• 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.

New (2016) Vortex Diamondback 8x28 (2 Viewers)

mfunnell

Registered Confuser
I've been using two pairs of the old-version Diamondback 8x28s for while now, one having spent most of it's time as the glove-box bins in my car and the other being the go-everywhere bins I've been throwing into whatever camera bag I'm taking with me. Because of this I was interested to see what the 2016 "refresh" of this model is like, and I've finally had enough use of the new ones to give my first impressions.

Note: my review of the old version can be found here, while some comments on build quality and suchlike can be found here.

Much of the reason for my delay (I've had them for a while now) is that they're really not that much different from the old ones. Rather less different that the spec sheet would suggest, in fact.

Looking at key differences in specification:

Field of view:

6.2°/332'/110m (new) versus 6.9°/360'/119.5m (old)

I believe this one, though the change isn't readily apparent. I've found the practical field of view difference more-or-less doesn't exist for me as eyecup extension is too short for the eye relief on the old version, while the new one has a somewhat better match. I couldn't really see the full field of the old Diamondbacks with or without glasses (I'm nearsighted) while I do see it with the new ones.

Eye Relief:

18mm (new) versus 19.3mm (old).

As noted above, I found the eyecup extension a poor match to eye relief with the old Diamondbacks, leading to "fiddly" eye position, difficulty seeing the full field of view, and blackouts, unless very careful with eye position. The much better match of ER to eyecup extension makes the new Diamondback 8x28s a little easier for me to use, while 18mm of eye relief hardly seems restrictive. (Note: it's the ER that's changed, the eyecups seem the same.)

Inter-Pupillary Distance:

55mm-74mm (new) versus 56mm-74mm (old).

The 1mm improvement in minimum IPD is there, as near as I can tell with a ruler, though it has no impact on my personal use.

Dimensions:

4.6"x4.4" (new) versus 4.8"x4.5" (old).

This seems (ahem) inaccurate to me. Physical comparison shows they're exactly the same size, with the 4.8"x4.5" figures appearing to be the accurate ones. This matters in a set of compact bins (compactness often being their primary point). Inability to measure the bins, write the measurements down, and publish them accurately seems almost unfathomable and yet very, very, common among those selling binoculars.

Exit Pupil:

3.6mm (new) versus 2.8mm (old). ROTFL!

Total BS. Utter, total, BS. See above.

Close Focus:

6.5'/2m (new) versus 13.1'/4m (old).

This seems real to me, and is important. While, being nearsighted, I'm able to focus closer than spec with the old version, the long minimum focus distance occasionally irritated me. I can focus closer than 2m with the new ones, so I'd say that's something of a problem solved (especially for those with normal or longsighted vision).

--

As noted above, the old and new Diamondbacks are the same size and the new ones are otherwise almost (but not quite) physically identical to the old model. There have been some changes to the rubber armouring which seem mostly cosmetic but maybe, perhaps, make the new ones slightly better protected (it's hard to tell). The focus wheel on the new model is ribbed rather than "crosshatched" for traction and the word "waterproof" is absent from the plate on the wheel. A slight change to the hinge geometry seems to make for a 1mm improvement in minimum IPD. The " - .. v .. + " markings near the dioptre adjustment on the old have been replaced by a single "dot" with no direction indicator on the new. The strap, objective covers, rain guard and case appear identical between old and new. Resistance on the focus wheel seems "better" to me, being slightly stiffer (in a way I like) and without the trace of play I found in the old model.

Optically, the old and new versions are quite similar (while noting my field-of-view comments above). Otherwise, I'd say the new model has improvements in sharpness on centre, improved contrast, slightly better resistance to direct flare and slightly worse resistance to veiling flare. All of these are pretty marginal, though. Somewhat larger improvements seem to be in control of chromatic aberration and size of the sweet-spot, and also somewhat sharper edges (though the latter is probably the result of a reduced field of view). Colour seems better to me - perhaps because of improved contrast and CA but also, again perhaps, a slightly more neutral colour balance, as I see it, might help.

All in all I'd say the new version of the 8x28 Diamondback has minor but useful improvements on the old version, though really not enough to be worth upgrading if you already have the old one (unless the much better close focus matters enough to you). I'm keeping the new one since I have a good home the old one can go to. The relatively inexpensive price means I'm not too fussed about having a surplus of Diamondbacks, despite having substituted another (much more expensive!) compact bin for most of my regular use.

