Promaster Infinit Elite ELX ED 8x42 (1 Viewer)

Yes, quite a mouthful but definitely worth it when your eyes are placed up against the eyepieces.

I know this binocular has been discussed quite intensely under the "Mystery Binocular..." thread but I really feel the need to continue to draw attention to it simply because I continue to be impressed by its optical performance.

Really, it is that good.

After finally receiving my 8x32 Nikon SE this morning I have been sitting on the backporch shifting back and forth between the SE, the 7x42 Zeiss FL and the Promaster ED. Think this is an unfair comparison? Think again.

I spent alot of time last week comparing the image of the Promaster ED to the 8x32 Swarovski EL, the 8.5x42 EL and the 7x42 SLC. I came to the conclusion that the Promaster actually offered the best centerfield apparent sharpness of any of those models. Yes, you read that correctly. The image in the Promaster is exceptionally sharp. Granted both the ELs and the SLC had better edge performance. I have repeatedly compared the Promater to the FL in regards to this particular characteristic. Exceptional centerfield sharpness with a moderate level of astigmatism in the outer 1/3rd of the field of view. Because of the flatness of the image (no field curvature) the astigmatism isn't that troublesome though it does "turn your eye" towards the extremely sharp centerfield.

I have now been comparing the FL, SE and Promaster. In my opinion the centerfield apparent sharpness of the Promaster is very close, if not at the same level as the FL and SE.

I am not exaggerating in the least.

Edge performance is better in the SE and brightness is better in the FL but the Promaster really does compare very well optically to both of these models. Both the FL and SE display an extremely neutral color representation. Probably the most neutral of any binoculars I have had the privelege to look through. Only in comparison to these two models does the Promaster display an ever so slight warm color bias. To give you some perspective the Promaster looks entirely neutral in comparison to the ELs and SLCs. Flare control is also very good in the variety of conditions I have had the opportunity to place these binoculars in.

For those of you that have not been following the Mystery binocular thread the Promaster is now selling at several camera-specialty stores for $500 US and around $550 for the 10x42 model. (From my understanding Promaster only sells to these types of stores so those of you waiting for Eagle Optics or Cabelas to start carrying these may be waiting a long time.)

From an optical standpoint I do not really have anything negative to say about these bins. What I have found though is that when a person is really pleased with the optical package of a binocular then they start being really picky of the physical package...and vice versa. I guess it is just our nature to want to try for the "perfect binocular". In the case of the Promaster its physical characteristics and overall ergonomics are entirely acceptable. After intense use over the last two weeks I do not really have any "major" complaints in this regard.

On the minor side...

...the eyecups could be slightly more contoured and slightly stiffer in movement

...the focusing tension could be just a hair "tighter" as there is some play in my unit

...the diopter arrangment could be a little "classier" but is entirely adequate in its current design

The focusing speed is slow by todays standards requiring 2.5 turns to go from a close focus of 6 feet to infiniti. I have found this to actually be an asset though as it really gives me superior control in dialing in the sharpest image possible. The thumb indents on the underside of the barrel are fairly shallow but they fit my hands quite well. Placing my right thumb in the indent and allowing my left hand to wander further up the barrel, closer to the objective, produces an extremely stable platform while still allowing for perfect finger placement on the focusing knob.

All and all I am extremely satisfied with this binocular...excited even when you consider that you now can buy a Chinese manufactured binocular at the $500 price point that performs at this level.

Low light performance? Excellent
Apparent sharpness? Superb
Color representation? Very neutral
Brightness? Excellent
Handling? Very good

Its features read like a checklist.....

