• 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.

MHG - Beginning or end (1 Viewer)

Yes, it is very disappointing the UVid 8x32 has such short ER. I always wanted the little 8x32, but not enough ER for me unfortunately (I wear glasses).

Well, that's the price you pay for the small, compact size. Relatively short focal lengths of the objectives require a short focal length of the eyepieces. And that means short eye relief, unless you put in a lot more glass - which would make the binoculars bigger and heavier again.

Hermann
 
Well, that's the price you pay for the small, compact size. Relatively short focal lengths of the objectives require a short focal length of the eyepieces. And that means short eye relief, unless you put in a lot more glass - which would make the binoculars bigger and heavier again.

Hermann

Yes I am aware of this, but I do wonder how Zeiss has 2mm more ER in their 8x32 FL. The little FL is the same height as the Ultravid. Also, FL 10x32 has 16mm ER...not bad.

Another thing I wonder is how Zeiss FL 8x32 controls CA so well since CA is supposedly more prevalent in bins with short focal length (?).
 
Last edited:
Yes I am aware of this, but I do wonder how Zeiss has 2mm more ER in their 8x32 FL. The little FL is the same height as the Ultravid. Also, FL 10x32 has 16mm ER...not bad.

Another thing I wonder is how Zeiss FL 8x32 controls CA so well...

Yes, the little FL bins are miraculous in those respects. If Zeiss could reduce off-axis astigmatism (even at the cost of field flatness) in an updated 8x32 FL without making it any larger, I'd get it and never look at another x32 (such as the 8x32 Ultravid HD) longingly again.

--AP
 
Hi Tim

Just for info Hawke supply 4 individual rubber lens caps with their Endurance and Sapphire compacts.

I do think it is poor of these premium brands to neglect this. Some Zeiss, Leica? don't even supply a case (in some cases) if I understand it correctly.

I have an RSPB 8x20 HD and it has a nice compact leather case with a slightly reinforced bottom so goes some way to protection of the objectives in transit.

My Pentax 8x20 DCF ED has a leather case but a flexible bottom which I only partially trust.

I actually use some of the caps from my Hawke Endurance 10x25 to help protect these other bins as they fit perfectly to all three. In fact Hawke recently exchanged my 10x25 and I was glad to get a few more of the caps as a result. If I ever need more I will contact them.

Basically I totally agree with you on this topic. It is simply poor that this is neglected by these superior brands.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it was a deal breaker. As was said earlier there's a perfectly legitimate philosophy for not including extra paraphernalia in the compact class. You either buy into it or not. Similarly, I'm extremely unlikely to use whatever bag comes with a bin no matter what. I have accumulated some very useful Lowe Pro pockets and can easily get MOLLE (MOdular Light-weight Load -carrying Equipment) compliant pouches for my 5.11 2 Banger bag if needs be for compacts. Bubble wrap is an excellent, cheap and replacable impact cushion. Also a few sachets of dessicant thrown in for good measure.

Perhaps get to try some Hawke bins. They suit me very well such as my Sapphire 8x43 ED but then I don't wear specs so I am fortunate not to be limited by this issue. I don't really know how anyone can enjoy a binocular while wearing glasses but then I suppose if needs must then it's different. I certainly don't like the sound of potentially damaging expensive eyewear.

Yes, Hawke seem very well respected and plenty of bang for buck. Some of their models have excellent ER I believe. I'm afraid to say, 'Needs must when the devil drives' on this one. The devil has the car keys on this occasion. Yeah, eyes permitting, I would look to avoid having to switch to new glasses for a good few years yet. New, flatter fronted frames however might 'buy' me 2-3 mm in ER. That's about £250 per mm ! Binocular I expect to last at least a decade of use and being jostled around in my EDC. Where's the balance of economies in that equation? I'm too tired to think it through right now.

BTW My Pentax was an ebay bin I bought for £19. It was out of colimation, basically seemingly thrown together by whoever assembled it. I dismantled, collimated and reassembled and now I have to say it's kind of one of my favourite bins because it seems to have the colour/contrast recipe very nicely implemented. It's perhaps very slightly on the warm side but I like that as opposed to the RSPB which veers to the cooler side. My other Pentax is the famous Papilio 6.5x21 but this is on the cooler side also.

Working on something is a tremendous way to bomd with it I find. The critical fractions involved in a re-colimation must be nerve wracking. I'll have to see it done on Youtube.

