• 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.

Minox APO-HG Binoculars (1 Viewer)

C

chartwell99

Well-known member
Minox has evidently elbowed aside the HG series binoculars in favor of a presumably even more expensive series called APO-HG. The Minox website tells us: "Pin-sharp optics with natural color rendition puts the new APO-HG binoculars from MINOX in a class of their own and first in the top league. The APO-HG 8.5x43 BR and the APO-HG 10x43 BR models impressively represent the latest technologies in binocular design. Featuring SCHOTT fluoride ED-glass lens elements these apochromatically-corrected binoculars deliver a brilliant color-fringe-free image."

Anyone tried these yet? I liked the HG predecessors, especially the 8 x 33, but thought the shiny rangefinding focus knob a gimmick and the overall prices non-competitive vs. other sub-$1000 bins (like the Vortex Viper, Pentax SP etc.).
 
Hope that you are refering to the ones I tried last weekend. They are the new Minox HG 8.5x43 but they are quoted as Aspheric.

Assuming they are then I was very impressed. The show I was at had LOTS of binoculars on show and to try. The only ones I felt compared to the Minox HG were Leica's at £1325, the Minox HG was £625. Very clear and sharp, also very usable.

The Minox HG's and the Leica's were the best 2 that I tried and wouldn't like to say which one was the better.

If I had the spare £625, needed a better set then I have, and felt I deserved a present I would happily buy a set.
 
SG6 said:
Hope that you are refering to the ones I tried last weekend. They are the new Minox HG 8.5x43 but they are quoted as Aspheric.
If I had the spare £625, needed a better set then I have, and felt I deserved a present I would happily buy a set.
Click to expand...

I think all the current higher end Minox binoculars boast aspheric lens elements. The new APO-HGs have dropped the shiny focus wheel (a good indicator of which model you looked at) and now tout ED glass and "apochromatic lens technology". Inasmuch as the APO-HGs now come in "an exclusive wooden box together with an elegant leather case", your quoted price sounds too low.
 
As always, I am interested in new designs. From those of you who have seen the specs...does it appear as if Minox did what Pentax and Leica did in that they introduced ED/FL style glass to currently existing designs or was a total redesign in order? The only characteristic that I found a bit restricting in the HGs was the field of view (not counting the 8x33 that is). Are the new HGs better in this regard?
 
FrankD said:
As always, I am interested in new designs. From those of you who have seen the specs...does it appear as if Minox did what Pentax and Leica did in that they introduced ED/FL style glass to currently existing designs or was a total redesign in order? The only characteristic that I found a bit restricting in the HGs was the field of view (not counting the 8x33 that is). Are the new HGs better in this regard?
Click to expand...
The FOV of the new bins is 6.1°. Here are the specs.

Michael
 
I hate to see the APO claim creeping into binocular marketing. The meaning of the term was already stretched to the limit in scopes, but it's ridiculous to see it applied to f/4 optics. NO binocular has APO optics. The binoculars that use ED glass in the objectives may have less longitudinal CA than conventional crown and flint objectives, but there's still plenty of it, roughly comparable to about an f/8 achromat. Just like conventional binoculars, ED binoculars are dependent on low magnification to keep the CA invisible.
 
henry link said:
I hate to see the APO claim creeping into binocular marketing. The meaning of the term was already stretched to the limit in scopes, but it's ridiculous to see it applied to f/4 optics. NO binocular has APO optics.
Click to expand...

Henry - my recollection is that the not too long ago discontinued Zeiss Night Owl series binoculars claimed to offer aprochromatic objectives. I owned a 7 x 45 for a time (actually I sold it, got buyer's remorse and bought a second example which I subsequently sold for the same reasons that I sold the first) and thought the image quality was notably superior to everything else then available. The excessive weight and remarkably poor balance were the achilles heel of these glasses for me, however, and the reasons for my finally parting ways with the series.
 
Last edited:
I think Zeiss used the term "Superachromat" in their Night Owl marketing. I never tested a Night Owl, but I'm quite sure it wasn't an APO. A true APO should have color correction so good that the blur size of the most out of focus color remains so small that it can't be detected in the Airy disc of a focused star at high magnification. Some telescopes that claim to be APOs can't do that. The performance of fast binocular objectives is more or less an order of magnitude worse than that, even with ED glass. But, true APO performance couldn't be seen and isn't needed at binocular magnifications. I just don't like to see a useful term reduced to something meaningless, like "deluxe" or "premium".
 