ED objectives....................check
Fully multicoated lenses......check
Phase coated prisms...........check
Silver coated prisms...........check
Waterproof.......................check
Nitrogen purged.................check
Close focusing...................check
Wide field of view...............check
Oil/water repellent coating...check
"No fault" warranty..............check
Average "high end" weight.....check
Good ergonomics..................check

I had the opportunity to compare the EDs against almost all of my bins last night....the Leupold Yosemite 8x30, Celestron Ultima DX 8x32, Bushnell Discoverer 7x42, Zeiss FL 7x42, Zeiss Conquest 8x30.....and really only the FLs displayed slightly better image quality. (see picture below)

I strongly encourage all of you binocular aficionados out there to give these binoculars a try. They are going to start gaining a following quickly.

only 6?
Is that the whole family portrait, aside from pocket binoculars?

Frank,

It is nice to see the ELX is continuing to maintain its good graces as you use it more and more. I'm pretty certain that I'm going to get one as well. The way it turns out, it'll be about 3 weeks before the money is all there.

I notice one difference in my impression of the image and yours. In the sample I reviewed, edge distortion almost had to be "imagined" to be there. There was a little at the very edge, but I saw a very flat, distortion free image over at least 85% of the total field. I tend to wonder if this is more indicative of sample variation in reviewers or sample variation in binoculars?

Like, you, I also could find no real need for improvement as far as the image quality and pure resolution are concerned. It is really amazing that this happened at the $500 US price level. I guess it remains to be seen how the ELX is for long term durability and build quality, and how often and how well Promaster handles warranty and customer service complaints. However for an entry into the arena with a truly "field worthy" optic, this is a hard act to follow, let alone improve upon. Makes me wonder what they could (maybe will?) do at the $1,000 US level.

There is one other binocular I REALLY want to get side by side to the Promaster ELX, and that happens to be the Leupold Gold Ring. This is a glass you and I seem to have a little differen "view" of. You seem not to be too favorably impressed. I, on the other hand, after several fairly decent in the field comparisons would take the GR over the EL if offered the choice of either one NIB. I was really looking at a GR as my "good binocular". Now the Promaster shows up. SO I guess a get one of each and put them through the paces test is in order. And I's like to do the same with a Meostar, and.........and...........

Tero said:

only 6?
Is that the whole family portrait, aside from pocket binoculars?

Click to expand...

Yes and no Tero. The three Swaros are sitting in their boxes waiting. Two are waiting for someone to buy them on Ebay and one is sold. The SE and an Audubon porro just arrived this morning and I took that pic last night. I have one pair of big honkin' 60 mm zoom porros, two compacts, the 6x30 Yosemite and the 7x35 Nikon E. Those 6 are the ones I have been playing around with the most.



Steve,

I think your suggestions are right on the money. Sample variation at this price point is to be expected. If you had a model with as superb centerfield resolution as mine and a big ol' sweet spot then you really did have a cherry unit. As I mentioned in the other thread I would not say the sweet spot on my model is small by any stretch of the imagination. I would say the center 50-65% of the image is sharp. The next 20-30% is still reasonably sharp but there is a noticeable drop off in apparent sharpness from the center. The outer 15-20% has noticeable astigmatism.

I really wish I had a solid answer for our difference in opinion on the Leupold GR. You and Lucznik were both favorably impressed with its image quality. I found it to be less sharp than I had expected from an ED/FL style glass and the brightness level didn't really impress me either. I would, without question, put the Promaster ahead of it optically. I am beginning to feel that I would put the Promaster ahead of the Razor and Meostar too but that is probably just because I have it in my hands and not the other two at the moment. Speaking of which, that 8x42 Meostar that I returned a couple of weeks ago is just sitting in the local Cabelas Bargain Cave for $600.....



Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Previously discussed on

http://birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=121162&page=3
http://birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=121831
http://birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=122052

Plus this one on biases and blind testing

http://birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=121484

to save people from trying to figure out which thread is which!

True Kevin but I thought it would be helpful to discuss it further because of its optical performance....plus it is nice to have the "Mystery binocular" actually named in the title.

hm.. so between Vortex Razor and Promaster Elite ED, which one whould you recommend? How does Promaster Elite compare to Bushnell Elite?

FrankD said:

True Kevin but I thought it would be helpful to discuss it further because of its optical performance....plus it is nice to have the "Mystery binocular" actually named in the title.

