User report, Kowa Genesis 8x33 (1 Viewer)

Hello everybody,

Bob don't worry, i don't listen to Dennis opinion for long time now, i think he is famous as an entertainment person than a reliable reviewer.

Dennis, i have to be honest, you can amuse us but in your posts we (probably) all wondering what's the best binocular every time.

'oetzi' it will be great to read your review about SV 8x32 and Genesis 8x33.
Do you know if Kowa updated the latest Genesis with better coatings?

My biggest question is if the Genesis are as sharp as the other best 8x32s, and secondly the brightness of course.

George

On-axis sharpness is IMO (that means as seen with my ageing eyes) as good as the Nikon EII 8x30. Brightness is a little bit below.

But I cant reduce it to sharpness.
The micro contrast is what makes a positive difference. Fine structures are separated much better. The indices on the face of the clock were highlighted (for want of a better word) a bit better than with the Nikon.

For example. in hazy conditions, watching over larger distances (40-50Km) , the Kowa made buildings a bit better visible, which otherwise could only be sensed to be there (or known from past experience).

Pictures of similar (a bit worse) conditions are added to this post. The second one shows the "Großer Feldberg" as seen with bare eyey and my not-too-good camera. The third shows what the binos can see. These three buildings could be seen form a distance of 50Km with the Kowa, the Nikon ahowed only two, the smallest one could only be guessed.

For tomorrow, 06:00h, the review is scheduled. The above mentioned pictures of the clock will be there, too. It then can be found here:
http://www.outdoor-professionell.de/category/test/fernglaeser-test/

Best to have it translated from german to english. This works better than into another language.

Edit:
Here is my review.
http://www.outdoor-professionell.de/2013/04/kowa-genesis-8x33-test-fernglas/

george-spiridakis said:

Hello John,

thanks for your review and comments about the Genesis.
From the discusion i realized that your 2 other pairs are a Swarovision EL 10x42 and one SLC 7x42. I hope i am right.
What do you think abou the Genesis, does it stand side by side among the 2 others? You say that central sharpness is very good, so probably there is no noticeable difference, what about the brightness (or low light performance)? The exit pupil of the 8x33 is very similar to your 10x42, are they equal on that factor? And compared to the 7x42, do you see much difference?

And one more question, have you tested/tried any other good 8x32? If you did how they compare with the Genesis 8x33?

Thanks in advance,

George

Click to expand...

George,

I didn't really feel able to make a reliable assessment of the relative brightness of the 8x33 Genesis and the 10x42 SV. Despite the similar exit pupils, the difference in magnification complicates a subjective judgement.
The Albinos test of the Genesis showed a rather good transmission diagram: http://www.allbinos.com/182-binoculars_review-Kowa_Genesis_8x33.html but even measurements are subject to fairly high tolerances as RonE (Surveyor) explained in post #41 here: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=180743&highlight=comprehensive+review&page=2.

For better low light performance there is no substitute for larger objective lenses and I think Zeiss' advertising for the new Victory HTs is very misleading as a 2 or 3% improvement in transmission is not going to make a lot of difference to twilight performance.

There was some discussion on Oetzi's thread on truncated exit pupils about the vignetting of the 8x33 Genesis. I really think the picture of the left exit pupil in the Albinos test must have been taken off axis. I set mine up on a tripod with a calibrated pan and tilt head and viewed the exit pupils at about 8 m distance through a scope, so that the differences between left and right barrels were reduced to less than 0,5°. The prisms are obviously somewhat small as vignetting became apparent 10° off axis and the exit pupils assumed a lentil or double -convex lens shape 20° off axis. I don't think, however, that this will be apparent in normal use. My old 7x42 SLC, BTW, held up very well and was still showing 3/4 moon-shaped exit pupils 20° off axis - with its 54° AFOV there is full cut-off at 27°.

The 8x33 Genesis seems to show less lateral CA at the field edge than my 10x42 SV but perhaps the astigmatism masks the CA. The overall edge sharpness of the SV though is much better. A 6x boosted test for longitudinal CA showed the Genesis to have an advantage bút perhaps it is not fair comparing 48x to 60x magnification.

I have not been able to do a direct comparison to the other alphas and it will be interesting to read Oetzi's comparison with the 8x32 Swarovision, when it arrives. I would expect the latter in the sum of its attributes to come off better, but then it is 65% more expensive!

After five months experience with the Kowa it still has the power to surprise me every time I pick it up, with the clarity of its central image and the way it jumps into focus. I doubt there is a better 8x30-33 roof prism bin for less money, but would not argue with anyone who favoured a Meopta Meostar, Swaovski CL or Zeiss Conquest HD.