Last edited:
henry link said:
I think Zeiss used the term "Superachromat" in their Night Owl marketing. I never tested a Night Owl, but I'm quite sure it wasn't an APO. A true APO should have color correction so good that the blur size of the most out of focus color remains so small that it can't be detected in the Airy disc of a focused star at high magnification. Some telescopes that claim to be APOs can't do that. The performance of fast binocular objectives is more or less an order of magnitude worse than that, even with ED glass. But, true APO performance couldn't be seen and isn't needed at binocular magnifications. I just don't like to see a useful term reduced to something meaningless, like "deluxe" or "premium".
Click to expand...

Hi Henry,
You are of course right about the use of the designation APO being used more and more in the sport optics world.
I and two mates have spent three days looking through all binoculars and telescopes at the birdfair in rutland england,as regards binoculars we all came to the same conclusion that the Zeiss 10x56 was the star of the show, with the new swarovski el close behind it (only our humble opinion of course) unlike the other fls which have a 4,lens objectives the 8x56 and 10 x56 have a 5,lens objective the same as the diascopes. I think the Zeiss 8x56 and 10x56 fls are as close to being APO as any binoculars have achieved though I appreciate they are still not APO. Anyway I was so impressed with the 10x56 fls that I have ordered a pair and hopefully will get them later next week.
fiddler.
 
That's interesting, fiddler.

Is the extra element part of the focusing lens? Diascopes have doublet focusing lenses. I've noticed that the internal view below shows a focusing lens that is unusually thick and there's a ring around the front of it that could depict the the cementing of a doublet. That's the only thing I see that looks like it could be a fifth element.

The longitudinal CA in the 8x56 is very low for a 56mm binocular and, at 64x, it doesn't look like the usual purple fringing. As I recall red is the dominate out of focus color. There's much more of it than a true APO should have, but it's plenty low enough for 8 or 10x, and in daylight there's even less when the objectives are stopped down.

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A800347580/GraphikTitelIntern/VFL_56_Schnitt_574/$File/VFL_56_Schnitt_574.jpg

Henry
 
I agree with Henry that the term "APO" has been bandied about with such indiscrimination that you need to be wary when you see it used in an optics ad.

However, I would not dismiss the use of ED/FL glass in birding binoculars as being unnecessary.

I haven’t tried the FLs or Minox “APOs,” but I do see the value of ED glass in binoculars from a birding perspective.

The Celestron 10x50 ED I owned showed me what no other binoculars I’ve had, including $1,000 10x42 LX L roofs and premium 8x porros, could – a crow perched on a branch against a dull, gray winter’s sky with NO color fringing.

I thought my eyes were playing tricks on me. So I looked at the bird with my 8x32 SE and 10x42 LX L, and they both showed a false color halo around the bird, although the SE showed less than the LX L. The LX/LX L series shows excessive CA for their price points, IMO, particularly the 10x model.

The Swift 8x44 ED I had “outshined” all my other binoculars on dim wintery days. The views were sharp and bright, and the colors were more vivid than my other binoculars (except my 8x32 LX, which on a sunny day showed colors almost as vivid, but it also showed a lot more color fringing in high contrast situations).

I’ve also owned a Celestron 9.5x44 ED and a Swift Audubon 804 ED. Both exhibited these same beneficial characteristics (in fact, all except the 10x50 probably used the same 44mm ED element made by Vixen).

When I first bought the 8x44 ED, it was raining out so I tried it in doors. My TV set has two small square buttons: one green, one red. The green is to show the TV is “ON” and the red shows if the station is broadcasting in stereo.

With my other bins (8), when I focused on the clock on top of the TV and then focused the bins on the two squares, the green square was sharply focused while the red was out of focus. I could refocus the red square with the right diopter and get both colors in focus at the same time.

When I did this same test with the 8x44 ED, both squares where in focus w/out diopter tweaking. That tells me that both wavelengths are hitting the same part of my retina.

How could that not improve image quality? The bin might not throw a perfect airy disk, but it did show very vivid and bright color images and less color fringing in high contrast situations than my other binoculars.

The 10x50 ED I did use for stargazing, and while I never did an airy disk test, I did test the color correction on Jupiter.

Even near the horizon, Jupiter was a clean, round ball, with no color smearing. With the other 10x bin I had at the time, the 10x30 IS, Jupiter was a smear of colors, which got worse as the planet sun lower to the horizon.

I realize that the planets are not the primary objects that stargazers view, but it illustrates my point about the noticeable, increased color correction with ED glass.

Off-axis, the 10x50 ED did show CA, but very little on axis even in high contrast situations, which is when CA is most noticeable in binoculars.

So if ED glass is so great, why I don’t I have any ED bins now? It takes more than ED glass to make a great bin.

