Steve C
Well-known member
Pro se loquator. “It will speak for itself”. The equivalent, more or less, of just shut up and listen. Forget the name on the box or the price tag. Just listen to the binocular. I ask myself one basic question. Is this something I would buy for myself? This has been a difficult review to write. It has been difficult not because the binocular is anything other than superb, but because I can already hear the disbelief that will rise up when I say what I think needs to be said about it. It is longer than I’d like but there are still things that will need to be discussed further. So here goes.
It is my opinion, and I guess my opinion only, that this is an instrument that anybody interested in optics needs to have a look at. That is really the reason for the review. This may well signal a change in the game for the $1,000 binocular. Maven really is the new kid on the block. They have been in business for just over a year. They had previous optics industry employment and kept their relationship with Kamakura from that experience. Kamakura is a renowned Japanese Optical firm, with a reputation for being able to build any quality level. They started just after WW II and are still here. So Maven is in good company.
Maven is not looking for dealers. They are selling direct to customers. This lets them eliminate the middle man cost, and the savings can be substantial. One approach they have adopted is that every binocular gets the once over in their lab. Each binocular goes on a collimation stand in the Maven lab. It has to pass that test first. The barrels must show close tolerances to each other in their performance. The rest of the inspection is similar to what an experienced user will do to their new binocular. The best way to avoid return and warranty issues is to send out a good unit in the first place. Those that flunk the test go back to Kamakura.
Want to try before you buy? Hard to do with no dealer network. What you can do is order a stock model on the website. You can choose to use the demo option. Your card will be charged. You have two weeks to return an undamaged binocular. Your card will be refunded on receipt of same. They offer a lifetime full unconditional warranty.
Maven is unique in that they offer a series of exterior customizations. You have two stock choices for rubber armor, and five different camouflage patterns. You can customize the colors on the focus wheel, the strap connectors, the ocular rings, the tripod plate, the logo color, and there is an engraving option. You can stay stock conservative, go stealthy camo, or go for it all with black, white, pink, orange, green and blue. This option adds a week to the delivery. That work is done by Kamakura in San Diego. It goes back to Maven, gets its inspection, and heads for the customer. Repairs are done by Kamakura in their USA facility.
Out of the box:
This immediately strikes you as a solid, substantial instrument. Nothing in the feel indicates any corners were cut anywhere. The rubber armor is thick, soft, non-slippery, and has a nice tactile feel. It gives the impression it means business and is not here to be ignored or trifled with. As this is the first opportunity for a first impression, it makes a good one.
Mechanics and construction:
This is an Abbe-Koenig prism system. It has a somewhat larger than typical objective diameter at 45 mm. The clear aperture appears to be the full 45 mm. The AK prisms and the enhanced objective make this a long binocular. With eye cups extended and with objective and ocular covers in place it is 7.5” long (190 mm). Wearing a Rick Young harness, with guards in place, it weighs 35.5 oz. Without the harness it is 34.0, and the binocular sans covers is 33.0. So it’s long and fairly heavy, which will undoubtedly deter some people. It does not feel like it weighs 34 oz. I know the naysayers will be out in force with how heavy this is…before they try it…dare I say without ever trying it?
This leaves the question as to why 9 and 11x and a 45 mm objective. This is a strictly Kamakura design with a couple of years of R&D behind it. The premise is to use the light transmission potential of the AK prism with a small increase in objective diameter. The design parameters allow 5 and 4 mm EP size with a bit of a magnification boost from 8 and 10x. Typically companies walk into Kamakura with a team of engineers and experts with reams of their own set of demands, designs and specifications. Almost never does anyone ask for a pure Kamakura design. Everyone is concerned with having their own binocular. Maven walked in and asked what Kamakura had that would do what they wanted. This is what they got.
EDIT: Since the above bolded sentences may be partly in error, I will note them and admit a mistake. The rest of the review stands.
