• 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.

Stalking the Elusive Alpha (1 Viewer)

Today’s Alphas are tomorrow’s...???
Seems to be mostly a marketing term.. to help cope with market saturation?

PEter

It could appear that way but I have never seen any of the 'alphas' use the term 'alpha' in any way at all.

Lee
 
It could appear that way but I have never seen any of the 'alphas' use the term 'alpha' in any way at all.

Lee

That's a good point. It doesn't really mean anything, or at least it's mostly fuzzy boundaries, approximating 'very good and probably very expensive'. Who invented the term 'alpha' in relation to binos? Was it someone on BF? C'mon, 'fess up!
 
That's a good point. It doesn't really mean anything, or at least it's mostly fuzzy boundaries, approximating 'very good and probably very expensive'. Who invented the term 'alpha' in relation to binos? Was it someone on BF? C'mon, 'fess up!

This might be the first "alpha binocular" post on BF by caesar back in 2007:

"I think the Nikon 8 x 32 LX L can still be found for under $900.00. I have one. They're tough! The LX L is definitely an "Alpha" binocular and belongs right up there with the big three /../"

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=989230&postcount=4
 
Last edited:
Wow! You AGREE!:t: That is the first time I have ever had anybody agree with me on Bird Forum. Their methods aren't perfect I am sure but at least they do some objective testing.

https://www.allbinos.com/2.1-article-How_do_we_test_binoculars_.html

Knock it off! I agreed with you about something else in the last few hours. It was about the time I got sick and my thinking was probably not up to par ... even for me. I have to admit, you do make some sweeping statements when they could be tempered a little more. But ... you can live ... at least this time.

Today, is pretty filled up. But, as soon as posslble I will check out the link——thank you. :cat:

Bill
 
Bill,

  1. There can be no EXACT line between Alpha and incredibly good binoculars that fall short of Alpha because that implies agreement on a set of measurable features that would allow universal agreement on how to rank order the experience of using each binocular in a collection of binoculars. If there is anything demonstrated by this thread in particular and the forum more generally, it is that while you can take many objective measures of a binocular, the subjective response to that binocular will vary from one person to the next. You have stated as much in the “Which is Better?” section of da book.
  2. Nobody is qualified to draw a line which cannot be drawn. Yet, anyone is qualified to express what their experience of a particular binocular may be. To the extent that I have had experience which confirms (or denies) the experience of someone else with a given collection of binoculars, I have some calibration of the likelihood that their opinion of a binocular is likely to correlate with what I am likely to think about that binocular.
  3. Nothing should be seen as gospel (an interesting choice of words when you seem to be striving for objective measures). And yet, even in areas which are rather subjective I've been able to figure out whose advice I value. My point is that even without universal agreement on a precise ordering, we should not be surprised that an individual might discriminate between one binocular and another and thus have a preference. Nor should we be shocked to find others whose preferences mimic our own.
I have certainly found correlations between some objective measures and my rating of a binocular. For instance, there is some correlation between binocular price and my experience of optical/mechanical quality and customer service. But I also believe that each binocular is kind of a “blue plate special.” A large number of design, manufacturing, and after market serviceability decisions are made when a binocular is brought to market at a particular price point. There are always constraints and trade offs must be made. Sometimes the package suits you better and sometimes not so much. We see this even at the highest price points where there are definite differences in how the makers approach designing and marketing their top of the line offerings.

Alan

Hi, Alan:

And if a largely universal line cannot be drawn, does the "alpha" binocular exist?

BC
 
Last edited:
Anybody looking for and wanting perfection will always be disappointed.

Whatever perfect binocular or any other object or person chosen will always be a regret, because it or they will be seen to be not perfect. Either sooner or a bit later.

I spent over an hour sitting next to and chatting with Miss World runner up on an aircraft journey.
She looked extraordinary and I asked if I could chat with her.
She said yes.

The effect she had on people when we walked through the airport and past immigration was just amazing.
I rate her as 9 out of 10.
Why?
Because 10 out of 10 doesn't exist.

Alpha binoculars only exist in the imagination of perfectionists.
 
Bill,

A large number of design, manufacturing, and after market serviceability decisions are made when a binocular is brought to market at a particular price point.

Alan

I would substitute the word "compromises" in place of the word "decisions" in the statement above.
 
Hi, John:

My original question was: where is the line drawn between "Alpha" binoculars and those VERY good binoculars that don't rate as being "Alphas"? Also, who is qualified to make that distinction? Where I personally draw the line is when the performance of the so called alpha is too close to the sub alpha that makes spending the excess money a bad idea. The only one, IMHO, who is able to make that distinction is ME, because they are going to be my binoculars. I have fallen into the trap of listening too closely to so called experts about what is best for me, and wound up regretting it (Swaro SV 8x32 and it's horrendous glare control issues).

Finally, what gives the reviewers the authority to make that distinction when many don't qualify any more than some of our BF readers——except that they have a MORE ALPHA vehicle for spreading their opinions. :cat:I guess they feel they have the authority because they actually own it. I've found that most everyone will recommend their own binoculars, especially the uber expensive ones, because they need to keep telling themselves that the money they spent was worth it. Many times it isn't, and I've done the same thing. When I'm glassing for big game with a client, they cannot believe I can find 3 times more game with my Meopta Gold Ring HD, Toric, etc than they can with their Ultravid HD's.

