Martin Fagg
Guest
Meopta Meostar 8x32
Brightness- least bright of the three but they are brighter than mid-priced 42mm bins I have used, so don't read this and think they are dim. They are far from it but I have needed a bit more light gathering this winter which has been very overcast and murky.
Definition- slightly less sharp than both the Opticrons.
FOV- to my eye equal with the SRGAs but spec is 7.8 degrees
Colour- very slight yellow cast that is only noticeable when used directly after the Opticrons and in certain lights. Not an issue in everyday use though.
Contrast- there was hardly any difference between the three bins here but the Meoptas were just a touch less contrasty.
Sweet spot- this is where these bins win out over the other two. Definitely the widest sweet spot and also the best edge performance.
Focuser- definitely the best of the three. Smooth with a turn and three quarters from lock to lock but in use only small a movement needed to go from around 50 feet to a mile away. They have very good depth of focus so focuser use is not needed often.
Waterproof
Price- £550
Opticron SRGA 8x32
Brightness- Second brightest. A fair bit brighter than the Meoptas.
Definition- I could barely separate the two Opticrons for definition in the centre of field. The SRGAs were just a tiny bit less sharp I think.
FOV- by eye equal with the Meoptas but spec is 8.25 degrees
Colour- excellent colour representation. I see colours through these the same as with the naked eye.
Contrast- the two Opticrons were the same in this regard, both excellent.
Sweet spot- the smallest of the three here, with quite noticeable deterioration towards the edges, but it does have the widest fov. In use in the field the bins are very easy to use, the size of the sweet spot or edge performance are not an issue.
Focuser- very fast action. Only half aturn from lock to lock. Too fast at times, leading to overshooting of the focus point. Good for chasing small birds in the under brush though. The yahve very depth of focus.
Not waterproof
Price- £130-170
Opticron HR WP 8x42
Brightness- Brightest. I bought these for the extra brightness of a 42mm porro and I got what I wanted. Even on an overcast day they are very bright.
Definition- The HRWP just has the edge over the SRGA I think. I assume due to the extra light gathering on such a grey day as when compared.
FOV- Spec is 6.4 degrees so they have a very noticeably smaller fov when compared with the others but in use it's not a problem. The eyerelief of these bins must be right for my eyes because the narrow fov is very comfortable for me. My eyes know that the fov is quite narrow but the view isn't tunnel like.
Since trying these out and after drawing fovs as concentric circles to scale I have decided that (despite a long term obsession with finding the widest possible with the right eyerelief to get full benefit) fov is not that important, within reasonable parameters at least. I was really surprise that I found this narrow fov acceptable. I tried these bins in 2005 when they were first released and dismissed them. Now I really like them.
Colour- excellent colour representation. I see colours through these the same as with the naked eye. I'm not sure if there is any difference between the Opticrons in this regard but if I was pushed to find a difference then I would say that the HR WPs are very slightly better.
Contrast- as mentioned above, excellent.
Sweetspot- nice big sweet spot and good edge performance but not as good as the Meoptas.
Focuser- very slow. Two whole turns from lock to lock. Bit in use not as slow s that sounds. Focussing from around 50 feet to the horizon out to sea only tales about one turn. There is three quarters of a turn from the sea horizon to locking point at infinity. Complete opposite of the SRGAs, no overshoot and very good fine focus. Not the bins for warblers in the undergrowth but very good for waders and wildfowl on the marshes. They have very good depth of focus which helps alleviate the slow focus wheel.
Waterproof
Price- £180-240
Ergonomics- I am going to write about the ergonomics of them together rather than separately like the other qualities.
I really like the ergonomics of small porros. I think most people say that roofs are more comfortable because you can keep you arms in near your body when holding them to your eyes but I actually prefer the 'seagull' position of porros, it puts less strain on my shoulders. I find small roofs make me feel like my shoulders are all hunched up tight and pulled forward. Porros make my shoulders feel more relaxed.
So naturally I prefer the ergonomics of the SRGAs the best. The HR WPs are a close second as, although they are the largest of the three, they are quite dainty for a 42mm porro and are very comfortable to hold.
Having said that, if you prefer roofs, the ergonomics of the Meoptas are excellent, they are very easy to hold being small and have thunb grooves which my small hands fit very well.
All three have very good rubber armour and feel secure in the hand.
EDIT- I forgotto to mention eyerelief-
Meopta spec says 16mm. They fit my eyes very well. I can see full fov with and without glasses. Small eyecups make then very comfortable for my small eye sockest.
SRGAs- spec says 12mm. I can only use these with contact lenses in and even then I can't quite see full fov but almost all of it.