Focus characteristics and handling:
While the length and weight may be seen as a weakness, they are also strengths of this binocular. The length is (obviously) a function of the A-K prism design requirements. The length is also increased a bit due to a larger objective. It balances just at the end of the hinge, the center of gravity is at the center of the binocular. The flare out in the objective tubes begins ahead of the balance point, so only large hands will involve that area, and large hands won’t mind it. There is room for any size hand to comfortably grab this binocular and have it balance. I can get all four fingers on the tube in front of the hinge. Wherever you grab it, whether a deliberate, normal placement, or hurried grab to ID a lifer, average adult hands will find the focus wheel perfectly placed under the index finger when they grab the binocular. The grip surface is superb. This cannot be accidental. Kamakura must be making a statement here. It may be long and ungainly looking, but the ergonomics experience is becoming a favorite.
The focus is counterclockwise to infinity. The close focus distance on my unit is 40” (3.5’, a bit over a meter). I’d made some different statements on my other thread, but this is it after actually measuring it. There is a 20 mm offset difference, at a 60 mm IPD, the objectives are 80 mm center to center. This close focus measurement is at the narrow point of 56 mm IPD. At my 60 mm IPD, I get a figure 8 image barrel separation at 4.0’. I can focus quite clearly on my boot toe when standing up. The published 4.9’ is likely the distance a median IPD will give a single image focus. Certainly at 5.0’, everything is a focused single image at my IPD. The IPD range is 56-75 mm.
There is 1.25 turns focus wheel travel. For my eyes, there is 0.25 turns left after infinity, leaving a useful wheel rotation of one turn. With the focus wheel in the midpoint of the remaining turn, the binocular is focused at 10’. Or one half turn from close to 10’. Cut the remaining wheel travel in half, or going toward infinity another quarter turn, and focus is at about 100 feet. The next quarter turn obviously gets to infinity. The focus is just slightly stiffer than buttery smooth. Terrific description I realize, but I’m not sure how to measure quantifiable energy requirements for focus wheel movement. Overall it’s great…for lack of a less subjective term, just stiff enough to typically require user input to move it, but not difficult to move. I suppose you just know a good one when you feel it. There is no slack in the movement, not in starting the movement or in switching movement direction. There are no rough spots, no increase in difficulty in wheel travel when changing directions. Two hours in the freezer initially increases focus wheel movement tension by what I’d estimate to be 25-30%. It gets stiffer, but not unusable. Move the focus wheel to and fro a couple of times and that increase in tension is mostly gone. I’d guess that cold weather focus won’t be much of an issue. Unless you let the binocular freeze. Inside your jacket or other protection I’d think would be used in colder weather should keep it from getting overly cold.
The binocular uses a right eye diopter ring. Center hinge is tight, but does not need to be brute forced. There is a standard tripod adapter.
Optical characteristics: Field performance
This 9x45 unit has a 377’ fov. This is 7.2*, an old fashioned AFOV of very nearly 65*. For the arc tangent inclined, it’s a 59* AFOV. As I measure this unit, the 45 mm is the full aperture. By measuring exit pupils, I calculate a magnification of 8.7x.
Interior baffling seems near perfection. The exit pupils are perfectly round, clear spheres in a stark, black, background, unmarked by reflections of any sort.
There is essentially no glare, veiling or otherwise. One of my uses for a binocular this time of year is morning inspection of the cattle. It’s calving season. I live at an elevation of 4,050 feet. Just east as a background to the rising sun, is Stukel Mountain a hogback ridge with a peak of 6,900 ‘. It rises in a nearly sheer fashion and forms a perfect background against the cattle pasture. The sunrise is just on the south flank of the mountain. On a typical frosty morning here, on a clear day, as the last few have been, conditions looking toward the pasture can be blinding. The sunrise line across the pasture is brilliant on the sunny side, and deep gloom on the shady side. That blindingly bright view with sunrise glinting off of a frosty pasture surface silhouetting a herd of black Angus cattle can destroy the image presentation of many binoculars. The B2 will cut right through that. It seems oblivious to glare.
CA can be found, only with difficulty, and in situations where I would not typically use a glass. However, as I have noted numerous times, I am not CA sensitive. I often wonder how much good comes from CA comments in reviews. I’m not sure how much assistance I can be, since I am CA insensitive. On the other hand it is quite common for a reviewer to indicate it is a real problem with the review binocular. Stated like is it an obvious, inarguable fact. You almost never hear comments from the reviewer about whether or not they are sensitive. I suspect many are, and since they see it, they assume it is normal. Their reality must be true for everybody. I really suspect most people are mostly CA insensitive and I’d be pretty surprised if there is enough CA here to bother most.
