Dakota Elite series (2 Viewers)

I would love to see it as well Bob. The only other 7x28 I have seen recently (short of that military reticle model) was the new IF Minox unit. Looks "cute"...now if it just wasn't IF.

Ceasar,

I second the Pentax 7x28 comment. One of those would be just what I want. I have zero interest in 9x in a small binocular, zero. I'm not so sure a 6x28 might not be even better.

Frank,

It is certainly a matter of perspective, and I don't think you are being argumentative, and I'm not trying to be here either .

It simply seems to me that the purchaser of one of these $19.99 "bargains" has about an equal chance of getting a whale of a deal on a $100+ quality glass or spending it on a "deal" on a $49.99 glass. From my perspective, one of the scenarios is a deal, the other...not so much. I think the variation apparent in the comments is precisely the reason we see these on the clearance/closeout counter. I'd like to hear from some of those who've bought several to see what their take on product variation is. I still don't think there is anything "wrong" with mine. Both barrels are virtually identical. In my experience a bum binocular usually has its problem in widely different performance between barrels.

I'm tempted to send these to Charles at Zen Ray and say "here, these are about what I want, but... fix these things and put me first on the list for the new ZRS 7x28".

FrankD said:

As always I believe it to be a matter of perspective. I am not aware of any other $20 binocular that performs at this level...regardless of individual unit quality.

Click to expand...

Perspective and expectations I simply wanted a cheap but functionally competent pair of compact (pocketable if possible) bins to replace my aging 9x21 UCF-Minis. My pair of Dakota DEs will fill that bill nicely, although they only fit some of the pockets I was shooting for. They certainly loose out in critical comparison to all my other bins but I never expected otherwise. They're not trash either, performing optically very satisfactorily, which makes the closeout acquisition price the bargain that was hoped for

And yes, I'd love to see Charles give us a great low power pocket bino too!

Steve,

Please add the following requests on your note to Charles....

- dielectric prism coating
- ED glass objectives
- better internal baffling

Oh, and around a $200 or under price point.

All I can think of for now.

FrankD said:

Steve,

Please add the following requests on your note to Charles....

- dielectric prism coating
- ED glass objectives
- better internal baffling

Oh, and around a $200 or under price point.

All I can think of for now.

Click to expand...

Well, the ZRS standard was good enough, despite lack of ED (didn't want to push my luck) . I suppose Charles just loves another complication tossed into his path.

That said this physical size (maybe a tad more svelte) I think has a lot going for it.

Give me a hand here Frank, send Charles one of yours too...:t:

FrankD said:

Steve,

Please add the following requests on your note to Charles....

- dielectric prism coating
- ED glass objectives
- better internal baffling

Oh, and around a $200 or under price point.

All I can think of for now.

Click to expand...

What, no IS??!!:eek!:

Bob

FrankD said:

...I would agree that it can be "fun" to tear apart, from a technical perspective, some of these lower priced models.

Click to expand...

Frank,

It's just as much or more fun to find ways that cheap binoculars equal the high end stuff. In that spirit I though I should add a few more observations about the surprisingly good qualities of the Dakota 8x32.

First, center sharpness is just fine. In this case the alarming looking defects in a star test are not very damaging to the low magnification image.

The sweet spot is reasonably generous, about the same as a Zeiss 8x42 Fl with similar fall-off toward the edge.

The distortion characteristics may disturb some people, but they will be the same people who are disturbed by the very similar distortion in the Swarovski 8.5x42 SV.

The quality of the roof prisms is surprisingly good. I might have expected poorly made roof edges, but no problem appears in a star test and spiking is minimal. I also thought the phase coating might be inferior, but to the extent I can evaluate it with polarizing filters it appears to behave very much like Zeiss P* coatings.

Lateral CA is low for a binocular of this design (negative internal focus), once again similar to the Zeiss 8x42 FL, and no longitudinal CA is visible.

With so many good qualities, it's a shame that such a potentially successful design is marred by a couple of lapses in execution, specifically the failure to fully coat the optics and to properly baffle the objective lens cell. It's still a pretty good binocular, but for a few dollars more in production costs and a little extra care this very inexpensive binocular could have been optically close to the best 8x32's.

Henry

For what it's worth, I cancelled my order for the 7x28, having decided I was just too fond of my Yosemite 6x30s.

Just to add some further comments.....

My 8x32s arrived today. I spent some time with them this afternoon. I wanted to comment on the quality control issues first since they seem applicable with this unit.