HR WPs- 20mm. Good with and without glasses. Complete field of view is visible. There is a hint of looking down a tunnel in that I can see slightly more than full fov so there is a black edge visible. I don't find it a problem though.
General
Today has been overcast and raining constantly so I compared the bins while watching wildfowl and waders from a hide and by looking at signposts from the car (I didn't want to get the HR WPs wet in case I want to return them and the same for the SRGAs because they're not waterproof.
Both the Opticrons had the slightly annoying need to alter the ipd when focussing on a near object (as porros do). But I was quite taken aback by just how far away from me that became necessary with the HR WPs (about 30 feet). I assume that is because the objectives are further apart than on the SRGAs.
I find all three bins very nice to use in the field in different ways.
If you're on a budget then the two Opticrons are especially good value and excellent optically, if you can accept the SRGAs non-waterproofness and the HR WPs narrow fov and slow focus. As a pair I think they compliment each other well.
One, being small , lightweight and fast focussing, is good for brighter weather use, for small, fast moving birds closer to, in foliage. The other, being brighter, waterproof and internal focussing, is good for bad weather use, and having slower focus is more suited to more sedentary distant birds on shore or marsh, say. If you bought them at the lowest prices I have seen them going for new, you could have both for £310.
The Meoptas are about £550. If I could only have one of these bins, it would have to be the Meoptas because they have most of the good points of the other two in one waterproof package. They are good allrounders but the Opticron double act does offer somethings they can't. Particularly the brightness of the 42mm objective which I missed in the Meoptas this wnter.
In this respect, I am still undecided what to do as I can't afford to keep them all. Either the Meoptas or the HR WPs will go.
Addendum
Since writing this comparison, I have taken the HR WPs out on their own so I could use them for a few hours birding without comparing them to the others in order to get a proper feel for them in normal use. Unfortunately the double image at close focus is not just that. I found myself constantly having to adjust the ipd whether looking at near or far objects. That is to say, having set the ipd, I would look into the distance and then a short while later look into the distance again and have to adjust the ipd. I just could not get the distance between the eyepieces right. The hinge is good and stiff so it's not that there is movement occurring there.
They leave me with a vague feeling that something isn't right and leave my eyes feeling slightly off.
I have tried adjusting the eye cups so they are not fully extended but they are most comfortable when extended to the max.
Is this poor collimation do you think? Or is there something else that I am not considering.
I think I'll return them and ask then to send another pair.
Brightness- least bright of the three but they are brighter than mid-priced 42mm bins I have used, so don't read this and think they are dim. They are far from it but I have needed a bit more light gathering this winter which has been very overcast and murky.
Definition- slightly less sharp than both the Opticrons.
FOV- to my eye equal with the SRGAs but spec is 7.8 degrees
Colour- very slight yellow cast that is only noticeable when used directly after the Opticrons and in certain lights. Not an issue in everyday use though.
Contrast- there was hardly any difference between the three bins here but the Meoptas were just a touch less contrasty.
Sweet spot- this is where these bins win out over the other two. Definitely the widest sweet spot and also the best edge performance.
Focuser- definitely the best of the three. Smooth with a turn and three quarters from lock to lock but in use only small a movement needed to go from around 50 feet to a mile away. They have very good depth of focus so focuser use is not needed often.
Waterproof
Price- £550
Opticron SRGA 8x32
Brightness- Second brightest. A fair bit brighter than the Meoptas.
Definition- I could barely separate the two Opticrons for definition in the centre of field. The SRGAs were just a tiny bit less sharp I think.
FOV- by eye equal with the Meoptas but spec is 8.25 degrees
Colour- excellent colour representation. I see colours through these the same as with the naked eye.
Contrast- the two Opticrons were the same in this regard, both excellent.
Sweet spot- the smallest of the three here, with quite noticeable deterioration towards the edges, but it does have the widest fov. In use in the field the bins are very easy to use, the size of the sweet spot or edge performance are not an issue.
Focuser- very fast action. Only half aturn from lock to lock. Too fast at times, leading to overshooting of the focus point. Good for chasing small birds in the under brush though. The yahve very depth of focus.
Not waterproof
Price- £130-170
Opticron HR WP 8x42
Brightness- Brightest. I bought these for the extra brightness of a 42mm porro and I got what I wanted. Even on an overcast day they are very bright.
Definition- The HRWP just has the edge over the SRGA I think. I assume due to the extra light gathering on such a grey day as when compared.
FOV- Spec is 6.4 degrees so they have a very noticeably smaller fov when compared with the others but in use it's not a problem. The eyerelief of these bins must be right for my eyes because the narrow fov is very comfortable for me. My eyes know that the fov is quite narrow but the view isn't tunnel like.
