What is interesting about Amazon reviews is that some of the cheapest binoculars get the best star ratings. The reason is because like you say the people buying a Leupold Yosemite are usually people who have little or no experience with binoculars or they are simply cheapskates(HaHa). Just because a Yosemite has a 4.8 star rating and a Swarovski SV has a 4.8 star rating doesn't mean the Yosemite is as good as the Swaro. It means that for the PRICE paid the reviewer thinks it is a good VALUE. The people buying the Yosemite have probably never experienced an alpha binocular so they don't know any better. The same way with a man who has never experienced an alpha woman. They think their wife is just fine. The ratings are relative to the price of the item. There are greater expectations when you pay $2K for a binocular versus $100. Of course the ratings don't represent long term durability or manufacturers warranty or any of that stuff that really matters down the road either.
Apart from the mechanical quality we most not forget that the optical performance with a cheap porro compares to a several times more expensive roof.
We know there are some manufacturers who sell optics to several brands. Take a look at Kowa YF, Opticron Savanna and Vixen Atrek, all 6x30s. Very identical body design as Yosemite and with nearly same stated ER and FOV. I am very suspicious that these are all the exactly same optics under different brands.
I finally got a respectable Leupold Yosemite 6x30 Black from B&H and I will agree if you get a good pair they are quite nice especially for their price. Very sharp, lightweight,bright and easy to use. The eyecups are a little sloppy but in this price range you expect that. Overall, I will agree they are a bargain and I retract my junk statement. Under $100 I would have to recommend them. I only paid $80(with free shipping) for mine. I think they are keepers.I would agree with that optically. On-axis they are very sharp. But I think every sense Leupold farmed the Yosemites out to China the quality has went down. The older USA built version had a more rubber like armour on them now it is more like plastic. They do have attractive specifications. Porro-prism, 8 degree FOV, waterproof and fogproof and compact and light. I ordered three of them from Amazon about a year ago and two of them had defective focusers and one had defective eyecups. China just does not have any QC. They don't care. If you are lucky enough to get a good one they are a bargain.
I finally got a respectable Leupold Yosemite 6x30 Black from B&H and I will agree if you get a good pair they are quite nice especially for their price. Very sharp, lightweight,bright and easy to use. The eyecups are a little sloppy but in this price range you expect that. Overall, I will agree they are a bargain and I retract my junk statement. Under $100 I would have to recommend them. I only paid $80(with free shipping) for mine. I think they are keepers.
Those Nikon 12x50 SE's are awesome binoculars. Great for astronomy. The Kowa YF 6x30 and Opticron Savanna 6x30 are about the same but I still like the look of the Leupold's. The Kowa focus looks weird to me. They are perfect kids binoculars. Just the right size and small IPD. Shocked me how sharp they are! Almost like a small Habicht 8x30 except with an easier focus(Did Proud Papa hear that?). HaHa! At first I thought the focus wheel was defective on the Leupold's because the movement was limited but it was just stuck. Once I loosened it it was ok.I had these but sold them to friends for a 10-years birthday gift to their daughter but miss them, and consider to get either Kowa YF 6x30 or Opticron Savanna 6x30.
I bet these are the same binoculars under different brands.
By the way: today I picked up Nikon 12x50 SE from the post office. And therefore I think it would be nice to get some 6x30s again as a porro complement!
Those Nikon 12x50 SE's are awesome binoculars. Great for astronomy. The Kowa YF 6x30 and Opticron Savanna 6x30 are about the same but I still like the look of the Leupold's. The Kowa focus looks weird to me. They are perfect kids binoculars. Just the right size and small IPD. Shocked me how sharp they are! Almost like a small Habicht 8x30 except with an easier focus(Did Proud Papa hear that?). HaHa! At first I thought the focus wheel was defective on the Leupold's because the movement was limited but it was just stuck. Once I loosened it it was ok.
You can't beat the big 50mm Swarovision's in either 10x50 or 12x50 but the SE comes close for a lot less money. Those 12x50 SE's would be good for Raptors at long distance. They are not too heavy and I know they are sharp. A simple porro is transparent offering a nice crisp sharp unencumbered view even an inexpensive one like the Yosemite. Remarkable.Absolutely Nikon SEs are awesome. The optical quality is excellent. While not offering the large eyepiece lenses and ease of view as the newest binoculars I find the eye relief to be adequate with my new eyeglasses, enable me to come a bit closer to the lens than the old eyeglasses.
I read in a review that Swarovski Svarovision 12x50s are slightly better, but: for 1/4 the price(I paid) the Nikon SEs are very good value!
Regarding Leupold 6x30s I really agree: on-axis sharpness is impressive, rivalling some 10 times more expensive porros.
We know there are some manufacturers who sell optics to several brands. Take a look at Kowa YF, Opticron Savanna and Vixen Atrek. Very identical body design as Yosemite and with nearly same stated ER and FOV. I am very suspicious that these are all the exactly same optics under different brands.
What is interesting about Amazon reviews is that some of the cheapest binoculars get the best star ratings. The reason is because like you say the people buying a Leupold Yosemite are usually people who have little or no experience with binoculars or they are simply cheapskates(HaHa). Just because a Yosemite has a 4.8 star rating and a Swarovski SV has a 4.8 star rating doesn't mean the Yosemite is as good as the Swaro. It means that for the PRICE paid the reviewer thinks it is a good VALUE. The people buying the Yosemite have probably never experienced an alpha binocular so they don't know any better. The same way with a man who has never experienced an alpha woman. They think their wife is just fine. The ratings are relative to the price of the item. There are greater expectations when you pay $2K for a binocular versus $100. Of course the ratings don't represent long term durability or manufacturers warranty or any of that stuff that really matters down the road either.
Excuse me Mods but is crass mysogyny considered acceptable on BirdForum?
When my first girlfriend got older, she had to have a mysogyny. However, it wasn't on her crass! :eek!:
Hi Bill
I don't wish to come across as a humourless killjoy but I just felt that this particular attempt at levity by Dennis was unnecessarily tasteless and disrespectful to women. We have few enough female contributors to this forum as it is and I personally do not think that such comments are likely to encourage more. If I am being too over-sensitive or politically correct on this issue perhaps the OP and/or the moderators could advise me.
Hi Bill
I don't wish to come across as a humourless killjoy but I just felt that this particular attempt at levity by Dennis was unnecessarily tasteless and disrespectful to women. We have few enough female contributors to this forum as it is and I personally do not think that such comments are likely to encourage more. If I am being too over-sensitive or politically correct on this issue perhaps the OP and/or the moderators could advise me.
At the risk of getting banned ... the word "prissy" came to mind, when I read your comment.
Graham I think you are right on with your comment. Well spoken.
Point here being that face to face with ladies that you know, you can be risquee and with some downright rude because they know you and can tell from your voice and body language that you don't mean to be offensive. On a webpage there are just the words and, in this case, they come across as offensive to women. I really don't think Dennis meant to be offensive but some care a sensitivity wouldn't go amiss here.
Lee