There are two people on Bird Forum who's opinion I really trust and they are Steve and jgraider because they recommended the Maven B.2 9x45 and the Tract Toric 8x42 which are the binoculars I now own and really like. I really feel the direct to consumer sales approach is the future which both Tract and Maven use. I think if more birders would try the Maven or Tract they would find they are all the binocular they need. As Chartwell says they are excellent companies to deal with because they are not a huge corporation. When you call Maven you are talking to the owners in Lander Wyoming and they know what they are talking about. It is really refreshing.
-
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.
Review: Maven B2 9x45: Has the $1,000 game just changed? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Steve C
- Start date
Denco, chartwell99, chill6x6 thanks for the responses. The weather is clearing today and I should have some clear night skies in the next day or so for at least some urban astronomical tests.
Something I noticed today is that I really cannot discern any more detail viewing birds at 150 yards or so using 9x vs 8x or 7x. In fact, I think I prefer the 7x because I can hold the image steadier. This is consistent with my experience many years ago comparing binoculars for astronomy where I preferred 7x50 to 10x50 for the same reason. Of course there are IS binoculars and tripod mounted scope/binoculars for steadiness, but for hand held non-IS, I am not sure of the advantage for me of 9x except that I am using marginally more of the objective under bright condition. This is actually a bit surprising to me since during daytime tests I didn't find the steadiness of 10x42 roof prism binoculars bothersome trying them out at a shop. However, doing more careful side by side comparisons this morning and really trying to notice markings and shadings I believe I do prefer lower magnification even at this distance. This and weight have me thinking B3. I am leaving town for a few days on Saturday, but I may order a demo B3 and ask for an extension of the demo time on the B2 so I can do a direct comparison. The B1 strikes me as still on the heavy side, and the 7x45 strikes me as size and weight overkill for daytime viewing, especially as weight is my current primary concern with the B2 9x45.
I appreciate the inputs and the help brainstorming which Maven. Not to sound like too much of a fan boy, but while the Sightron cannot keep up with the Fuji and Maven offerings, I have no trouble enjoying all the positive ergonomic characteristics and it's view is not at all shabby.
Thanks again,
Alan
Something I noticed today is that I really cannot discern any more detail viewing birds at 150 yards or so using 9x vs 8x or 7x. In fact, I think I prefer the 7x because I can hold the image steadier. This is consistent with my experience many years ago comparing binoculars for astronomy where I preferred 7x50 to 10x50 for the same reason. Of course there are IS binoculars and tripod mounted scope/binoculars for steadiness, but for hand held non-IS, I am not sure of the advantage for me of 9x except that I am using marginally more of the objective under bright condition. This is actually a bit surprising to me since during daytime tests I didn't find the steadiness of 10x42 roof prism binoculars bothersome trying them out at a shop. However, doing more careful side by side comparisons this morning and really trying to notice markings and shadings I believe I do prefer lower magnification even at this distance. This and weight have me thinking B3. I am leaving town for a few days on Saturday, but I may order a demo B3 and ask for an extension of the demo time on the B2 so I can do a direct comparison. The B1 strikes me as still on the heavy side, and the 7x45 strikes me as size and weight overkill for daytime viewing, especially as weight is my current primary concern with the B2 9x45.
I appreciate the inputs and the help brainstorming which Maven. Not to sound like too much of a fan boy, but while the Sightron cannot keep up with the Fuji and Maven offerings, I have no trouble enjoying all the positive ergonomic characteristics and it's view is not at all shabby.
Thanks again,
Alan
Steve C
Well-known member
Alan
I think you are correct about not noticing much detail increase between 7, 8, and 9 magnifications. I think you are better off with a lower magnification you can hold steady than one you can't, mostly regardless of the optics. 7x seems, IMO, to be the level where magnification gets to be very close to enough. By the time we get to 10x we are getting close to more than enough. Lots of people like higher range magnifications, but we are dealing with the purely subjective nature of individual user differences and perceptions play a large role as well.
In spite of your observations about poor viewing conditions, often they are the best. If you have a binocular that impresses in poor light, it will only do better in good conditions. hard to really judge a glass in bright daylight.
