Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Saturday 18th March 2017, 15:27   #1
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
GPO HD 10x42

*Look/build quality*
Well built, stylish bin. Made in Japan. Very clean tube interior. Rubber armor with different texturing to assist with hand grip. Magnesium body, aluminum eyecup tubes, hydrophobic coatings.

*Accessories*
Good rubber rainguard, very good wide and well-padded neck strap, stylish hard clam-shell case (somewhat similar to the one that comes with the SF), plastic caps for the objective lenses.

*Mechanics*
The hinge has the right tension, the eyecups stay in place and have an intermediate stop, the focus wheel is large, has a rubber surface with good friction (it should be fine even when used with gloves) and it moves smoothly without any play. Focusing direction: CCW to infinity. From close focus to infinity: about 1.6 turns. The dioptric compensation knob works like for the SV and SF by pulling the focus wheel, adjusting, and then pushing it back: it adjusts the diopters in small steps with clicks.


*Handling*
The HD feels very well in the hand, it is well balanced, it does not feel heavy at all, and can be held in a stable way to eliminate tremor (the view through the HD appears to be as stable as the one through the SF); the rubber armor is non-tacky and of very good quality. Without glasses and with the eyecups fully extended I can see the entire FoV without any blackouts.

*Optics*
CA is well controlled and is a non-issue (there is some CA close to the edge of the FoV, but it's not disturbing at all---it consists of a pale green, almost yellowish fringe, not the strong green seen in other bins). Pincushion distortion is minimal---despite this I have not noticed any RB effect. The on-axis resolution is excellent (on a par with the very best). The sweet spot is large and the blur at the edge of the FoV, due to field curvature, is minimal. The star test showed that both astigmatism and coma distortions are well controlled. On the other hand, glare control is only average---the lower part of the FoV gets a whitish haze when one views close to the sun (similar to the SV 8x32).

*Conclusion*
There is hardly anything not to like about the HD. However if there is one thing that I must mention I would say that glare control should be improved, at least at the level of the EDG (the NV glare control being the ideal).

Peter

Last edited by PeterPS : Saturday 18th March 2017 at 16:03.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 07:12   #2
typo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 3,330
Peter,

Thanks for the report. I've been intrigued by this new model, and it's going to be interesting to see what the different reviewers make of it. I've seen a few of the high end Japanese made models and this seems to be something a little different. Hopefully it will make it's way to the UK in due course.

Have you been able to do any diagnostics on the glare? Inspecting the exit pupil at different angles to the sun often gives a clue if it is due to shiney internals or one or more false pupils that only come in to play with pupil dilation and specific eye positioning, like the EL SV 8x32?

It's interesting to note the "double HD technology", which presumably means two ED elements like the Kowa Genesis for example, which is particularly noted for it's very good micro contrast. How does that fit with the Passion? Sorry, that sounds too intimate to me, lets stick to the GPO HD.

You know I'm particularly interested in resolution and perceived sharpness. If you can't do a boosted chart test, could you have a go at rating it, against anything else you have, for contrast at the very limit of the detail you can see in good light?

Thanks again,

David
typo is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 09:07   #3
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,190
David

Peter will no doubt reply for himself but I would like to mention I am currently reviewing an HD 8x42 and this is really impressing me with its level of contrast in just the way you mention in your post.

More follows when I post the review but in the meantime I can report that the 8x42 has good glare control and I can only provoke modest-sized milky semi-circles at the bottom of the FOV by viewing far closer to the sun than I would normally ever do.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 10:16   #4
typo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 3,330
Lee,

What happened? You took an hour and fifty minutes longer to respond than I expected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
......I can only provoke modest-sized milky semi-circles at the bottom of the FOV by viewing far closer to the sun than I would normally ever do.........
Is that Troubador speak for OMG! It's a glare monster!?

David
typo is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 13:32   #5
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
 
Chosun Juan's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central West NSW, Australia
Posts: 3,471
Cool

Thanks for the prelim, but I gotta be honest guys - I'm finding all this washed out milky stuff "close to the sun", or even "far closer" (than normal) to be well ..... quite frankly - a bit wishy washy !! This has been a growing pet peeve of mine for a while ....

Surely it's not too hard to define the angle to the sun and/or elevation somewhat? I don't think you need go to the extreme of a sextant and arcsecond compass, but what are we talking about here ....? 45? , 30? , 22.5? , 15? , better?!!

I find it useful in the field just to make a right angle with your arms, and go from there for a rough estimate .....



Chosun
Chosun Juan is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 14:26   #6
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 226
Lee, could you please check out glare in this situation. Crinklystarfish writes (here) of the Nikon Monarch-HG 10x42 as follows, and this particularly bothers me too, in otherwise fine models: "The control of veiling glare when looking into dark 'walls' of vegetation under otherwise open skies is a particular winner for me. This phenomenon ruins my enjoyment of so many bins." Thank you!

