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 Tuesday 25th July 2017, 15:09   #1
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
GPO 10x50 HD Review

This is the first time I have reviewed a 10x50 although I have ventured even larger in the past, having reviewed Swarovski and Zeiss 56mm models a few years ago. GPO’s 10x50 arrived looking very much like the 8x42 I reviewed a few weeks ago and that is to say it is produced to an extremely high standard of finish, quite possibly higher than any other brand I have handled. Priced at $1250 and €1250 (there are no distribution arrangements for the UK yet so ŁGBP prices are not available) it occupies an almost solitary corner of the bino world. Searching around for competitor models within a similar price bracket I could only locate Vortex’s Razor at around $40 more or Pentax’s ZD ED for $100 less.

I will discount the Pentax immediately since its field of view of 261ft / 87m is way below par. The GP’s field of view is 309ft / 103m and so pretty much in the same ballpark as the Vortex’s 315ft / 105m.

Talking of the Vortex leads me to the subject of weight. The GPO weighs 960g / 33.9ozs and so is a little lighter than premium models such as Leica’s Ultravid HD (1,000g / 35.3ozs) and Swarovski’s EL (999g / 35ozs) and Meopta’s discontinued B1 (1,020g / 36ozs). The Vortex, however, is in a whole different ball game at 797g /28ozs, or 197g / 7ozs lighter than the average of this group. Now, Vortex definitely do not have a reputation for inadequate build quality but this difference is so dramatic I find myself wondering whether Vortex is to be congratulated or asked what it is they left out that 4 other brands felt was necessary.

Eye relief of the GPO as measured from the top surface of the top eyepiece lens (this is stated in the specifications) is 19.5mm. Vortex gives 16.6mm for the Razor. I found the GPO had perfectly fine eye relief either with or without glasses. When it comes to IPD the GPO only just accommodated my 58mm distance with its range of 58-76mm, so I was going to criticise it gently but this is competitive with the Vortex at 57-74mm, Swarovski at 56-74mm and Leica at 58-74mm. Instead I will criticise them all for their IPD range: if Zeiss can offer 54-74mm on the Conquest HD 56mm series then this lot should really have done better with their 50s and don’t think I am letting Zeiss off the hook. Given the range on the Conquest 56s, their premium status HT 54mm should really have done better than 58-76mm which exactly equals the GPO.

The eyecups are made from machined aluminium (as on their 8x42) with 3 very positive click-stop positions and a smoothly precise action that actually allows the eyecups to be positioned wherever you like, without moving out of position. The rainguard that sits on top is not beyond criticism however, the inside diameter of the individual cups needs to be enlarged somewhat as the current dimensions mean the cups sit far too snugly around the eyecups. As it is, the guard resists quick removal and replacement and thus fails to perform adequately in rain. I will also mention here that the neck strap is the type that hangs from the back of your neck and while it is quite adequate, one is more often finding binos equipped with tailored straps that lie flat around one’s shoulders and for me at least, are more comfortable. Still there are plenty of aftermarket rainguards and straps to choose from, but I would urge GPO to take a look at these accessories. The semi-hard case supplied is first class by the way.

The focus action is really excellent being both smooth and precise, and goes counter-clockwise from near to far. This is the opposite direction to most models on the market place although the list of counter-clockwisers is growing. If a GPO is to be your only bino then the focus direction will not be something you dwell on, but if you use other bins with the more conventional focus direction you may encounter ‘muscle-memory’ confusion when swapping from one to the other. This will surely vary from individual to individual and may be a trivial issue to some. And take a look at Vortex. Most of their full-sized roofs are counter-clockwisers and it hasn’t stopped them becoming one of the most popular brands in the USA.


Moving outdoors I took the binos to a place on a high moor near home to search for the Red Deer that have taken up residence there, but despite searching every bush and fold in the ground for tell-tale antlers sticking up, I was unsuccessful. However there were two upland bird species to compensate.