Since trying these out and after drawing fovs as concentric circles to scale I have decided that (despite a long term obsession with finding the widest possible with the right eyerelief to get full benefit) fov is not that important, within reasonable parameters at least. I was really surprise that I found this narrow fov acceptable. I tried these bins in 2005 when they were first released and dismissed them. Now I really like them.
Colour- excellent colour representation. I see colours through these the same as with the naked eye. I'm not sure if there is any difference between the Opticrons in this regard but if I was pushed to find a difference then I would say that the HR WPs are very slightly better.
Contrast- as mentioned above, excellent.
Sweetspot- nice big sweet spot and good edge performance but not as good as the Meoptas.
Focuser- very slow. Two whole turns from lock to lock. Bit in use not as slow s that sounds. Focussing from around 50 feet to the horizon out to sea only tales about one turn. There is three quarters of a turn from the sea horizon to locking point at infinity. Complete opposite of the SRGAs, no overshoot and very good fine focus. Not the bins for warblers in the undergrowth but very good for waders and wildfowl on the marshes. They have very good depth of focus which helps alleviate the slow focus wheel.
Waterproof
Price- £180-240
Ergonomics- I am going to write about the ergonomics of them together rather than separately like the other qualities.
I really like the ergonomics of small porros. I think most people say that roofs are more comfortable because you can keep you arms in near your body when holding them to your eyes but I actually prefer the 'seagull' position of porros, it puts less strain on my shoulders. I find small roofs make me feel like my shoulders are all hunched up tight and pulled forward. Porros make my shoulders feel more relaxed.
So naturally I prefer the ergonomics of the SRGAs the best. The HR WPs are a close second as, although they are the largest of the three, they are quite dainty for a 42mm porro and are very comfortable to hold.
Having said that, if you prefer roofs, the ergonomics of the Meoptas are excellent, they are very easy to hold being small and have thunb grooves which my small hands fit very well.
All three have very good rubber armour and feel secure in the hand.
EDIT- I forgotto to mention eyerelief-
Meopta spec says 16mm. They fit my eyes very well. I can see full fov with and without glasses. Small eyecups make then very comfortable for my small eye sockest.
SRGAs- spec says 12mm. I can only use these with contact lenses in and even then I can't quite see full fov but almost all of it.
HR WPs- 20mm. Good with and without glasses. Complete field of view is visible. There is a hint of looking down a tunnel in that I can see slightly more than full fov so there is a black edge visible. I don't find it a problem though.
General
Today has been overcast and raining constantly so I compared the bins while watching wildfowl and waders from a hide and by looking at signposts from the car (I didn't want to get the HR WPs wet in case I want to return them and the same for the SRGAs because they're not waterproof.
Both the Opticrons had the slightly annoying need to alter the ipd when focussing on a near object (as porros do). But I was quite taken aback by just how far away from me that became necessary with the HR WPs (about 30 feet). I assume that is because the objectives are further apart than on the SRGAs.
I find all three bins very nice to use in the field in different ways.
If you're on a budget then the two Opticrons are especially good value and excellent optically, if you can accept the SRGAs non-waterproofness and the HR WPs narrow fov and slow focus. As a pair I think they compliment each other well.
One, being small , lightweight and fast focussing, is good for brighter weather use, for small, fast moving birds closer to, in foliage. The other, being brighter, waterproof and internal focussing, is good for bad weather use, and having slower focus is more suited to more sedentary distant birds on shore or marsh, say. If you bought them at the lowest prices I have seen them going for new, you could have both for £310.
The Meoptas are about £550. If I could only have one of these bins, it would have to be the Meoptas because they have most of the good points of the other two in one waterproof package. They are good allrounders but the Opticron double act does offer somethings they can't. Particularly the brightness of the 42mm objective which I missed in the Meoptas this wnter.
In this respect, I am still undecided what to do as I can't afford to keep them all. Either the Meoptas or the HR WPs will go.
Addendum
Since writing this comparison, I have taken the HR WPs out on their own so I could use them for a few hours birding without comparing them to the others in order to get a proper feel for them in normal use. Unfortunately the double image at close focus is not just that. I found myself constantly having to adjust the ipd whether looking at near or far objects. That is to say, having set the ipd, I would look into the distance and then a short while later look into the distance again and have to adjust the ipd. I just could not get the distance between the eyepieces right. The hinge is good and stiff so it's not that there is movement occurring there.
They leave me with a vague feeling that something isn't right and leave my eyes feeling slightly off.
I have tried adjusting the eye cups so they are not fully extended but they are most comfortable when extended to the max.
Is this poor collimation do you think? Or is there something else that I am not considering.
I think I'll return them and ask then to send another pair.
Last edited:
