Hands on with new Mavens (3 Viewers)

[Binoseeker]

Today Kamakura sells their own binoculars......

http://www.gofoto.se/typ-av-kikare/fagelkikare-naturkikare?subname=KAMAKURA

 

[jremmons]

The gist of Steves thread, as I took it was, dont get mired in the data on the spec sheet until you look thru the binocular. Seems simple enough, I have followed Steve both here and optics talk for a number of years, pretty sure thats what he has always said with every brand he has looked thru. And so far, both he and Frank havent lead me astray

While I do agree with this, the issue I have with ignoring the spec sheet until you look through it is where are you going to get a Maven in-hand? Sure you could order one and return it, but where is the incentive?

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Perterra, post 40,
Now we have two completely opposite opinions from persons who actually used the Mavens (had them in their hands and before their eyes(Dennis and Steve) and we have the fact sheet from the WEB-site. Now if we can not trust the fact sheet than we have a problem, since 95% transmission generates a briljant bright image and that as yet is not confirmed here without any doubt.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[ceasar]

Bob, post 35,
Dennis is right in that there are some puzzles to be solved around Maven for a clear picture. Nobody is helped by making them holy or discarding them on unfair grounds.
After comparing for example the bodies of the 30 mm Mavens, the Nikon M7 and the 30 mm Kite Lynx binoculars, I am almost 100% certain, that their body structures are the same, so there is little room for exceptional differences in optics. The Maven WEB-site reports 95% transmission for the 8x30 and 10x20 Mavens with SP prisms. We have investigated the Kite Lynx 30 mm binoculars and none of them come close to 95% transmission. Moreover, in the course of the years we have investigated many roof prism binoculars with SP prisms and among them the very top lines and none has a light transmission of 95%. Yes, we found such high light transmissions in Swarovski porro's and in the new Zeiss HT with HT glass. So my question is: how reliable are the data in the Maven WEB-site?
Gijs van Ginkel

Gijs,

I have repeatedly stated that the stock item Maven binoculars are priced at under $1000.00. B-1s are under $900.00. B-2s are under $1000.00 and B3s are under $500.00.

Based on these prices I have no idea how any prospective purchaser could think they were getting an "Alpha" binocular.

The specs are out there for any one to see. The only issue (except for the use of expensive wide field eye pieces in the 7x45 B2) seems to be the transmission figures you discuss. So have some tests done to get the correct numbers but be sure to test them against binoculars in the same price range.

One would expect $1800.00 8x42s with SP prisms; $2,000.00 10x42s with AK prisms and $1000.00 8x30 binoculars with SP prisms to be brighter.

Bob

PS: This tempest in a tea pot is based on 2 opinions. Steve's report on using a Maven binocular and Dennis's comment below it that he disagrees with it. If Dennis has a report to make on his own use of a Maven binocular he should also post it here in this thread.

 

[perterra]

Perterra, post 40,
Now we have two completely opposite opinions from persons who actually used the Mavens (had them in their hands and before their eyes(Dennis and Steve) and we have the fact sheet from the WEB-site. Now if we can not trust the fact sheet than we have a problem, since 95% transmission generates a briljant bright image and that as yet is not confirmed here without any doubt.
Gijs van Ginkel

It's only a dilemma if you give both equal credibility. I dont.

 

[perterra]

While I do agree with this, the issue I have with ignoring the spec sheet until you look through it is where are you going to get a Maven in-hand? Sure you could order one and return it, but where is the incentive?

I think if the spec sheet is that important, then this may not be the one for you. The spec sheet on the Leupold Yosemite aint much to look at. But it's my favorite to use.

The incentive is really no more than the person recommending it to you. I think I read a couple days ago that you recommended a McKinley HD to someone. Dont know any way to get one in my hands these days, but I trust what you say to be true for your eyes, so if I were looking, given the power of your past comments, I would look at one. Same with Steve, if Dennis told me they were great, I would assume he had one for sale, nothing more.

 

[gcole]

Why is it when a new kid on the block( in this case Mavens Optics) is suggested to be at or near Zeiss/Leica or Swaro's optics level do some(not all) owners of the holy three seem to get so combative. Now I am not suggesting that any future purchases/owners of Leica/Zeiss/ Swaro binoculars will be paying insane prices when compared to Maven Optics or that some current owners of Zeiss/Leica or Swaro can not stand the thought that just maybe Maven has some " Alpha Qualities " for half or two thirds the cost of what they might have paid. This can't be, for Maven starts with a "M" not a Z or a L or even S . If I were to suggest any of the above which I am not ..... I am sure a hale of bad words would come my way & boy I would not want that.

 

[Steve C]

While I do agree with this, the issue I have with ignoring the spec sheet until you look through it is where are you going to get a Maven in-hand? Sure you could order one and return it, but where is the incentive?

This is getting nuts.

I do not ignore the spec sheet. I do not adore the spec sheet either. In the same light, I do not ignore the brand name, neither do I adore the brand name. A binocular is the sum of its parts and the way it interacts with the sum of the parts of the user. I do not automatically add or subtract points due to the name. My whole point is that the 7x45 is worthy of a look. What is the motivation...a full size 7x with a 6+mm ep. Decrease in magnification and increase in fov do not go hand in hand.

I figured there would be some reaction to a 7x with a 389' fov, there is, but...w:eek!:w I guess.

If anybody has ever had both an Epoch and a Maven B1 in their hands, it is COMPLETELY OBVIOUS they are different. For the umptyseventh time...Brunton is dead, Brunton is gone.

 

[james holdsworth]

Why is it when a new kid on the block( in this case Mavens Optics) is suggested to be at or near Zeiss/Leica or Swaro's optics level do some(not all) owners of the holy three seem to get so combative. Now I am not suggesting that any future purchases/owners of Leica/Zeiss/ Swaro binoculars will be paying insane prices when compared to Maven Optics or that some current owners of Zeiss/Leica or Swaro can not stand the thought that just maybe Maven has some " Alpha Qualities " for half or two thirds the cost of what they might have paid. This can't be, for Maven starts with a "M" not a Z or a L or even S . If I were to suggest any of the above which I am not ..... I am sure a hale of bad words would come my way & boy I would not want that.

That was my point from the beginning - they are not the new kids on the block - they market and bling existing Kamakura products. My problem with Maven is the same I would have with Zen-ray, Bushnell, Brunton, Leupold etc. - they are all rebranders of products they buy off the shelf and then badge.

I don't like this in other products [cars for instance] and I don't like it in bins. All just my opinion and not intended to sway anyone either way.

 

[chartwell99]

Henry and James, and Everybody else....

Maven is here, Kamakura is still here, Brunton as an optics entity is dead and gone. There was a reason for that (probably more than one).
One of the things you will not find...for instance...is the aluminium mirrored prisms Brunton insisted on...right up to their optical end.

Very interesting discussion, Steve - as always. For what it's worth, I have tried over the years to like wide field 7x binoculars as my primary go-to birding glass, and have owned in the past the 7 x 45 Zeiss Night Owl, the 7 x 42 Zeiss Classic and the 7 x 42 Swarovski SLC Swarobright, but the experience always came up short, and all three ended up in the hands of hopefully happier owners than I. Maybe I didn't do enough twilight birding, but the extra magnification of an 8x (or now with my Maven B2, a 9x) made the experience for me much more satisfying. Same story with the 6 x 30 approach - unless used from a boat, the 6x image never offered the detailed view I needed, despite the wide field of view.

As for the Bruntons - I still own a 10.5 x 43 Version 2 Epoch, and would never have guessed the use of aluminum mirrored prisms. My example is tack sharp, as bright as any 10x I have used, with a wonderful wide field view and the fantastic innovative variable focus system (although you've cautioned that this has been a reliability issue for some users).

Finally, I truly cannot thank you enough for the Maven B2 recommendation. I have owned mine for approximately 7 months, and its remarkable handling characteristics and images in all lighting conditions always amazes. It really is the finest instrument I believe I have ever owned.

 

[ceasar]

This is getting nuts.

I do not ignore the spec sheet. I do not adore the spec sheet either. In the same light, I do not ignore the brand name, neither do I adore the brand name. A binocular is the sum of its parts and the way it interacts with the sum of the parts of the user. I do not automatically add or subtract points due to the name. My whole point is that the 7x45 is worthy of a look. What is the motivation...a full size 7x with a 6+mm ep. Decrease in magnification and increase in fov do not go hand in hand.

I figured there would be some reaction to a 7x with a 389' fov, there is, but...w:eek!:w I guess.

If anybody has ever had both an Epoch and a Maven B1 in their hands, it is COMPLETELY OBVIOUS they are different. For the umptyseventh time...Brunton is dead, Brunton is gone.

Yes,

We forget times have changed or we think time began when we were born.

I took my Leupold 7x42 BX2 Cascade out to use for a while yesterday. I will carry it around in my car for a while. I paid $229.99 for it 4 years ago. It has a 389' FOV. It is much better than my Green Armored Leitz 7x42 Trinovid BN which I used for many years in the 1990s. The Leitz has a FOV of 420.' I find that I can live with 389' even though my binocular of choice is my Zeiss 7x42 Victory FL which has a FOV of 450.'

Bob

 

[jremmons]

I think if the spec sheet is that important, then this may not be the one for you. The spec sheet on the Leupold Yosemite aint much to look at. But it's my favorite to use.

The incentive is really no more than the person recommending it to you. I think I read a couple days ago that you recommended a McKinley HD to someone. Dont know any way to get one in my hands these days, but I trust what you say to be true for your eyes, so if I were looking, given the power of your past comments, I would look at one. Same with Steve, if Dennis told me they were great, I would assume he had one for sale, nothing more.

For me it isn't that the spec sheet is this all deciding factor, but it is one of many that I look into when considering a binocular purchase. The Maven's is underwhelming based upon the other 7x binoculars I've peered through with a similar field of view. Aside from just the FoV, the weight is quite high.

I am sure the optics are good, and I strongly respect Steve C's opinion. However, for a roughly $1000 product, I'd need several things (good specs, good reviews, competitive pricing, lowish weight, good company) before purchasing sight unseen. The Maven does not tick enough boxes for me to retain interest; for others, I'm sure it will.

Again, this is all just my opinion drawn upon my experiences with other binoculars. I do not intend this to start a forum war.

 

[BruceH]

7X45 Diopter Correction

Let me stir the pot some more on this new offering from Maven. :bounce:

The specs list a diopter correction of plus/minus of 2. Is that correct?

The number seems low compared to other binoculars of a similar class and also compared to the other models in the same family. The Maven 9X45 and the 11X45 both list a diopter correction of Plus/Minus of 4.

The diopter correction, I do believe, is one spec that cannot appear to be other than what it is. If it is +/- 2, that could be limiting.

 

[gunut]

lets face it....Maven is just another in the pack of wannabes....all trying to get a share of the low/mid priced market....they all put their own spin on their product....but with the big 3 more and more willing to dip their toes into the mid price market and Leopold and Nikon holding their own the pickings are getting smaller and smaller for unknown upstarts....

besides this group already tried their luck with the low end market with Brunton....and it didn't end well.

 

[A2GG]

Today Kamakura sells their own binoculars......

http://www.gofoto.se/typ-av-kikare/fagelkikare-naturkikare?subname=KAMAKURA

wow...I had no idea they sell their own brand. I like the look of that little
8x32 MR3.

 

[JerryLogan]

While I do agree with this, the issue I have with ignoring the spec sheet until you look through it is where are you going to get a Maven in-hand? Sure you could order one and return it, but where is the incentive?

Hello Jay,

I haven't tried a Maven yet but I was impressed with their demo plan/offer. You order a demo at a 10% discount. Try it out for 30 days. If you don't like the binoculars ship them back at Mavens expense for a full refund. If you do like them two choices; keep the discounted demo you've been using or trade them in for a full price new version.

I don't know about the binoculars but I'm deeply impressed by the thought that went into this solution to the buying sight unseen problem. A risk free 30 day trial is a good way to decide for yourself and there's no guilt or expense if you decide they're not for you.

Sadly for this thread, there aren't any 7x demos yet but when there are I'll just take advantage and see for myself.

Best,
Jerry

 

[[email protected]]

Bob, post 35,
Dennis is right in that there are some puzzles to be solved around Maven for a clear picture. Nobody is helped by making them holy or discarding them on unfair grounds.
After comparing for example the bodies of the 30 mm Mavens, the Nikon M7 and the 30 mm Kite Lynx binoculars, I am almost 100% certain, that their body structures are the same, so there is little room for exceptional differences in optics. The Maven WEB-site reports 95% transmission for the 8x30 and 10x20 Mavens with SP prisms. We have investigated the Kite Lynx 30 mm binoculars and none of them come close to 95% transmission. Moreover, in the course of the years we have investigated many roof prism binoculars with SP prisms and among them the very top lines and none has a light transmission of 95%. Yes, we found such high light transmissions in Swarovski porro's and in the new Zeiss HT with HT glass. So my question is: how reliable are the data in the Maven WEB-site?
Gijs van Ginkel

I am with you there. 95% light transmission in an SP prism roof is unbelievable without HT glass.

 

[[email protected]]

The gist of Steves thread, as I took it was, dont get mired in the data on the spec sheet until you look thru the binocular. Seems simple enough, I have followed Steve both here and optics talk for a number of years, pretty sure thats what he has always said with every brand he has looked thru. And so far, both he and Frank havent lead me astray

Honestly, I have tried about one sample of every binocular Frank and Steve have recommended over the years because they lured me into it with their great positive reviews and I have returned them all in less than two weeks. But my problem is I am USE to alpha level binoculars so their $200 to $1000 binoculars are not going to measure up to what I am used to which are $2k binoculars and which I am comparing them to. It is logical. I tried the Sightron Blue Sky, Maven B2 and the Theron Questa and a couple other ones and returned them all. They were pretty good binoculars at their price point but none are a Swarovision, Zeiss SF or Leica Ultravid Plus. That is why I am probably over critical of this latest offering from Steve. I don't want to be tempted into trying one again. I already tried the Maven B2 8x30 and the focus developed slack after about two hours so I am not too tempted on the Maven's. My point is although these Maven's may be an excellent binocular at their PRICE POINT they are NOT equal to an alpha level binocular so don't have any illusion thinking you are getting a $2K binocular for $1K. Your not.

 

[[email protected]]

Today Kamakura sells their own binoculars......

http://www.gofoto.se/typ-av-kikare/fagelkikare-naturkikare?subname=KAMAKURA

Those prices look really good. Wouldn't it be better to eliminate the middlemen like Maven and buy direct from Kamakura. I know on most things that come from Japan or China you can get the exact same item for way less money if buy direct from them.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Dennis, post 57,
The Leica Ultravid HD-plus 7x42 and 8x42 have SP prisms and HT glass and they both do not reach a light transmission of 90%, so it seems to be quite a challenge to getvery high values with SP prisms and in our spectrometer we did not catch one as yet.
Gijs van Ginkel