Looking into the objective end of the binocular I noted two issues. In one barrel is a small "fleck" of material. It appears to be in on the second lens from the objective. I believe it is likely the result of the second issue. The retaining ring for the prism shows signs of either wear or just flaking of the black coating material around almost the entire circumference. Small bits of the silver colored metal are shining through. I am sure this is affecting some of the stray light issues mentioned previously.

Beyond the quality control issues....

I don't remember anyone posting about the physical size the 8x32. It is actually shorter than the 7x28 by a good 3/4 to 1 inch. It is a very compact 8x32. I wish I had a Leupold Katmai to compare as I remember the Katmai as being the shortest 8x32 on the market. The ocular diameter is also noticeably smaller on the 8x32. Exterior design and handling appear to be identical. The color of the antireflective coating reflections for the ocular are of the green/purple mixture I mentioned in reference to the second 7x28 unit the I purchased.

There is a definitive difference in the view between the two configurations. The size of the sweet spot in the 8x32 is larger than either of the 7x28s that I have on hand. Eye relief, listed at 14 mm, is also noticeably shorter than the 7x28. I use them with the eyecups fully collapsed and can see the field stop without any type of blackouts. Other than the size of the sweet spot, and subsequent edge distortions, the images are very comparable. I would rate the apparent sharpness as good with good overall color representation. Both binoculars display a slightly warm color bias to my eyes. I detect less color fringing in the 8x32 and most notably outside of the sweet spot. Apparent brightness levels seem to be above average for an 8x32 but not exceptional. The image appears relatively flat and evenly illuminated. As Henry noted there is a combination of distortions outside of the sweet spot.

All for now...

FrankD said:

Looking into the objective end of the binocular I noted two issues. In one barrel is a small "fleck" of material. It appears to be in on the second lens from the objective. I believe it is likely the result of the second issue. The retaining ring for the prism shows signs of either wear or just flaking of the black coating material around almost the entire circumference. Small bits of the silver colored metal are shining through. I am sure this is affecting some of the stray light issues mentioned previously....

Click to expand...

Yeah, the innards are not a pretty sight, but all that poor finishing and bright metal is relatively harmless because it's blocked by the prism aperture so that those reflections never reach the eyepiece. The problem area is just at the edge of the objective where there is a narrow shiny surface that isn't completely baffled (see photo). Looking from the front you wouldn't notice it since the light that strikes it is reflected backwards at an angle that sends the light directly to the eyepiece where you don't want it to go. Flecks on the objective lenses are also harmless to the image.

I went back to the store today and had another look at the 7x28. I saw the same problems as the first time, but I can add a couple more. The 7x28 has poor baffling similar to the 8x32, so that it suffers similar veiling glare. It also has the same uncoated prism surfaces so its light transmission is equally low. Also, it appears that that something, perhaps the back of the prism housing, is constricting the field, so there is a fuzzy unfocused field stop and the apparent field is quite narrow. Distortion, unlike the 8x32, is straightforward pincushion all the way to the edge. IMO, the 8x32 is so optically superior that the 7x28 should only be considered instead if its size, weight and magnification are priorities that completely override optical quality.

henry link said:

... the 7x28 should only be considered instead if its size, weight and magnification are priorities that completely override optical quality.

Click to expand...

Ouch. That's pretty damning Henry. And a significant change to your previous comment

henry link said:

Overall, I think this is a pretty decent pair of binoculars.

Click to expand...

Again I think we need to keep things in perspective. The Dakota 7x28s do NOT belong in a Cracker Jack box as a toy. Neither should they be looked upon as anyone's "go to" optics. They are inexpensive "beaters" or as some would say "truck bins" or "glove box bins." Their optics are more than passable for such casual use despite their shortcomings. For $20 plus shipping they do fill that niche nicely.

My Dakota Elite 8x32's arrived today and they are DOA. The left barrel does not focus at all. When I move the focus knob while looking into the objective end I can see the mechanism moving in the right barrel but nothing moves in the left barrel. I called Wolf Camera but the folks who handle the ebay sales were gone for the day. We shall see what tomorrow brings. Bummer!
Tom

Bob A (SD) said:

Ouch. That's pretty damning Henry. And a significant change to your previous comment

Again I think we need to keep things in perspective. The Dakota 7x28s do NOT belong in a Cracker Jack box as a toy. Neither should they be looked upon as anyone's "go to" optics. They are inexpensive "beaters" or as some would say "truck bins" or "glove box bins." Their optics are more than passable for such casual use despite their shortcomings. For $20 plus shipping they do fill that niche nicely.

Click to expand...

