• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Alpen Wings ED 10x25 Binos - Review (3 Viewers)

If indeed the OL review put them up against full-size bins that would easily explain the lower scores. I'd consider that an unfair comparison, and kind of useless.

Mark

Here is a link to a portion of the OL review. I found no mention of how the tests were done and how objective/subjective they may be.

They rated the Alpen 10x25 3rd out of four of mid sized binoculars, below a Pentax 9x32 and a Minox 8x33.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/g...-new-binoculars-2011?photo=17#node-1001345786

Use the "Previous" button above table to scroll back through binos.
 
Do you know if they are going to make single hinge compact binoculars? From previous experience, even with alpha, I had a hard time to control the IPD of the binoculars while using it.
 
Here is a link to a portion of the OL review. I found no mention of how the tests were done and how objective/subjective they may be.

They rated the Alpen 10x25 3rd out of four of mid sized binoculars, below a Pentax 9x32 and a Minox 8x33.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/g...-new-binoculars-2011?photo=17#node-1001345786

Use the "Previous" button above table to scroll back through binos.

Ron
When I first read the OL article over a month ago, I printed the chart and tried to make sense of the categories by going back and reading the review and comparing to the chart. Not much of it makes much sense. The most confounding one was the Minox BL 8x33's when you read the review and compare to the chart. Plus I have still have the 10x42 Zen Zrs HD and got rid of the 10x42 Excursion EX's. Anyone who would rate the Excursion EX above the Zen is either blind or has rocks in their head IMO.

Tom
 
Here is a link to a portion of the OL review. I found no mention of how the tests were done and how objective/subjective they may be.

They rated the Alpen 10x25 3rd out of four of mid sized binoculars, below a Pentax 9x32 and a Minox 8x33.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/g...-new-binoculars-2011?photo=17#node-1001345786

Use the "Previous" button above table to scroll back through binos.

Ron in the past when Bill McRae was testing optics he used a 3x booster and on some of the reviews he posted the boosted resolution, this is not saying 3x was enough power. The 2001 issue is one they did post the resolution, Pentax 10x50 DCF WP 3.7 SOA, Nikon 10x35EII 3.9 SOA and the "Editors Choice" Zeiss 8x56 BT*P* 3.7 SOA. Low Light test was conducted under natural light in the evening using a 10 inch dia. disk covered with alternating white and black stripes and they rotated this every few seconds until the person couldn't say what direction the stripes where facing and how many min. after sunset this was. Supposed to check for flare, workmanship, aesthetics[beauty,ugly etc.], applicability [intended purpose] and price value. Example spotting scope the EC was the Nikon Sky&Earth 20-60x80mm with 1.8 arcsec
I think they do the same thing now that Bill McRae retired, but I am not impressed sometimes.
I had my mother buy my boy the 2001"great buy" Alpen 8x25 reverse porro for him at Christmas time and it is decent. Well this was quite a while ago.

Tom, Thanks for the excellent review!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the review, Tom. They sound quite good.

Two questions though. Based on photos I somewhat doubt I'd like that tiny focus knob on the back end. My Leica 8x20's focus is bigger and easier to get at. Any further thoughts on that? It seems like something you'd either get used to, or just grow to dislike.

Also, although they are 10x, how would you compare them to the Olympus 8x25 Tracker, which for me still trumps just about everything out there?

If indeed the OL review put them up against full-size bins that would easily explain the lower scores. I'd consider that an unfair comparison, and kind of useless.

Mark

Mark

These are almost an identical design to the newer Swaros and similar to the Nikon LXL's and all three focus at the bottom with your ring finger. I find I prefer the bottom focus on these lightweight minis as it allows me to lock my index fingers against my forehead and cuts down more on movement. Due to the small occular lenses and eyecups on the alphas I have a harder time holding them still because you can't get the eyesocket rest like many of the single hinge 25's with the much larger occulars and wider eyecups.