David, I am interested in the GPO HD 12.5x50 (the only current binocular of that configuration, it seems). If this question is too vague or wide-ranging please forget it! From your knowledge of other model series, can we expect optical quality be similar in the major aspects (including glare control) in the 12.5x going by the 8x42? Thank you! BTW, compared with the Meopta HD 12x50 you like(d) so much this is 95 g lighter and 0.2 in. longer, and the FOV is 0.2 deg. wider.
adhoc is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 14:40   #7
etudiant
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 3,772
Glare shields are cheap and pretty effective.
Ideally the glass has a threaded fitting at the objective end, otherwise some slip on hood will be needed.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 15:08   #8
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 226
Thanks, Etudiant, if these indeed control this kind of glare. However, I like a binocular I use to be as small as possible (for its configuration and other criteria), and the GPO 12.5x is already very long!
adhoc is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 15:26   #9
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
David:

Thanks for your comments.

Quote:
Have you been able to do any diagnostics on the glare? Inspecting the exit pupil at different angles to the sun often gives a clue if it is due to shiney internals or one or more false pupils that only come in to play with pupil dilation and specific eye positioning, like the EL SV 8x32?
There are no false pupils close to the EP---the area around the EP is dark, as it should be. However the lower *edge* of the EP is shiny, which is what causes the glare. I believe this is due to some shiny internals close to the focusing shaft---let's hope that's a problem of my unit only.

Peter.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 15:33   #10
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Hi David:

Quote:
You know I'm particularly interested in resolution and perceived sharpness. If you can't do a boosted chart test, could you have a go at rating it, against anything else you have, for contrast at the very limit of the detail you can see in good light?
I have compared the GPO HD 10x42 with my SE 10x42, and I can see more detail with the HD, However I would be reluctant to claim that the HD has higher resolution than the SE, as more detailed testing would be required to be sure.

Best, Peter.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 15:50   #11
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by typo View Post
Lee,

What happened? You took an hour and fifty minutes longer to respond than I expected.



Is that Troubador speak for OMG! It's a glare monster!?

David
LOL. Nah the 8x42 is more than fine in this regard but I haven't tried a 10x like Peter. However I did notice that correct eye alignment was important.

Lee

Last edited by Troubador : Sunday 19th March 2017 at 16:01.
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 15:57   #12
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Chosun:

You sure have looked through the SV 8x32. The glare problem of the GPO HD 10x42 (my unit!) is very similar: glare affects the view with both closed pupil (when you look under the sun, the closer you look the bigger the part of the FoV affected by glare, and it starts at an angle of about 30-40deg) as well as with open pupil (when you look at a dark area under a cloudy sky, but the glare is more subtle in such a case and not a real problem).

Peter.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 15:59   #13
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
Lee, could you please check out glare in this situation. Crinklystarfish writes (here) of the Nikon Monarch-HG 10x42 as follows, and this particularly bothers me too, in otherwise fine models: "The control of veiling glare when looking into dark 'walls' of vegetation under otherwise open skies is a particular winner for me. This phenomenon ruins my enjoyment of so many bins." Thank you!
As it happens I was looking into dark walls of vegetation today for other reasons and didn't detect any glare at all despite the sun being low at this time of year and directly above the vegetation.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 16:03   #14
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Quote:
Glare shields are cheap and pretty effective.
Ideally the glass has a threaded fitting at the objective end, otherwise some slip on hood will be needed.
The GPO has a threaded fitting at the objective end, but instead of glare shields you can simply use your hand, it can be quite effective.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 16:09   #15
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chosun Juan View Post
Thanks for the prelim, but I gotta be honest guys - I'm finding all this washed out milky stuff "close to the sun", or even "far closer" (than normal) to be well ..... quite frankly - a bit wishy washy !! This has been a growing pet peeve of mine for a while ....

Surely it's not too hard to define the angle to the sun and/or elevation somewhat? I don't think you need go to the extreme of a sextant and arcsecond compass, but what are we talking about here ....? 45? , 30? , 22.5? , 15? , better?!!

I find it useful in the field just to make a right angle with your arms, and go from there for a rough estimate .....


Chosun

HI CJ
Just nipped outside to try this out. With the bins viewing horizontally I could rotate my view until directly under the sun with no glare. Lifting the bins up until I was in danger of the sun creeping into the field of view provoked a small area of glare in the lower portion of the field of view but ensuring my eyes were centred on axist meant this didn't appear until it was dangerous to proceed any further. I came indoors with my vision dazzled by the brightness for a minute or two. In terms of degrees how close did I get to the sun? I don't know but hey, I sure as hell didn't want to get any closer and wouldn't normally view anywhere near as close as this. Sorry if this doesn't satisfy your inner sextant CJ but there you go.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 16:10   #16
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Hi Lee:

Quote:
Nah the 8x42 is more than fine in this regard but I haven't tried a 10x like Peter. However I did notice that correct eye alignment was important.
There you have it: the larger EP of the 8x42 should be the explanation. This together with correct eye alignment allow you to avoid the shiny lower parts of the EP.

Peter.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 16:13   #17
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 226
Peter, sorry, when posting those questions in some haste I have got a bit confused about who had done the original review in this thread (did not look back up)! Thank you, for that, and for the information in post #12 which answers my question.
adhoc is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 16:38   #18
etudiant
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 3,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
The GPO has a threaded fitting at the objective end, but instead of glare shields you can simply use your hand, it can be quite effective.