John

I bought Genesis 8x33 in the autumn 2012 for 745€ from Finnish net shop LintuVille (the net page is in Finnish and I don´t know if they ship products outside Finland). There might be better binos and I haven´t made exact comparisons. However I´ve been very pleased with them. They are easy to carry, good to use (I have eyeglasses), focusing is exact and smooth, they feel good on hands, the FOV is wide and the image is fine for birdwatching and identification. I have especially liked the image when looking straight towards light - you can still see details. Excellent binos for my needs.

Hannu Varkki said:

I bought Genesis 8x33 in the autumn 2012 for 745€ from Finnish net shop LintuVille (the net page is in Finnish and I don´t know if they ship products outside Finland). There might be better binos and I haven´t made exact comparisons. However I´ve been very pleased with them. They are easy to carry, good to use (I have eyeglasses), focusing is exact and smooth, they feel good on hands, the FOV is wide and the image is fine for birdwatching and identification. I have especially liked the image when looking straight towards light - you can still see details. Excellent binos for my needs.

Click to expand...

Hi to all, i've also published a review of Kowa Genesis 8x33, with a small comparison with others binoculars
You can find here http://www.binomania.it/wordpress/?p=2841
I hope that google translate will work well

Thank you for that fine review. The results are mostly identical with mine.

Please note, according to the german distributor, the Genesis 33 does not have a magnesium body, its plain plastic. the Genesis 44 is magnesium.

On the subject of the big eye pieces, thats why the Kowa fits me so perfect. I have al large, but long nose. Between the eye pieces (IPD 64mm) my nose is narrow enough not to get pinched.

BTW, I much preferred your older version of website, easier to navigate than the current one. Most important, reading white letters on black is a pain for the eyes.

Thanks for that excellent test, Piergiovanni.

I'm pleased to see confirmation of my impressions (and Oetzi's) but was nevertheless a little surprised at the degree to which the Kowa outperformed the Zeiss FL in sharpness and contrast.
Jan Meijerink's tests indicated that Kowa achieve good consistency in their Prominar scopes and I suspect this is also the case with their bins. Perhaps the FL was a lemon.

My Kowa was purchased as a no. 3 bin but its light weight and excellent sharpness have contributed to making it my current favourite.

John

oetzi said:

Thank you for that fine review. The results are mostly identical with mine.

Please note, according to the german distributor, the Genesis 33 does not have a magnesium body, its plain plastic. the Genesis 44 is magnesium.

On the subject of the big eye pieces, thats why the Kowa fits me so perfect. I have al large, but long nose. Between the eye pieces (IPD 64mm) my nose is narrow enough not to get pinched.

BTW, I much preferred your older version of website, easier to navigate than the current one. Most important, reading white letters on black is a pain for the eyes.

Click to expand...

Dear Oetzi, thanks for the comments. About the composition of the kowa Chassis, i've just controlled on official website and you are right. Italian distributor said to me that also the XD 33 was in magnesium. Now i will change the review. Concerning the big eye piece i wrote that is a very subjective issue. It really depends on the shape of the face.
I had to change the web site because now, this version, for me, it is easier to manage. It is more simple upload photos, and more. Even my collaborators and friends may publish independently. As for colors I'm undecided. I created the website with white background and many people wrote that they preferred with the black background. I'm trying to improve the menu on the right I hope to make some changes in the coming weeks. Thank so much for your opinion.

John Russell said:

Thanks for that excellent test, Piergiovanni.

I'm pleased to see confirmation of my impressions (and Oetzi's) but was nevertheless a little surprised at the degree to which the Kowa outperformed the Zeiss FL in sharpness and contrast.
Jan Meijerink's tests indicated that Kowa achieve good consistency in their Prominar scopes and I suspect this is also the case with their bins. Perhaps the FL was a lemon.

My Kowa was purchased as a no. 3 bin but its light weight and excellent sharpness have contributed to making it my current favourite.

John

Click to expand...