Getting a bin where you enjoy it's white balance is very nice as I'm sure you will know well from photography. I would try and pay attention to this some also but I'm sure you will know what you like when you see it..

Yes, it is. Less so in an age of auto wb which in theory is all set against the tried and trusted 18% grey card. Nothing can top that and was part of my wider kit as a technician. Caste is different though. On a bin it is what it is. No B&W filter threads for Cokin system rigs etc. I personally favour the sort of National Geographic rich saturation which comes from deliberate under/over exposure on E6/c41. Nowadays it can be graded and histograms biased in a post production suite.

On a bin I would be inclined to believe that this saturation comes at the opportunity cost of some brightness. One of the limitations of this bin I have is that it's dawn and dusk performance is pretty impressive at the expense of saturation and, to some extent, contrast. Deep blacks therefore look grey and detail is clipped out at the top end.

No getting round the laws of physics right? Colour rendition and how it pleases the eye is as personal as smell or touch. A manufacturer must have to make a judgement call on it's coatings and how this will impinge on the final image.

Real? There is, imho, 'real' once you put the acetate in the first bath of dev as you can pull or push the timings to suit. The decisions are creative from the second you hit the shutter button. Same with the second it comes down the firewire cable etc.
Real, in the moment, with a binocular is as real as it gets. Chose your coatings accordingly right?

Tm
 
Hermann, GG and Alexis.

I'm inclined to think Leica have dropped the ball with such a short ER on their 8x32 UV+ in relation to some of other makers who seem to have got it figured at that price point Zeiss/Swaro etc. or, in some cases, much lower.
I know the UV+ is only a relative tweak rather than a new chassis design and that chassis appears to have been around for quite a while now. It's like their trying to squueze absolutely every drop of performance they can out of that chassic before moving on. Fair play.

You don't turn a huge 'ship' like Leica around on a sixpence and their reputation perhaps permits them to sit a little behind the curve and be a little more contemplative about their design priorities. But the same could be said of the other prestige marques. (I may be coming across all anti Leica but in fact I love their classic and timeless designs as I've said elsewhere)
As I see it (no doubt wrongly) MOST people aren't buying Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski for cutting edge, zeitgeist increments. That's what Nikon apparently does so well. It appears to be more of an 'esprit de corps' thang.

ER is just another parameter that offers no interest to non glass wearers but is almost paramount to those that do wear glasses. Even then I believe we generally get more long sighted as we age so it's then about latitude past infinity, as was explained to me earlier, than ER.



Hawke offer 18mm of (nominal) ER on their 8x32 Endurance and Sapphire lines and they're not alone.
I would lay good money Leica ups that metric in the next iteration of the UV and TV lines.....but in their own good time and not because a moany old git in the UK says so eh?
The lack of x32 in the Nv and Tv lines does however seem, well, a little uncompetitive in 2017 - glass wearer or no.

The NVs offer a seemingly generous 19mm albeit on a x42. So maybe 16-17mm on their next (now) tier two and three lines?
Anyone know when the 2017 brochures and catalogues are due for release across the makers as pdfs?

All the best

Tm
 
I dismiss the idea that binocular magnification is about resolving power.
In theory, it's correct. But when I tested the ultra-sharp 10x32 FL against the equally sharp 8x30 E II, it was impossible to find any far and small detail the FL delivered that the E II didn't. Differences were non-existent.

I did not mount them on tripods, since that's not how binoculars are used, but I was sitting down with my elbows resting on a shelf, overlooking the Getterön nature reserve, stretching 2,5 kilometers from the observation point. That's the heureka moment when I gave up carrying two binoculars.



//L


Some very good points. Yes, I've misused 'resolving power'. Wrong context. (Slaps own wrist). I more correctly meant, 'Do you miss the additional magnification power of the 7x over the 8x?'


Meopro? But no 7xs.

The Meostars look very robust, almost military, which appears to be their raison d'etre.
I get that.
Jesse Ventura in Predator probably would have Meostars |8)|

Thanks LS for all of that.
Tm
 
Assembled in wherever may well be a more accurate description but these companies look at what the law allows (thats not just European but also USA and other territories' laws) and work within it.

Conquest HD optics were designed by Zeiss and the external appearance by KISKA. From info posted on here it appears kits of parts are sent to Germany where they are assembled, collimated and quality controlled.

