Best 10x50 Porro for under $200 (1 Viewer)

[rdnzl]

True but I tell people the same on CN, too .

No, I'm not. All of them are porros. I thought you were looking for a porro?

I was unaware that those you referred to were porros. I assumed they were roofs just by the designations. They must be similar to the Kowa inexpensive porros.

 

[Binocollector]

The Adventurer T WP comes in a lot of different sizes and was BTW also sold as Celestron Ultima. My 8x32 is actually labeled Celestron but they are technically identical to the Opticron.
The Oberwerk deluxe linked by Dennis above might actually be a good choice BTW.
I hear Oberwerk US is quite good. I had mixed experiences with Oberwerk Europe.

 

[rdnzl]

I've used a Celestron Ultima 10x50, and I wasn't too impressed. I thought they felt cheap, and the views were just so so. Maybe a bad sample?

 

[rdnzl]

I'm waiting for Dennis to answer my question about Bak 7 prisms.

 

[normjackson]

I earlier had a look at the Oberwerk Deluxe but thought the specified closest focusing distance looked a bit prohibitive for birding .

 

[Binocollector]

I've used a Celestron Ultima 10x50, and I wasn't too impressed. I thought they felt cheap, and the views were just so so. Maybe a bad sample?

Don't confuse it with the old one. I mean this one. That is the same bino as the Adventurer T WP.
If that was the one you tried and didn't like it, I think you might have to spend more than 200

https://www.amazon.de/dp/B08N5FPN3X?ref_=cm_sw_r_apan_dp_KAFJ7YG80PK81H2F0QDM

 

[Binocollector]

I'm waiting for Dennis to answer my question about Bak 7 prisms.

Probably a typo. There is no Bak7 only BK7.

 

[exup]

Don't confuse it with the old one. I mean this one. That is the same bino as the Adventurer T WP.
If that was the one you tried and didn't like it, I think you might have to spend more than 200

https://www.amazon.de/dp/B08N5FPN3X?ref_=cm_sw_r_apan_dp_KAFJ7YG80PK81H2F0QDM

I just got a pair of these Ultima 10x50s.

As a matter of interest, I pulled out my Adventure T WP 6.5x32 and Ultima 8x32 too.

For me the x6.5s and x10s can't be used without glasses, the x8s can.

The x10s aren't bad, but with my quick assessment, the x6.5 and x8 are better, with the top spot going to the x8s, mostly due to the ability to use without glasses.

I also compared to Pentax SP WP 8x40 ..... These are less immersive with a smaller FoV and again can't be used without glasses, but they do present a nice sharp bright image, probably with a bigger sweet spot within the smaller FoV.

 

[pat mitchel]

exup- can you elaborate on this
"For me the x6.5s and x10s can't be used without glasses, the x8s can."
Too much eye relief perhaps?
I could understand can't be used WITH glasses as sometimes you loose a significant potion of the FOV depending on the shap of the face, closeness of glasses fit and eye cup shape, diameter. Regards, Pat

 

[Binocollector]

What happened to Dennis's posts in this thread? Did he delete them all? Because of the "BK7"-typo? Really?

 

[Binocollector]

So, since Dennis seems to have sulkingly deleted his posts I'll repost the link to the Obie "Ultra". I almost cannot imagine the 15m close focus is true but we'd probably have to hear from someone who has one.

10×50 Deluxe - Oberwerk

Oberwerk 10x50 Deluxe Series models are precise center-focus, waterproof, and nitrogen charged.

oberwerk.com

Dennis also had recommended the Fujinon FMTR but I think we can rule out using an IF 10x50 for birding anyway. The 7x50 can be used easier during the day because of the greater depth of focus of a 7x compared to a 10x bino. But still the weight is an issue.
I almost never use my FMTR 7x50 for anything else than astronomy. If I want a low mag bino during the day, I'd go for a 7x35 or 6.5x32 or even 6x30.

 

[pat mitchel]

regarding to this chart, there is "BAK7" glass

Fuzhou Rising Electro Optics Co., Ltd.

Fuzhou hongxu technology co. LTDIt is developed with PHP+MYSQL technology and MVC mode. The architecture is clear and the code is easy to maintain. Support pseudo-static function, can generate google and Baidu map, support custom url, keyword and description, in line with SEO standards. Have the...

www.rising-eo.com

Pat

 

[normjackson]

regarding to this chart, there is "BAK7" glass

Fuzhou Rising Electro Optics Co., Ltd.