...Mike
 
Last edited:
Sorry it's a bit late and I've had quite few amber necktars and haven't read the whole getting round to a verdict review but have they perhaps copied that bloody awful Bresser Everest 8x28 that I unfortunately own?

I really hate that bin and the sooner I get shot of it by whatever means the better but I somehow don't think the Vortex will be the replacement although it looks a funky new design from what I've seen but that don't matter shit if it ain't no good but then maybe they (vortex) don't get that and I might be able to sell my shit Bresser to some idiot but I'd rather destroy it to be honest.

Phew. That Bresser does bug me. I wish I had some dynamite.
 
but have they perhaps copied that bloody awful Bresser Everest 8x28 that I unfortunately own?
Clive, I think not - judging by your reports of how horrid the Bresser Everests are. I've not seen the Bressers and can't know if they're derived from a similar design. If they are, I'd guess the Vortex implementation is better.

I've had quite good use from my Diamondback 8x28s and think they're a nice little binocular, solidly constructed and giving quite good views at low cost in size, weight and price. Others who have looked through my Diamondback 8x28s have agreed (at least one bought their own after looking through mine).

...Mike
 
Morning. Wow did I have a crap drunken sleep.

There is something strange about that Bresser or something that bugs my eyes. It's different to all of my other bins is some way. From indoors the view is pretty flat and with good definition in the right light etc but it just lacks width and there is a lot of eye relief but with the eyecups extended it can be like looking down a tunnel.

I do like small bins and today I will be taking out my Carson 8x22 rev porro and my Vistron 8x25 to see how they go.

I haven't really had a good try out with the Carson but I shortened the focus wheel a little and it's looking more promising and the Vistron I actually took the rubber eyecups off (well the glue came loose) and I discovered I could take the metal sliding cups off and up end them and get an extra bit of extension on them and the ideal eye placement. I think they had been assembled incorrectly upside down in the manufacture. Definite improvement with only this small change. You can't buy them anymore ( the Vixen Atrek seems the equivalent ) but it got me thinking about the Vistron Pro 8x32 which is still only 11cm long (shorter than the Bresser 8x28) and light but with only 6.5 deg fov. I think the Nikon 7s Prostaff 10x could be a good replacement but then it's getting bigger than I would like. I really do like the size of my Vistron 8x25 compared to my Nikon M7 10x30 for my on the go cycling trips. The Bresser is somewhere in between and then for even smaller I think these reverse porros are actually pretty good. A lot more distortion than my Bresser but I pretty much already prefer the Carson 8x22 to the Bresser even though the Bresser is a bit better in lower light.

I'm wary now though of anything like the Bresser 8x28 as even if it was a little bit better I still don't think I'd ever like it very much. It would definitely need to be a lot better. I guess it is something to do with the design restrictions or something for this size of bin but it's very amazing in how big a difference there can be just going to the 32mm at least on paper. Didn't you return the Diamondback 32mm though? I guess just down to a size choice and you already having a good 32mm.

I definitely like the Vistron 8x25 over the Bresser so I would say I would favour the 8x32 Vistron Pro (or just Vistron) over the Diamondback 8x28 and the Vistron is even more compact yet with the bigger objective. It's an interesting one.
 
Didn't you return the Diamondback 32mm though?
No, I just don't like them all that much, even though in many ways they really are good bins. They're just not for me. But given the cost of international shipping all the way to and from Oz, there's no returning: only passing them free to a good home or finding a use for them. The use I'm putting the 8x32 Diamondbacks to is replacing 8x28 Diamondbacks in the bag I take with camera and binoculars I can live without if I lose them (ie. when drinking or going to dodgy areas or both).
I guess just down to a size choice and you already having a good 32mm.
It's a bit more than that. I bought a Victory 8x32 FL, even though the cost seemed well over the odds, because I couldn't find anything remotely likely to do what I wanted any other way. All the physically small non-alpha 8x32s I could find had views which disappointed. All the non-alpha 8x32s I could find with good views were too large - even when climbing to the $1,000(+/- +++) range. So I bit the bullet and decided between the Leica HD+ and the Zeiss FL (the only two small-enough alphas), with the Zeiss winning in a number of areas (for me): the $hundreds in lower price (here in Oz) being a huge chunk of that.