A Curlew appeared over the nearby horizon, set its wings and glided gradually down, trilling that fabulously evocative song. Against the fluffy white clouds it was a silhouette without chromatic aberration in the centre-field, and just a touch when at the edge of the field of view. Out of the
corner of my eye I glimpsed a fast-moving shape and turning to look saw a Wheatear land on a stone gatepost that had long ago lost not only its gate but also the wall that had been its home. The Wheatear turned around and as the sun came out I had a terrific view of it. Through the GPO the subtle buff of its breast and clean grey of its mantle were beautifully rendered and the black mask and white supercilium looked freshly painted and sharply differentiated. These binos can reproduce both the subtle and highly contrasting.

Moving to another moorland site with a medium sized pool I was rewarded with a dragonfly, a Four-spot Chaser or Libellula quadrimaculata. It zoomed around the pond alternately hawking high for insects and searching low for females and at last it perched on a thin twig. Through the 10x50s the dark patches with golden streaks on the wing roots next to the abdomen (that identify this as a Libellula species) were clear and sharp. Satisfied with this I nevertheless wanted something a bit more colourful and preferably with some bright blue and red. A Kingfisher would fit the bill but it was to be another 2 weeks before I saw one and by then I had almost given up on the idea. But there I was scanning over a beautifully clear river searching for Water Voles and not finding them, when a sound came down the breeze and made me turn and lift the binos. Coming upstream at a cruise was a Kingfisher and I got the bins on it as it flew by and landed a short distance upstream. OK, this dazzling bird would flatter most binoculars but the GPOs did the business and delivered the full experience with nothing left out, rendering Its patchwork of white, orange and blue beautifully.

I would say that the view through these 10x50s is identical to the 8x42s I tried and reviewed some time ago in terms of colour rendition, contrast and perceived sharpness and that means very good indeed. Going back to that earlier review I ventured that the 8x42 Passion HD might be the best finished bino I have seen and this 10x50 lives up to the same very high standards. Just handling this unit is a pleasure and the eyecups are to the highest standards as is the feel and precision of the focus. If GPOs are being distributed in the country where you live and you are in the market for a $1200-$1300 / €1200-€1300 50mm model you owe it to yourself to check-out what you get for your money with GPO’s Passion HD models which include 8.5x and 12.5x as well as the 10x tested here.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	GPO10x50.jpg
Views:	136
Size:	212.9 KB
ID:	634202  
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 25th July 2017, 15:36   #2
jgraider
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: West Texas
Posts: 1,056
Outstanding Lee. Thanks for the thorough and informative information, and for taking the time to post it.
jgraider is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 25th July 2017, 16:57   #3
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgraider View Post
Outstanding Lee. Thanks for the thorough and informative information, and for taking the time to post it.
Thanks JG, you are very welcome.
Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th July 2017, 00:16   #4
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,187
Thanks Lee for putting together the review. Good job! It has been quiet in the GPO forum so it is good to get some more information on this new entry.

It sounds like a nice solid instrument but I wish it had a wider FOV. (I was surprised with the 261 ft of the Pentax!) I wonder why the GPO and Razor are only around 315 ft. I look for about 335 or more in a 10X based on my experience with newer 10X42 models. I assume it is a cost issue to make a wider FOV in a 50mm but I really do not know. I do know it can be done because the Swaro 10X50 EL SV is 345 ft and the Leica 10X50 Ultrivid Plus is 352 ft. However the catch is that these are twice the cost and more!

I used a Bushnell 10X42 double hinge Elite for years as my primary binocular and it has a FOV of 315 ft. Back then it was fine but when I use it now, it just seems to be lacking. I assume it takes a more complex eye piece to get a wider FOV but I do wonder how much that would add to the cost. If it were a 100 bucks or so, it would be worth it to me.

That 50 mm does make a difference in brightness the last few minutes of daylight. I have the Swaro 10X50 and can easily pick up the extra brightness just before dark compared to the Zeiss SF 10X42. Other than that last few minutes, they do equally as well with brightness. The extra light gathering of the new GPO would be nice for late evening game spotting. I used my Swaro a couple of weeks ago to watch a black bear in the moon light about 10:30 at night. There was not a lot of detail but it was easy to follow the bear. Definitely a fun experience!