According to information from a reliable optical engineer and repairer in Europe the latest Trinovids are also made from parts made in Japan. Probably this means they are assembled in Portugal from kits too. I expect that Leica designed the optics.

Lee

Amen to 'assembled'.

Talking of disparities between Europe and UK why the seemingly weakened guarantees in Europe? Are we notoriously cack-handed over this side of the pond or something?
It could be a sort of market culture thing where a product just won't get a look in over in The 'States if it's not backed by a rock solid warranty. Who knows eh?


Production chains appear to be a deep rabbit hole that's bordering on unfathomable. Best let the eyes and hands be the judge or that way madness beckons. Interesting though. I appreciate the input.

Tm
 
This is all to easy for you Tim. Time to get down the shops in your wheelchair 8-P

For that compact Swaro (no lens caps) decision anticlimax, yawn. Actually I'd probably like one myself if it would be good enough to replace my beloved Viking Vistron 8x25, no longer produced but replaced by the Vistron Pro 8x32 (11cm long) which I would consider myself in future. You see my 8x20's are great for pockety type use but the Vistron 8x25 (non foldable single hinge and large full size focus wheel) delivers the most compactness while approaching full size bin view and performance that I have yet encountered but I suspect the Swaro may be at least the equal but really I'd want it to be clearly better. FYI Vixen still make the 8x25 equivalent of the Vistron but you are unlikely to find it locally I would think.

I always like to have a little guess ;) and am perfectly fine about getting it wrong.

£250/mm on eyeglasses. Bloomin eck. Hallelujah I can see !!!



Oh, here's a crazy site if you are not already aware of it. Amazing graphs of some pricing trends on each model.
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-Binoculars


I also have a £30 Carson Scout 8x22 reverse porro and I am not ashamed to say that on a summers day this is a great ultra light compact to have along. The top end aren't the be (beginning) and end of all.
 
Last edited:
Amen to 'assembled'.

Talking of disparities between Europe and UK why the seemingly weakened guarantees in Europe? Are we notoriously cack-handed over this side of the pond or something?

Tm

Here is how it has been explained to me. The EU in its wisdom requires that warranties be supported by spare parts made to the same specification as the parts originally used for manufacturing the product. This sounds fine but it has had an unintended consequence and that is that the manufacturers can't use improved components and have to keep a stock of components that are no longer used for production. In binocular terms this means keeping stocks of lenses and prisms for example with outdate coatings or profiles. So in Europe manufacturers are not inclined to sink cash into piles of components that can only be used if a warranty claim requires it. Hence we get 10 years while other territories get 30 years or lifetimes.

Lee
 
On a bin I would be inclined to believe that this saturation comes at the opportunity cost of some brightness. One of the limitations of this bin I have is that it's dawn and dusk performance is pretty impressive at the expense of saturation and, to some extent, contrast. Deep blacks therefore look grey and detail is clipped out at the top end.

No getting round the laws of physics right? Colour rendition and how it pleases the eye is as personal as smell or touch. A manufacturer must have to make a judgement call on it's coatings and how this will impinge on the final image.

I figure you might make use of two threads I started in 2012:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=233869
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=234596

My guesstimation is that the binocular whose name you avoid mentioning is a Zeiss FL. Right or wrong?

//L
 
Last edited:
Tm,

I agree.

I don't think that it will be possible to tell whether Leica's Portuguese made binoculars have better quality control than their German made ones have based on the complaints that we receive about Leica's reputation for antsy and snotty service here on Bird Forum.

I had no problems with Leica service when I purchased new screw on replacement fold down rubber eye cups for my long discontinued Leitz 7x42 Trinovid BA. They did advise me that they were running out of parts for these binoculars and that future repairs, if needed, would be questionable. They also had a computer record of the other Leica binoculars I owned which I had registered with Leica when I purchased them.

Bob

Interesting. That's what I call back up.

Tm
 
'Our survey says.......'

This is all to easy for you Tim. Time to get down the shops in your wheelchair 8-P

But for I could Clive, but for I could. Soon (ish)
Walking stick - just for stability.

For that compact Swaro (no lens caps) decision anticlimax, yawn.

Sorry to disappoint. Fwiw irrespective of ones take on the matter, to not even offer them as an accessory strikes me as a bit silly.