In compact(ish) bins I now have:

* Diamondback 8x28 (old) as a glove-box bin and will see if it survives the Australian summer (it has, so far, but will it make the next?).

* Diamondback 8x28 (old) I'm giving away, but which hasn't gone yet.

* Diamondback 8x28 (new) I'll put in a laptop bag I've grabbed and gone with, forgetting to put binoculars inside. Even if I forget, I won't now.

* Diamondback 8x32 (new). Goes in my "boozy" camera bag along with a Canon G1XmkI. I'll live if I lose it (though of course I don't want to).

* Meade Rainforest 8x32. I don't and won't use it, since it's a glare-monster. I probably won't even afflict it on someone else, even for free.

* Sightron SII "Blue Sky" 8x32. Really nice bins. A friend has them with her on a trip. I'll probably use these for many a "loaner" application. Or let Marie have them if she's keen.

* Zeiss Victory 8x32 T* FL LotuTec. New (late 2015 production, as near as I can tell; full Oz warranty), and now used for 90% of my compact bin requirements and 80% of my total requirements. Which, for their swingeing cost, they d*mned well ought to be useful for. A wonderful optical instrument, and I'll no doubt appreciate their quality long after I've forgotten their price (at the price, that'll be a few decades).

I definitely like the Vistron 8x25 over the Bresser so I would say I would favour the 8x32 Vistron Pro (or just Vistron) over the Diamondback 8x28 and the Vistron is even more compact yet with the bigger objective. It's an interesting one.
Clive, let me know how that goes. As noted above, I kind of gave up.

...Mike
 
Last edited:
The Carson 8x22 worked well today. I tried to use it and the Vistron equally to get a comparison and reaquaint myself with he Vistron as I've been changing bins so much lately.

They were both very good and I only missed the Kowa SV a little but I've decided I need that here by me always at the window and I can't be bothered attaching a strap to take it along. I probably need another one of these 8x32 SV but the Carson and Vistron were good enough to do the job very well and actually difficult to pick a winner between them as they both have a different view and strengths. The Carson is wide and sharp but with some distortion that requires very precise ipd setting to reduce it as much as possible but maybe that's just with this particular one but once you get your eyes in and forget about it then it's all good. The Vistron is a sort of mini Kowa SV view with a bit narrower fov than the Carson but seems to have better dof, it's just such a great compact bin and great for watching the frogs having orgies all over the place today at my local reserve.

I think the first bird I spotted with the Carson today was a Kingfisher coming towards me and under the bridge and out the other side and I was able to follow it the whole time so quite impressive for a $35 dollar bin in fact rather amazing. That's one bin were the price very much underrepresents the performance. Also probably best ever view of a treecreeper feeding on something in the moss on the old bridge. Just sitting in the light coming through the trees and super clear with the Carson, enough to see the beauty in the feather colours and patterns but I was only 20ft or so away so surprised it wasn't bothered by me being around.

So a good test today and I'm feeling that either of these are good enough for me in the good light seasons now arriving and I don't need look any further which is handy as I am pretty skint at the moment.

I think I will probably pack the Vistron and the Carson 7x18 for most of my upcoming outings. I think the Carson 7x18 is more impressive than the 8x22 as far as wow view but I think I did get some kind of strangely good one. The 8x22 is better for distance so I may grab it on it's own from time to time and maybe the 10x25 Hawke Endurance also.

The FL is a super bin and if you didn't find anything else less expensive to your liking then I think it was a good choice. I'm well happy with my larger /medium bins, it's always been the smaller stuff that I find the most difficult but I think I'm satisfied there now also and in future would definitely look again at these reverse porro type bins and something like my Vistron. Even my kind of blurry 8x22U Visionary is somehow a sort of entertaining view and hangs brilliantly around the neck using the long lanyard from my Optima monocular. My collection is a happy one excepting you know what but I just use the Bresser now from the bedroom to view the distant mountains or football stadium next door and it's ok for that I suppose but it still has to go sometime. It's just not in the team.8-P I sort of hoped it would have broken or something but the damn thing seems pretty reliable. I did mention to my sister if she would like to have the Bresser but she's already happy with the crap Olympus 8x21 I gave her. Unlike us she has absolutely no desire for a better view?
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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