Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 14:54   #51
ailevin
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Southern California
Posts: 180
Steve,

I appreciate the summary and comparison, and I look forward to your future reviews.

I know that for astronomical refractors (half a binocular plus or minus correcting prisms), the CA of an objective design will get worse as the focal ratio gets faster (smaller). If these 42mm binoculars are using similar objective materials/designs, I would expect that the more compact Styrka objectives might have a shorter focal length and faster focal ratio.

Alan

P.S. I'm still thrilled with my Maven 9x45, thanks for introducing us! And thanks to Chuck for sealing the deal.
ailevin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 15:58   #52
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
.............
......... but you add: "Bill Cook did an evaluation of the S7, ............" I have searched quite a bit for his review but cannot find it.
...............
Here is a link to WJC's thread with the review.........

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=317245

The review starts with post number 11 and comments follow although most are not on topic of the review.

--------------------------

Steve ....... Thanks for the clarification on the Toric focus. It will be great if you can come up with a list summarizing the FOV measurements.
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)

Last edited by BruceH : Tuesday 7th November 2017 at 16:01.
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 16:32   #53
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
Thanks Steve.
Bill's review in the Styrka website: I just read it. (I could find no others on the S7 8x42 there).
S7 8x42 "clones": I will be following up.
Kruger Caldera 8x42: Some years back I read up all about about it in this forum and elsewhere (including what you wrote of course) and was keen on it for a while. But there were some negative aspects, I now forget exactly what, and the co. seemed weak; their website, I just found, is now defunct.
At a higher price the Nikon Monarch-HG 8x42 is tempting with all its positive qualities, but David/Typo's lone voice about its lack of sharpness has deterred me so far. If that is resolved (get it?) I may go for it.
The Styrka S7 842 is attractive to me because of its mix of size (even smaller), FOV and optical quality. Now, that CA...
Just checked the Kruger site and it is fully functional. Wonder why the difference?
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 17:32   #54
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve C View Post
Just checked the Kruger site and it is fully functional. Wonder why the difference?
The site worked for me but I did come across one bad link.

For whatever reason, the Kruger Caldera never makes it on my radar. I am not sure why considering that I go for the wide FOV models, especially in the 8X42. It may be the winged eye cups that push them off the list.

I believe the wings on the eye cups can be folded down for eye glass use. Do you know if they can be removed altogether without things looking hacked up?

The specs indicate they have a lot going for them ...... Di-electric coatings, ED glass and a wide FOV. Matt Cashell has a nice review on his Rokslide site where he says it also has a wide center view.

http://www.krugeroptical.com/cal842.htm

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/optic...dera-8x42.html

Do you think the Caldera can be grouped in this group of sub alphas discussed in this thread or is more of a quality entry model such as as the GPO ED? The going price of the Caldera looks to be about $400 which is closer to the GPO ED class and considerably less than the sub alphas discussed here.
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 19:28   #55
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceH View Post
The site worked for me but I did come across one bad link.

For whatever reason, the Kruger Caldera never makes it on my radar. I am not sure why considering that I go for the wide FOV models, especially in the 8X42. It may be the winged eye cups that push them off the list.

I believe the wings on the eye cups can be folded down for eye glass use. Do you know if they can be removed altogether without things looking hacked up?

The specs indicate they have a lot going for them ...... Di-electric coatings, ED glass and a wide FOV. Matt Cashell has a nice review on his Rokslide site where he says it also has a wide center view.

http://www.krugeroptical.com/cal842.htm

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/optic...dera-8x42.html

Do you think the Caldera can be grouped in this group of sub alphas discussed in this thread or is more of a quality entry model such as as the GPO ED? The going price of the Caldera looks to be about $400 which is closer to the GPO ED class and considerably less than the sub alphas discussed here.
If the Caldera questions keep coming, I'll bump up the old review I did. I guess I should not have mentioned them as they don't quite fit here anyway. The winged eye cups can't be removed. Field Optics Research ones work better anyway. I cut mine off. They have very large diameter eye cup assemblies and will be a problem for some. The diopter on the early ones like mine unlock and move far too easily. The fov on mine is 450' and the have a pretty wide sweet spot. They are not as bright as this group so I would not place them there. They do have a lot going for them, and I don't know if light transmission has gone up since I bought the initial model I have some 8-9 years ago
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 02:37   #56
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 237
Styrka S7 8x42

Bruce: Thanks for that link in BirdForum. It is the same review as in the Styrka website, to which Steve directed me.

Kruger Caldera 8x42

Steve: Thanks for checking the link. But it does not work for me. The reason may be geography. (As you can see on the left I live in Anon.!)