The Swaro Field Pro strap mountings also strike me as a bit meh too. I could well be wrong but they stick out like boils on the sides of those sleek tubes. Are you then committed to using Field Pro compliant straps in perpetuity also?
If so;

'Our survey says- ehhh uhhhh'

(I sem a bit anti-Swarovski at the moment. I'll no doubt play a different tune once I've seen them in person)

£250/mm on eyeglasses. Bloomin eck. Hallelujah I can see !!!

Quite


Oh, here's a crazy site if you are not already aware of it. Amazing graphs of some pricing trends on each model.
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-Binoculars

I could get lost in that for days. Thank you. Love data sets. Really need to get out more. Oh wait a minute.....


I also have a £30 Carson Scout 8x22 reverse porro and I am not ashamed to say that on a summers day this is a great ultra light compact to have along. The top end aren't the be (beginning) and end of all.

Not at all. I really don't want £2k of nickable kit on my person if I can possibly avoid it. I see gaffer tape being judiciously deployed as needs be.

My new EDC bag has turned up today and the mid-sized unnamed bins slip in with plenty of space to spare for the rest of my bits and bobs. Looks like I'm therefore inclined to gravitate towards a mid or a compact full size.

I'll still run the tests on any compacts that fall into my paws just in case.

I've already found that buying cheap(ish) will no doubt lead to buying twice in this game. I remain open to the possibility of spending more money if only to avoid it becoming er......thrice?

All the best Clive

Tm
 
Here is how it has been explained to me. The EU in its wisdom requires that warranties be supported by spare parts made to the same specification as the parts originally used for manufacturing the product. This sounds fine but it has had an unintended consequence and that is that the manufacturers can't use improved components and have to keep a stock of components that are no longer used for production. In binocular terms this means keeping stocks of lenses and prisms for example with outdate coatings or profiles. So in Europe manufacturers are not inclined to sink cash into piles of components that can only be used if a warranty claim requires it. Hence we get 10 years while other territories get 30 years or lifetimes.

Lee

Brilliant !Even if it's not true it's brilliant (not that I doubt it for a second).

Does this mean though that buyers in the USA, where European products appear to offer longer warranties for the same given product,are getting modified parts for their old bins with the upside of better tech but at the expense of, for want of a better term, authenticity?

EU legislation eh? Let's not even touch that subject.

Tm
 

Interesting. I can do lux and K(kelvin) but arcseconds were a stretch. Very in depth, analytical and wide ranging points.

I certainly won't be messing around with filters but I take your point about Zeiss seeming brighter and therefore a little washed out, as an argument, whilst you see Nikon as being more 'boosted'. I shall have to see if I agree in time.

Thanks for drawing me to the threads.

All the best

Tm
 
Yes, good luck Tim with your choice and future mobility improvement.

It will be interesting to see what finally gets your approval and why (and maybe even a reveal of your scorned secret bin 8-P).
I imagine there will be several bins that get you thinking when the time comes but for some reason or other there will be a winner or possibly several.

If it makes you go WOW HOLY ETC :-O when you take in the view this is a good sign but try and mentally picture how it will look for where or what and when you will be viewing. I only really get to know my bins once I've taken them on some of the routes that I have known for a long time and have previously viewed with quite a few other bins (it's all relative). I don't think a shop viewing can ever really do this but it's better than nothing and if it's nice to handle then that is another important aspect. It's actually amazing how much there actually is to a relatively simple thing like a binocular.

Of course keep asking here if you have any more queries. You will be much better prepared when you finally get to the checkout panic, overexcitment stimulation, danger zone :-O
 
Last edited:
Brilliant !Even if it's not true it's brilliant (not that I doubt it for a second).

Does this mean though that buyers in the USA, where European products appear to offer longer warranties for the same given product,are getting modified parts for their old bins with the upside of better tech but at the expense of, for want of a better term, authenticity?


Tm

Folks in the States have reported on here about their bins being returned from repair having had lenses with the latest coatings fitted, so the answer is, yes.

Lee
 
Folks in the States have reported on here about their bins being returned from repair having had lenses with the latest coatings fitted, so the answer is, yes.

Lee


That happened with Swarovski as I recall with its legendary 7 and 8x30 SLCs and I'm not sure if all of them were done under warranty. I don't recall anything like that with the other big three firms and personally I wouldn't count on it happening with any one of them on a regular basis.

