• 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.

William Optics 8x42 Review (1 Viewer)

What was your overall impression of the bino's low light performance? Good to hear that they are addding Phase coatings, I would not own a roof prism that did not have this feature. My personal concerns would be the friction eyetubes on a low-cost bino and the fact that it is not fully multi-coated. My personal low cost favorite roof is the Bushnell Legend. If you have used the Bushy, how do the two compare?

ranburr
 
ranburr said:
What was your overall impression of the bino's low light performance? Good to hear that they are addding Phase coatings, I would not own a roof prism that did not have this feature. My personal concerns would be the friction eyetubes on a low-cost bino and the fact that it is not fully multi-coated. My personal low cost favorite roof is the Bushnell Legend. If you have used the Bushy, how do the two compare?

ranburr

Low light performance was very good (about as bright as my Nikon 8x40 Egret). I keep meaning to try them on the night sky, but we have either cloud or a full moon.

I have not used the Bushnell Legend, though I have seen one and it is noticeably bigger and heavier. It also has a narrower FOV. I usually find roof prism bins have too much CA for my tastes and I would expect that to be true of the Legend (though that is a guess). In the UK the Legend is considerably more expensive than the WO i.e. £300 versus £200 (or £150 for a trial period) so they are not directly comparable. A fairer comparison would be the Bushnell Natureview 8x42 at ~£160 on Warehouse Express.

The eye tubes seemed fine to me, though there might be sample to sample variation.

Unfortunately the manufacturer sent the sample through the post, and I am sure the right optical assembly has been slightly knocked out of collimation, presumably by being dropped in transit. That would explain the problem with the dioptre and why tests on a resolution chart show lower resolution from the right optical assembly.

I think if they can improve the sharpness a bit then they will offer very good value for someone who needs a compact and waterproof binocular. The FOV and eye relief are unusually good for the price. Personally I would opt for the porro prism route (Swift Audubon 8.5x44) and accept the increased bulk and weight but I'm sure many will prefer the better ergonomics and eye relief of the WO.

Leif
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 19 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