<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Review Binoculars</title>
	<link>http://reviewbinoculars.com</link>
	<description>Review Binoculars for Twitchers and Hunters</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 12:13:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress/3.0.4" -->

	<item>
		<title>Specifications Binoculars &#8211; the Best Magnification</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The title is tongue in cheek.  If there was one best magnification then Nikon, Zeiss, Zwarowksi, Bushnell etc would all stop wasting their time and specifications of binoculars would just offer one magnification. There is a trade off. The higher the magnification, the lower the light throughput. The &#8216;Exit Pupil&#8217; of the binoculars is calculated [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://reviewbinoculars.com/specifications-binoculars-the-best-magnification.html</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Apparent and Real Depth of Field Related</title>
		<description><![CDATA[This is not light entertainment, nor is it a Frequently Asked Question.  My other post on binocular specifications focusing on Depth of Field discusses the difference between apparent and real depth of field.  The following is the mathematical relationship between the two - Magnification: τ Real field of view: 2ω τ x tan ω=tan ω&#8217; [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://reviewbinoculars.com/apparent-and-real-depth-of-field-related.html</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Specifications Binoculars &#8211; field of view</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The Specifications of Binoculars can be quite confusing, and I shall try to demystify  some of the subject for you, to help you assess the true performance of binoculars. The following artwork and text is taken from Nikon, and I hereby acknowledge their copyright.  They are a little mean in their use of language so [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://reviewbinoculars.com/specifications-binoculars-field-of-view.html</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Binoculars Best for Birdwatching</title>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#8217;t want to be flippant, but the best binoculars for birdwatching are the ones in your hand when you are trying to get a closer view of a bird you have spotted.  So to me there is always always an argument for owning two pairs of binoculars , and one of those pairs should [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://reviewbinoculars.com/binoculars-best-for-birdwatching.html</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Dont Bin your Bins &#8211; review binoculars has a much better idea</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Presumably you are in the market for a new pair of binoculars as you are reading Review Binoculars &#8211; but if you have old, uwanted second hand binoculars please don’t throw them away. The RSPB has been running a second hand binocular scheme since 1985. Your old optics could join over 8,000 items collected by [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://reviewbinoculars.com/43.html</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Should You Pay More – Can  The Nikon7294 Monarch ATB 8&#215;42 Binocular Live with the Competition?</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The Nikon Monarch ATB bins are a fine pair of binoculars.   Canon optics are excellent and top of the range in the camera business.  To read a review of this fine optical intrument and find out more please click here]]></description>
		<link>http://reviewbinoculars.com/should-you-pay-more-%e2%80%93-can-the-nikon7294-monarch-atb-8x42-binocular-live-with-the-competition.html</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/


Served from: reviewbinoculars.com @ 2012-02-08 11:04:01 -->
