Albinos review of 'hawke fronteir ed' (1 Viewer)

Just in case anyone hadn't seen the link in Zen Ray forum. A review of what is eseentially a pair of 8x43 Hawke Fronteir ed's on Allbinos site.

Interesting reading....


http://www.allbinos.com/254-binoculars_review-Zen-Ray_Optics_ZEN_ED2_8x43.html

Thanks for the link.

I had been thinking seriously of getting a Hawke Frontier 8x43 ED, but now I'm not so sure. Before reading their article I was suspicious of the "43" figure, and they've confirmed my suspicions. (assuming that the Zen Ray & Hawke come out of the same mould.)

Try them my friend I have the 8x43 just ordered a pair of 10x43 Christmas present to self.I find the 8x superb as soon as i looked through them excellent clear wide field view I take reviews with a large pinch of salt. As i say give them a look lots of us on here like them Cheer's Chris

One thing new that I noticed about allbinos reviews is that they now contain links to advertisers inside the reviews. For example, in the aforementioned review of the 8x43(2) ED2, there's a clickable ad for Zen Ray's Website and another one for a store called Lanius Books, which sells optics. You can find them right below the photos.

<B>

Along that line of thinking, any idea why Delta Optical is so heavily reviewed recently? I realize they are a Polish-based company but the reviews for them tend to be many in number and very positive.

Excuse me, but is Zen Ray Deben aka Hawke? because I had the Hawke Frontier ED 10x43s and they are superbly sharp optics.

If Zen Ray is Hawke, then there is some thing amiss to be honest.

They are not the same company but the ZR ED2 and the Hawke Frontier ED Mark I could very possibly have been made in the same factory. They are more alike than not if that helps any. I think that is the reason why the association that started this thread.

As far as we can figure out the in Chinese cities like Kunming there are large numbers of individual companies that make the optical components, mechanics, housings and assemble binoculars either as standard or custom configurations. Other companies like United Optics or Kunming Optical market these to overseas distributors, but it sounds like some deal with the individual companies directly. The Zen Zays, Hawkes and others appear to be similar to the United Optics BW16 offering ED glass and flattened fields. No doubt they are built to order, and may differ in specification. The housings are subtlety different and while the view descriptions seem substantially similar it's quite possible that they have specified different criteria for optical quality, coatings, baffles and the like. They may be assembled by different companies using common components and have different standards of QC. As far as I understand no one has subjected them both to the detailed scrutiny necessary to tell them apart.

David

http://www.united-optics.com/Produc...tdoor_Binoculars/BW16_Series/BW16_Series.html

I would not go leaping to conclusions here . Zen Ray and Hawke are different companies. They both sell the same design (in this particular instance, ED 2 and Frontier) binocular from the same place in China. The specs are probably marginally different in some respects. I'd bet that Eagle Optics' Atlas Intrepid is another from the same place as is the Promaster Infinity Elite ELX, and likely the Vortex Talon HD. Zen Ray has moved on from that particular source for the ZEN ED 3. What Vortex has done with respect to where the Talon is outsourced from I'm not sure, but it appears to be indistinguishable aside from armor.

Further, taking the leap that since Allbino's did not seem to like the ZEN ED 2, DON"T apply that thinking to the Hawke (or any of the others). The Allbino's review of the ZEN ED 2 is obviously of a defective, or at least substandard specimen, see the discussion of the review in the Zen Ray thread.

I dont think that you can excuse a company ,or a model,(or a maker) saying that an average unit used in a tes,was substandard..what you are saying with this, is that QUALITY CONTROL is substandard, and that in itself is a negative review ...If you are trying to say that the Bins are THEORETICALLY good in their conception,you have a point ,but this doesnt translate in quality,except by careful implementation ..Or luck..

Charles from ZEN RAY said ,in some part of this forum ,that ZEN RAY has now their own facilities in China,and production as well as design ,are their own..This is of course recent news ,and does not apply to the ZEN ED2 that was reviewed in the Allbinos site...I think quality control sub-standards are the reason ZEN RAY wanted to move away from the previous source..If this the case We might see more and more differences between ZEN and other brands in the future(like the new Prime HD)

mayoayo said:

I dont think that you can excuse a company ,or a model,(or a maker) saying that an average unit used in a tes,was substandard..what you are saying with this, is that QUALITY CONTROL is substandard, and that in itself is a negative review ...If you are trying to say that the Bins are THEORETICALLY good in their conception,you have a point ,but this doesnt translate in quality,except by careful implementation ..Or luck..

Charles from ZEN RAY said ,in some part of this forum ,that ZEN RAY has now their own facilities in China,and production as well as design ,are their own..This is of course recent news ,and does not apply to the ZEN ED2 that was reviewed in the Allbinos site...I think quality control sub-standards are the reason ZEN RAY wanted to move away from the previous source..If this the case We might see more and more differences between ZEN and other brands in the future(like the new Prime HD)

Click to expand...

My post was not intended to excuse anything . The point was to prevent people from taking leaps of conclusion by applying the report of a substandard review performance from a ZEN ED 2 to the Hawke Frontier. That is what the OP did and people were thinking of ditching Hawke as a result.

On the other hand you cannot extend quality control issues to an entire line based on one poor sample either. A single specimen is just that...a single specimen. You are correct however in your QC issues with the ZEN ED 2. Yes they changed OEM with the ZEN ED 3. Better implementation makes the ED 3 better than the ED 2. The QC issues really surfaced with the last couple of runs of the ED 2 and were less an issue earlier. That factory lost some key personnel and never adequately replaced them. ZR sent a lot of rejected later ED 2's back to the factory. Part of the evolution of a binocular line.

I will point out that the draw of a good out of the box binocular has a lot to do with luck. There are more poor out of the box specimens at any price range than there should be. It does not take a lot of effort to determine if you are dealing with a binocular that has problems. One of my issues with Allbino's is that they do not seem to factor the luck aspect in at all. Makes no difference if they got a cherry out of the box sample or a clunker.

Read the thread in the ZR section about this review. There is a post from the Polish dealer saying this binocular was part of a year long test. Allbino's should have said that and referenced the review they did when the binocular was new...along with the results of the rest of the binoculars in the test. So was the review of a new or of a used binocular?

For all the good i red about the Zen ED2 8x43 (optics close to alphas), aren't allbinos a bit too strict regarding this pair?!
This surprised me at a certain point but also not. Allbinos can be good for reviews, but should be only used to know certain specs of binoculars (level of distorsion, transmission...).
The reviews lack of some resolution and contrasts points. Anyway it still is the best site for accurate datas.

Giorgio, you seem to be unaware there's another, longer, thread in the Zen Ray section on this Allbinos review?

Exact, going to search for it ^^