• 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.

Death Of The Alpha? (1 Viewer)

;)
The “alpha” leaders have earned our trust over years of innovation and investment. But when 97% of the performance and longevity is available for 20% of the price ... REAL not imagined ... it has to raise eyebrows of the more rational. This is especially true when the average observer can only appreciate about 89% of those differences they claim to be able to see. The times, they are a’changin’.

Not sure about the precision of the percentages, but I generally agree.

I had not looked at roof prism binoculars for about 20-25 years until about a year ago. Back then I was primarily interested astronomy binoculars, but I wanted an 8x40. Only at the absolute high end did I find phase coated roof prisms that avoided diffraction spikes on bright stars, so I stayed with Porros.

When a friend asked for some binocular advice about a year ago, I discovered there had been somewhat of a revolution in low cost and mid-market roof prism binoculars. Just recently, my son purchased an Endeavor 8x42 that was marked down to ~$200 and in addition there was a $100 rebate. $100 for an ED, phase coated, dielectric fully multicoated 8x42? I borrowed it for an evening last month, and I thought the performance was excellent.

BTW, I do not believe in the death of the alpha--I pulled up in my 2001 Honda Odyssey next to a new Aston Martin DB9 convertible yesterday. Just think, he could have bought a Maserati at a fraction of the price ;).
 
Hmmmmm...where did Dennis go? Not meaning to resurrect this thread, but post count dropped 7.5K and it's been a month since last seen...hope all is well?!
 
probably went into one of those pot shops there in Denver :smoke: ...mistaking it for an optics store??!!...I'm sure.;).....but now he cant find his way out.....:-C
 
Hmmmmm...where did Dennis go?.......!

He posted a little over a week ago in the Bargains thread about Zeiss packaging, but apparently deleted the post later in the interests of accuracy.

He might be getting in some nice migration outings right now in CO. The waterfowl are leaving AZ and heading north. The 30,000 Sandhill cranes that winter in SE AZ are now in exit mode and some of them hold over in CO for a short period on their northward travels. This is a good time to be out and about enjoying the binoculars that you have. I noticed the Binocular Forum has been slow lately and some of the other regulars have not posted much. Things are warming up on the top side of the world so people may be getting away from the keyboard and enjoying the outdoors.
 
Hmmmmm...where did Dennis go? Not meaning to resurrect this thread, but post count dropped 7.5K and it's been a month since last seen...hope all is well?!
Dennis was last seen in the CO wilds doing a hands on comparison between the Tracts, the GPOs, and every other KK bin. The report was due last week but had to be redone after he tested for CA too soon after a visit to one of 'those' Denver shops :hippy: .... :eek!:

I believe the massive post count drop was due to his history being filtered for spam, trolling, alter egos, nonsense, non relevant replies, posts where he replied to himself, pump and dumps, and any opinion he backflipped on ..... |:p|



Chosun :gh:
 
Gunut, post 1033,
Hensoldt was commercially very successfull with its roof prism binoculars from about 1890-1900 until the years after that. The company became part of the Zeiss company in 1928 and that may have affected it somewhat, but they were always commercailly available.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Gunut, post 1033,
Hensoldt was commercially very successfull with its roof prism binoculars from about 1890-1900 until the years after that. The company became part of the Zeiss company in 1928 and that may have affected it somewhat, but they were always commercailly available.
Gijs van Ginkel

Gijs

Gunut referred to 'sexy bins' in his post. Are sexy bins allowed in Utrecht?

Lee
 
Alphas still here, but thread dying

Can I divert the thread slightly.

I think that Dennis has a very good point and the "rave" reviews of the eastern (to me) clones suggests that he might well be right. At the moment.

However, all of the newcomers are just revamps of existing technology in fancy dress. Most of improvements in binocular start at the higher end and filter down and that is how its likely to remain.

There is no doubt that the gap is closing as Dennis is suggesting, so the big boys will need to get their skates on if the are to stay ahead and I think that that will need be sooner rather than later. One of them has got to make a major improvement to get them all out of their comfort zone. Who will it be and what the improvement will be remains to be seen. There is a limit to the number of times you can improve the coatings and the style before customers get fed up with the improvement/cost ratio and decide enough is enough.

Over the last couple of years l have had to realise that I am at an age where I can no longer achieve the superb view through my Nikon EDG and SE that is available with some the best binoculars available. Why, I can't hold them steady enough to do them justice so I am changing over to Canon IS.

The image stabilisation of Canons has been a revelation and I now realise that I should have considered the changeover before the the shake became a problem. I have also become convinced that it would be the route to take for many more people should investigate and not just those who have a shake problem. I accept the style of Canon IS binoculars are not going to set the world on fire and I could give a number of reasons for not buying one, but press the IS button and these become side issues. Remember that Canon have no IS competitors in reasonably priced birding binoculars and as sales appear to be low, they probably have no incentive to do any major upgrade.

It is my changeover that shown me what improvements could be available to the top end manufactures if one of them took the plunge. But who? Nikon already have IS scopes and Zeiss IS binoculars - but these are very expensive - and I a certain that everyone else is beavering away on other solutions, but I doubt that the clones are amongst them.

I have only used named binocular makers to indicate a personal point and I hope that if anyone follows up with a reply that we don't end up with a "mine is better than yours" thread.

Stan
 
Last edited:
Stan,

I "converted" to IS binoculars 16 years ago, with the 15x50 Canon, and switched to 10x42 when they became available about 10 years ago. I don't have particularly shaky hands, and mostly use a finnstick whether or not I use IS.

Like you say, when one presses the IS button, all other aspects of the binocular become a side issue. It has remained a mystery to me how birders can be so conservative as to not realize this.

Kimmo
 
Can I divert the thread slightly.

I think that Dennis has a very good point and the "rave" reviews of the eastern (to me) clones suggests that he might well be right. At the moment.

However, all of the newcomers are just revamps of existing technology in fancy dress. Most of improvements in binocular start at the higher end and filter down and that is how its likely to remain.


Stan


That's already been proven false by Lee, as he posted the numerous patents awarded to Kamakura over the years.
 
I have the Canon 18x50 IS binoculars and I agree that IS is amazing - I often use it instead of a scope. I think the reason they have not caught on for mainstream use is the weight. I don't think most people want to use something so heavy all the time - combined with the cost it leaves them in a niche.
 
I have the Canon 18x50 IS binoculars and I agree that IS is amazing - I often use it instead of a scope. I think the reason they have not caught on for mainstream use is the weight. I don't think most people want to use something so heavy all the time - combined with the cost it leaves them in a niche.

Agreed Pete!

IMHO (and keeping with the theme of this particular thread), the Only possible Alpha-Killers Would be an IS or VR stabilized optic that had equal Ergonomics (weight-handling-comfort), equal investment Cost (or less), equal Warranties and equal Optics compared to the current top-of-the-line offerings. After all, who Wouldn't be willing to have their best "hand-held binocular viewing as-is", with virtually No Image Shake (think of IS & VR SLR camera lenses and bodies)!

Reality check...an "equally performing stabilized" Alpha product probably will never be fully achievable in a glass based hand held instrument (due to many production\limitation\cost factors, etc.). If it could have, they would have...Maybe?!

Ted
 
Agreed Pete!

IMHO (and keeping with the theme of this particular thread), the Only possible Alpha-Killers Would be an IS or VR stabilized optic that had equal Ergonomics (weight-handling-comfort), equal investment Cost (or less), equal Warranties and equal Optics compared to the current top-of-the-line offerings. After all, who Wouldn't be willing to have their best "hand-held binocular viewing as-is", with virtually No Image Shake (think of IS & VR SLR camera lenses and bodies)!

Reality check...an "equally performing stabilized" Alpha product probably will never be fully achievable in a glass based hand held instrument (due to many production\limitation\cost factors, etc.). If it could have, they would have...Maybe?!

Ted

Is cost really an issue?
The Canon 10x42L, their flagship birding glass, is available for less than half the price of unstabilized Zeiss or Swaro 10x42s. It is one of the true bargains in todays optics market, imho.
The obstacles to wider acceptance are probably partly ergonomics (they are heavy and bulky), but more likely the derisory warranty period, now extended to three years iirc, from 1 year initially. For alpha glass buying birders, conditioned to expect lifetime service by Swaro, this is a huge red flag.
In real life, the glass is quite robust. One served me flawlessly for 8 years before the IS packed in. It is now back in the pink, but the repair took several iterations, which was disconcerting.
It may be that the service model that new entrants such a Maven are pioneering, to replace rather than to repair, is in fact appropriate for this technology. Unfortunately, no one has yet quite cracked the code of how to sell this superior optics technology in the mainstream.
 
Is cost really an issue?

Well for example...Take the 10X42L with its great optics and effective stabilization, Add the top-quality ergonomics (much smaller size, much lower weight, very comfortable handling), insure best-in-class optics (or at least equal to), match industry's long term warranties...all this of say the SV, SF, NVID, EDG, etc.! Could it be done for the same price-of-entry as per the current high end optic market offerings, or would their cost to the public be way over the top?? :eek!:

Since this All Performing & Encompassing optic hasn't yet appeared, then the main reason, probably, is because "Cost is the Issue" and would not make for a profitable marketing strategy! Could it be done as a "cost-no-object" commodity, I'm sure it could. I would Love to see Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, Nikon or Canon engineer a no-holds-bared respectable (top optical+ergonomic) Stabilized Alpha, Just to "See" this capable technology in action!

Ted
 
Well for example...Take the 10X42L with its great optics and effective stabilization, Add the top-quality ergonomics (much smaller size, much lower weight, very comfortable handling), insure best-in-class optics (or at least equal to), match industry's long term warranties...all this of say the SV, SF, NVID, EDG, etc.! Could it be done for the same price-of-entry as per the current high end optic market offerings, or would their cost to the public be way over the top?? :eek!:

Since this All Performing & Encompassing optic hasn't yet appeared, then the main reason, probably, is because "Cost is the Issue" and would not make for a profitable marketing strategy! Could it be done as a "cost-no-object" commodity, I'm sure it could. I would Love to see Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, Nikon or Canon engineer a no-holds-bared respectable (top optical+ergonomic) Stabilized Alpha, Just to "See" this capable technology in action!

Ted

Image stabilization is now a routine technology, available even in entry level cameras, so incremental costs can't be huge. I'd expect some enterprising beta supplier to pioneer the next step, seen that the alpha makers are obviously asleep at the switch.
The patent listings discovered by 'troubador' are quite provocative, perhaps Kamakura recognizes that there is a market opportunity....
 
Image stabilization is now a routine technology, available even in entry level cameras, so incremental costs can't be huge. I'd expect some enterprising beta supplier to pioneer the next step, seen that the alpha makers are obviously asleep at the switch.
The patent listings discovered by 'troubador' are quite provocative, perhaps Kamakura recognizes that there is a market opportunity....
:t:

WG,

Yes...Mechanical\electrical stabilization in camera lenses\imagers works very well for photography\videography. If the practical application (keeping ergonomics\cost well under control) would be applied to high end visual optics, then Kamakura IS development would be very welcome. To keep their competitive edge, the 4 big optic providers might then be stirred into IS action...just a thought! ;) :t:

Ted
 
Stan,


Like you say, when one presses the IS button, all other aspects of the binocular become a side issue. It has remained a mystery to me how birders can be so conservative as to not realize this.

Kimmo

I had, over the years, Canon IS in 10x42, 12x36, 10x30 and 8x25 (not in that order). I dearly wanted to love them. But for quick scanning, 8x is my usual bino, and the Canon 8x25 is a nasty plastic, jerky IS, narrow FOV beast. The big 15x and 10x are heavy, cumbersome to use and unecessary if you have a scope and tripod with you anyway. I liked the 10x30 and 12x36, but again, if you scan with binos and observe carefully with a scope (which is IS anyway if you have a good tripod), they're not needed. All Canon IS suffer from rotten warranty, really awful service/repair facility, and 'battery anxiety'. For searching in close foliage, etc., none have sufficient FOV.
All that said, if there were a lightweight 8x IS bino with FOV of 7.8 degrees or more, I'd be interested. Maybe if I didn't want to use a scope I'd find the 15x50 useful again....but 15x is insufficient for estuaries or seawatching.
(Caveat...all the above is IMHO only. I know nothing.)
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 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