Your comments on fit and finish of the GPO products are well timed for me. I ordered a GPO ED 8X42 yesterday and hope it is as nice as in the photos. That binocular has special appeal to me because of a class leading FOV of 426 ft for the $300+ price range. Most in that class are around 380 ft.
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 26th July 2017, 04:57   #5
St. Elmo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 477
Great job Lee.

I especially like language such as that quoted below (as opposed to reviews containing mind-numbing text, e.g., "and the flamoulous chloride coating keeps the nano-molecular induced forstan in the .00002-.00003qpd range to a bare minimum when viewing in near total darkness").

"Through the GPO the subtle buff of its breast and clean grey of its mantle were beautifully rendered and the black mask and white supercilium looked freshly painted and sharply differentiated."

"Through the 10x50s the dark patches with golden streaks on the wing roots next to the abdomen (that identify this as a Libellula species) were clear and sharp."

Thank you Lee,

Michael

Last edited by St. Elmo : Wednesday 26th July 2017 at 05:15.
St. Elmo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th July 2017, 11:14   #6
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceH View Post
Thanks Lee for putting together the review. Good job! It has been quiet in the GPO forum so it is good to get some more information on this new entry.

It sounds like a nice solid instrument but I wish it had a wider FOV. (I was surprised with the 261 ft of the Pentax!) I wonder why the GPO and Razor are only around 315 ft. I look for about 335 or more in a 10X based on my experience with newer 10X42 models. I assume it is a cost issue to make a wider FOV in a 50mm but I really do not know. I do know it can be done because the Swaro 10X50 EL SV is 345 ft and the Leica 10X50 Ultrivid Plus is 352 ft. However the catch is that these are twice the cost and more!
Thanks Bruce. It was a surprise to me to find the GPO in an almost unoccupied price-corner of the market. As you point out, if you want a wider field you will need to be comfortable with a different price tag, and the feel of these in the hands is just top class. The eyecups alone are worth the price! OK, crazy remark and GPO are not the only company using machined aluminium, but I sure wish Zeiss would as it gives practical benefits such as secure positioning of the eyecups even away from the 'click-stops' which themselves are extremely secure.

I haven't handled a GPO ED yet, so I look forward to hearing from you when you have taken yours for a test drive.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th July 2017, 11:17   #7
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by St. Elmo View Post
Great job Lee.

I especially like language such as that quoted below (as opposed to reviews containing mind-numbing text, e.g., "and the flamoulous chloride coating keeps the nano-molecular induced forstan in the .00002-.00003qpd range to a bare minimum when viewing in near total darkness").

"Through the GPO the subtle buff of its breast and clean grey of its mantle were beautifully rendered and the black mask and white supercilium looked freshly painted and sharply differentiated."

"Through the 10x50s the dark patches with golden streaks on the wing roots next to the abdomen (that identify this as a Libellula species) were clear and sharp."

Thank you Lee,

Michael
Wow, thank you kindly Michael. The language used might be too subjective for some but this is how I see stuff through my bins and I write my reviews to appeal to those who also use their bins in this way. Glad it appealed to you and thanks for posting.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th July 2017, 17:21   #8
Piskeddu
Registered User
 
Piskeddu's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Milan
Posts: 49
Beautiful, professional, as usual. :) Giorgio
Piskeddu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th July 2017, 17:29   #9
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piskeddu View Post
Beautiful, professional, as usual. :) Giorgio
Grazie molto.

Ciao bello.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 26th July 2017, 19:53   #10
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,670
Review-poetry indeed..

In the photo they look pretty unbalanced with the focuser and strap-lugs on the wrong places...
Anything you noted?