Each bin had its own issue: the 10x50 had a 5* FOV, fine for stargazing but too cramped for birding. Still, I do regret selling it at times when CA bothers me in my other binoculars;

the 8x44 ED had too much pincushion, and the long 18 ft. close focus made it limited for birding;

the 9.5x44 ED I bought was out of collimation and in poor condition so I returned it to the seller;

the Audubon 8.5x44 804 ED was also in poor mechanical condition and had a very small sweet spot, returned that bin too.

Better samples of the 9.5xED and Audubon 804 ED would have been keepers.

I think ED/FL glass is a welcome upgrade to birding optics especially in spotting scopes, but even for binoculars, it makes subtle but noticeable improvements that discriminating birders and optics aficionados would appreciate.

However, taking the same roof, and adding ED glass to it, then charging hundreds of dollars more is a rip-off, IMO.

Comparable configuration porros with ED glass only cost about $100 more than their non-ED porro counterparts.

If Pentax and Minox want their roofs to compete with the Big Boys, they need to do more than just add ED glass and price their ED line in the premium bracket; they need to redesign their EPs to give their full sized binoculars a wider FOV while maintaining a wide sweet spot.

Brock
 
Last edited:
If Pentax and Minox want their roofs to compete with the Big Boys, they need to do more than just add ED glass and price their ED line in the premium bracket; they need to redesign their EPs to give their full sized binoculars a wider FOV while maintaining a wide sweet spot.
Click to expand...

My feelings as well. Sorry for not adding more to this discussion but Brock summed up my feelings quite nicely.
 
I am a little wary of the term LD glass, simply because to design and build a doublet lens the 2 glass components have to have different refractive indexes. The lower refractive index glass also therefore has a lower dispersion then does the higher refractive index glass.

The use of Crown and Flint glass to make a cheap doublet means that the Crown component is the "LD" component. But I would not count Crown glass as a real "LD" glass. Seems that ice would made a good LD component but has a habit of melting.;)

So any doublet lens at the front of a set of binoculars can to some extent claim to have an LD component.o:D and I suspect that the marketing people have already latched on to this.

What is not advertised is that a lower dispersion glass will need to have a more curved set of faces in order to attain the required focal length and this introduces more spherical abberations. You could get a nice colour balanced fuzzy image therefore.:-O

Chartwell's comment of weight of an apochromatic set of binoculars makes sense, the front objective will be a triplet built of 3 types of glass - more glass = more weight and the weight is at the front and has a greater effect when holding them. Each glass component is there to colour correct for a separate wavelength. Wonder which wavelengths the different manufacturers build their lenses for? That would be interesting and may explain why some people find one make better then another.

As for Henry saying no binoculars have apochromatic lenses if the manufacturer has built, or uses, a triplet lens for colour correction at 3 different wavelengths then it is a apochromatic lens. It may be good or bad, may work with the remaining optics of the binocular or not, but it is a apochromatic lens.

They are probably in binoculars as they have been around for years, I was building systems with them 25+ years back and aren't exactly expensive, but are a good marketing ploy, and some of them may work.:eek!::eek!::eek!:

A well designed doublet with good components will probably give better results then a mediocre triplet, but the triplet ultimately has more protential.

The other thing I see that never comes into the overall performance is mention of one optical component that we have little control over, is a necessary component and that basically is a simple single lens system that is supposed to handle all situations, near, far, bright, dark, all wavelengths and deteriorates with time. The human eye. The bin's I have do not quite handle my eyes so I need to use glasses with them and I have a small astigmatism correction which not even the most expensive binoculars can compensate for.
 
henry link said:
That's interesting, fiddler.

Is the extra element part of the focusing lens? Diascopes have doublet focusing lenses. I've noticed that the internal view below shows a focusing lens that is unusually thick and there's a ring around the front of it that could depict the the cementing of a doublet. That's the only thing I see that looks like it could be a fifth element.

The longitudinal CA in the 8x56 is very low for a 56mm binocular and, at 64x, it doesn't look like the usual purple fringing. As I recall red is the dominate out of focus color. There's much more of it than a true APO should have, but it's plenty low enough for 8 or 10x, and in daylight there's even less when the objectives are stopped down.

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A800347580/GraphikTitelIntern/VFL_56_Schnitt_574/$File/VFL_56_Schnitt_574.jpg

Henry
Click to expand...
Hi Henry,
Not sure how the optics are laid out,but they do have a 5,lens objective, it states as much in the new Zeiss catalogue and I have had it confirmed by Zeiss UK.My guess is that its the same configuration as the diascopes,but it is only a guess.Whatever the layout these 56 ,binoculars give a superb image ,we really were most impressed. I have placed my order for a pair of 10x56 fls this evening so hopefully I will be caressing them by the end of the week.
I have been looking at a diagram of the insides,but it is hard to be certain of the layout.
Sorry to have not been much help,but will endeavour to find out more.
fiddler.
 