What is the present state of the co. with regard to binocular production, I wonder. (Please see the last post in your thread, in 2015.) The last time I got through to the website was 1-2 years ago and they still showed the pic of the older version of the Caldera replaced several years before that. (The diopter button had been changed from a little round to a larger square one but the pic had the earlier.)

The Kruger Caldera is "clones with" the GTH-ED which was marketed in Europe, is apparently no longer being sold, and was reviewed by Binomania. The generic original is Chinese, though to what extent I do not know.
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 04:16   #57
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
Styrka S7 8x42

Bruce: Thanks for that link in BirdForum. It is the same review as in the Styrka website, to which Steve directed me.

Kruger Caldera 8x42

Steve: Thanks for checking the link. But it does not work for me. The reason may be geography. (As you can see on the left I live in Anon.!)

What is the present state of the co. with regard to binocular production, I wonder. (Please see the last post in your thread, in 2015.) The last time I got through to the website was 1-2 years ago and they still showed the pic of the older version of the Caldera replaced several years before that. (The diopter button had been changed from a little round to a larger square one but the pic had the earlier.)

The Kruger Caldera is "clones with" the GTH-ED which was marketed in Europe, is apparently no longer being sold, and was reviewed by Binomania. The generic original is Chinese, though to what extent I do not know.
I have no idea what Kruger's status is at present. Kruger is/was somewhat different than many other OEM's. They started out as Pacific Rim Optical (in China) but PRO was and is a strictly glass producing facility. It is now a division of the larger Kruger Optical. Kruger owns the assembly facility in China, but does all the engineering, design, and prototype development in Oregon (then Sisters, now Tigard). So in theory Kruger has control over the the whole process from design to the finished product. At the time I was in the facility at Sisters, they had full assembly capability, but were not using much of their capacity at that time.
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 05:14   #58
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 237
Steve, thanks for correcting me on the generic original, and the extent of Kruger's involvement. We have another clarification of the hidden global processes which now bring us fine binoculars at a much lower price than comparable quality commanded less than a decade back. (Behind the subject makes of this thread may be similarly unexpected processes.)
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 05:23   #59
WJC
Registered User
 
WJC's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Twin Falls
Posts: 1,658
Steve proposes a comparative review, GPO, Maven, Stryka, Tract.

In my day, it might have been a review of Celestron, Meade, Swift, and Minolta.

The generation before me had reviews of Wallensack, Asahi Pentax, Tamron, and Bell and Howell.

When we have really come into our own we will be reviewing Katsuma, Kamakura, Fujita, and Akira.

Just a thought.

Bill
__________________
"The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."—Dr. Stephen Hawking
WJC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 05:55   #60
chill6x6
Registered User
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJC View Post
Steve proposes a comparative review, GPO, Maven, Stryka, Tract.

In my day, it might have been a review of Celestron, Meade, Swift, and Minolta.

The generation before me had reviews of Wallensack, Asahi Pentax, Tamron, and Bell and Howell.

When we have really come into our own we will be reviewing Katsuma, Kamakura, Fujita, and Akira.

Just a thought.

Bill
When I first started with binoculars and such it was Jason, Bushnell, Bausch and Lomb, Steiner, and of course Swift.
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 06:03   #61
chill6x6
Registered User
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 840
Steve....
I just wanted to add a photo of the two I still have that are in your comparison and two likely competitors. I hope you don't mind! I just felt like it might be of help to someone... We have from left to right the Styrka S7 8X42, Leica Trinovid HD 8X42, Nikon Monarch HG 8X42, Maven B.1 8X42.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0155.jpg
Views:	87
Size:	50.6 KB
ID:	645670  
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 07:18   #62
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 237
Chuck, Someone agrees, just what I wanted, thanks! Adhoc
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th November 2017, 15:06   #63
WJC
Registered User
 
WJC's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Twin Falls
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
When I first started with binoculars and such it was Jason, Bushnell, Bausch and Lomb, Steiner, and of course Swift.
Hi, Chuck:

Times are a changing.

In 1972, David Bushnell sold out to B&L. Then, when B&L got more interested in larger, more expensive equipment they sold the binocular business—Bushnell. Thus, it became its own company, again. Today, it comes from the same warehouse as TASCO and JASON. Steiner became part of Beretta Holding in 2008 and instruments made in Germany became the exception instead of the rule. Then for a time Burris was the importer of Steiner—most coming from China.

Finally, we have Swift—est. 1926. When Humphry Swift died, LONG-TIME employees were let go and Allison Swift (Hop’s daughter) closed the Boston operation to concentrate on the microscope branch in California. And, the last I heard was that she had sold that operation and was now working as a marketing and advertising guru in SoCal.

I would have liked to have had the reins at Swift before, after the sale, it became another “me too” company offering “me too” instruments.