Click to expand...

Sorry, my purpose in posting those links was a little unclear.

I'm not saying the comments should go there or they've already been made (I'm all for another Promaster thread ).

I just wanted to give a quick set of pointers of the background of those bins on this thread so people who didn't follow those (disparate) threads could see peoples comments "as they unfolded" which I think are quite revealing as to how people think about this sort of bin (Devil's advocate says "A Chinese ED bin from a no-name company for $500 ... how good could they be?" of course we now know the answer ).

It started by "hijacking" the "the 8x42" thread starting on page 3 ... then a couple of other threads in chronological order.

Hope someone finds those links handy. Perhaps in 6 months time when the connections are not so obvious.

Kevin,

Thanks for the clarification. I was thinking you were going in that direction but wasn't sure if you were being rhetorical or not.

I think your comment about people's thought processes is spot on. They are probably thinking "how good can a $500 Chinese roof prism binocular be?".

In my opinion, the answer is very good. Very good.

NW,

That is a tough question. I haven't had my Razors for close to two years. I was very impressed with the Razors when they first came out and still consider them to be true competitors as they provide 99% of the performance of the Alpha bins but at about half to 2/5ths the cost. I think the Razors have the nod in terms of fit and finish as their design had many little "niceties" that the Promasters do not.

I would really love to put a Razor side by side with the Promaster to see which I preferred and why. Along that same line of thinking I came "this" close to going and buying those Meostars again just to do a comparison between them and the Promasters. A little voice told me to wait though until I made sure the Swaros sell.

Another day out with the Promaster ED/Nikon SE/Zeiss FL combination. The morning started bright and early (daybreak) while I and a fellow bird forum member ventured up to the local hawkwatch to see if we could take advantage of any wayward birds from yesterday's Hurricane Hanna.

No luck on that end. The day was slow for the first three hours (all the time I had at that point as I had some running around to do). Later on the family and I headed up to Hawk Mountain for some walking and moderate raptor watching followed by a family trip to one of the local lakes for bike riding (and occasional waterfowl birding).

During all of this I repeatedly rotated through each of these three binoculars. At no time did I feel handicapped by using one instead of the others. Migrating hawks and eagles appeared bright, colorful and vibrant in each binocular. Looking for a full head and tail of white on a Bald Eagle while it soars by several hundred feet over your head can be challenging for any person. Each of the binoculars performed admirably. The incredibly low levels of color fringing in each model coupled with the bright images made id'ing many of these birds much easier.

The Promaster EDs continue to impress me. They truly are a diamond in the rough. Their optical performance really has reached a new level for this price range. They are extremely hard to put down after you start using them.

Marcus,

Any chance you received yours yet? Impressions?

No, I haven't yet though I hope that they are delivered this week. What you have been saying about them drives me nuts that I haven't gotten them! They must be super-duper great and I'll trust that they are going to be the best of all the binoculars that I have now.
I bought mine from Camcor.com. I wish I knew what's taking them so long.

Frank,

How does the Promaster compare to the Meostar.....thanks.

Thanks Marcus...one word of warning though. Expect a $500 binocular and you will be quite impressed. Expect a $1500 one and you won't be.

The optics speak for themselves.

Frank,

How does the Promaster compare to the Meostar.....thanks.

Click to expand...

Good question. I came "this" close to buying a Meostar, again, just do to a side by side comparison. Still, after having owned one just recently I still think I can do a few comparisons while really only focusing on key differences.

Handling:

Definitely a different feel to each binocular. The Meopta is shorter and heavier but more ergonomic with its texture and shape. The Promaster is longer but with the appropriate hand position can provide just as steady of an image. Focusing speed, tension and overall feel is a toss-up. The Meopta's speed is faster but the Promasters is more precise.