Bob,

The "pretty decent pair of binoculars" comment was made about the 8x32, not the 7x28. My point in the last post is that the extra $10 spent on the 8x32 will buy you a much better beater binocular.

Henry

henry link said:

Bob,

The "pretty decent pair of binoculars" comment was made about the 8x32, not the 7x28. My point in the last post is that the extra $10 spent on the 8x32 will buy you a much better beater binocular.

Click to expand...

Ah nutz! Sorry Henry. Point taken and I stand corrected regarding your comments.

Guess I queue up in the size / magnification group in opting for the 7x28s as beaters

brownpelican1 said:

My Dakota Elite 8x32's arrived today and they are DOA. The left barrel does not focus at all. When I move the focus knob while looking into the objective end I can see the mechanism moving in the right barrel but nothing moves in the left barrel. I called Wolf Camera but the folks who handle the ebay sales were gone for the day. We shall see what tomorrow brings. Bummer!
Tom

Click to expand...

Tom:

I have been watching this one, and I will defer to SteveC, the odds are not good to get one that even works well. I do respect his opinion, and I have not tried one of these.
It seems that the quality does vary and it may not even meet the needs of the glove box.

Why bother with this one? Many here can do much better than this.

Jerry

henry link said:

Bob,

The "pretty decent pair of binoculars" comment was made about the 8x32, not the 7x28. My point in the last post is that the extra $10 spent on the 8x32 will buy you a much better beater binocular.

Henry

Click to expand...

Sounds like these "beaters" are mostly "pre-beaten" at the factory. How long can you expect them to last in actual use?

I'll pass. I'm not that desperate for a bargain I guess.

Mark

NDhunter said:

Tom:

I have been watching this one, and I will defer to SteveC, the odds are not good to get one that even works well. I do respect his opinion, and I have not tried one of these.
It seems that the quality does vary and it may not even meet the needs of the glove box.

Why bother with this one? Many here can do much better than this.

Jerry

Click to expand...

Well Jerry, I guess I gambled and lost on this one. The 7x28's were what I expected, decent glove box/beaters and I was reading that the 8x32 was a better bin for an extra 10 bucks. So, what the hell, I gave them a try. It didn't work out but I knew there was that chance. If Wolf Camera has a pair I can get in an exchange I still might get lucky. It's not like I'm playing with the mortgage money. I'm not taking this too seriously.
I don't know what I did to piss off the Chinese Quality Control Gods but they've been pretty rough on me lately. Looks like my bino karma's in the crapper!
Tom

Sorry to hear about the defective unit. Hopefully the situation gets resolved one way or the other.

As for the bins and people's expectations...well the bins are what they are. Inexpensive little roof prism binoculars. They certainly aren't at the quality level of the cheap little 8x21 and 7x35 bubble pack binoculars but they don't appear to better than some of the least expensive phase-coated roofs out there. I feel that I have been fairly lucky with my purchases recently though I have had my share of poor quality specimens as well (thinking Barska Huntmaster that I am about to return).

I would love to move up the proverbial quality control latter but finances do not currently permit that. If anyone has suggestions for decent, inexpensive binos with good optical performance....that already haven't been reviewed to death (thinking Leupold Yosemites in particular here)...then I would love to hear them.

I did find a very nice price for a Pentax PCF 8x40 recently and bit on one of the 8x28 Excursions after reading some of the nice reviews on them. I will continue to keep my eye out for any "good deals".

Frank:

Good of you to reply, as you started this post. For most here, and especially those
that enjoy birding, a binocular needs to have a solid base on which to enjoy the hobby.

I am thinking that these were not a good choice to post about.

Cheap does not mean a good value.

Jerry

Well, I finally dragged my second pair out of the box today and they have one major problem that Frank hit on earlier about the 8x32. In looking thru the left barrel I notice a black squiggly thread extending from the right side into about the right 25% of the FOV. Highly noticeable and definitely annoying. Turning them over and looking thru the objectives, there is a fleck of fiber about the size of a matchhead stuck to the edge of the first ring in from the objective. No amount of shaking has dislodged it.

This pair had more green in the occular coating, but the reflection in one barrel was dark green and the other was light green indicating a lack of coating uniformity. The sweetspot was a little wider in this pair and the CA not as noticeable as the first pair, but the problem with white object CA was there. Stray light and glare issues were about equal to the first pair, which is to say fairly poor anywhere near the direction of the sun.

Now if they had just stuck a black squiggly thread on the other side of the left tube I could use them as an M24 ranging recticle.

Needless to say, these are going back.

Tom