I used to enjoy after hours chats with Humphry, who would answer the phone pretending to be the janitor until he recognized my voice.

Ah, but we can’t un-ring the bell.

Bill
__________________
"The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."—Dr. Stephen Hawking
WJC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 9th December 2017, 19:24   #64
jnielsen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: northern utah
Posts: 58
Steve, have you looked at the Sig Sauer Zulu 7 or Zulu 9 binoculars?

They appear to be the same as the Maven B1 and B2 with different armor.

The Zulu 7 is steadily gaining popularity in the hunting crowd. Better pricing than from Maven on the same glass?

I have a 10x42 Zulu 7 in route and will compare to 10x42 examples of the Zeiss Conquest HD and Styrka S9.

Thanks

Last edited by jnielsen : Saturday 9th December 2017 at 19:33.
jnielsen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 00:23   #65
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnielsen View Post
Steve, have you looked at the Sig Sauer Zulu 7 or Zulu 9 binoculars?

They appear to be the same as the Maven B1 and B2 with different armor.

The Zulu 7 is steadily gaining popularity in the hunting crowd. Better pricing than from Maven on the same glass?

I have a 10x42 Zulu 7 in route and will compare to 10x42 examples of the Zeiss Conquest HD and Styrka S9.

Thanks
I have not seen a Sig Sauer. I can not comment on them other than that.
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 15:53   #66
dries1
Registered User
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 51
Steve C.,

Than you for providing some enlightening reading on this Sunday Morning with snow on the ground. I am new to the roof glass, so being curious how long have these brands been around. When I was a diver in the past we all used seiko divers, build like tanks....Now they are so many boutique watch brands of which have gone, or are going out of business - so no parts for repair. I have amassed some old seikos over the years, and they are over 35 years old and still going strong - they were well made and produced so many that the parts supply seems endless.
The binos you reviewed seem to be built well and have a good rep. with avid users, I just wonder if parts and service will be around in XX Years and how many they actually sell, (world numbers vs the EU or the US). Just curious.

Andy W.
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 19:57   #67
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by dries1 View Post
Steve C.,

Than you for providing some enlightening reading on this Sunday Morning with snow on the ground. I am new to the roof glass, so being curious how long have these brands been around. When I was a diver in the past we all used seiko divers, build like tanks....Now they are so many boutique watch brands of which have gone, or are going out of business - so no parts for repair. I have amassed some old seikos over the years, and they are over 35 years old and still going strong - they were well made and produced so many that the parts supply seems endless.
The binos you reviewed seem to be built well and have a good rep. with avid users, I just wonder if parts and service will be around in XX Years and how many they actually sell, (world numbers vs the EU or the US). Just curious.

Andy W.
Andy,

None of the brands in the review have been around long enough to have much of a history. To some, that represents true tragedy. To some it is not much of an issue. I do not want to undervalue the idea of history and future continuity if repair is needed somewhere down the line. My goal is to evaluate these binoculars, one because they are there, two that potential users should have some awareness of what is there.

So I suppose it depends on where someone fits in the continuum. In fact there is little if any, technology involved in producing a binocular that is in the sole domain of a particular producer. Technology transfer has largely occurred. It further seems that the frontiers of possible improvement in the binocular of today are pretty much diminished.

A point not much noted outside of the reviews is that all of these companies are being started by people coming from pretty solid prior backgrounds in the optics business. They had to know upfront the road ahead was steep. Binoculars are not a huge business. Yet they started them anyway. Why would they do that? No reward without some risk. If you are a big player, you better keep your eyes open. Why are the new companies there in the first place? Sitting on your laurels will get you run over. Would we have the Zeiss Conquest HD or the Nikon Monarch HG if it were not for the push from the newcomers? Will the new comers push hard enough to succeed? Will the old guard innovate enough to keep their place? Vortex seems a pretty good example of a newcomer who seems to have a pretty high chance of survival. What will happen is anybody's guess.

For my part, I appreciate knowing you liked the review.
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.

Last edited by Steve C : Yesterday at 20:11.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Review: Tract Toric 8x42 Steve C Binoculars 73 Thursday 26th October 2017 21:27
GPO, Maven or Tract? Nixterdemus Binoculars 7 Saturday 5th August 2017 17:32
Maven vs Swarovski Comparative Evaluation. Steve C Binoculars 42 Thursday 10th September 2015 19:27
Leica Geovid HB-B 8x42, an independent comparative review Samandag Leica 15 Saturday 27th June 2015 13:41
Four budget bins: a comparative review Kevin Purcell Binoculars 64 Sunday 18th January 2009 20:09

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.17176294 seconds with 30 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:19.