There has been no particular effort to incorporate what we hear spoken of as “field flattening technology”. It would be a waste of money I think. While there is some pincushion and a very small amount of curvature, the edge is sharper than nearly anything else. More on this in comparisons to other binoculars later on. It is a classic edge pattern with slight distortions at the edge, but seemingly less obvious than one might expect.
For terrestrial viewing the sweet spot looks to be at least 75%. In star gazing, you can see some degradation beginning at 60%. That does not seem to manifest itself in terrestrial viewing, where it seems wider. Stars focus to perfect, spike free spheres.
Optical characteristics: Image performance
This binocular has a claimed overall light transmission figure of 93.7%. The color bias here is absolutely neutral. A bright white surface viewed through the objective is a bright white surface. The colors accordingly are brilliant and natural in tint reproduction in the image. Reds are red, etc. The contrast is outstanding, certainly on par with anything else I have ever viewed. A very sharp, satisfying, transparent, natural view. The apparent brightness and overall sharpness argue strongly in favor of the listed transmission %. It is commonly stated that eyes usually need at least a 5% increase in light transmission to produce a noticeable difference. I have a binocular which has been bench tested at 90% overall light transmission. This one is brighter than that. If we need a further 5% increase here to see an improvement, we are needing to get to 99% territory.
I am not able to give the resolution specs, but this binocular is as close to the limit of human optical acuity as anything you will buy.
The image strong points of the B2 are detail at distance in poor light, close detail in in poor light, and a true to life sharp image. The objective offset imparts a better than average 3-D presentation for a roof prism. The image excels in defining the stark edges of an object while offering superb texture rendition.
Eye relief:
Stated as 17.3 mm. The effective, or user available seems to be closer to 14.0. I can see the whole field with either my reading glasses or with sunglasses. I use them fully extended. The eye cups extend upward in a three click-stop affair. The right eye cup on mine is a bit too loose. That and the too little eye cup extension are the only two things I will fault.
I have been using these with a set of winged eye cup adapters for the Nikon EDG. The Field Optics Research Winged eye shields work well too, so these are two nice options if you want it.
Comparisons:
Well, here we get to the tricky part of the review. I have a 9x to compare with 7, 8, and 10x samples. But the view here demands comparisons. The Maven B2 image is…well…superb. There is no other way to say it. I took the binocular out on the second day I had it to the White Lake unit of the Lower Klamath Wildlife Refuge. There are gazillions of water birds there this time of year. While looking things over, another car pulled into the access point. A guy with an 8x42 Zeiss FL and I struck up a bit of a conversation. He asked what in the world those binoculars were. So we traded off binoculars back and forth for a while. The FL is the ONLY alpha class glass I ever really ever came close to buying. I did not for the simple reason (and this is solely personal) that I did not like the high transmission in concert with the quite cold, even icy cool color balance. For this time of the year, they can be too bright. I quickly concluded that I liked the Maven better than the FL. The neutral color balance is much preferable to my eyes and removes the too bright objection. The Maven has better edge performance. Put the Maven in black armor and a Zeiss logo, and with the AK heritage, I doubt many people would not think the binocular was Zeiss. Heresy…maybe, but that is how it is. Not a Victory (pun intended) for either, just a point for the Maven.
The next day I headed for a local Sporting Goods store who had both a Swarovski EL 10x 42 and a Zeiss Conquest 10x42. While I like the Conquest a lot, it is a step behind the Maven in apparent brightness, and a bit less sharp. I’d spent some time with the Conquest before and was not really surprised. The Conquest being smaller will be preferred by some certainly.
But the Swarovision was the real reason I showed up. I know the owner as I buy a fair amount of stuff there. My version of “support the local brick and mortar family business”. So I told him what I was up to. I left him my card and he agreed to let me take it for a few hours. The image presentation of these two is superb and (for all practical intents and purposes) equal. I was pretty surprised as I figured the SV would be able to show alpha vs second tier improvements. I don’t think I could tell a photo of the image of one from the other. I’ll give the EL SV the edge in eyecup design, and it has a somewhat better edge. This is the reason I don’t think Maven needed to go flat field. If it can compete this well with the SV, there seems no need for the extra cost. There is also the 9x vs 10x and 45 mm vs 42 mm configuration differences. The Maven focuses closer, has a better depth of field, and a bit of extra 3-D. Now, there are certain folks who are going to read this and lose a gasket.
