate where smaller objectives fail. Again, it is a matter of the amount of energy the larger objectives capture, but this time we are talking about the number of rays (or the width of the wave front) that the objectives intercept from any given point in the object and focus back into the corresponding point in the image. Think of it like this: shadowed points are still reflecting a certain amount of light. The energy radiates outward so that at any given distance the energy from that point could be thought of as being spread over the surface of a hemisphere with the reflecting point at its center. Larger objectives intersect a bigger area of that sphere than smaller objectives do. That greater amount of energy their larger area captures is then focused back into an image of the reflecting point.
Since the larger objective captures more energy, the point appears brighter and we, in effect, see deeper into the shadow. This is why, by the way, larger objectives can appear brighter in all situations, including full daylight, than smaller ones, even though in bright light it should be the contracted diameter of the pupil of our eye that is the limiting factor, and not the binoculars at all. Given a high contrast image, we interpret the full daylight view as brighter through the larger glasses because we see more detail in the shadows, not because there is any more light in the highlights."
Ist dieser Ansatz theoretisch überhaupt valide oder physikalisch Unsinn?
Vielleicht kann hier einer der Physiker im Forum etwas zu sagen?
