• 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.

The NEW Meopro HD line...still no thoughts? (1 Viewer)

gcole .... Thanks for providing the additional content to your other post. I think that puts it in perspective for me. My biggest issue with the Nikon Monarch 7 8X30 is that the eye placement is somewhat touchy. That is expected to a large extent due to the limitations of the small exit pupil and small physical size. However Nikon could have made things somewhat better I think if the eye cups were a little longer. Fortunately, it did not take long to adjust.

I think the view out of the little Monarch is surprising good, even without considering the small size. It sounds like the Meopta view is even better so that is great news. I definitely will look for one to check out the next time I am at Cabela's.

That is interesting to hear that Cabela's has a price of $799 for the display case model of the 8X32 HD MeoPro. Assuming we are talking about the same model, the web site is listing it at $649.99.

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Meop...0&Ntt=meopro&WTz_l=Header;Search-All+Products

I bought a jacket from them last year in the store and then went home and looked it up on the net to find it listed at a lower price. I went back with a screen print of the listing and they refunded the difference. I suspect if one went into the store with a screen print of the MeoPro listing, they would sell it at the lower price. If not, then there is the option of purchasing off the website with free shipping to the store. It pays to do your homework!

Thanks for taking the time to post your comments.
 
I've had the 8x32 Meopro HD for a few days, and I thought I'd give a brief report for others who might be considering it. I've owned the non-HD Meopro 6.5x32 for a few years, and I had it in mind when I first picked up the 8x32 HD. My first impression holding the 8x32 was that it felt smaller than the 6.5x32. I was surprised when later I compared the two, and it turned out that they had nearly identical dimensions. The difference comes from the HD having slimmer armor. I actually like this change. For my small hands, it improves the ergonomics. I also noticed that the HD's armor has a much coarser texture than the non-HD, which gives the HD a nice tackiness to the touch. One questionable difference between the HD and the non-HD is the focuser. The focuser on the non-HD was excellent, in my opinion. Right out of the box, it was silky smooth, had no play or stiction whatsoever, and was easily manipulated with one finger. The HD's focuser is still smooth, but it's noticeably stiffer, and with a little stiction. In time, the focuser tension may loosen, but for now, I find that I need to use at least one or two fingers from each hand in order to work it with any precision.

Optically, the 8x32 is very good. I brought out a few other 8x32 roofs to compare with it, including the Conquest HD, the Nikon Premier (HGL), and the Leupold Mojave BX-3. On-axis (using a tree trunk at about 30 yards as a subject), the Conquest and the Meopro both showed themselves to be very sharp, effortlessly showing fine detail in the wood. I couldn't really distinguish whether the Meopro or the Conquest was showing me more detail, although the Meopro's color rendition seemed to provide greater contrast on this particular subject. The Mojave and Premier trailed slightly behind, although neither of them is a slouch in this area. I did notice that the Meopro seems to have the smallest sweetspot of this group (about 50% or so, versus 60% or so for the other three), but the fall-off just outside the sweetspot is gradual, and users with more accommodation than I would likely judge the sweetspot to be larger. It's also worth noting that, although all four of these binoculars are rated at or around 8* in field of view, the Meopro seems to have a slightly wider field than the other three. As far as the edges, the Conquest and the Premier came out on top, with the Meopro just slightly below their level. The Mojave showed the softest edges. The results were similar with brightness: the Meopro seems to slightly trail the Premier and the Conquest, with the Mojave again pulling up the rear. Although all seem rather neutral in color, the Meopro is neither as cool as the Conquest nor as warm as the Premier. It does seem to have a slight warm yellow tone compared to the old non-HD Meopro, but it's not as pronounced a yellow tone as you would see through a Meostar. All in all, it's a high quality view that can stand up to the Conquest, but with a slightly smaller sweetspot and slightly softer edges.