Fuzhou hongxu technology co. LTDIt is developed with PHP+MYSQL technology and MVC mode. The architecture is clear and the code is easy to maintain. Support pseudo-static function, can generate google and Baidu map, support custom url, keyword and description, in line with SEO standards. Have the...

www.rising-eo.com

Pat

According to the Chinese nomenclature seems that is the product that most closely matches Schott BaK4 as regards Abbe number and refractive index numbers (though says nothing of other properties like bubble density). The Chinese "Bak4" matches the properties of Schott N-PSK3 which is a dense phosphate crown glass. This is a better diagram than the one on that page :

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Abbe-diagram_2.svg

Yep a phone call to the well regarded US Oberwerk customer support is probably the best way to confirm on the minimum close focus.

 

[exup]

exup- can you elaborate on this
"For me the x6.5s and x10s can't be used without glasses, the x8s can."
Too much eye relief perhaps?
I could understand can't be used WITH glasses as sometimes you loose a significant potion of the FOV depending on the shap of the face, closeness of glasses fit and eye cup shape, diameter. Regards, Pat

Sorry, I was keeping it short.

I have ~6.5-7.0 dioptre correction for myopia, so it is focus related.

I prefer not using glasses. I can use contact lenses if required.

To add.....SR.GA 8x32 are the worst for lack of infinity focus. Opticron Savanna 8x30 porros also don't focus, but only just not enough.

Hope that helps.

 

[pat mitchel]

Thanks for that exup- I NEVER would have made that connection. I bought a pair of eagle optics platinum rangers 8x32 back in the late 90's
as they offered a rebate that brought the cost down. They are still a very good binoc but at that time , my correction was about-4 ish- slightly over the amount the bino could accommodate. Fast forward 2 years and my correction had diminished (barely) to the point of beign useful without glasses. As the years have passed, my correction has subsided a bit more but I haven't found any bino's that couldn't be made to work without glasses. I'll wager the choice of useful binos sans glasses has been narrower for you. Regards, Pat

 

[rdnzl]

Don't confuse it with the old one. I mean this one. That is the same bino as the Adventurer T WP.
If that was the one you tried and didn't like it, I think you might have to spend more than 200

https://www.amazon.de/dp/B08N5FPN3X?ref_=cm_sw_r_apan_dp_KAFJ7YG80PK81H2F0QDM

It was the old one. It looked a little different than the one in that link.

 

[rdnzl]

This is the Celestron that is the same as the Opticron, right?

https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-Binoculars-Waterproof-Multi-Coated-Protective/dp/B08N5FPN3X/ref=sr_1_3?crid=1GW5FR04NYL45&keywords=celestron%2Bultima%2B10x50&qid=1671032346&s=electronics&sprefix=celestron%2Bultima%2B10x50%2Celectronics%2C126&sr=1-3&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.f5122f16-c3e8-4386-bf32-63e904010ad0&th=1

And how would the Celestron Skymaster DX 8x56 fit into a comparison? Supposed better coatings, and twist up eye cups. Nitrogen purged. They are $179. Obviously not a 10X is one difference. And bigger objectives.

 

[rdnzl]

I keep coming up with more candidates.

What about the Orion UltraView 10x50? They used to be made in japan, not sure these days.

 

[Binocollector]

This is the Celestron that is the same as the Opticron, right?

That's the one.

And how would the Celestron Skymaster DX 8x56 fit into a comparison? Supposed better coatings, and twist up eye cups. Nitrogen purged. They are $179. Obviously not a 10X is one difference. And bigger objectives.

More of a twilight/hunting bino. I have a Kite 8x56 but rarely use it. It's excellent but large.
The "Skymaster"-series is notorious for collimation issues. I have never had one arrive in proper alignment. Two out of two were mis-aligned. Never bought another one.
The "Ultima" as well as the Opticron Adventurer T WP seems far better quality to me. But even with those models some people seemed to have alignment issues. But both my 6.5x and 8x are just fine, no alignment issues. I even used the 6.5x32 for astronomy and you'd very quickly notice if there were alignment problems when using them on the stars. They are nice for sweeping the milky way.
So, I'd definitely take the "Ultima" or Adventurer over any "Skymaster" models.

 

[Binocollector]

I keep coming up with more candidates.

What about the Orion UltraView 10x50? They used to be made in japan, not sure these days.

Pretty sure they are Made in China nowadays. One of the very few cheaper porros I found that claim "Made in Japan" are the "Kite Fitis". Never saw any reviews on those however. But I am very close to getting the 8x40 Fitis just to try them.

Kite Fitis | Kite Optics

Kite Fitis

www.kiteoptics.com