Back during our previous Tracker go round, I got the 10x25's as well but sent them back after a couple of days as they weren't close to the 8x25 in performance. The Alpens outdo the 8x25 Trackers in CA and glare control, and are a little sharper. I would suppose the Trackers would have the edge in brightness, and are definetly easier to use. I say I suppose because I got rid of the 8x25's as well several weeks back when I was paring my collection down and decided to keep my 7x26 Customs and Elites as my non waterproof reverse porros and decided to get another pair of 8x28 Excursion roofs. I was never quite as enthusiastic as you and Dennis on them, but I still think they are the best around for the money.

Tom
 
Thanks Surveyor for the link. It looks like OL put the Alpen up against some middling mid-size, which isn't exactly fair. Nonetheless the Alpen got a B- in a field that achieved only a B. Sounds about right.

I won't soon forget a review by birdwatching.com that put the Leica 8x20 UV ahead of the Pentax 8x32 ED in tems of resolution. At the time I thought: WTF are you lookin' at?? Up to a point there's no substitute for aperture. Cute is not the same as great.

Thanks also to Tom. I didn't buy the 10x25 Olympus because I figured it would be less impressive. The 8x seems to be a bit of a fluke. The smaller the objective, the lower the mag, if you want a good view. How's that for a rule of thumb?

Mark
 
Tom,

Thanks for the review. These sound just about like what I've been sort of looking for. However, I'll go with the 8x20 and likely wish it were 6x20.

Outdoor Life reviews are best taken with two large grains of salt followed by asprin chasers. I gave up[ giving them any credence long, long ago.
 
I can only hope that the 8x20's are as good as I feel the 10x25's are. I have had innumerable 8x binos where the 10x disappointed me, but very seldom has an 8x been worse than a 10x. I think I am going to spring for the 8x20 as well, and probably dump out my 8x20 Nikon LXL's.

Funny how all the top double hinge minis are always 8x20 & 10x25, but the good single hinges are always 8x25 & 10x25 with large occulars and eyecups. I wish someone would make an 8x25 as good as these Wings ED's.

tom
 
Tom,

Just curious.... how do your 8x28 Excursions stack up against the Alpens? Obviously there is a magnification difference but I wonder about key basic attributes. Kinda sounds like the Alpens trump the Excursions. Is my presumption correct?
 
I can only hope that the 8x20's are as good as I feel the 10x25's are. I have had innumerable 8x binos where the 10x disappointed me, but very seldom has an 8x been worse than a 10x. I think I am going to spring for the 8x20 as well, and probably dump out my 8x20 Nikon LXL's.

Funny how all the top double hinge minis are always 8x20 & 10x25, but the good single hinges are always 8x25 & 10x25 with large occulars and eyecups. I wish someone would make an 8x25 as good as these Wings ED's.

tom

Tom
How do the Alpen ED Wings 10x25 compare with the Olympus Tracker 8x25's?
 
Tom,

Just curious.... how do your 8x28 Excursions stack up against the Alpens? Obviously there is a magnification difference but I wonder about key basic attributes. Kinda sounds like the Alpens trump the Excursions. Is my presumption correct?

Bob
Thats a hard comparison to make as they are such different binos, and my uses for them are drastically different. The Alpens have the nod on sharpness, contrast, CA and glare, but since the Excursions have a 417 ft FOV, the sweetspot is as large as the whole FOV on the Alpens at 285 ft. Low light is about a wash due to the higher mag of the Alpens. Ease of use and enjoyment is hands down, no contest the Excursions. Obviously the Alpens folded are much smaller, but when both are opened and IPD set, the Excursions are not that much larger footprint wise.

I have posted many times that the mini compacts have their limitations due to the small EP and very small occulars and eyecups, which makes eye positioning critical. But they do have a use, and between the 10x25 Victory and 8x20 Nikon LXL, I prefer the Alpens.

I do a fair amount of orienteering so they will always have a spot in my fanny pack. I like to go to the meets and just pay for a course map and wander around and enjoy the birds, wildlife and nature, as most of the courses are laid out in different parks throughout PA, MD & NJ. My favorites are the half and full marathons as they get you out the entire day, and you get to cover alot of varied terrain, but I never go faster than a slow walk, and consequently always finish last.;)

But day in and day out, my 8x28 Excursions will get a lot more use than the 10x25 Alpen ED Wings.

Tom
 
Thanks Tom :) It would seem we both favor wide FOVs in our bins.