I never thought a $1,000 binocular would ever unseat my Leupold Gold Ring HD. The B2 in some important ways does that. This GR has been bench tested at 90% transmission and it is not as bright as the B2. However the color bias in the Leupold is warm as opposed to neutral, so the apparent brightness perception is somewhat skewed. The ergonomics are totally different. The more I use the big Maven, the more I come to favor the feel.
Where does the $500 or thereabouts class now stand? Well nothing has really changed. This glass is not intended to compete there. The better mid- price glass typically has light transmission figures in the 86-89% range. So that is enough of a difference that the difference can be noted. But at the 86-88 range it is still bright enough to give the quite satisfactory views they do. What transmission improvements are to come in this range, time will tell. We are only quite recently moving, even with the high end binoculars, into the 90% and above range.
We tend to think of these comparisons from a competition mentality. Gather the contestants, it is the binocular version of March madness. Place your bets, fill out your brackets. The contestants square off, one game at a time, each with their cheering section. The winner will emerge with the trophy. My binocular is better than yours! Yeah, maybe, but here it was more like Kamakura-san from Japan getting together with Herr Swarovski from Austria, each half a planet apart from the other, sitting on the tailgate of my pickup, someplace in the middle. Instead of a 15 round winner take all prize fight they had a nice discussion dealing with 15 chapters in the newest optics textbook. I was the one who got the beating. I finally had to give up and holler “uncle”. There is no winner here, there is no loser. I finally concluded these are two superb binoculars (throw in the Zeiss Victory FL in here and make it three) and decided I was done. Certainly not everyone is going to agree with this, but it is just the best way I can come up with to describe what I have seen over the last days. As I said earlier, this Maven B2 needs to be seen by anyone interested in optics. Some alpha owners will not agree with me. That is to be expected, and I’m not claiming defeat or victory for either side of the debate. Not everyone will sell their alpha and get a B2, but that is not the point.
At some point after I called it quits, it hit me. I had begun to think of the Maven B2 as the new reference standard for a $1,000 binocular. Since that is the price tag it bears, that is true. It is however a much more expensive glass than that. It took some time for what the Maven was telling me to register, but it finally did. I was assuming (despite my efforts to avoid assumptions) that I was going to be dealing with a typical $1,000 binocular. The whole paradigm of $1,000 vs $2,000 or more is invalid in this instance. The price is what it is because Maven has chosen to sell direct. They have no wish to support wholesale distributors who sell to dealers, who sell to us. They are paying Japanese Labor costs, not Austrian or German. While Japanese costs are up they are still a lot less than in Europe. Now, there may be some corners that will considered to have been cut by Kamakura. They could have chosen to do away with the less expensive right eye diopter for a more expensive center focus style. They could have chosen to launch into the field flattener frenzy. In the end they could have claimed flat field victory, but I doubt the field would have been any flatter than it is. They could have used more expensive fluoride glass components instead of plain Jane high grade ED glass. So far as the user could tell, the binocular would have been no better, just more expensive.
I think Maven has done a couple of things right here. First is their choice of Kamakura, one of the planets premier optics companies, who has a long history of OEM binoculars sold under names other than Kamakura. The second is the way they approached them. They just asked Kamakura for their best binoculars. Three guys who recreate in the Wyoming outdoors who knew what they wanted, who had worked with Kamakura went in and asked what they had, not something off the dusty shelf in the back room, but what front room stuff did Kamakura have ready to go that would do what was wanted. What they got was what they are selling as the B1, B2, and B3. This AK design was just ready for production when Maven walked in the door. So Maven got Kamakura’s best. I for one am taking advantage of the fact. Right now the $1,000 price tag means a lot more than it did not so long ago. Just remember, if you want Kamakura’s best, you can’t get it direct from Kamakura.
