• 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.

Meopta Forum ? (1 Viewer)

I made some searches for “manufacturer name” in the Binoculars section:

Search for ”manufacturer name” in the threads gave following number of hits:

Meopta 769
Hawke 712
Kowa 699
RSPB & Viking 399 + 265 = 664

Leupold 1000
Nikon 1000
Zeiss 1000
Pentax 1000
Opticron 1000
Vortex 1000
Minox 1000
Swift 1000

It seems BF has set the upper limit to 1000.

Search for ”manufacturer name” in the titles gave following number of hits:

Meopta 64
Hawke 99
Kowa 63
RSPB & Viking 35+23 = 58

Leupold 126
Nikon 814
Zeiss 545
Pentax 162
Opticron 171
Vortex 210
Minox 158
Swift 153


So the word "Meopta" seems to be mentioned more frequently than "kowa" and "RSPB + Viking" ...so I think there is an interest for that brand too :)


Anders
 
Frank, here is an update,

Search for ”manufacturer name” in the threads gave following number of hits:

Meopta 769 & Cabelas+euro 74
Hawke 712
Kowa 699
RSPB & Viking 399 + 265 = 664

Zen ray BF didn’t show results when searching on ”zen ray”

Leupold 1000
Nikon 1000
Zeiss 1000
Pentax 1000
Opticron 1000
Vortex 1000
Minox 1000
Swift 1000

It seems BF has set the upper limit to 1000.

Search for ”manufacturer name” in the titles gave following number of hits:

Meopta 64 & Cabelas+euro 8
Hawke 99
Kowa 63
RSPB & Viking 35+23 = 58

Leupold 126
Nikon 814
Zeiss 545
Pentax 162
Opticron 171
Vortex 210
Minox 158
Swift 153


Anders
 
There are several reasons I became interested in Meopta products, among them optical excellence, robust build and quality, and the fact that Meopta makes all their own products in house, or at least all of their components are made by themselves in house. The Meopro may have some assembly done in their plant in NY, I'm not certain. Anyhow, it is no secret that Meopta used to make some components for the Zeiss spotting scopes, and some of the earlier Zeiss 85 spotters had a "made in Czech Republic" label on the box, hinting that Meopta may have even made the whole spotter for Zeiss at some point. They also made the glass for the Zeiss Conquest rifle scopes. I guess the moral to the story is that even Zeiss, always mentioned as an alpha make, recognizes that Meopta makes world class products by having them make components for Zeiss themselves. I find that interesting.
 
Absolute nonsense.... you really think that? Forums are created when there is sufficient demand and that often means a reasonable number of previous threads to move into amd populate a new forum.
We'll look into it.

Hi Andy,

I wasn't too serious - yet, good to hear that there is definitely no such sponsoring system. Thanks for clarification, and, yes, I also think that Meopta/Cabela has deserved its own sub-forum.

Cheers,
Holger
 
You should focus your editorial wrath on all those posters who don't know the difference between "it's" and "its" :D
"editorial wrath"? Something I've yet to experience, sir; sounds like potential fallout from a request to separate all the "what do I buy" threads on this forum into a separate sub-forum |=)|
Anyways, as I see it, the choice was between my naughty post and one from Brock posting a link to a "Whet, Whet, Whet" video on Youtube; my conscience is clear.

Another suggestion slightly off topic (and not too serious) is that Holger gets invoiced every his time his book is mentioned on Birdforum. Boom, boom 8-P

Happy day after boxing day B :)
 
There are several reasons I became interested in Meopta products, among them optical excellence, robust build and quality, and the fact that Meopta makes all their own products in house, or at least all of their components are made by themselves in house. The Meopro may have some assembly done in their plant in NY, I'm not certain. Anyhow, it is no secret that Meopta used to make some components for the Zeiss spotting scopes, and some of the earlier Zeiss 85 spotters had a "made in Czech Republic" label on the box, hinting that Meopta may have even made the whole spotter for Zeiss at some point. They also made the glass for the Zeiss Conquest rifle scopes. I guess the moral to the story is that even Zeiss, always mentioned as an alpha make, recognizes that Meopta makes world class products by having them make components for Zeiss themselves. I find that interesting.