Hello all,

this has turned into a very interesting thread with quite a familiar sound to it!

In turn...

@FrankD & @Dogfish: The APO-HGs are in all intents and purposes exactly the same bino as the standard HGs but use the latest APO glass from Schott along with a 'nano' moisture / grease repellent coating on the objective lenses and not least have a thankfully dumbed down colour on the fopcus wheel and diopter adjustment.

Here at Newpro UK, (Minox's UK distributor), we agree with you that the FOV shoudl have been wider, and have been telling Minox this since soon after the original HGs were launched.

Things do take a while to get through to Minox & their development team, but we do sometimes succeed - the mid-priced BL range is entirely based on the specifications that WE supplied to them.

@Brocknroller - see above with reference to us agreeing with your final comment.

However, although this is BIRDforum, please all be aware that we sell binos to a LOT of markets other than the birding one where FOV does not seem to matter nearly as much.

That said, we keep plugging away and are pretty sure that Minox will eventually give in to the constant request for a birder-friendly FOV in any future models!

ATB,

Dave.
 
brocknroller said:
> snip <

The 10x50 ED I did use for stargazing, and while I never did an airy disk test, I did test the color correction on Jupiter.

Even near the horizon, Jupiter was a clean, round ball, with no color smearing. With the other 10x bin I had at the time, the 10x30 IS, Jupiter was a smear of colors, which got worse as the planet sun lower to the horizon.

I realize that the planets are not the primary objects that stargazers view, but it illustrates my point about the noticeable, increased color correction with ED glass.

> snip <

1) It takes a lot more magnification than 10 to see a star's Airy disk -- perhaps at least 150.

2) Whether or not Jupiter, or any object that is low in the sky shows colors, is dependent mostly on the Earth's atmosphere, not the binocular or telescope optics. You can only test optics effectively when the object is overhead and/or the Earth's atmosphere is particularly steady. (I specify overhead because our atmosphere in that area of the sky is the thinnest and therefore least susceptible to bad "seeing.") So if Jupiter or the moon shows color when they're as high in the sky as possible, then yes -- ED glass should improve that image.
Click to expand...
 
Howard220 said:
brocknroller said:
> snip <

The 10x50 ED I did use for stargazing, and while I never did an airy disk test, I did test the color correction on Jupiter.

Even near the horizon, Jupiter was a clean, round ball, with no color smearing. With the other 10x bin I had at the time, the 10x30 IS, Jupiter was a smear of colors, which got worse as the planet sun lower to the horizon.

I realize that the planets are not the primary objects that stargazers view, but it illustrates my point about the noticeable, increased color correction with ED glass.

> snip <

1) It takes a lot more magnification than 10 to see a star's Airy disk -- perhaps at least 150.

2) Whether or not Jupiter, or any object that is low in the sky shows colors, is dependent mostly on the Earth's atmosphere, not the binocular or telescope optics. You can only test optics effectively when the object is overhead and/or the Earth's atmosphere is particularly steady. (I specify overhead because our atmosphere in that area of the sky is the thinnest and therefore least susceptible to bad "seeing.") So if Jupiter or the moon shows color when they're as high in the sky as possible, then yes -- ED glass should improve that image.
Click to expand...

True, the best test for false color on planets is when the planets are high in the sky, although Mars at my latitude never gets much higher than 30* in the sky.

Jupiter was at about the same angle, but I had both bins out so I wanted to compare them, and I looked through both bins back and forth repeatedly and the magnification was the same, so it's still apples to apples.

Even during daytime observation, in high contrast situations, the 10x30 showed noticeably more CA than the 10x50 ED. For example, the IS was particularly "colorful" while looking at a crow perched on a branch against a bleak winter sky. The ED showed no color fringing on the same bird.

As far as "airy disks," at the time, I had a Nikon 8x-16x40 XL Zoom, which I used to test my binoculars.

Brock
Click to expand...
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 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.

Similar threads

J
Review / Test Hawke Frontier APO 10x42 vs Nikon Monarch HG 8x42
Replies
13
Views
10K
Veracocha
Veracocha
G
Last Day - Kowa Spotting Scope & Binocular Sale
Replies
2
Views
1K
gr8fuldoug
G
E
A KamaTech flub, a Tract Toric Schott HT review, and my 10x42 quest...
2
Replies
20
Views
6K
mskb
M
E
Trinovid 10x42 (2012-2015 edition) impressions
2 3
Replies
53
Views
7K
AGPank
A
N
Minox HG 8.5X52 BR ?
Replies
6
Views
5K
Nixterdemus
N

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top