Optics:

Here is an area where it really is going to come down to individual preferences. The Meopta's image is bright and vibrant with a large field of view (411 feet) and a very good-sized sweet spot. The Promaster is just as bright but with a more neutral representation of color and significantly less color fringing on almost any object. Because of the latter it is also noticeably sharper. The downside is that the sweet spot isn't quite as wide as that of the Meopta.

If you are looking for my opinion rather than an observation then the Promaster's optics are more to my liking because of the incredibly crisp and bright image though I really would not be disappointed using either.

Marcus,

Frank is right: Expect a $500 glass and you will be impressed. This is, in my view, clearly an attempt by Prostar to elevate optical performance in the $500 class. The general feel and apparent build quality is not quite that of a $1,500+ US binocular. The focused image does come very, very close.

Remember, when you get it, the binocular focuses clockwise to infinity. When I first got it, I started with the idea that is would be like most of the rest of my binoculars and go clockwise to close focus (I started out with a Swift Porro that focuses like the Promaster, so I can live with either direction). That and the slow wheel rate had me thinking something was seriously wron gfor a minute. The focus rate must be intended to get the most precise focus possible, particularly at close distance. The close focus is really good and precise. You will not notice a slow focus so much when looking at a particular distance. You probably will notice a somewhat shallow depth of focus, but you will quite easly accomadate to those two niggles I have with the glass. First of next month, I have one on order.

I am glad to see you placed the order Steve. Maybe I am jumping the gun a bit but this I would wager this binocular is going to become a classic. To use Mr. Ingraham's terminology I believe it represents a reference standard for roof prisms at the $500 price point...even when we start nearing the $1000 price point if we are considering just optics and assuming regular average prices for the Alphas (and discontinued/refurb Alphas).

I just wanted to copy and paste part of a PM discussion between Steve and myself which is relevant to this model....

Just to comment on those Promasters further. I was just sitting out back with four good quality porros (Celestron DX, Nikon SE, Nikon E and the little 8x30 Yosemite). The quality they exhibit in terms of image sharpness really is not met in most roofs until you are at least at the $500 level. The level of apparent sharpness/clarity is matched by even fewer roofs and then you really have to start climbing into the price stratosphere. The Promaster EDs seem to hang with them quite well in the center of the field.

I am in the midst of doing an interesting little "test". I focused all five bins on a distant tree...specifically an open area where you can see the trunk and several branches though they are partly concealed by shadow. As it gets darker I am curious to see which one starts to "give way" optically first. My guess...the Yosemite followed by the Celestron or possibly the Nikon E then the SE and finally the Promaster. It should prove interesting and I hope to post more on it later.

To throw another variable into the mix I put the Bushnell Discoverer 7x42 in with the rest of them just to see how much the larger exit pupil played a role in the comparison.

I went back out right around 7:30 EST. It was dark enough that I could just barely make out the distant treeline (approximately 240 yards away). None of the bins showed the exposed trunk and branches at that time. However, it was interesting to note that....

.....there really wasn't that significant of a difference between any of the models. The 7x42 Discoverer and the 8x30 Yosemite showed the largest difference in comparison to one another. The Celestron and the Discoverer seemed to show the brightest overall image but I wasn't able to pull quite as much detail from either in comparison to the Promaster ED. The Promaster was only a shade darker but I could see edges of the treeline better.

Right before heading in I refocused each binocular on some of my feeders which are 20 yards behind the back porch and under a canopy of trees. I went back out 45 minutes later and compared them all again. The Yosemite showed practically nothing at this time and at this distance. I couldn't see any of the feeders' outlines or make out any detail. The Celestron and the SE started to show some very vague outlines but I couldn't pick out any real detail. The Nikon E started showing more detail and the overall image appeared a hair brighter than either the SE or DX. Next the Discoverer and the Promaster seemed to display a noticeably brighter image than any of the others. I could notice more detail with the Promasters but the overall image seemed a hair brighter on the Discoverer.

Just thought I would share.

Frank,

I'll put part of my input into our PM discussion in here.