When you get it in hand, keep the Latin in mind. Let it speak for itself, it was, but it took me a bit of time to listen closely enough. That is what I’ve been doing, no regrets, and a great binocular…Pro se loquator.
OK folks, pictures to follow
It is my opinion, and I guess my opinion only, that this is an instrument that anybody interested in optics needs to have a look at. That is really the reason for the review. This may well signal a change in the game for the $1,000 binocular. Maven really is the new kid on the block. They have been in business for just over a year. They had previous optics industry employment and kept their relationship with Kamakura from that experience. Kamakura is a renowned Japanese Optical firm, with a reputation for being able to build any quality level. They started just after WW II and are still here. So Maven is in good company.
Maven is not looking for dealers. They are selling direct to customers. This lets them eliminate the middle man cost, and the savings can be substantial. One approach they have adopted is that every binocular gets the once over in their lab. Each binocular goes on a collimation stand in the Maven lab. It has to pass that test first. The barrels must show close tolerances to each other in their performance. The rest of the inspection is similar to what an experienced user will do to their new binocular. The best way to avoid return and warranty issues is to send out a good unit in the first place. Those that flunk the test go back to Kamakura.
Want to try before you buy? Hard to do with no dealer network. What you can do is order a stock model on the website. You can choose to use the demo option. Your card will be charged. You have two weeks to return an undamaged binocular. Your card will be refunded on receipt of same. They offer a lifetime full unconditional warranty.
Maven is unique in that they offer a series of exterior customizations. You have two stock choices for rubber armor, and five different camouflage patterns. You can customize the colors on the focus wheel, the strap connectors, the ocular rings, the tripod plate, the logo color, and there is an engraving option. You can stay stock conservative, go stealthy camo, or go for it all with black, white, pink, orange, green and blue. This option adds a week to the delivery. That work is done by Kamakura in San Diego. It goes back to Maven, gets its inspection, and heads for the customer. Repairs are done by Kamakura in their USA facility.
Out of the box:
This immediately strikes you as a solid, substantial instrument. Nothing in the feel indicates any corners were cut anywhere. The rubber armor is thick, soft, non-slippery, and has a nice tactile feel. It gives the impression it means business and is not here to be ignored or trifled with. As this is the first opportunity for a first impression, it makes a good one.
Mechanics and construction:
This is an Abbe-Koenig prism system. It has a somewhat larger than typical objective diameter at 45 mm. The clear aperture appears to be the full 45 mm. The AK prisms and the enhanced objective make this a long binocular. With eye cups extended and with objective and ocular covers in place it is 7.5” long (190 mm). Wearing a Rick Young harness, with guards in place, it weighs 35.5 oz. Without the harness it is 34.0, and the binocular sans covers is 33.0. So it’s long and fairly heavy, which will undoubtedly deter some people. It does not feel like it weighs 34 oz. I know the naysayers will be out in force with how heavy this is…before they try it…dare I say without ever trying it?
This leaves the question as to why 9 and 11x and a 45 mm objective. This is a strictly Kamakura design with a couple of years of R&D behind it. The premise is to use the light transmission potential of the AK prism with a small increase in objective diameter. The design parameters allow 5 and 4 mm EP size with a bit of a magnification boost from 8 and 10x. Typically companies walk into Kamakura with a team of engineers and experts with reams of their own set of demands, designs and specifications. Almost never does anyone ask for a pure Kamakura design. Everyone is concerned with having their own binocular. Maven walked in and asked what Kamakura had that would do what they wanted. This is what they got.
EDIT: Since the above bolded sentences may be partly in error, I will note them and admit a mistake. The rest of the review stands.
Focus characteristics and handling:
While the length and weight may be seen as a weakness, they are also strengths of this binocular. The length is (obviously) a function of the A-K prism design requirements. The length is also increased a bit due to a larger objective. It balances just at the end of the hinge, the center of gravity is at the center of the binocular. The flare out in the objective tubes begins ahead of the balance point, so only large hands will involve that area, and large hands won’t mind it. There is room for any size hand to comfortably grab this binocular and have it balance. I can get all four fingers on the tube in front of the hinge. Wherever you grab it, whether a deliberate, normal placement, or hurried grab to ID a lifer, average adult hands will find the focus wheel perfectly placed under the index finger when they grab the binocular. The grip surface is superb. This cannot be accidental. Kamakura must be making a statement here. It may be long and ungainly looking, but the ergonomics experience is becoming a favorite.