The one aspect of the Meopro's optical performance that gives me pause is its handling of stray light. I'd caution that I've only had this binocular for a few days, and probably won't have a chance to use it extensively outdoors until the spring. However, I did do a little indoor testing with a bare lightbulb and outdoor testing just after sunset. With the bare bulb (which is admittedly an extreme test), the Meopro shows noticeably more glare than the other three binoculars. Outdoors after sunset, it likewise shows some veiling glare, although not as strong as in the indoor test. There seems to be an area just behind the objectives (possibly part of the objective cell) that is too reflective, and also an area towards the front of the focusing lens cell that is also too reflective. I'm not sure what impact this will have out in the real world (like I said, I probably won't have a chance to use these much outdoors for a while), but it's worth mentioning, in case other users notice a similar issue. One thing I did notice is that if I take off my glasses, I can often adjust my eye position in such a way that it lessens the effects of the glare. However, with my glasses on, the limits of the eye relief prevent me from finding a glare-free eye position.

Just a few quick notes of the accessories. The rainguard and lens caps are of very good quality, and comparable to the original Meopro. The Meopro HD strap is thinner than the old Meopro's: 1 ¼ inch for the HD versus 2 ¼ inch for the non-HD. It's still made with air-cells and just as high quality as the original, just not as wide (maybe they saved a little money here). Also, the HD comes with the same black cordura pouch case as the original Meopro. Anybody who's used the original Meopro knows how tightly this case fits those binoculars, and, unfortunately, the new HD fits just as tightly as the original. I guess Meopta never read the complaints that the case was too small for the binoculars.

To sum it all up, this is a very high quality pair of binoculars that's well worth considering if you're shopping in its price range.
 
to add to Peatmoss's review-briefly

I have the Cabela Euro 10x32 HD
It is a very good binocular,
close, but not quite as good
as my zeiss 8x32 FL

edj
 
Peatmoss - Enjoyed your post #23 on the Meopro HD 8x32. I recently acquired the complete copy of Meoptas 2015 Sports Optics Collection with all the specifications. Your 8x32 weighs about four ounces more than the Zeiss Terra 8x32. The Terra's body is made of reinforced fiberglass. I suspect the Meopro has a metal body, but I have seen no Meopta literature stating that. Your mentioning of the glare intrigues me. Is it possible that some of that is feedback from your eyeglasses? When I remove my glasses and use the extended eyecups, all the glare seen in difficult lighting conditions seems to disappear. My eyeglass lens are not coated and must reflect some light back into the oculars. Just a thought and perhaps not valid. John
 
Hello John.

Thanks for your kind words. The only reference I see on the Meopta website regarding the HD's body construction concerns the chassis, which is stated to be magnesium alloy. http://www.meoptasportsoptics.com/shop/us/32-mm-series-nbsp-new/meopro-32mm-binoculars/ctgBus.html My feeling is that this is definitely not a lightweight body construction, yet it is not as noticeably heavy as some other 8x32s. I suppose you could say that it has a reassuring amount of heft. Having said that, I can appreciate why one might want to shave 4 oz off of a binocular's weight if one could, and so I understand the attraction of models like the Terra. Btw, I very much enjoyed your review of that model, and I might eventually try one of those too! I also consider the 8x32 SE to be a sort of benchmark, and when someone of your experience finds that the Terra can stand up to the SE, well, it certainly piques my interest.

About the glare issue, I too have occasionally experienced the feedback you describe off of my eyeglasses. I can't remember which binoculars I had been using, but I do recall it happening in the past. In the case of the HDs, I don't think feedback accounts for the glare I was seeing because I tested both with and without my glasses. What I would do, upon seeing the any glare, would be to hold the binoculars steady and then carefully back my eyes away, so that I could get an idea about what was causing the glare. And, regardless of whether or not I was wearing my glasses, the glare seemed tied to shiny areas just outside the exit pupils. I don't want to overblow this issue. I've certainly seen binoculars with worse performance in this aspect. But it did handle that tough lighting situation a bit worse than the conquest (which was not perfect either). Here is my attempt to photograph an example of the bright area around the exit pupil (not a great photo.... sorry!). The light source is at the 9 o'clock position, and the brightening is around the 3 o'clock position.
 

Attachments

  • RSCN1840.JPG
    RSCN1840.JPG
    78.1 KB · Views: 249
Peatmoss - can you shed some light on how to attach the rain cover for the optical lens. It is very loose when placed on the end of the binoculars. It has slots that might accommodate the strap to retain the cover when not on the bins yet I cannot thread the strap through the slots over the clip for the quick release strap. How do you make sure that the loose cover does come off inadvertently? Thanks.
 
Hi P4B,:hi:

Welcome to Bird Forum!

If Peat doesn't mind here is how I do it.

Put your binocular upright on a table, objectives down. Put the rain guard on the oculars. Take one of your straps and pull the little buckle up it a few inches. Now take the tip of the strap and push it up through the bottom of the bracket on the binocular and then up through the one on the rain guard. Then take the tip and thread it up through the little buckle and adjust the length. Do the same thing with the other strap except do not thread it through the rain guard. That way when you take the rain guard off to use it it will dangle loosely from one side of the binocular.

Bob

PS: For me, any way, it is always a pain in the butt to do this.;)
 
Last edited:
Hi Penchant, and welcome to the forum! Bob's description sounds good to me. If it's helpful, here is a photo of how I loop the strap through the rainguard on the right hand side.

Hi Joe101. The focuser turns clockwise to infinity, and the full travel on it is about 1.3 revolutions. The focuser on mine is starting to smooth out nicely (not as much stiction as when it was new).
 

Attachments

  • DSCN1841.JPG
    DSCN1841.JPG
    127 KB · Views: 387
Last edited:
Hi Penchant, and welcome to the forum! Bob's description sounds good to me. If it's helpful, here is a photo of how I loop the strap through the rainguard on the right hand side.

Hi Joe101. The focuser turns clockwise to infinity, and the full travel on it is about 1.3 revolutions. The focuser on mine is starting to smooth out nicely (not as much stiction as when it was new).


Thanks for the info, I am planning to get a pair of waterproof 8x32. Weighing my options between the SV, conquest HD and the meopta. By far the cheapest and might suit the rough and tumber purpose that I am going to use it for.
 

Attachments

  • P3174610.jpg
    P3174610.jpg
    113 KB · Views: 264
  • P3174611.jpg
    P3174611.jpg
    137.1 KB · Views: 223
  • P3174613.jpg
    P3174613.jpg
    159.5 KB · Views: 274
  • P3174614.jpg
    P3174614.jpg
    159 KB · Views: 313
Thanks for the info, I am planning to get a pair of waterproof 8x32. Weighing my options between the SV, conquest HD and the meopta. By far the cheapest and might suit the rough and tumber purpose that I am going to use it for.

You have mentioned 3 very good choices. I would rate them as
best, and then midrange, price and optics have a great deal to do
with that, as well as it should.
I have experience with the SV and the Conquest and rank them highly,
but not in the smaller size. My best binoculars need to be 42mm or
better.;)

In your case and for the purpose check out those midrange models,
I have not tried the Meopta, but everything I find from those I
trust, recommend them.

Jerry
 
I already have a pair of 42s and also have a pair of nikon EII 8x30 which are my favourite pair of bins but I want to get a pair of binoculars for camping and I can be rough with it. It is for trips where I am not birding but want a pair as a side thing to do like on a trek or fishing.
 
Last edited:
Meopro HD 8x42

I have a pair of Meopro HD 8x42 that I bought mainly to compare... since there haven't been many reviews of the new HD models. They are very impressive at their price point. I'll more than likely stay with my Swarovski's and these will sell, new for about $700, which I figure is a bargain for the glass.

The ergonomics were comfortable. They seem a little on the narrow side when holding, which is fine for my medium sized hands. Eyecups were comfortable and easily adjustable. The focus wheel was smooth and quick. I must admit that I wish my Swaro SLCs focus wheel had this feel.

Optically, I only have one complaint which is a little distracting glare/reflection at the right angles of view looking back toward the sun. Chromatic aberration is not a factor and I noticed no fringing whatsoever. I thought the colors were vibrant and true. The sharpness was superb and where there might be a little edge distortion, it was not distracting or any more than my SLC's. They perform well in low light and provide good contrast in shadows.

Overall, I have no major complaints and lots of positives for these Meopro HD 8x42. I see these retail for $849. That's probably a good price point for these. They should compete well with the higher priced Vortex Razor HD in my mind. They remind me a lot of the Razor HD, but the Meopro HD have better glass and a better view in my opinion. They definitely beat the Razors when it comes to color fringing, which the Meopro has none and the Razor's become distracting once you notice it.

Hope this helps a little bit, if you're interested in the newer HD glass from Meopta. Very good job Meopta.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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