The earlier Zeiss spotters were pretty notorious regarding sample variation. At that time I wondered if Zeiss does pay enough for Meopta or if at Meopta they simply had some serious issues with quality controll.
 
yellow v. warmer?

:-C
The yellow hue (which to a certain degree impacts the contrast and brightness) is the only thing I don't like about the older Meostar 8x32.
I am planning/was planning to swap for the Meopta badged Meostar HD when it is released. I wish someone could have both versions side by side for a review.
The new version must have considerably better colour representation if it's going to be worth upgrading.

//L

locksharp65,
You and FrankD and Brocknroller mention improved yellow control in the newer Meoptas. I don't have both the older and newer Meoptas to compare, but did see something in the newer version. And I'm guessing there is a difference between "yellow" and "warm"?

When I got my bins two weeks ago, looking north at a field of straw, a blue sky, and snow on the ground, the view appeared "warmer" than with the neutral Zeiss HT (and a couple of other bins). I didn't see much difference in contrast and brightness between the Meopta and the HT, until sunset when HT does best.

Repeated comparing this morning and looking north, the sky looked bluer with the HT, no difference when looking at snow in the shade, or sun, and the straw seemed warmer with the Meopta. The difference was slight enough that different eyes and tubes started giving me different results... I'm trying too hard to be a BF "tester" and just getting confused! :h?:

So asked my wife to do the same comparison (however she doesn't see faults, lucky for me ) and the correct results are:
- only difference is the straw in the morning sun looks warmer with the Meopta.
 
Last edited:
The earlier Zeiss spotters were pretty notorious regarding sample variation. At that time I wondered if Zeiss does pay enough for Meopta or if at Meopta they simply had some serious issues with quality controll.

The newest Zeiss spotters have a lot of sample variation too. I've seen several side by side with my 884.
 
locksharp65,
You and FrankD and Brocknroller mention improved yellow control in the newer Meoptas. I don't have both the older and newer Meoptas to compare, but did see something in the newer version. And I'm guessing there is a difference between "yellow" and "warm"?

When I got my bins two weeks ago, looking north at a field of straw, a blue sky, and snow on the ground, the view appeared "warmer" than with the neutral Zeiss HT (and a couple of other bins). I didn't see much difference in contrast and brightness between the Meopta and the HT, until sunset when HT does best.

Repeated comparing this morning and looking north, the sky looked bluer with the HT, no difference when looking at snow in the shade, or sun, and the straw seemed warmer with the Meopta. The difference was slight enough that different eyes and tubes started giving me different results... I'm trying too hard to be a BF "tester" and just getting confused! :h?:

So asked my wife to do the same comparison (however she doesn't see faults, lucky for me ) and the correct results are:
- only difference is the straw in the morning sun looks warmer with the Meopta.

CC,

The only Meopta product I have tried is the Cabelas 10x42 Euro HD. In that sample of that binocular the yellow bias that was evident in the non-HD Meostar was much improved. It still had a slight warm bias but not near the yellow bias that the non-HD Meostar 42 mm models displayed in the past.

I have not tried the new 8x32 Cabelas Euro HD or any of the, reportedly, new Meostar HDs.
 
locksharp65,
You and FrankD and Brocknroller mention improved yellow control in the newer Meoptas. I don't have both the older and newer Meoptas to compare, but did see something in the newer version. And I'm guessing there is a difference between "yellow" and "warm"?

When I got my bins two weeks ago, looking north at a field of straw, a blue sky, and snow on the ground, the view appeared "warmer" than with the neutral Zeiss HT (and a couple of other bins). I didn't see much difference in contrast and brightness between the Meopta and the HT, until sunset when HT does best.

