Difference between Hoya 58CIR or Hoya HMC ? Does the more expensive HMC give that much better results to justify the price?
485483
Yes it does. I would never consider using a non-multi-coated filter on a digital camera. The reason is simple. The sensor has a flat glass protecting it (called a low-pass filter - LPF). Some light will bounce off the LPF and head out the lens. Since lens elements are multi-coated and curved, very little light will reflect back to the sensor. But since the front filter IS flat, you can get a lot of light bouncing back. If you use a non-coated, or single-coated filter, you get a lot of light reflected back into the sensor. This shows up as a loss of contrast (veiling flair) or as ghosts and hot spots. Multi-coated filters are designed to reduce this effect, but cannot eliminate it. This is a real problem when you shoot into a light source. When shooing into a light, ANY filter will degrade the image. Multi-coated filters are much better, though.
187070
I was not sure when I first looked, then I realized the different models had different temperature capabilities, and if I recall some of them had different focus ratio as well. Keeping this in mind, Read descriptions carefully, the differences will be more apparent!
1754727
The Edmund's AstroScan cannot be collimated, and it usually arrives in an uncollimated state. The StarBlast can be collimated by the user. In my experience with both, the StarBlast is far superior, even though the optical intentions for both instruments are identical. (FWIW, the AstroScan's eyepieces are better, but E.P.'s can be purchased separately.)(Some of the comments on Amazon mention the AstroScan, as do replies to the comments. Suggest you read these.)(Some of the comments on Amazon mention the AstroScan, as do replies to the comments. Suggest you read these.)
1886592
Despite what amazon wrote, the Canon VIXIA HF R100 Dual Flash Memory Camcorder is not the newer version of the Canon VIXIA HF200 HD Flash Memory Camcorder with 15x Optical Zoom, the Canon VIXIA HF M300 Flash Memory Camcorder is. The HF200 is a 2009 model with a list price of $749.99 and the HF R100 is a 2010 model with a list price of $499.99, which makes it the lowest-cost (or bottom of the line) Vixia model. The HF200 was also the lowest cost of the 2009 line-up, but the 2010 line-up has a lower bottom. There are several differences. The HF R100 has a 20X optical zoom, vs. 15X optical for the HF200. That appears to be the only advantage the HF R100 has over the HF200. However, unless you use the HF R100 on a tripod, that extra zoom will be useless because it has worse image stabilization than the HF200 and you can't handhold a camcorder at that magnification and shoot acceptable footage (it will be bouncing all over the place). So, that extra zoom is mainly a marketing ploy rather than a true advantage. The HF200 has a larger image sensor (for better low-light performance), higher resolution image sensor (for sharper video and still images), higher resolution LCD screen (for sharper images and icons), Multi-Angle Vivid LCD screen (apparently for wider viewing angles), optical image stabilization (for sharper images; the HF R100 has no optical image stabilization but uses electronic image shifting instead), and a higher maximum recording bit rate (for sharper images with fewer compression artifacts, a.k.a. pixelation). Since the HF200 is a 2009 model, it is available at about 1/3 off the list price bringing it down to the same street price as the still new 2010 HF R100 model. The HF200 is a much better camcorder than the HF R100 and they sell for the same price right now.
2163034
Just looking quickly it seems the 84 is build for long range use over the 94 which is labeled as "medium to long range." My 84 is able to receive a clear hd channels from d.c (55 miles away) and Richmond (60 miles away) I do have a signal booster. My suggestion based on price would be if you can test/return it easily to get the cheaper one and if it doesn't do the trick return it to amazon and get the more expensive antenna.
42098
The Nocticron IMO is better corrected and more Leica-like. The Voigtlanders get a tiny bit more light but the rendering is different. The 42.5/0.95 was excellent before the Nocticron was released but after comparing images from both, the Nocticron just seems to be better. The 25/0.95 is a different focal length but is also a fast lens which now has a clickless aperture ring. I'm a stills person so this is from a stills perspective. If you're into video, the Voigtlanders are tough to beat due to the clickless aperture rings. If you need optical stabilization however, the Nocticron is your best bet that is still fast and mid-telephoto. The Nocticron IMO is better corrected and more Leica-like. The Voigtlanders get a tiny bit more light but the rendering is different. The 42.5/0.95 was excellent before the Nocticron was released but after comparing images from both, the Nocticron just seems to be better. The 25/0.95 is a different focal length but is also a fast lens which now has a clickless aperture ring. I'm a stills person so this is from a stills perspective. If you're into video, the Voigtlanders are tough to beat due to the clickless aperture rings. If you need optical stabilization however, the Nocticron is your... » Read More The Nocticron IMO is better corrected and more Leica-like. The Voigtlanders get a tiny bit more light but the rendering is different. The 42.5/0.95 was excellent before the Nocticron was released but after comparing images from both, the Nocticron just seems to be better. The 25/0.95 is a different focal length but is also a fast lens which now has a clickless aperture ring. I'm a stills person so this is from a stills perspective. If you're into video, the Voigtlanders are tough to beat due to the clickless aperture rings. If you need optical stabilization however, the Nocticron is your best bet that is still fast and mid-telephoto. « Show Less
1260997
That's a great question, The Talon Hd's run about $250-350 more than the Diamondbacks, I Currently own the Diamondback 10 x 42, I'm extremely pleased with them. I would recommend going to a local retailer, like maybe a Cabales? or a store that is very big, and tell the sales clerk you want to compare the Diamondback to the Talon Hd. Then pick something to focus on in the store as far away as possible, and switch back and forth between the two. You may be able to determine if the extra money is worth it? Vortex has a lifetime VIP warranty. If I had the extra money to upgrade to the Talon HD? I would, just because each step up with the Vortex bino's, gets better and better, but I have many different outdoor Items I purchase, so I have to set a budget on each item. Excellent Optics! Good Luck! Enjoy the outdoors