Now go outside and point them at Jupiter. That is where the Promaster really whacked the rest of my stuff. The planet edges were definitely sharper and the moons more distinct than what I had on hand (Yosemite 6&8x, B&L 7x26, Swift 7x36, Monarch 8x, Leupold Porro 9x35 IF, and Viper 10x). I'd be curious to see what the resolution of your particular binocular stew is at that "way out yonder" distance.

Steve,

If it clears up then I will follow through with your advice this evening. Otherwise it is going to have to wait.

On an another note, I saw the comment on the other forum about the gentleman not being impressed when looking through the Promaster. I did not get a chance to ask but I wonder if he looked at the regular Promaster Elite or the Elite ED. I made that mistake the first time I googled "Promaster Elite" assuming there was only one

Ofcourse, everyone's eyes are different and what one person looks for in an image another person ignores.

I will be keeping an eye out to see more comments on these bins as more folks take the plunge.

I just received an ELX ED Saturday evening and thought I would share some of my quick checks with you. The view in these are such that I would normally not be testing them as the view is better than expected and maybe even a little better than FrankD’s assessment.

On the unit tested I could have hoped for better collimation. The measured values for this unit were 7.5 minutes of dipvergence and 30 minutes of horizontal convergence. The respective ISO tolerances for this measurement for General Purpose and High Performance instruments are 20/20 and 20/40 respectively. The 7.5 minutes of dipvergence falls well within the limits and this is the one that gives most trouble. The horizontal convergence is out of the High Performance range but within acceptable General Purpose limits. This is the one area that the ELX falls short of the Big 3; they usually fall in, or very close to, the High Performance values. This may well be sample variation though.

I did notice a little field curvature, but probably less than 1 diopter in the collimator but did not seem apparent when field viewing. A little pincushion is apparent.

As others have mentioned, the focus rate is somewhat slow for my liking but I may adjust to that. Seems to be about 22 degrees per diopter and my unit goes about 180 degrees past infinity focus. Close focus was around 1.9 meters.

Resolution is good, measured about 3.2 arc seconds in the right tube (best side) and about 3.4 and 3.6 seconds in the left side. Using my usual criteria (116% and 130%) one tube is average and one better than average. I think the same could be said using Henry Links criteria, 3.2x42=134 and 3.6x42=151. In general this is close to the Big 3 ranges.

I have attached my unprofessional transmission plot along with some professionally measured plots for comparison. The ELX curve falls among the Big 3, most closely following the curve of the pre HD Ultravid until the near IR range. I have also attached the color files for the left and right tubes showing a very, very minor red bias, 7.2% red and 6.7% green. Again, this is in the same neutral range as the most neutral of the Big 3.

Also, I made a quick stab at a star test. I looked at a 1.7 arc second point at 5 meters and made my own assessments, which I will not list here due to my inexperience doing these tests and hope the more experienced, such as Henry Link, will either confirm or correct my opinions. The right tube was the best, showing about half the error of the left side. The left in focus position was to small to see but appeared to be round with two dim rings visible outside the center spot. I could not photograph the image due the light and size so I changed to six light sources to increase the light and changed the size to about 6 arc seconds for the points, the points are spaced about 70 arc seconds for reference. This is still pretty close in appearance to the original test. Some of the SA may be due to the short test length I used although it is more than 20 times the focal length. Even this configuration took 4 second exposures to capture. I really need to work on this more. I have seen a few better results and quiet a few worse. FWIW my “guess” is about minus a half wave of lower order SA with maybe + a tenth or two of higher or SA and about .1 waves of curvature error. Maybe .5 or .6 wave error. I need help in this area; I just do not have enough samples of known errors to help me. I need mentoring badly.

So much for the inside stuff. Next, I have to get them out for real world testing. What I saw Sunday in the brief time I was out, the weather was drab and dull but the view was impressive with no apparent distractions.

Best,
Ron

Both of the star test images are for the left barrel.
I forgot. I measured the FOV at 7.43 degrees left and 7.6 degrees right side.