Something else that I have been mulling over is possibility that in a comparison of various optics at different latitudes and altitudes and enviornments (say snow to forest or desert) can yield different results in their performance and how we would rate them.
For example, I live roughly 17 degrees South in a desert region at 700ft MSL where ground level colour temperature is a little warmer (redder) due to the influence of the terrain... and how this would compare to say a snow covered region 50 degrees North at an altitude of 8000ft where the colour temperature would be significantly cooler (bluer) and there would likely be a significant increase in UV... given that each layer of a lens coating is optimum in a fairly narrow range of the spectrum... and that there would likely be a significant spectral shift in the example given... even though the multicoatings cover the full spectrum the shift might expose weak points in the coatings... and that different optics manufacturers are likely to have had slightly different design considerations, materials and techniques.
Also: Some manufacturers are marketing "Euro" scopes which, from the marketing blurb, I figure are designed for the long low light periods around dawn and dusk at higher latitudes. I figure that the designers had a totally different set of design parameters, resulting in a different set of coatings than what would otherwise be seen on a daylight scope.
I guess what I am getting at is: Is it possible that what is good for you may not be good for me given different enviornments? Thoughts or experiences?
Cheers
PS. This train of thought was started by having a Nikkor 58/1.2 Nocturnal and a CZ 50/1.4 sitting on the desk in front of me. Both are superb lenses in different enviornments.
For example, I live roughly 17 degrees South in a desert region at 700ft MSL where ground level colour temperature is a little warmer (redder) due to the influence of the terrain... and how this would compare to say a snow covered region 50 degrees North at an altitude of 8000ft where the colour temperature would be significantly cooler (bluer) and there would likely be a significant increase in UV... given that each layer of a lens coating is optimum in a fairly narrow range of the spectrum... and that there would likely be a significant spectral shift in the example given... even though the multicoatings cover the full spectrum the shift might expose weak points in the coatings... and that different optics manufacturers are likely to have had slightly different design considerations, materials and techniques.
Also: Some manufacturers are marketing "Euro" scopes which, from the marketing blurb, I figure are designed for the long low light periods around dawn and dusk at higher latitudes. I figure that the designers had a totally different set of design parameters, resulting in a different set of coatings than what would otherwise be seen on a daylight scope.
I guess what I am getting at is: Is it possible that what is good for you may not be good for me given different enviornments? Thoughts or experiences?
Cheers
PS. This train of thought was started by having a Nikkor 58/1.2 Nocturnal and a CZ 50/1.4 sitting on the desk in front of me. Both are superb lenses in different enviornments.