Bill

That was my best shot at it.
 
There is nothing wrong with Nikon's USA warranty. If you purchase a new non-gray market Nikon binocular and register it with Nikon and a problem shows up in it, simply contact Nikon by e-mail with your registration and purchase information and they will either repair it or replace it with a new one at their option.

I have had a well used 4 year old EDG replaced with a new binocular and a one month old Monarch HG replaced with a new binocular under Nikon's warranty.

I am confident that they will do the same thing with their numerous economy line binoculars.

Bob

There's a lot wrong with it. Nikon only warrants an optic to the original purchaser, unless it has recently changed. That's piss poor IMO, when commanding a premium price for a glass like the EDG, or MHG for that matter.
 
WJC appears to be asking the same question as was explored in this thread
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=265755

...There can be no EXACT line between Alpha and incredibly good binoculars that fall short of Alpha because that implies agreement on a set of measurable features that would allow universal agreement on how to rank order the experience of using each binocular in a collection of binoculars...

I'd further argue that there is no line between alpha quality and almost-as-good-as-alpha-quality because alpha refers to brand status and is only imperfectly related to model quality. The alpha brands make some bins that do not perform as well as some models from non-alpha brands.

This might be the first "alpha binocular" post on BF by caesar back in 2007:

"I think the Nikon 8 x 32 LX L can still be found for under $900.00. I have one. They're tough! The LX L is definitely an "Alpha" binocular and belongs right up there with the big three /../"

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=989230&postcount=4

No, it goes back much further. See my post #39 in this thread, which reports my research of its use on Birdforum and elsewhere.
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=235008

...I have never seen any of the 'alphas' use the term 'alpha' in any way at all..

Well, as I pointed out in an earlier thread, Mike Jensen, then of Zeiss, used the term.
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=2794595&highlight=alpha#post2794595

--AP
 
Last edited:
Hi, Alan:

And if a largely universal line cannot be drawn, does the "alpha" binocular exist?

BC

Hi Bill,

It is the universality of your line that is the problem, and in a broader context getting a precise definition of what makes a binocular an alpha binocular. Yet, I would say that the term alpha still has meaning in the sense that folks here use it to communicate a notion of what sort of performance (here I am speaking in the broad sense of the user experience) is currently available at the top of line price point from one or more respected manufacturers.

Though you or anyone else could define alpha to mean some ideal of what may or may not be possible in optical design, I don't believe that is how the term is used here commonly.

Striving for precision in scientific inquiry or engineering may be important, but trying to reduce the subjective experience of using a binocular to a series of precise definitions and specification is IMHO a fools errand. Certainly specification can be useful to a purchaser, and they may be critical to someone engineering components or managing production, but they simply do not tell the entire story of how the binocular will be in hand for a particular user. That is part of the reason that designs evolve.

Alan
 
I would substitute the word "compromises" in place of the word "decisions" in the statement above.

Compromises is fine by me. I was trying to indicate that at times there are "laws of physics" sorts of choices to be made where it is not lack of will or lack of resources that force you to compromise.
 
Makes me think about a famous quote:

"If you can't distinguish an alpha from the rest, you probably don't need one."

A. Einstein
 
It suddenly dawned on me that this recurrent obsession with alpha has nothing at all to do with binoculars. B :)
 
Last edited:
There's a lot wrong with it. Nikon only warrants an optic to the original purchaser, unless it has recently changed. That's piss poor IMO, when commanding a premium price for a glass like the EDG, or MHG for that matter.


A Warranty costs money. Everyone pays for it when they purchase binoculars.

If Nikon wants to save money on the price of these warranties by not extending them to 2nd hand purchasers it is because they made a business decision to do so.

If Swarovski, Leica and Zeiss made the numbers and varieties of binoculars that Nikon makes they wouldn't be insuring the 2nd hand buyers of their binoculars either. It is likely that the three of them together don't make and sell as many binoculars as Nikon does.
 
A Warranty costs money. Everyone pays for it when they purchase binoculars.

If Nikon wants to save money on the price of these warranties by not extending them to 2nd hand purchasers it is because they made a business decision to do so.

If Swarovski, Leica and Zeiss made the numbers and varieties of binoculars that Nikon makes they wouldn't be insuring the 2nd hand buyers of their binoculars either. It is likely that the three of them together don't make and sell as many binoculars as Nikon does.

Bob,

.....and sell as many binoculars as Nikon does.....

That would be so in volume beneath the Terra, Conquest, Trinovid and CL quality line.
I think the Monarch series, LV/HG series are in salesvolume not comparable with the sales volume of the others above and surely not the EDG serie in sales compared to HT/SF/SV/NV.

Writing this from a crashplace in the Caribs between two divesB :)B :)

Jan
 
Jan:

Enjoy the weather and everything else. But don't go watching the bikinis on the beach...
with your binoculars... o:D

Jerry
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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