The focus is counterclockwise to infinity. The close focus distance on my unit is 40” (3.5’, a bit over a meter). I’d made some different statements on my other thread, but this is it after actually measuring it. There is a 20 mm offset difference, at a 60 mm IPD, the objectives are 80 mm center to center. This close focus measurement is at the narrow point of 56 mm IPD. At my 60 mm IPD, I get a figure 8 image barrel separation at 4.0’. I can focus quite clearly on my boot toe when standing up. The published 4.9’ is likely the distance a median IPD will give a single image focus. Certainly at 5.0’, everything is a focused single image at my IPD. The IPD range is 56-75 mm.
There is 1.25 turns focus wheel travel. For my eyes, there is 0.25 turns left after infinity, leaving a useful wheel rotation of one turn. With the focus wheel in the midpoint of the remaining turn, the binocular is focused at 10’. Or one half turn from close to 10’. Cut the remaining wheel travel in half, or going toward infinity another quarter turn, and focus is at about 100 feet. The next quarter turn obviously gets to infinity. The focus is just slightly stiffer than buttery smooth. Terrific description I realize, but I’m not sure how to measure quantifiable energy requirements for focus wheel movement. Overall it’s great…for lack of a less subjective term, just stiff enough to typically require user input to move it, but not difficult to move. I suppose you just know a good one when you feel it. There is no slack in the movement, not in starting the movement or in switching movement direction. There are no rough spots, no increase in difficulty in wheel travel when changing directions. Two hours in the freezer initially increases focus wheel movement tension by what I’d estimate to be 25-30%. It gets stiffer, but not unusable. Move the focus wheel to and fro a couple of times and that increase in tension is mostly gone. I’d guess that cold weather focus won’t be much of an issue. Unless you let the binocular freeze. Inside your jacket or other protection I’d think would be used in colder weather should keep it from getting overly cold.
The binocular uses a right eye diopter ring. Center hinge is tight, but does not need to be brute forced. There is a standard tripod adapter.
Optical characteristics: Field performance
This 9x45 unit has a 377’ fov. This is 7.2*, an old fashioned AFOV of very nearly 65*. For the arc tangent inclined, it’s a 59* AFOV. As I measure this unit, the 45 mm is the full aperture. By measuring exit pupils, I calculate a magnification of 8.7x.
Interior baffling seems near perfection. The exit pupils are perfectly round, clear spheres in a stark, black, background, unmarked by reflections of any sort.
There is essentially no glare, veiling or otherwise. One of my uses for a binocular this time of year is morning inspection of the cattle. It’s calving season. I live at an elevation of 4,050 feet. Just east as a background to the rising sun, is Stukel Mountain a hogback ridge with a peak of 6,900 ‘. It rises in a nearly sheer fashion and forms a perfect background against the cattle pasture. The sunrise is just on the south flank of the mountain. On a typical frosty morning here, on a clear day, as the last few have been, conditions looking toward the pasture can be blinding. The sunrise line across the pasture is brilliant on the sunny side, and deep gloom on the shady side. That blindingly bright view with sunrise glinting off of a frosty pasture surface silhouetting a herd of black Angus cattle can destroy the image presentation of many binoculars. The B2 will cut right through that. It seems oblivious to glare.
CA can be found, only with difficulty, and in situations where I would not typically use a glass. However, as I have noted numerous times, I am not CA sensitive. I often wonder how much good comes from CA comments in reviews. I’m not sure how much assistance I can be, since I am CA insensitive. On the other hand it is quite common for a reviewer to indicate it is a real problem with the review binocular. Stated like is it an obvious, inarguable fact. You almost never hear comments from the reviewer about whether or not they are sensitive. I suspect many are, and since they see it, they assume it is normal. Their reality must be true for everybody. I really suspect most people are mostly CA insensitive and I’d be pretty surprised if there is enough CA here to bother most.