Dear John
Unfortunately ,at the moment, I can not know if that specimen of Zeiss was a lemon or if the specimen of Kowa was an excellent piece. I just wrote what I noticed in my comparison
I repeat that the difference was minimal and was visible only with binoculars on a tripod
By the way it will possible to do another test, because my uncle bought the Kowa sample I tested ( he also saw that it was very sharp in the center of the field)
. Anyway, in recent months I have had the displeasure to try some Top of the Range with defects. Even the best make mistakes. Here in Italy there is a saying that mentions "non tutte le ciambelle escono con il buco" -not all cakes come with the hole" I hope you understand
A month ago I sold my 2011 SWAROVISION 8.5x42 to try a newer version. Unfortunately , the stars in the new specimen showing astigmatism, around 80% of the field. After, at the extreme edges, its returning pinpoints. By day, this thing is not noticed, but I'm also an amateur astronomer.
I have already written to Swarovski Italy. This week I will send them my copy for a control. Kind Regards from Italy
Pier

Binomania, thanks for a nice review!

Did you test the 8x33 and experienced the "abberation" as i did ?
See post http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2684346&postcount=11

Anders

binomania said:

Dear John
Unfortunately ,at the moment, I can not know if that specimen of Zeiss was a lemon or if the specimen of Kowa was an excellent piece. I just wrote what I noticed in my comparison
I repeat that the difference was minimal and was visible only with binoculars on a tripod
By the way it will possible to do another test, because my uncle bought the Kowa sample I tested ( he also saw that it was very sharp in the center of the field)
. Anyway, in recent months I have had the displeasure to try some Top of the Range with defects. Even the best make mistakes. Here in Italy there is a saying that mentions "non tutte le ciambelle escono con il buco" -not all cakes come with the hole" I hope you understand
A month ago I sold my 2011 SWAROVISION 8.5x42 to try a newer version. Unfortunately , the stars in the new specimen showing astigmatism, around 80% of the field. After, at the extreme edges, its returning pinpoints. By day, this thing is not noticed, but I'm also an amateur astronomer.
I have already written to Swarovski Italy. This week I will send them my copy for a control. Kind Regards from Italy
Pier

Click to expand...

Pier,

What I think you're seeing in the newer SV EL is what I've named the "Absam Ring". Others see it too, though the distance from the center where this astigmatism occurs appears to be different on various models, usually closer in, about 60 to 70% from the center. I speculated this might be the transition zone where the pincushion turns to angular momentum distortion.

Holger said that a Swaro rep told him that the company tweaked the distortion level on the new versions to make panning smoother. Did you still notice "rolling ball" in the newer version or did you find that not a problem?

The 8.5x SV EL model seems to be the worst in regard to "rolling ball". Some who see this effect in the 8.5x model find panning is smoother in the 10x42 and 8x32 models. I'm not sure if Swaro made them that way originally or if the 10x42 and 8x32 models they tried were newer models with revised distortion.

Brock

brocknroller said:

Pier,

What I think you're seeing in the newer SV EL is what I've named the "Absam Ring". Others see it too, though the distance from the center where this astigmatism occurs appears to be different on various models, usually closer in, about 60 to 70% from the center. I speculated this might be the transition zone where the pincushion turns to angular momentum distortion.

Holger said that a Swaro rep told him that the company tweaked the distortion level on the new versions to make panning smoother. Did you still notice "rolling ball" in the newer version or did you find that not a problem?

The 8.5x SV EL model seems to be the worst in regard to "rolling ball". Some who see this effect in the 8.5x model find panning is smoother in the 10x42 and 8x32 models. I'm not sure if Swaro made them that way originally or if the 10x42 and 8x32 models they tried were newer models with revised distortion.

Brock

Click to expand...

Dear Brok, like you know I am quite refractory to rolling ball effect. The only thing I can do is to compare the new specimen to an old one. My old copy was sold to a gentleman who lives far away from me. I also have a copy of SWAROVISION 12x50 at home, but it is a different format and it can not possibile to make a comparison. Today also I contact a Swarovski engineer that I had met last year. I'll see if I confirm this thing. I have already contacted Swarovski in Italy, but in this period, in Italy there are many holidays (April 25, May 1)
Besides, at this time I'm looking for nests of birds of prey and for the long distance observation I prefer using a Canon 10x42 IS and a Spotting Scopes. With the Canon I can better see the long distance nest. For this reason, I neglected a bit 'my SWAROVISION 8.5x42. In any case, also Canon as angular pincushion distorsion an flat field but if i look the stars with Canon its are pinpoint until the very edge of the field. ahhh...the porro prism!!!
By the way it 's very strange that Swarovski has not released a statement about this. Now I'll try to get more information and I will write an editorial on binomania. Thanks, as always, for your attention. Piergiovanni

Binoseeker said:

Binomania, thanks for a nice review!

Did you test the 8x33 and experienced the "abberation" as i did ?
See post http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2684346&postcount=11

Anders

Click to expand...