1657907
There is not much difference between the two but a mere $8.00. In both, the head swivels and there are levelers that will make your settings straight (up/down/sideways/etc). The only difference I can guess is the material's thickness. My previous tripod was a Precision Design 58 much stronger legs, but the head broke. There are not available anymore, I wonder why. If you have the extra $8.00 you might consider buying it but for less you would not notice the difference. As with any tripod, I would never leave my camara unattended unless am taking self pictures and then I would be carefull. Hope this answer your question. There is not much difference between the two but a mere $8.00. In both, the head swivels and there are levelers that will make your settings straight (up/down/sideways/etc). The only difference I can guess is the material's thickness. My previous tripod was a Precision Design 58 much stronger legs, but the head broke. There are not available anymore, I wonder why. If you have the extra $8.00 you might consider buying it but for less you would not notice the difference. As with any tripod, I would never leave my camara unattended unless am taking self pictures and then I would be carefull.... » Read More There is not much difference between the two but a mere $8.00. In both, the head swivels and there are levelers that will make your settings straight (up/down/sideways/etc). The only difference I can guess is the material's thickness. My previous tripod was a Precision Design 58 much stronger legs, but the head broke. There are not available anymore, I wonder why. If you have the extra $8.00 you might consider buying it but for less you would not notice the difference. As with any tripod, I would never leave my camara unattended unless am taking self pictures and then I would be carefull. Hope this answer your question. « Show Less
885492
It's comparable. Eheim media is definitely better, but it's also much more expensive. If you're using this media to fill up a canister filter and need a lot, get it. The difference won't be incredible. However, if you're trying to maximize the performance of a hang on back filter, or a canister filter, go with eheim and don't look back.
657160
Spend the extra $50 and get a Vortex 2-7 BDC. Loads of eye relief, fantastic optics and the best customer service there is. It will cost you less in the long run.
1448675
Descriptions are the same. Go with the less expensive one. Difference in price is significant.
897557
I don't think there is any difference there. But my suggestin don't buy either. Better buy 798H secura. It's way better plus it's self cleaning. I got 997MC and I am tired of cleaning Regret regret and regret that I got it.
1645861
Paul, thank you. From the specs alone, I agree, but I think there must be some significant difference between the two sets. The only thing I can see from the specs is something about the eyepiece adjustment.
2012761
Go with the Legend Hcx, I know it's more money but the Micro Sd card slot makes a HUGE difference in the maps you can do. I own the the Venture Cx(NOT THE HC) and I have a 2gb micro sd card with streetmaps and Topo for the entire US on the card.The letters in garmin speak mean this H= High Sensitivity, C=Color and X= external Memory card support.If you want to save 20 or 30 bucks go with the one I was saying the Venture Cx, but I bought my unit over a year ago, when the High sensitivity units weren't available, Today without a doubt I'd go with the Legend Hcx(they don't make a Venture Hcx just a severely limited HC. You are also going to need either Street maps or Topo(for hiking) so figure on an extra $125 or so or look online for free options, hope I helped you.
646580
I did not buy a Hoya polarizer, but I do have the tiffen, which I would definitely not recommend. Because when I looked thru the polarizer to see a LCD screen and rotated, there is no change of the strength of the light, which means there is no or minimum polarizing effect. It can only to be used as a protect glass. I would recommend a B+W or Hoya. Do not waste money.
776494
Glass is sharper, and the sharpness is broader in the middle Vs. the plastic one only being very sharp almost completely in the center. The glass lens also has less of the barrel distortion. I'ts simply about preference, typically people purchase the holga cameras for the distortion ability...
39796
Daniel, The major thing between these two is the reticle one has a first focal plane reticle (bushnell) which magnifies with your magnification setting. The MTAC has a 2nd focal plane reticle which will not adjust with your magnification. Some reviews I read about the MTAC says its way to small (i suspect not for the style of scopes we are talking about) The glass would be the next thing, personally I have not had tons of time behind a Burris scope but I typically suspect it to be clearer and better eye relief. Pros of the Bushnell 1/10 moa adjustments, BDC reticle sighted at 100 yards good out to 500 yards, Illumination is good for medium light, the quick adjust bar for magnification great for changing magnifications on the fly. Bushnell Cons High profile turrets, Illumination not good in bright lights (even though you wont need it). Mtac Pros Turret has covers and are low profile, Crisp clear glass, on off position for every brightness level of illumnation Mtac Cons Turret adjustment 1/2 MOA, Illumination not suitable for bright light (sunshine, over exposed lighting). Price of the scope I think it comes down to two things price and type of reticle. I believe the AR Optics holds over the Burris Mtac because of price, the glass is clear and I have no problems with fisheye problems. The adjustments of the AR optics allow for better sighting in. The reticle different off First focal plane (bushnell) and 2nd focal plane (Burris) is preference. I like the ar optics because I enjoy it at 1x as a small ghost ring for quick transitions, where the Burris will stay the same size through all magnifications. That is good if you intend no magnification out 100+ yards which may be your preference. Its really a hard decision because the two will get the job done, but I feel as I try to do pros and cons between them I feel they both have applications and can be very comparable. I do believe overall the bushnell is the way to go for price point and surely get the job done.