There has been no particular effort to incorporate what we hear spoken of as “field flattening technology”. It would be a waste of money I think. While there is some pincushion and a very small amount of curvature, the edge is sharper than nearly anything else. More on this in comparisons to other binoculars later on. It is a classic edge pattern with slight distortions at the edge, but seemingly less obvious than one might expect.
For terrestrial viewing the sweet spot looks to be at least 75%. In star gazing, you can see some degradation beginning at 60%. That does not seem to manifest itself in terrestrial viewing, where it seems wider. Stars focus to perfect, spike free spheres.
Optical characteristics: Image performance
This binocular has a claimed overall light transmission figure of 93.7%. The color bias here is absolutely neutral. A bright white surface viewed through the objective is a bright white surface. The colors accordingly are brilliant and natural in tint reproduction in the image. Reds are red, etc. The contrast is outstanding, certainly on par with anything else I have ever viewed. A very sharp, satisfying, transparent, natural view. The apparent brightness and overall sharpness argue strongly in favor of the listed transmission %. It is commonly stated that eyes usually need at least a 5% increase in light transmission to produce a noticeable difference. I have a binocular which has been bench tested at 90% overall light transmission. This one is brighter than that. If we need a further 5% increase here to see an improvement, we are needing to get to 99% territory.
I am not able to give the resolution specs, but this binocular is as close to the limit of human optical acuity as anything you will buy.
The image strong points of the B2 are detail at distance in poor light, close detail in in poor light, and a true to life sharp image. The objective offset imparts a better than average 3-D presentation for a roof prism. The image excels in defining the stark edges of an object while offering superb texture rendition.
Eye relief:
Stated as 17.3 mm. The effective, or user available seems to be closer to 14.0. I can see the whole field with either my reading glasses or with sunglasses. I use them fully extended. The eye cups extend upward in a three click-stop affair. The right eye cup on mine is a bit too loose. That and the too little eye cup extension are the only two things I will fault.
I have been using these with a set of winged eye cup adapters for the Nikon EDG. The Field Optics Research Winged eye shields work well too, so these are two nice options if you want it.
Comparisons:
Well, here we get to the tricky part of the review. I have a 9x to compare with 7, 8, and 10x samples. But the view here demands comparisons. The Maven B2 image is…well…superb. There is no other way to say it. I took the binocular out on the second day I had it to the White Lake unit of the Lower Klamath Wildlife Refuge. There are gazillions of water birds there this time of year. While looking things over, another car pulled into the access point. A guy with an 8x42 Zeiss FL and I struck up a bit of a conversation. He asked what in the world those binoculars were. So we traded off binoculars back and forth for a while. The FL is the ONLY alpha class glass I ever really ever came close to buying. I did not for the simple reason (and this is solely personal) that I did not like the high transmission in concert with the quite cold, even icy cool color balance. For this time of the year, they can be too bright. I quickly concluded that I liked the Maven better than the FL. The neutral color balance is much preferable to my eyes and removes the too bright objection. The Maven has better edge performance. Put the Maven in black armor and a Zeiss logo, and with the AK heritage, I doubt many people would not think the binocular was Zeiss. Heresy…maybe, but that is how it is. Not a Victory (pun intended) for either, just a point for the Maven.
The next day I headed for a local Sporting Goods store who had both a Swarovski EL 10x 42 and a Zeiss Conquest 10x42. While I like the Conquest a lot, it is a step behind the Maven in apparent brightness, and a bit less sharp. I’d spent some time with the Conquest before and was not really surprised. The Conquest being smaller will be preferred by some certainly.
But the Swarovision was the real reason I showed up. I know the owner as I buy a fair amount of stuff there. My version of “support the local brick and mortar family business”. So I told him what I was up to. I left him my card and he agreed to let me take it for a few hours. The image presentation of these two is superb and (for all practical intents and purposes) equal. I was pretty surprised as I figured the SV would be able to show alpha vs second tier improvements. I don’t think I could tell a photo of the image of one from the other. I’ll give the EL SV the edge in eyecup design, and it has a somewhat better edge. This is the reason I don’t think Maven needed to go flat field. If it can compete this well with the SV, there seems no need for the extra cost. There is also the 9x vs 10x and 45 mm vs 42 mm configuration differences. The Maven focuses closer, has a better depth of field, and a bit of extra 3-D. Now, there are certain folks who are going to read this and lose a gasket.