Last edited by Vespobuteo : Wednesday 26th July 2017 at 22:13.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 27th July 2017, 01:57   #11
chill6x6
Registered User
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 834
Enjoyed the review Lee! It sounds like a really nice instrument. It some ways it sound like quite an improvement even over some of the alpha binoculars. Like Bruce, I agree that it would be great for the FOV for be a few feet larger. Price over here would be about $1125 if purchased NOW at Optics Planet. That's probably a very fair price for a quality 10X50....
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 27th July 2017, 04:10   #12
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 232
Troubador, thanks for another nice review. Leaving out the .003qpd kind of thing cited by St Elmo does however mean that a reader (i.e. this one) could lose his/her bearings, and a brief comparison with one or two other familiar models in a couple of aspects will be still more useful. I must say that your quadrimaculata (!?) somewhat makes up for the omission of flamulous chloride ;-) The Meopta Meostar 10x50 is not really discontinued but upgraded to their HD range. Which brings this up: It is now time for Typo to get ahold of the GPO 12.5x50 and compare it with the Meostar HD 12x50 which he praised.
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 27th July 2017, 11:16   #13
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Review-poetry indeed..

In the photo they look pretty unbalanced with the focuser and strap-lugs on the wrong places...
Anything you noted?
Actually the hang well on the strap and I had no trouble finding the focuser. Do they handle like an SF? No they don't but nothing else does either and I don't want to compare everything to a Zeiss like I used to do a few years ago.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 27th July 2017, 11:22   #14
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
Troubador, thanks for another nice review. Leaving out the .003qpd kind of thing cited by St Elmo does however mean that a reader (i.e. this one) could lose his/her bearings, and a brief comparison with one or two other familiar models in a couple of aspects will be still more useful. I must say that your quadrimaculata (!?) somewhat makes up for the omission of flamulous chloride ;-) The Meopta Meostar 10x50 is not really discontinued but upgraded to their HD range. Which brings this up: It is now time for Typo to get ahold of the GPO 12.5x50 and compare it with the Meostar HD 12x50 which he praised.
Adhoc

Comparisons would have been helpful I agree but I didn't have access to any other 10x50s at the time and at their price point they are almost without competitors. I could have said that a Zeiss SF handles better but didn't think that was helpful as it isn't a 50mm. So in the end I decided just to see if they could do a good, bad or a great job in the great outdoors and they did a great job. Would an Ultravid 50 or EL 50 do better? I don't know but I suspect they might but then again we are looking at a different price level.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 27th July 2017, 11:28   #15
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
Enjoyed the review Lee! It sounds like a really nice instrument. It some ways it sound like quite an improvement even over some of the alpha binoculars. Like Bruce, I agree that it would be great for the FOV for be a few feet larger. Price over here would be about $1125 if purchased NOW at Optics Planet. That's probably a very fair price for a quality 10X50....
Hey Chuck

Yes, a bigger FOV would be nice. A bigger FOV is always nice!
But in terms of the small amount of competition at its price level, the GPO right up there. I keep on saying how great the finish is on these GPOs simply because the external surfaces and joints, the eyecups and focus are all tactile delights. If you get one of these for $1125 then every time you pick it up you are going to think 'Wow, I done good'.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 27th July 2017, 12:23   #16
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Actually the hang well on the strap and I had no trouble finding the focuser. Do they handle like an SF? No they don't but nothing else does either and I don't want to compare everything to a Zeiss like I used to do a few years ago.

Lee
Just wonder if a more ergonomic placement of the focuser would have driven up the price. I guess it's a pretty standard Kamakura configuration that is the base for the GPO:s that you can't change to much. Just speculating.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 27th July 2017, 15:20   #17
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
Just wonder if a more ergonomic placement of the focuser would have driven up the price. I guess it's a pretty standard Kamakura configuration that is the base for the GPO:s that you can't change to much. Just speculating.
GPO doesn't say where they are made but Kamakura wouldn't be a surprise. GPO refer to the bridge as a micro-bridge and it is pretty slim and gives more optical tube room for fingers. It looks smaller than Maven bridges but its hard to tell from photos.

I would prefer the focus wheel positioning of HT and definitely SF but like I said, I didn't want to bring Zeiss into it and in any case you are talking different price levels.

As to how much GPO has been able to specify I do know that they have changed the design of the focus mechanism and its materials and lubrication until they achieved the 'feel' that they thought was necessary to go with the level of finish, magnesium bodies and aluminium eyecups.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 29th July 2017, 11:53   #18
PHA
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bariloche-Argentine Patagonia
Posts: 264
Hi Troubador,

I like your reviews! Seems to be a very good binocular for the price. About that price bracket, would you include the Meopta Meostars in it?