Good on them, that is smart design!

Pesto, thank you for the information.
Do you happen to know the thread diameter needed? As my Canon 10x42 takes 52mm glare shields, that might be the size here as well.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 17:15   #19
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Quote:
Peter, sorry, when posting those questions in some haste I have got a bit confused about who had done the original review in this thread (did not look back up)! Thank you, for that, and for the information in post #12 which answers my question.
You're welcome, and of course no problem///Peter
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 18:11   #20
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,367
I have had the 8x42 HD for several days. It is a seemingly superb glass. I will save comments for my review, but my initial response is ..."glare?...what glare?" I happen to agree with Pesto's comment that this is a hard binocular not to like. The focus is as good as there is on any binocular. You can both feel and hear the eye cups sort of thunk into position, where they will remain until you take the effort to move them.

I'm going to do a series of reviews on the "new guy in town binoculars" Since I got the GPO first, it will be up first.
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.

Last edited by Steve C : Sunday 19th March 2017 at 18:15.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 18:19   #21
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Quote:
Good on them, that is smart design!
Pesto, thank you for the information.
Do you happen to know the thread diameter needed? As my Canon 10x42 takes 52mm glare shields, that might be the size here as well.
It looks like the thread size is 52mm but I do not have a caliper to confirm that. I'll try to confirm that with GPO.///Peter
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 18:25   #22
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Steve:

Quote:
I have had the 8x42 HD for several days. It is a seemingly superb glass. I will save comments for my review, but my initial response is ..."glare?...what glare?" I happen to agree with Pesto's comment that this is a hard binocular not to like. The focus is as good as there is on any binocular. You can both feel and hear the eye cups sort of thunk into position, where they will remain until you take the effort to move them.
Lee has also posted that the HD 8x42 has no glare issue, good to hear that you confirm that. The reason appears to be the larger EP of the 8x42: 5.25mm vs 4.2mm

Peter.

Last edited by PeterPS : Sunday 19th March 2017 at 18:29.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 18:35   #23
typo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 3,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
LOL. Nah the 8x42 is more than fine in this regard but I haven't tried a 10x like Peter. However I did notice that correct eye alignment was important.

Lee
As it is with most binoculars with a glare problem. Thats an admission in my book!

David
typo is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 19:31   #24
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by typo View Post
As it is with most binoculars with a glare problem. Thats an admission in my book!

David
Every so often I come across a comment that while perhaps not to the level of a full on epiphany, it at least comes close. David's comment is one of those. I don't think it should be viewed so much as an admission as it is the recognition of reality. There is always the argument of well controlled vs non well controlled glare. In my case the poorest glare control od any binocular I ever owned, and the reason I sold it and moved on is the second generation Vortex razor 8x42. The most glare free binocular in my experience is the Maven B2.

The reality here is that while there is ample due diligence in careful design to control glare, it can only go so far. What is left over is how the binocular fits any particular user. Things like eye relief, eye cup shape and diameter, size of the exit pupil, if there is unusual side light, to name but a few, can over ride design control. So in spite of me not being even able to induce glare in my B2, or having a binocular rendered useless by glare like the Razor, I have come to see the reality of glare being present for some in the B2, and absent in the Razor. How the thing fits a user face, hands, and eyes is as important as the design. Yet one more reason for trying it yourself, many things significant to any particular user may well over ride others.

Now I await for the post to pop by bubble!

Looking at the GPO, I see no place where there might be a surface to reflect light causing glare. Now that the sun is finally fully out, I'm off to look for glare in the GPO.
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 19th March 2017, 19:41   #25
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 3,286
I always try to hide the Sun behind a solid roof allowing for the drift of the Sun of about 1 diameter every two minutes, if looking for glare.

In Britain pollution and water vapour usually means it gets far too bright when nearing the Sun, whereas say in Switzerland the air can stay clear up to very close to the Sun.

Different binoculars of the same model, i.e. 8x42 and 10x42 often differ markedly regarding glare results.

Chosun.
A fist at arms length is between 8 and 10 degrees depending on whether someone is a boxer or tennis player etc or not.
First two knuckles 3 degrees.
Index finger about 1.5 degrees. I try not to use the next finger for measurement,
An outstretched hand at arms length about 23 degrees.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Binoculars Habicht 10x40 and Zeiss Fl 10x42 vs. Nikon SE 10x42 and HGL 10x42 PHA Binoculars 8 Thursday 9th September 2010 23:00
Buying assistance: Nikon Premier 10x42, Swarovision 10x42, or Minox HG 10x52 sbpeugh Nikon 13 Thursday 11th March 2010 19:06
Nikon Monarch 10x42 or Vortex Vipers 10x42? MSG Reaver Binoculars 12 Thursday 26th March 2009 12:21
Helios Am 6 10x42 Versus Nikon Monarch 10x42 superhov Say Hello 9 Sunday 22nd February 2009 09:01
Bushnell 10x42 Discoverer or Olympus 10x42 EXWP pw53 Bushnell - Bausch & Lomb 1 Thursday 3rd May 2007 02:05



Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.23164201 seconds with 34 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:25.