The only compacts I have are a decade old Pentax UCF-Mini 9x21 which has only a 6.3* TFOV 330' view. They are confining compared to my ED2s let alone the uber wide porros from ZOMZ and Binolux that I have. So although they have surprisingly decent optics I routinely find excuses to use larger bins instead. I doubt I would be happy with any of the current crop of mini-compacts.
 
I have had a pair of the RSPB HD 8x20s for just over a month. Before I bought them I compared them to the Nikon HGL 8x20. My opinion? Well, optically, there is little to choose between then - the Nikon had a wider sweet spot, but the HDs had less CA. Resolution and contrast were Indistinguishable. The HDs have hydrophobic coatings. Both are waterproof. The HDs have a 10 year warranty. The HDs are smaller (my main requirement). The Nikons, definately, have a better build and feel classier; the HDs have a large plastic plate across the top, which feels a bit cheap. One of the hinges has become slightly looser over time and the right eye cup is ever so slightly at an angle - something I only spotted after a couple of days.

My overal opinion is that, for the price, they are good value. But if you do not need the smallest with top optics, then maybe it would be worth saving the extra pennies for an Alpha - just for that quality feel and peace of mind.

Paul
 
I received an Alpen 8x20 last night by FedEx. I took me about 1 minute to know that it was going to be returned. The hinge tension was pretty loose and the left side would not support the binocular. When held by the left barrel the binocular would travel in any direction gravity dictated.

While I had it, I took about 30 minutes to make a few observations to go with the other reviews here. I am not going to do a review since I will not have it long enough. I will just make a few quick observations/measurements.

Resolution measured between 8 and 9” in both tubes. FOV about 6.5°.

I made a visual comparison, side by side, with Leica Ultravid, Trinovid, Zeiss Victory, Swarovski and Nikon LXL. All were sharper centerfield, albeit, almost imperceptible. My old Swaro, measured at 7.2”, was the closest to the Alpen, almost indistinguishable image.

The color is a little cooler than I care for, but very accurate. Probably about the same CCT as the Swaro.

Optics are very good for this price range instrument.

Attached are a couple of pictures for reference.
 

Attachments

  • Right side.jpg
    Right side.jpg
    129 KB · Views: 149
  • Left Side.jpg
    Left Side.jpg
    125.9 KB · Views: 133
  • Comparison Chart.jpg
    Comparison Chart.jpg
    101.6 KB · Views: 129
Last edited:
I received an Alpen 8x20 last night by FedEx. I took me about 1 minute to know that it was going to be returned. The hinge tension was pretty loose and the left side would not support the binocular. When held by the left barrel the binocular would travel in any direction gravity dictated.

While I had it, I took about 30 minutes to make a few observations to go with the other reviews here. I am not going to do a review since I will not have it long enough. I will just make a few quick observations/measurements.

Resolution measured between 8 and 9” in both tubes. FOV about 6.5 degrees.

I made a visual comparison, side by side, with Leica Ultravid, Trinovid, Zeiss Victory, Swarovski and Nikon LXL. All were sharper centerfield, albeit, almost imperceptible. My old Swaro, measured at 7.2”, was the closest to the Alpen, almost indistinguishable image.

The color is a little cooler than I care for, but very accurate. Probably about the same CCT as the Swaro.

Optics are very good for this price range instrument.

Attached are a couple of pictures for reference.

Sounds like they have some Quality Control issues. Maybe Brockroller's idea of ordering three pair and keeping the best of the three wasn't a bad idea. It doesn't seem like you are that crazy about the optics. Is that true?
 
It doesn't seem like you are that crazy about the optics. Is that true?

No Dennis, actually the optics are quiet good for that price point, very close to the level of those I compared them too. I would not notice the difference if not side-by-side.

I would have been happy with a good working pair, they just do not offer anything I don't already have so not worth messing around with trying to get a good pair.
 
Ron, I would send this binocular straight to Alpen. Maybe Tom will chime in here on this. I would think they would want to make it right.
 
Ron, I would send this binocular straight to Alpen. Maybe Tom will chime in here on this. I would think they would want to make it right.

Hi Steve,

Might have been worth a try, but I dropped it off at UPS about 6 yesterday morning.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top