• 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.

New (2016) Vortex Diamondback 8x42 (1 Viewer)

mfunnell

Registered Confuser
I've been using a set of the new (2016 model) Vortex Diamondback 8x42 binoculars for a few weeks now. In the early part of this I also had access to the old model and so am in a position to make a few comparisons with that one as well.

I've found the new Diamondback 8x42s to be decent enough - rather more so than the old model, which gave me the impression of being a rather tired design in fairly urgent need of an upgrade. But that is with one huge caveat, which is that the focus wheel on my new one is a mess - it's sloppy, floppy, nearly falling off and has to be carefully positioned to be able to focus at all. That happened after about a week and a half of pretty light usage. I can only assume this is an individual fault in my pair, and will not draw any inference that this is a general problem with this model of binocular. I'll be returning mine under warranty. That also means that I'll refrain from most commentary about focusing in my descriptions below. Even my impressions before the problem became apparent can't be trusted - with the obvious problems of my unit even those initial impressions may have been compromised by this now-obvious fault.

With that out of the way, my initial impressions and comparisons of the 2016 model of the Diamondback 8x42s were fairly favourable. They are quite slim and light-weight for the format in general and in comparison to the Vortex model they supersede. They are very comfortable in the hand and the low weight makes them comfortable to hold for long periods. The eye-cup design is a huge improvement on the old model, which I found quite cheap-and-nasty in 'feel' and lacking in positive adjustment. In practical terms the old ones seemed functional but precarious in adjustment, and not particularly comfortable used with or without glasses. The eye-cups on the new ones are positive in adjustment and comfortable to use. I would guess the eye relief of 18mm might be somewhat longer than maximum eye-cup extension for some users - they're right on the borderline for me, but OK in actual use.

The view through the 2016 8x42 Diamondbacks is bright, decently wide and reasonably sharp, with quite decent colour and contrast. The new model is most obviously an improvement on it's prececessor in colour and contrast, especially in dull or low light, where the old model seems to offer especially dull and "muddy" colours.

The sweet spot on the new model seems fairly large (perhaps 75% or so of the field of view), with the drop-off towards the edges seeming to be mostly field curvature (in that edge sharpness can mostly be cleared up through adjusting focus). I think the sweet spot on the 2016 model is larger in absolute terms than the older model, as well as occupying a larger portion of the narrower field of view. (The old model had a wider field of view, but far less of it in the sweet spot.) I wouldn't call either model particularly sharp in the sweet spot, though, more 'adequately' sharp. I think some of this impression may be due to fairly high levels of CA...

Which leads to: the primary optical fault of the 2016 8x42 Diamondbacks is, to my mind, chromatic aberration. In my estimation they are reasonably poor in this regard - though not truly dreadful, which is more-or-less how I'd rate their prececessor. Perhaps this is coloured (if you'll excuse the expression) by my viewing of a lot of sulphur-crested cockatoos of late - a bright white cockatoo is likely to really emphasise colour fringing, especially when viewed in bright light. These cockatoos really are an almost pure white over their wings and body - but not through these bins, which show yellow/green "fringing" in the sunwards direction that appears to extend across much of the birds' wings and bodies, as well as purple fringing on the other side. The 2016 8x42 Diamondbacks seem considerably worse for CA than my other bins, including some (eg. Opticron Discovery 10x50s) which I've not rated highly in this regard. This is also quite apparent when comparing different models against my favourite "torture-test" fixed target for assessing CA. Nonetheless, they are a considerable improvement over the old, superseded, 8x42 Diamondbacks which render a flock of white cockatoos as a riot of cascading colours, none of them seeming very white at all, and were an abysmal failure when I torture-tested them.

The 2016 model of 8x42 Diamondback does give the impression of being quite a bit brighter than the older model, as well as offering better colour and contrast. This is especially apparent in low light. My perhaps uneducated guess as to why this is would be the use of a dielectric rather than silver (or aluminium?) mirror coating on the earlier model and maybe something better by way of glass and coatings used in their construction.

Overall, these 2016 model 8x42 Vortex Diamondbacks seem a comfortable and useful set of binoculars for those not overly fussed by CA. Nonetheless, I'll be returning mine under warranty (for the broken focus mechanism noted above) and asking for a credit or refund, rather than a replacement. That's because my abiding impression of them is that they're decent enough but not, to my mind, especially good at anything in comparison to my other bins at around the same price. In particular, my Sightron 8x32 SII Blue Skys seem superior, to me, in every way except total light gathering in low light (where the larger objectives of the 8x42 format probably make up for what I see as inferior optics). I'd rather have a second pair of those or, more likely, put the money towards trying something different. I'll admit to a bit of disappointment in this: I'd read things suggesting the old model were pretty good value for money (having tried them, they weren't - to my mind) so expected better from the new model. While they are better than the old model, to me they don't seem good enough. In that way, the faulty focus mechanism on mine is probably a bit of a saviour - I'll be able to re-purpose at least some of the funds rather than writing this purchase off as "disappointing but stuck with 'em".

...Mike
 
Do you think that the binocular's faulty focus wheel and the inability to precisely focus it could have contributed to the excessive color fringing you saw while using it?

Bob
 
Do you think that the binocular's faulty focus wheel and the inability to precisely focus it could have contributed to the excessive color fringing you saw while using it?

Bob
I don't think so. While focusing them is a bit of a pain, and takes more messing around than it should, I can get them to focus precisely. Of course, if there's one fault in my particular example then there may be others - my unit is obviously not the best Vortex can do in terms of assembly. But my impression before the focus mechanism went bad is pretty much the same as afterwards.

They are quite nice binoculars, especially physically, if you can live with the CA (and get a good focus mechanism). I just think there are better bins at around the same price.

...Mike
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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