If terrestrial use and your personal preferences lean toward a lighter weight binocular, you will like the Maven B3.
You are getting close to recognition that there is getting to be very little difference when stepping up the ladder. The Sightron is a pretty decent binocular, and while there are differences to be found stepping up, those differences, in my view, are pretty small.
Last edited:
This is familiar is many arenas where performance vs. price gets asymptotic as you move to the higher end. My general philosophy is that for technology and things that are changing rapidly I like to purchase mid level on the linear part of the performance curve well before it bends over and goes flatter, because today's high-end is rather quickly tomorrow's medium quality.
On the other hand, for things that are more durable where technology is not changing quickly, I would rather buy a little higher quality and get up past the initial linear region to where the curve bends over and starts approaching the asymptote. If I am going to use something for a long time, I would like to really be pleased with it over that time.
From my limited experience so far with roof prism binoculars and what I read here, it appears that what I called the linear part of the curve is in the $150-$400 range, the level where the curve bends over and starts approaching the "alpha limit" is somewhere around $1K (I know there are dissenting opinions well above and below this figure). There are always going to be outliers that have particularly good (or bad) performance in their price range. However, once you get up on that upper part of the performance curve, you do not have to be very much of an outlier to be a potential game changer--hence the title of this thread
Obviously, many of these judgements are subjective, and I do not present myself as an expert on the current state of the art in binoculars.
BTW, and back to the thread topic, the B2 9x45, the past two nights demonstrate that this is a terrific astronomical binocular as well, but sadly they will be going back to Maven. I've decided that they are larger and heavier than I would like for regular daytime use, and they won't replace the combination of my 7x50 Fujinon + 15x45 Canon IS for night use. I believe my next try is the B3 in either 8x30 or 6x30. I will consider that while I am out of town, and perhaps give the guys at Maven a call to discuss it. I briefly considered the 7x45 B2 because I am curious, but since the issue is size and weight more than magnification, I think that is the wrong way to go for me right now. The B1 is interesting, but it too is no light weight at 29 oz, and I would rather start with something smaller unless and until I decide I really need the additional aperture.
BTW, the B2 is my first Wow! binocular experience in almost 30 years. That ancient Wow! was the first view through my Fujinon 7x50.
Alan
chartwell99
Well-known member
Alan - I have tried over the years to like the 6 x 30 configuration but ended up after several purchases of both roofs and porros disappointed. I will be most interested in your impressions.
Chartwell99:
I look forward to comparing notes with you once I have the Maven B3s in hand.
I've always liked 7x binoculars but have never tried a 6x. I am drawn by the larger exit pupil as much or more than the lower magnification. The actual field of view is a bit larger in the 6x, but the 8x already has a large field of view.
Maven said that the 7x45 B2 and 6x30 B3 do not sell nearly as well as the corresponding 9x and 8x models. They thought it was largely a preference of hunters, yet I've read here that other vendors no longer make 7x because of limited consumer demand. This isn't a jab at those who prefer higher magnification, but I have noticed that when friends and family approach me for advice on binoculars, they invariably are drawn to the higher magnification options as if it were a measure of performance or quality.
I look forward to comparing notes with you once I have the Maven B3s in hand.
I've always liked 7x binoculars but have never tried a 6x. I am drawn by the larger exit pupil as much or more than the lower magnification. The actual field of view is a bit larger in the 6x, but the 8x already has a large field of view.
Maven said that the 7x45 B2 and 6x30 B3 do not sell nearly as well as the corresponding 9x and 8x models. They thought it was largely a preference of hunters, yet I've read here that other vendors no longer make 7x because of limited consumer demand. This isn't a jab at those who prefer higher magnification, but I have noticed that when friends and family approach me for advice on binoculars, they invariably are drawn to the higher magnification options as if it were a measure of performance or quality.
oldfortyfive
Well-known member
I played with the Maven 6x30's a while back and really liked them. I've always tended to favor lower powered bino's as they are easier and quicker to use. Most hunters are over powered and because of that don't get the full benefits in the field. Takes to long to find your quarry unless you're in really open country so you tend not to bother actually using them unless you've spotted them first with your eyes. That's been my experience and observation in the field.