PHA
PHA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 29th July 2017, 17:17   #19
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHA View Post
Hi Troubador,

I like your reviews! Seems to be a very good binocular for the price. About that price bracket, would you include the Meopta Meostars in it?

PHA
PHA
Meoptas are fine binos and I referred to the B1 in the test and should have given it its full name of MeoStar B1. However there is some confusion about whether the 10x50 Meostar is still in production. On one part of the Meopta website if you click on all of the MeoStar 50mm models, one after the other, the only one shown in the subsequent text is the 12x, but having investigated further, the website does show tech specs for all of them including the 10x50, but Eagle Optics and B&H only list the 12x50 too.
I have mailed Meopta asking for clarification.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 29th July 2017, 19:04   #20
PHA
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bariloche-Argentine Patagonia
Posts: 264
Oh! I see...I would include the MM 10x50 HD or non-HD.

Thank you!

PHA
PHA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 29th July 2017, 19:24   #21
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 2,938
Hate to be a contrarian but to really understand where a bin like this stands we need to have a baseline model compared directly in the field.

I have a 25 year old Elite that really gives great views on its' own. It's only when I do the direct back and forth with my newer glass do I see the differences in brightness, contrast, colour-neutrality etc. And memory is too subjective and too fallible to be used as any sort of comparison tool.

All IMO, and I do appreciate the effort and the fine text of the review.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 5th August 2017, 13:51   #22
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by james holdsworth View Post
Hate to be a contrarian but to really understand where a bin like this stands we need to have a baseline model compared directly in the field.

I have a 25 year old Elite that really gives great views on its' own. It's only when I do the direct back and forth with my newer glass do I see the differences in brightness, contrast, colour-neutrality etc. And memory is too subjective and too fallible to be used as any sort of comparison tool.

All IMO, and I do appreciate the effort and the fine text of the review.
I wouldn't disagree with you James but I didn't have a comparable model to hand. I didn't think it fair or reasonable to compare with the only other 10x I have which is an SF as on the one hand the SF has so much going for it, and on the other, if I had posted this, some folks would say this was always going to be my opinion because I have been pretty Zeiss orientated in the past.

And although I have done comparison reviews that have offered my opinion of a 'winner' (since comparisons always tend to do this) I am increasingly skeptical of the value of this given the personal nature of such judgements.

My point with the review was to discover, not whether it was better or worse than some other model (which may or may not have been relevant to any reader) but whether it could deliver a good experience and therefore whether the model reviewed is worthy of putting on anyone's short list. It is.

I think there is merit in reviewing both in the way that I did it and the way you suggest.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 8th August 2017, 11:48   #23
MeoptaMan
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New York / Czech Republic
Posts: 51
To be clear on the Meopta's... the portfolio currently offers a MeoStar B1 10x50 and a MeoStar B1 12x50 HD. Discontinued 50mm models include the MeoStar B1 7x50 and non-HD 12x50.
MeoptaMan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 9th August 2017, 11:07   #24
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeoptaMan View Post
To be clear on the Meopta's... the portfolio currently offers a MeoStar B1 10x50 and a MeoStar B1 12x50 HD. Discontinued 50mm models include the MeoStar B1 7x50 and non-HD 12x50.
Thanks MM for clarifying this. Meoptas are very fine instruments and should be on everyone's short list for consideration.

Lee
Troubador 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
Swarovision EL 10x50 vs. Fujinon 10x50 FMT-SX Sharpness/Resolution ? tlb Swarovski 20 Sunday 18th January 2015 14:31
Opticrom Imagic BGA SE 10x50 or Celestron Granite 10x50 Rafael Campos Binoculars 3 Tuesday 13th January 2015 19:42
my review of Swarovision 10x50 and 12x50 binomania Swarovski 14 Friday 22nd July 2011 03:55
Olympus DPS I 10x50 - A Complete Review birdlove Others 5 Sunday 17th August 2008 23:32
Swarovski SLC 10x50 VS Leica Ultravid 10x50 szybszy Swarovski 19 Sunday 6th July 2008 10:46



Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.25171399 seconds with 34 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:07.