I wonder what the percentage of warranty repairs involving optics is as opposed to those with non-optical and/or mechanical problems?

Bob
 
Last edited:
That happened with Swarovski as I recall with its legendary 7 and 8x30 SLCs and I'm not sure if all of them were done under warranty. I don't recall anything like that with the other big three firms and personally I wouldn't count on it happening with any one of them on a regular basis.

I wonder what the percentage of warranty repairs involving optics is as opposed to those with non-optical and/or mechanical problems?

Bob

Good question Bob. And I wonder what the percentage of recent models actually get repaired at all rather than simply get replaced?

Lee
 
Good question Bob. And I wonder what the percentage of recent models actually get repaired at all rather than simply get replaced?

Lee

I suppose that if there are enough new models left in stock it might be more cost effective to replace one rather than have technicians drop what they are doing and repair the problem.

After they get enough of them to sit down and fix them all they end up on the big internet outlet at discount prices with doubtful warrantys.

Bbo
 
First look

Dear All,

Just to say that by sheer chance I found myself with 30 minutes to look at some binoculars in London today. Long story.

Anyway, here's the long and the short of it.

No Monarch HG's at all available. Awaiting stock.

Briefly examined and looked through the following;

Swarovski CL- P 10x25 green
Swarovski CL Companion 10x30 Sandstone/Traveller
Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42 ...er, black !

Impressions (because with simply mere minutes to look at that's all it can be. Just looking out shop window - hardly the most challenging, contrasty or indeed interesting view)

Swaro Cl-P's - Beautifully constructed and balanced little binocular. Perfect movement in the focus dial and fast and silky smooth action. No play.Enough ER for me. Nice pliable eye cups and stepless action on ER adjustment. Just the merest hint of loss of sharpness towards the edge and no discernible CA inside that. Very bright. Diopter adjustment not tested.

Swaro CL Companion - Similarly well constructed and even better balance and ergonomics. Tougher focussing than I expected and a distinct flat spot in both directions. Some sloppy play. Enough ER again. Again, silky smooth stepless eye relief action and yielding eye cup rubber.No real detectable loss of sharpness across the entire field or if so as to be so fractional as not to bother me one bit. No CA but as with all of them, hardly a challenging situation. Also very bright. Diopter adjustment not tested.

Zeiss Conquest HD - Reassuringly solid almost brutal and angular casings. Simple and purposeful aesthetic. 'Stealth Bomber' came to mind. Best focussing of all three. Precise, smooth, positive and seamless. ER felt a little more generous and more than sufficient. Slightly tougher and thicker eye cups but still of good quality and not at all unacceptable. Stepped (3?) ER stages which felt positive and robust. Not thenleast bit plasticy.Couldn't tell and instant difference in overall image sharpness or CA but if anything seemed even brighter. Can't remember how close to the edge field abberations were, sorry. Diopter adjustment not tested.

Take this as you will. Hardly a 'group test' eh? Hardly authorative either. Just some random thoughts on seemingly random sets. I wasn't there at a good time and I wasn't about to ask to get all the toys out. I had to be elsewhere and they were approaching their busy period.

Leica NV and UV HD+ were available but boxed. Another time. With more time I would have tested Nikon Monarch 7s too as well as Opticron which I was pleased to see available. For me this is a marathon not a sprint.

Thoughts; I wasn't wickedly impressed with the optics of any of them but marginally impressed with all of them, if that makes any sense. The build quality and finish of all of them I WAS impressed with. The noticable exception being the CL's focus. Maybe it was just a well thumbed demonstrator and not representative.

Frankly, as much as they were all different sizes it was clear to see that they also had distinctive design characteristics and one will be attracted to some of these and not others depending on taste. It's as much about that as optics I daresay beyond a certain point.

It's a little like golf clubs. I'm a Ping man, not good enough for Mizuno's or Titleist blades and just have never got on with Callaways or TaylorMade. Ping are maybe a bit 'boring' to my low handicap friends but they're great for me.....or they will be should my injuries ever permit me to loft them in anger again.

All sterling equipment. Just not 'right' for me.

One thing I DO know is that a 10x isn't for me just now. That's probably 45% of the available bins. crossed off with one swoosh of the pen. Pretty good afternoons' work.

My journey has begun in earnest.

All the best

Tm
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 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