Steve C
Well-known member
Personally I think most binocular users think they need more magnification than they really do.
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
It's that, to most people, more of anything [like mag.] really is more, so go for it when presented. It took me 35 years of field-use to realize that wasn't true.
chartwell99
Well-known member
I'm actually ambivalent about what power is best, and generally agree as to the benefits of lower powers, especially 7x, although I continue to have great experiences with the B2 9 x 45 despite my initial skepticism as to too much power. I owned a Fuji 6 x 30 IF porro some years back and found the lower power especially helpful for marine use but I never found the 6 x 30 CF models of various makers to offer notably better views that their 8 x 30 siblings taking into account brightness and apparent field of view.
Hermann
Well-known member
Well, it depends, I think. It depends on which magnification you can comfortably hold for a few minutes at least, and what kind of birding you're into.
I find people with reasonably steady hands who do a lot of birding at migration sites are often better off with a 10x, simply because even if there's some hand movement and even if they can't hold a 10x steady over a longer period of time, a 10x gives them a bit more detail when watching that pipit disappearing somewhere in the gras, or that raptor disappearing behind a cliff. And that may mean the difference between getting the ID or not getting it. There are nowadays even some folks over here who go for 12x, simply because they may get a bit more detail on a bird.
An 8x is something like a compromise - not as difficult to hold steady as a 10x, but with more magnification than a 6x or a 7x binocular. I find 7x is nice for casual birding, especially if I also carry a scope. But for birding at migration hotspots I find 7x too low. 8x just works better for me. And 6x is a no-go. Too little magnification.
Your mileage may vary, of course.
Hermann
I second what Hermann says. I agree with everything he said. A 6x or 7x doesn't have enough magnification for me personally and I think a lot of people agree because they sell very few 7x binoculars. That is why nobody makes them. Some dealer said they only sold one Zeiss 7x42 FL in a year or something like that. You can see more detail with the 8x to 10x without a doubt. I can anyway. I have had a lot of 6x and 7x binoculars and I always revert to 8x through 10x.
Last edited:
I've been going back and forth on which magnification I like best, 7x or 8x. Haven't been able to pick one. I think it comes down to when general viewing I like 7x best, and when I'm trying to get in close on something I prefer 8x. Not steady with 10x so I don't much care for it. I also have a small scope and a carbon fiber tripod that I like for carry and to really really get in close, but never have found a scope to be comfortable observation for any length of time.
I've often wondered if 7.5x would have any merit as a bin choice.
My .02, CG
I would be thrilled if Maven made a 7X30 with a little more eye relief than the 8X30. I might actually enjoy the 6X30.
Absolutely true! I used to be that person. Thankfully, I've seen the light!
+1
In particular how does the Mavin B1 8x42 compare with Tract Toric 8x42?
Thanks,
Alan
wdc
Well-known member
I do believe there's at least one person on this thread that can offer up a real world (experience based) observation on that one....
wdc
Well-known member
I thought 7x was much more of a common standard, even up into the 90's. 7x35, 7x50. I wonder if the market drove the increase in mag.
A 2x increase (6-8) can make a significant difference, but it helps to have an increase in aperture as well, especially in low light. Smaller and brighter is preferable to my eyes over bigger and dimmer. The latter observation is fairly specific to birding, where the target is often moving around, and one is carrying the optics.
In skywatching, many targets are dim, but they perceptually aren't moving very fast, so one has time to tease out details.
Perhaps its time to give 7x a try. Research! How about those Zen Ray 7x36 that were causing a mild fever on the forum last week? Who's got 'em?
A 2x increase (6-8) can make a significant difference, but it helps to have an increase in aperture as well, especially in low light. Smaller and brighter is preferable to my eyes over bigger and dimmer. The latter observation is fairly specific to birding, where the target is often moving around, and one is carrying the optics.
In skywatching, many targets are dim, but they perceptually aren't moving very fast, so one has time to tease out details.
Perhaps its time to give 7x a try. Research! How about those Zen Ray 7x36 that were causing a mild fever on the forum last week? Who's got 'em?
Last edited:
Similar threads