Hi Anders,
I noticed similar behaviour when looking through the Kowa last year. I attributed this to off-axis astigmatism. Basically, from 50% off centre towards the edges the image got more and more unsharp and I couldn't bring it to satisfactory sharpness by re-focusing. At that time I compared them to Leica ultravid and despite I could observe similar loss of sharpness towards the edge, it was easily fixable in the leica by re-focusing.

Maciej

Binoseeker said:

Last time i was at the local bino shop i looked at the Genesis 8x33.
I was looking with the genesis at a well illuminated wall with shelves on, at a distance of approximately 8-9 m away. When looking at a specific point on the wall and moving the bin to the right there was a drop in focus say at 60% distance from the image center, and then the focus came back when moving further to the edge of the image. Maybe a lemon....anyone else who can do this test in a similar way ?

Anders

Click to expand...

I bought a pair of the Kowa Prominar 8x33's HD and I noticed the same thing. Very distracting to me. Also, I didn't think they were any better than any of the less expensive ED binoculars at controlling CA because I still saw it at the edge as a purple fringe around black objects so I sent them back. I don't think they were defective. I wasn't that impressed with them. They are a high quality pair of binoculars but they just didn't WOW me.

binomania said:

Dear Brok, like you know I am quite refractory to rolling ball effect. The only thing I can do is to compare the new specimen to an old one. My old copy was sold to a gentleman who lives far away from me. I also have a copy of SWAROVISION 12x50 at home, but it is a different format and it can not possibile to make a comparison. Today also I contact a Swarovski engineer that I had met last year. I'll see if I confirm this thing. I have already contacted Swarovski in Italy, but in this period, in Italy there are many holidays (April 25, May 1)
Besides, at this time I'm looking for nests of birds of prey and for the long distance observation I prefer using a Canon 10x42 IS and a Spotting Scopes. With the Canon I can better see the long distance nest. For this reason, I neglected a bit 'my SWAROVISION 8.5x42. In any case, also Canon as angular pincushion distorsion an flat field but if i look the stars with Canon its are pinpoint until the very edge of the field. ahhh...the porro prism!!!
By the way it 's very strange that Swarovski has not released a statement about this. Now I'll try to get more information and I will write an editorial on binomania. Thanks, as always, for your attention. Piergiovanni

Click to expand...

Pier,

I'm looking forward to hearing what Swaro has to say about this. From Holger's post, I get the feeling that they do not want to officially announce the change in distortion.

I wish they would announce the serial # on each model where the changeover took place. They did this when they changed over to faster focusing on the full sized EL WBs. This way, people who are less "refractory" to RB can seek out a model with more pincushion and less AMD.

Brock

Hi Brock i've phoned to italian swarovski manager two says ago.i am waiting....

Brock, Piergiovanni, do Leica and Swarovski ever announce any changes to their existing model lines in their websites? Mentioned these two as I looked into them a bit in this connection. Can think of one reason why not: if they do many buyers may avoid pre-change but still very new stocks in the shops!

pompadour said:

Brock, Piergiovanni, do Leica and Swarovski ever announce any changes to their existing model lines in their websites? Mentioned these two as I looked into them a bit in this connection. Can think of one reason why not: if they do many buyers may avoid pre-change but still very new stocks in the shops!

Click to expand...

When they have done this, at later dates, they have both offered incentives to owners of the earlier models to upgrade them to the new models by trading them in on the new ones. Both Camera Land and Eagle Optics did this.


Bob

Bob, sorry I haven't been clear. By "changes to existing model lines" I meant technical improvements without actually "changing the model", i.e. its name and/or appearance. With model changes, e.g. Swaro. SLC to SL Neu, I do know they have made such offers - at least Swaro. as I did not previously know this about Leica.

pompadour said:

Bob, sorry I haven't been clear. By "changes to existing model lines" I meant technical improvements without actually "changing the model", i.e. its name and/or appearance. With model changes, e.g. Swaro. SLC to SL Neu, I do know they have made such offers - at least Swaro. as I did not previously know this about Leica.

Click to expand...

I believe I was wrong about Leica doing this. What they did was offer a rebate when any functioning binocular was turned in for a new Leica. This took place in 2011 as I recall.

Along these lines I was able to pick up a new 7 x 42 Trinovid BN from Cabelas at a VERY substantial discount, as advertised in their sale catalog, several years after the Trinovid was replaced by the Ultravid. I assume that sales like these had to be approved by Leica as I was able to register them with Leica. I think they had a Passport warranty.

Bob