Repeated comparing this morning and looking north, the sky looked bluer with the HT, no difference when looking at snow in the shade, or sun, and the straw seemed warmer with the Meopta. The difference was slight enough that different eyes and tubes started giving me different results... I'm trying too hard to be a BF "tester" and just getting confused! :h?:

So asked my wife to do the same comparison (however she doesn't see faults, lucky for me ) and the correct results are:
- only difference is the straw in the morning sun looks warmer with the Meopta.

The Meostar 8x32 has a similar yellow hue as the older Conquests or 10x40 B/GA T*. The Meopro 6.5x32 has a considerably more neutral colour, actually close to perfectly neutral.
Other reports claim that the 10x42 HD and the Cabela's Euro HD have a very good colour representation compared to the older version.

It is no secret that they don't have dielectric mirror coatings so a slight warm colour is expected and probably difficult to completely get rid of.

There is a difference between "warm" and "yellow" in this case. "Warm" is less specific than "yellow" since "warm" also would include reddish and orangey hues like many of Nikon's and Leica's models.
If there must be a bias, I much prefer that very slight red over yellow or bluish ones.

//L
 
I would agree with that last comment in particular. It is one of the reasons I enjoy the Sightron's optical performance.
 
Thank you FrankD and looksharp65.

That explains and defines a lot. Slowly picking up the language and variables... interesting.

The Meopta/Cabela is perfect for me.
 
Last edited:
I'd really like to know where they are made now. Did you notice any "Made in ..." infos, preferably at the tripod foot or at the box?

No I haven't, but I'll pay more attention when we all get these scopes together again. It may be a couple of months though.

I think you guys have hit the nail on the head. Owning both the 10x42HD and 8x32HD, I'd call it "warm" and most definitely not "yellow" by any stretch. Very contrasty and the colors "pop" out at you. All of this, obviously, IMHO.
 
Last edited:
One of the Seven Great Mysteries of the modern world: why does the Bf. bins subforum list begin Leica, Nikon, Swarovski, Zeiss? If the original idea was to first have "the alphas" in alphabetical order and then proceed in some way may I (with my venerable 2 yrs of seniority here) suggest that today this is a bit "elitist" and could be reconsidered?
 
One of the Seven Great Mysteries of the modern world: why does the Bf. bins subforum list begin Leica, Nikon, Swarovski, Zeiss? If the original idea was to first have "the alphas" in alphabetical order and then proceed in some way may I (with my venerable 2 yrs of seniority here) suggest that today this is a bit "elitist" and could be reconsidered?

Pomp:

It is simple, just look at the number of threads and posts of the 4 top subforums, they are Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski and Leica.

They are the leaders and Nikon is the leader with the most threads
and the most posts, and that does mean something.
Nikon sells a lot of binoculars, all the way from entry level to
the very best.

Birders like to enjoy the hobby, and that means they like to discuss
the best tools to use.

The forum members that post here, are active users, and they
vote as anyone else can.

I think it is just like a horserace, Nikon is leading with Zeiss in 2nd place, with a small edg over Swarovski that is in 3rd.
Zeiss has had some strength recently with some new products, and Leica is lagging a bit at the rail. ;)

Jerry
 
Jerry, thanks, now I see. So obvious, stupid of me, don't know how I missed that, or maybe I did see it at some time and then didn't. But still, those four there in alphab. order seems to be historical. Maybe if another make zooms up there'll be some rethinking.
 
... Slowly picking up the language and variables... interesting ...
Cc, also a bit dicey, and subjective, varying among different people and even with one person acc. to his/her experience. If you'll excuse the personal stuff, I get disappointed /upset /whatever when upon comparison some bin is clearly even a bit inferior to another in some way, and when the "golden" coloration in one of my bins was shown up thus I thought of the word "muddy". Since then haven't been positively pleased by that "tuning". The difference Ls65 explains above is significant to me. That "reddish" palette is alright by me now, but early on it was a bit disturbing, and I called the "vivid" newer Leica tuning "Bollywood". To me, till now, Nikon tuning is best, and it's somehow "cooler" than Leica (unable to explain further), though Ls65 mentions them together.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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