I never thought a $1,000 binocular would ever unseat my Leupold Gold Ring HD. The B2 in some important ways does that. This GR has been bench tested at 90% transmission and it is not as bright as the B2. However the color bias in the Leupold is warm as opposed to neutral, so the apparent brightness perception is somewhat skewed. The ergonomics are totally different. The more I use the big Maven, the more I come to favor the feel.
Where does the $500 or thereabouts class now stand? Well nothing has really changed. This glass is not intended to compete there. The better mid- price glass typically has light transmission figures in the 86-89% range. So that is enough of a difference that the difference can be noted. But at the 86-88 range it is still bright enough to give the quite satisfactory views they do. What transmission improvements are to come in this range, time will tell. We are only quite recently moving, even with the high end binoculars, into the 90% and above range.
We tend to think of these comparisons from a competition mentality. Gather the contestants, it is the binocular version of March madness. Place your bets, fill out your brackets. The contestants square off, one game at a time, each with their cheering section. The winner will emerge with the trophy. My binocular is better than yours! Yeah, maybe, but here it was more like Kamakura-san from Japan getting together with Herr Swarovski from Austria, each half a planet apart from the other, sitting on the tailgate of my pickup, someplace in the middle. Instead of a 15 round winner take all prize fight they had a nice discussion dealing with 15 chapters in the newest optics textbook. I was the one who got the beating. I finally had to give up and holler “uncle”. There is no winner here, there is no loser. I finally concluded these are two superb binoculars (throw in the Zeiss Victory FL in here and make it three) and decided I was done. Certainly not everyone is going to agree with this, but it is just the best way I can come up with to describe what I have seen over the last days. As I said earlier, this Maven B2 needs to be seen by anyone interested in optics. Some alpha owners will not agree with me. That is to be expected, and I’m not claiming defeat or victory for either side of the debate. Not everyone will sell their alpha and get a B2, but that is not the point.
At some point after I called it quits, it hit me. I had begun to think of the Maven B2 as the new reference standard for a $1,000 binocular. Since that is the price tag it bears, that is true. It is however a much more expensive glass than that. It took some time for what the Maven was telling me to register, but it finally did. I was assuming (despite my efforts to avoid assumptions) that I was going to be dealing with a typical $1,000 binocular. The whole paradigm of $1,000 vs $2,000 or more is invalid in this instance. The price is what it is because Maven has chosen to sell direct. They have no wish to support wholesale distributors who sell to dealers, who sell to us. They are paying Japanese Labor costs, not Austrian or German. While Japanese costs are up they are still a lot less than in Europe. Now, there may be some corners that will considered to have been cut by Kamakura. They could have chosen to do away with the less expensive right eye diopter for a more expensive center focus style. They could have chosen to launch into the field flattener frenzy. In the end they could have claimed flat field victory, but I doubt the field would have been any flatter than it is. They could have used more expensive fluoride glass components instead of plain Jane high grade ED glass. So far as the user could tell, the binocular would have been no better, just more expensive.
I think Maven has done a couple of things right here. First is their choice of Kamakura, one of the planets premier optics companies, who has a long history of OEM binoculars sold under names other than Kamakura. The second is the way they approached them. They just asked Kamakura for their best binoculars. Three guys who recreate in the Wyoming outdoors who knew what they wanted, who had worked with Kamakura went in and asked what they had, not something off the dusty shelf in the back room, but what front room stuff did Kamakura have ready to go that would do what was wanted. What they got was what they are selling as the B1, B2, and B3. This AK design was just ready for production when Maven walked in the door. So Maven got Kamakura’s best. I for one am taking advantage of the fact. Right now the $1,000 price tag means a lot more than it did not so long ago. Just remember, if you want Kamakura’s best, you can’t get it direct from Kamakura.
When you get it in hand, keep the Latin in mind. Let it speak for itself, it was, but it took me a bit of time to listen closely enough. That is what I’ve been doing, no regrets, and a great binocular…Pro se loquator.
OK folks, pictures to follow
Last edited: