-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Leupy 7x42 Hawthorne? Reviews? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BirderMJ
- Start date
eitanaltman
Well-known member
Dennis is going to be very sad that someone isn't following his antics....
Any credible info appreciated. The site does not specify the type of phase coating. I emailed to ask what type it uses (dielectric, silver, etc) and they replied that it was "proprietary". I'm inclined to take that as not the best or latest type so as to give their upper tier lines more differentiation.
FrankD
Well-known member
My guess, considering its price point in relation to other models in their lineup (and knowing what some other models utilize) would be silver. Nothing wrong with that. I actually prefer several silver coated roofs to several dielectric coated models. In my experience it is more of the combinaton of prism coating with lens coating that makes more of a difference.
mayoayo
Well-known member
" These unwanted interference effects can be suppressed by vapour depositing a special dielectric coating known as a phase-correction coating or P-coating on the roof surfaces of the roof prism. This coating corrects for the difference in geometric phase between the two paths so both have effectively the same phase shift and no interference degrades the image."
This is from an explanation ( wikipedia )about phase correcting optical coatings ..It seems pretty confident in the dielectric nature of phase coatings...
.FrankD just pointed at Silver as the type of METALLIC MIRROR COATING...Silver Mirrors ,(or Aluminum) or Dielectric Mirrors are used to reflect the light and create the path,but I dont think they have anything to do with correcting the Phase shift.I think those coatings are another thing altogether..In other words,your question about the type Phase coating, was more than fairly answered with the term "propietary"..
Thanks for clarifying guys. I still would like to know what they use but I think the lack of their specification is the answer but I agree with Frank, not necessarily bad. I do want to order one but I'll have to try to see one in person as I don't want to be a bad consumer and return it on a whim.
After having compared the Bresser 8x42 ED, Leupold Hawthorne 7x42 and now the Vanguard Endeavor ED 8x42 over the past week I am struck with really how close optically they are too each other. The only real difference between these three is the Bresser has a bigger FOV. The Bresser and the Endeavor with their ED glass had slightly better CA control than the Hawthorne but CA was still there. Sweetspot size, edges, contrast,color saturation, brightness or whatever are all about the same. These are all amazing roof prism binoculars for less than $300.00. I would say they perform within 95% of the current alpha binoculars so really there is no reason outside of maybe durability or mechanical construction to get an alpha and spend $2K. The Bresser seems like it has a lot of build quality problems so you might want to avoid that one so which of the other two did I prefer. The Hawthorne and the Endeavor are very close optically. Of course the Hawthorne is 7x so it has the advantage of better DOF and a bigger exit pupil. They are both equally sharp on-axis meaning very good. It comes down to personal preference which one you like the best. I kept the Hawthorne because I feel after looking them both over it has the best build quality. The Japanese still build them a little better. I think the Endeavor has a cheaper look about it and you can tell that it is Chinese just by the look of it. The Hawthorne is shorter by about 1/2 inch and it is more compact which I preferred. The eye cups for example work smoother and feel tighter on the Hawthorne. Of course the Endeavor is open bridge and you may prefer the feel of it. I didn't. I personally enjoyed the better DOF in the 7x. It just made viewing more enjoyable and is a good complement to my 8x binoculars. The point is these three all have incredible optics for sub $300 binoculars. They could easily hold their own with even alphas. When I compared these two roofs I also had my Opticron 8x42 HRWP and as usual the porro outperformed the roofs being sharper on-axis and presenting a clearer and more natural 3D view. The porro view just seems more RELAXED and is awesomely sharp especially on-axis. You think you have it in focus and you move the focus wheel a little more and it gets even sharper! But any of these roofs are REALLY good and you could probably be happy with any of them. My pick is the Hawthorne though. To me it has the best combination of quality and optics to slightly beat out the Chinese competitors.
Last edited:
I have tried a lot of value binoculars and the Leupold Hawthorne 7x42 is the best roof prism in the sub $300 range I have seen. I recently tried the Bresser 8x42 ED and the Vanguard Endeavor 8x42 ED and I kept the Hawthorne. The Hawthorne has better build quality than the Chinese binoculars being Japanese. It has slightly more CA than the Bresser or the Vanguard but optically I prefer the Hawthorne. It has a big sweet spot and excellent edges so you don't notice the 7 degree field as much as you would think. It is superior to any of the Chinese binoculars I have tried and that includes several Zen Rays and other assorted models. The focus is very smooth and precise and I get hardly any blackouts. The eyecups will not come off and they twist out with more precision than the Chinese binoculars. They are the best value binoculars I have tried and are 95% as good as an alpha. I see no reason to spend $2k on binoculars anymore with binoculars like this for $280. I am very picky and these are the first roof prisms under $500 that I truly like.
Last edited:
Frank,
Had them a year ago. Don't agree with what I'm hearing from Dennis about them. They were not sharp all the way to the edges. What a rediculous claim. Look at Albinos, this is only claimed to being achieved by the EDG's and Swaro ELs. Do you think a $280-$350 binocular is doing the same? I'm thinking it started to fall off at 50-60%, but not overly distracting beyond that, but in no way holding center sharpness to the edge. This is starting to sound like Amazon buyer reviews where $60 binoculars do everthing alphas do. CA was a bit worse than other bin's I've owned... and none were HD. Focus wheel had a bit of resistance at one point but not as noticable as the bit of resistance I experienced in the Bresser's. In other words, not perfect. All that said, still a likeable pair of binoculars, more likeable at $280 than $350.
I am beginning to think Dennis is finally realizing 7x has striking qualities to it that 8x don't!
CG
Had them a year ago. Don't agree with what I'm hearing from Dennis about them. They were not sharp all the way to the edges. What a rediculous claim. Look at Albinos, this is only claimed to being achieved by the EDG's and Swaro ELs. Do you think a $280-$350 binocular is doing the same? I'm thinking it started to fall off at 50-60%, but not overly distracting beyond that, but in no way holding center sharpness to the edge. This is starting to sound like Amazon buyer reviews where $60 binoculars do everthing alphas do. CA was a bit worse than other bin's I've owned... and none were HD. Focus wheel had a bit of resistance at one point but not as noticable as the bit of resistance I experienced in the Bresser's. In other words, not perfect. All that said, still a likeable pair of binoculars, more likeable at $280 than $350.
I am beginning to think Dennis is finally realizing 7x has striking qualities to it that 8x don't!
CG
Last edited:
I didn't say they were as sharp at the edge as they are on-axis. Only SV's do that(with RB). They do have a gradual fall-off but it is not as you say distracting. They have good edges compared to a lot of other binoculars. They do have slightly more CA than the HD Chinese binoculars but the Chinese HD binoculars aren't totally free of it either. I think they are a great pair of binoculars for less than $300 and so are the Bresser's if they they get their mechanical and QC problems worked out and so are the Vanguard's. All three are really good.
Thanks Dennis, CG and all. I may have a brick and mortar around that has them so I want to check them out. 7x42 is really missing from the quiver but I still feel leery about the buy. If it was ED and had more precise specs I'd be willing to pay a bit of a premium but it seems this is already at a bit of a premium due to the name. I like Leupold but not to the extent of paying for name - paying for quality yes. If I do get my hands on some I will be happy to share my meager thoughts.
Thanks again.
Thanks again.
chartwell99
Well-known member
I own one and am much impressed with the sharpness to the edges, apparent high quality construction and smooth focus. Field of view seems somewhat narrow for a 7 x 42 and the binocular is not as bright as I would have expected from a 7 x 42 (but still brighter than most 8 x 42 binoculars). Depth of field is exceptional and ergonomics are also superb. Loopy's commitment to standing behind its products and honoring warranty issues is legendary. All told, this is a real bargain.
eitanaltman
Well-known member
Have you considered the Zen-Ray 7x43 ED3?
Hawthorne 7x42 user review
I just purchased a Leupold Hawthorne 7x42 bin for $350 from Eagle Optics. 7x42 is arguably the ideal bin for birding - especially for elderly birders – but they’re being dropped by manufacturers in favor of 8x and 10x bins. I’ll compare the Hawthorne 7x42 to my wife’s Vortex Viper 6x32, a well-regarded bin that I purchased a year & ½ ago from EO for $275 on closeout. Both bins are about the same price, made with non-ED glass, with about the same size exit pupil, and both are stamped MADE IN JAPAN. The Viper is still being manufactured, but only with ED glass, and it now costs $550 at Eagle Optics.
Overall image quality: The Hawthorne image is bright, sharp and contrasty. It makes my 30-year old Swift Audubon 8.5x44 porro feel like I’m looking through a shower curtain. The Hawthorne’s sweet spot is big – 2/3 to 3/4 of the 390’ FOV - and the view is spacious and comfortable. There’s significant softening near the edges, but for birding that doesn’t bother me. The Viper has a 420’ FOV, with a smaller sweet spot than the Hawthorne, and noticeable pincushion, but with a similar expansive feeling. Brightness is about the same for both bins, which is what you’d expect given the 6.0 mm exit pupil for the Hawthorne vs. the 5.3 mm exit pupil for the Viper. If I had to pick one over the other, I’d give the nod to the Hawthorne view for overall brilliance.
3d effect: Pretty good on both bins, but nothing like a porro.
Resolution: I did the dollar bill at 25’ resolution test in poor light, and mostly I noticed the difference in hand shake (I’m 62 years old) between the 6x Viper and the 7x Hawthorne. Once I braced the bins on my car roof, the serial numbers on the dollar bill were sharply readable with both bins. For natural settings, the Hawthorne image looks sharper to my eyes.
Color bias: They both look pretty neutral to me. Looking backward through one tube at a sheet of bright white paper, I could maybe see a slight warm bias in both bins.
CA: If I look for it, I can pick up purple color fringing at the Hawthorne’s edge. So I don’t look for it. Ditto for the Viper.
Glare control: Both bins look nicely blackened inside. I generally try to move my position if a bird is between me and the sun, so this isn’t a big issue for me.
Eye relief: The Hawthorne’s 18 mm ER is perfect for me – no blackouts. The plastic eyecups (no intermediate stops) felt a little flimsy at first, but they seem like they’ll last OK. The Viper ER of 20 mm is actually slightly too much for my eyes. The Viper eyecups have two intermediate stops and feel solid. The eyecups on both bins were comfortable.
Focuser: The Viper’s is smooth. The Hawthorne’s is not, but it seems to be smoothing out some with use. I live in Florida, so I didn’t bother doing the night in the freezer test for cold weather operation. I don’t feel any slop in either focuser. The Hawthorne focuser is on the slow side (1-1/2 turns from 10’ to infinity), so it takes time to adjust, but it also makes it easier to get it dead on focus, and then the detail really jumps out at you. The first time I used it, I had a Wow! moment looking at a Red-Bellied Woodpecker on a tree trunk about 30’ away, when I thought it was in focus, then I kept focusing and it got even sharper. The Viper’s focus (only a half turn from 10’ to infinity) is probably a little too fast for me.
Close focus: The Hawthorne’s 10’ close focus is OK for birding; nothing like the amazing 3’ close focus on the Viper.
Diopter ring: On the Hawthorne, it’s built into the front face of the center focus wheel, and it locks in place. There are no + to - reference marks, so if somebody else uses it and changes the diopter setting, you have to do it again from scratch to re-set it for your eyes. The Viper’s locking diopter ring is on the right eyepiece, with + and – reference marks.
Depth of field: Compared to an 8x bin, I like the increased depth of field on the 7x Hawthorne, and it’s even more pronounced on the 6x Viper.
Fit and finish: The black rubber armoring on the Hawthorne is substantial and comfortable. Ditto for the Viper’s green rubber armoring.
Ergonomics: Both bins are center hinge construction, with thumb indents on the barrels. They both work well for my medium-size hands. Resistance on the hinge adjustment is fine on both bins.
Size and weight: The Hawthorne’s aluminum construction keeps the weight down to 23 oz, which is pretty light for a 7x42; only slightly heavier than the Viper 6x32 at 19.4 oz. At only 5.5 inches long, the Hawthorne is also pretty compact for a 7x42. The Viper is just a half-inch shorter.
Accessories: Both bins came with OK quality neck strap, rainguard and tethered objective lens covers. Actually, the Vortex stuff was better quality than the Leupold.
Warranty: The Hawthorne comes with a Leupold Limited Lifetime Warranty; only good for the original owner. The Vortex warranty is better; no fault and fully transferrable.
Overall: The 7x42 Hawthorne doesn’t have the widest FOV or the closest close focus, but what a sweet view for $350, and with Leupold’s reputation for ruggedness, I expect to use it for a long time.
I just purchased a Leupold Hawthorne 7x42 bin for $350 from Eagle Optics. 7x42 is arguably the ideal bin for birding - especially for elderly birders – but they’re being dropped by manufacturers in favor of 8x and 10x bins. I’ll compare the Hawthorne 7x42 to my wife’s Vortex Viper 6x32, a well-regarded bin that I purchased a year & ½ ago from EO for $275 on closeout. Both bins are about the same price, made with non-ED glass, with about the same size exit pupil, and both are stamped MADE IN JAPAN. The Viper is still being manufactured, but only with ED glass, and it now costs $550 at Eagle Optics.
Overall image quality: The Hawthorne image is bright, sharp and contrasty. It makes my 30-year old Swift Audubon 8.5x44 porro feel like I’m looking through a shower curtain. The Hawthorne’s sweet spot is big – 2/3 to 3/4 of the 390’ FOV - and the view is spacious and comfortable. There’s significant softening near the edges, but for birding that doesn’t bother me. The Viper has a 420’ FOV, with a smaller sweet spot than the Hawthorne, and noticeable pincushion, but with a similar expansive feeling. Brightness is about the same for both bins, which is what you’d expect given the 6.0 mm exit pupil for the Hawthorne vs. the 5.3 mm exit pupil for the Viper. If I had to pick one over the other, I’d give the nod to the Hawthorne view for overall brilliance.
3d effect: Pretty good on both bins, but nothing like a porro.
Resolution: I did the dollar bill at 25’ resolution test in poor light, and mostly I noticed the difference in hand shake (I’m 62 years old) between the 6x Viper and the 7x Hawthorne. Once I braced the bins on my car roof, the serial numbers on the dollar bill were sharply readable with both bins. For natural settings, the Hawthorne image looks sharper to my eyes.
Color bias: They both look pretty neutral to me. Looking backward through one tube at a sheet of bright white paper, I could maybe see a slight warm bias in both bins.
CA: If I look for it, I can pick up purple color fringing at the Hawthorne’s edge. So I don’t look for it. Ditto for the Viper.
Glare control: Both bins look nicely blackened inside. I generally try to move my position if a bird is between me and the sun, so this isn’t a big issue for me.
Eye relief: The Hawthorne’s 18 mm ER is perfect for me – no blackouts. The plastic eyecups (no intermediate stops) felt a little flimsy at first, but they seem like they’ll last OK. The Viper ER of 20 mm is actually slightly too much for my eyes. The Viper eyecups have two intermediate stops and feel solid. The eyecups on both bins were comfortable.
Focuser: The Viper’s is smooth. The Hawthorne’s is not, but it seems to be smoothing out some with use. I live in Florida, so I didn’t bother doing the night in the freezer test for cold weather operation. I don’t feel any slop in either focuser. The Hawthorne focuser is on the slow side (1-1/2 turns from 10’ to infinity), so it takes time to adjust, but it also makes it easier to get it dead on focus, and then the detail really jumps out at you. The first time I used it, I had a Wow! moment looking at a Red-Bellied Woodpecker on a tree trunk about 30’ away, when I thought it was in focus, then I kept focusing and it got even sharper. The Viper’s focus (only a half turn from 10’ to infinity) is probably a little too fast for me.
Close focus: The Hawthorne’s 10’ close focus is OK for birding; nothing like the amazing 3’ close focus on the Viper.
Diopter ring: On the Hawthorne, it’s built into the front face of the center focus wheel, and it locks in place. There are no + to - reference marks, so if somebody else uses it and changes the diopter setting, you have to do it again from scratch to re-set it for your eyes. The Viper’s locking diopter ring is on the right eyepiece, with + and – reference marks.
Depth of field: Compared to an 8x bin, I like the increased depth of field on the 7x Hawthorne, and it’s even more pronounced on the 6x Viper.
Fit and finish: The black rubber armoring on the Hawthorne is substantial and comfortable. Ditto for the Viper’s green rubber armoring.
Ergonomics: Both bins are center hinge construction, with thumb indents on the barrels. They both work well for my medium-size hands. Resistance on the hinge adjustment is fine on both bins.
Size and weight: The Hawthorne’s aluminum construction keeps the weight down to 23 oz, which is pretty light for a 7x42; only slightly heavier than the Viper 6x32 at 19.4 oz. At only 5.5 inches long, the Hawthorne is also pretty compact for a 7x42. The Viper is just a half-inch shorter.
Accessories: Both bins came with OK quality neck strap, rainguard and tethered objective lens covers. Actually, the Vortex stuff was better quality than the Leupold.
Warranty: The Hawthorne comes with a Leupold Limited Lifetime Warranty; only good for the original owner. The Vortex warranty is better; no fault and fully transferrable.
Overall: The 7x42 Hawthorne doesn’t have the widest FOV or the closest close focus, but what a sweet view for $350, and with Leupold’s reputation for ruggedness, I expect to use it for a long time.
First off, a fellow aficionado on the group was nice enough to sell me a Hawthorne so thank you!
I haven't had it out for any great length yet. Hopefully this weekend. My first impressions are good.
After having had a Swaro 8.5x42 for the last 2 years, I was shocked at how compact the Hawthorne is. It's only slightly longer than the 8x32 Swaro (5.3 vs 5.5 inches). It is also only 2.5 ounces heavier than the 8x32. So it feels compact. If other 7x42 models are like this, I can see why there are fans of the format. The CA is there but minimal - If the ED 7x4x models are showing less CA, it's a disappointment that this one doesn't have ED glass. The "narrow" FOV doesn't bother me in the slightest, but I have a 7x50 which has a 5.5 degree FOV so the 7.5 is great compared to that!
One thing about the oculars - the metal of the oculars protrudes out ever so slightly (less than a mm) past the rubber eyecups when eyecups are down for eyeglass wearers. This is easy to adjust. While the eyecups do not have any intermediate detents between full up and full down, they are taught enough to hold wherever you want. A rubber o-ring will also keep it at the right trim.
Accessories - the objective covers are good quality. The rainguard is a stiff plastic and feels cheapish - I will use my nice rubber Leica rainguard. The strap is great. The case is neoprene. The case on the cheaper Bushnell Legend is significantly better, but this is not a huge issue.
I like the cosmetics a lot. I would consider it understated but elegant. Nice use of the logo and the brand. Nice use of the maple leaf pattern. Good quality rubber.
I will continue to look at it for CA and any weird optical effects. The rolling ball of the SV series doesn't bother me at all though I see it plain as day.
I think if Leupold corrected the eyepiece issue, added a 3 stop eyecup adjustment and added ED glass, these would be the belle of the ball. But as they are, so far I'm very happy and impressed with the compact 7x42 format.
I haven't had it out for any great length yet. Hopefully this weekend. My first impressions are good.
After having had a Swaro 8.5x42 for the last 2 years, I was shocked at how compact the Hawthorne is. It's only slightly longer than the 8x32 Swaro (5.3 vs 5.5 inches). It is also only 2.5 ounces heavier than the 8x32. So it feels compact. If other 7x42 models are like this, I can see why there are fans of the format. The CA is there but minimal - If the ED 7x4x models are showing less CA, it's a disappointment that this one doesn't have ED glass. The "narrow" FOV doesn't bother me in the slightest, but I have a 7x50 which has a 5.5 degree FOV so the 7.5 is great compared to that!
One thing about the oculars - the metal of the oculars protrudes out ever so slightly (less than a mm) past the rubber eyecups when eyecups are down for eyeglass wearers. This is easy to adjust. While the eyecups do not have any intermediate detents between full up and full down, they are taught enough to hold wherever you want. A rubber o-ring will also keep it at the right trim.
Accessories - the objective covers are good quality. The rainguard is a stiff plastic and feels cheapish - I will use my nice rubber Leica rainguard. The strap is great. The case is neoprene. The case on the cheaper Bushnell Legend is significantly better, but this is not a huge issue.
I like the cosmetics a lot. I would consider it understated but elegant. Nice use of the logo and the brand. Nice use of the maple leaf pattern. Good quality rubber.
I will continue to look at it for CA and any weird optical effects. The rolling ball of the SV series doesn't bother me at all though I see it plain as day.
I think if Leupold corrected the eyepiece issue, added a 3 stop eyecup adjustment and added ED glass, these would be the belle of the ball. But as they are, so far I'm very happy and impressed with the compact 7x42 format.
eitanaltman
Well-known member
Just FYI, the compactness has nothing to do with the format. Most 7x42's are the same size as their 42mm brethren. For example the Swaro 7x42 SLC is a 30+oz big boy, and the Leica Ultravid 7x42, Nikon EDG 7x42, Zen 7x43 ED3, etc. are all the same size as the 8x/10x versions. It's just that this specific model is on the compact side.
The fandom for 7x42 has to do more with lower magnification yielding greater depth of field, wider FOV, larger exit pupils, etc.
But that said, the compactness of the Leupy certainly has a lot of appeal. I don't have much interest in carrying around one of those 6"+ long 27-28oz 42's.
