Meopta compared to Alpha glass? (3 Viewers)

[sidpost]

I'm on the serious hunt for some Zeiss bins right now but, in that search, I have had several recommendations for Meostar options. I see the MeoStar B1 Plus and MeoStar B1.1 being referenced as 'near peers' to things like Swarovski SLC's. I'm have also been cautioned that their resale value is not terribly good.

I don't think I have ever seen a Meopta product in a retail location and, if I have seen them out and about they didn't make a significant impression on me. I also understand they were the OEM for some Zeiss products made on the East Coast of the USA.

At $1100~$1500 in general, I'm not sure if this is just marketing or if these are hidden gems. Czech products can be of very high quality but, they also don't have the favorable market perceptions of Germany and Austria. So I'm left wondering if adding another $500~$1,000 for a similar binocular from the "Big 3" is really worth it or not. I was fortunate to score some Premium Minox bins before they moved to Blaser in the USA for distribution and from my perspective, left the retail marketplace in the USA. Is Meopta a "diamond in the rough" or, is it really just strong marketing for a good set of bins into the near "Alpha" realm over similar competition from other brands?

In terms of premium binoculars. how do these rate in broad terms for:

• Birders
• Astronomy
• Hunting
• Ocean and Coastal use

TIA,
Sid

 

[dries1]

Sidpost,

I have a couple of the B1 Meostar models, (7X42 and 8X42). I think they are alpha glass, others will disagree though. However, only my eyes matter not theirs. The only beef with the Meostar line up, is the weight, they are on the heavy side for some. I tried the 12X50 B1 also, nice glass but the eye relief was just a bit short for my eyes. Their Warranty is transferrable, so if you buy used from a seller that has them registered, the Warranty can be transferred, at least for now anyway.
I have no comment on the Meopro models.

Andy W.

 

[Conndomat]

Hi Sid,

I don't know the Meopta's enough myself, but Holger Merlitz rates these glasses very highly, I think the Meopta's are not far removed from other alphas.

Andreas

 

[kestrel1]

Hello Sid,
Generally rule is:
IF budget is limited THEN go Meopta, ELSE go Swarovski

As basically with:
Meopta you get Very Good product, service and resale value.
Swarovski you get Great product, service and resale value.

Of course, there can be application exceptions based on binocular format.

This was my current case, as I was seeking tool for watching raptors, ravens and waterfowls over long distances.
My budget was limited this year, so I throw away idea of 10x/12x NLs.
I was playing with idea of 10x56 SLCs, but as it fits more to low light specialist, has its weight and pricetag, and as it will fill my 10x window, which will later virtually block me from 10x purchases in next years (me still keeping dream of 10x NL, when economics will recover). As above-mentioned long range application is critical to the chromatic aberration (CA) control, I decided for Meostar HD because of their A+ class CA correction (two fluoride-doped lenses per barrel).

I had previously EL 12x50 for 2015 and 2016 season (SN D84... ) which compared to Meostar had better AFOV, tad better monochromatic aberrations control, contrast, night transmission, eye relief, but Meopta is clearly better in CA control.

Meopta has silver mirror, cons is about 4% lower night transmission values, but pros is relaxed view due pleasant color tone.
I did not had previous 12xHD version (I had 2013 10x42HD version), but the 12xHD+ has better grip, and in my sample the sweetspot is bigger than I was expecting, based on experience with 2013 10x42HD. (My 12x has horizontally 100%, vertically 90% as there is small region in bottom of FOV where sharpness degrades little bit). I consider Meostars HD as alpha glass.

Meopta made good leap in recent decade, from being not well known brand outside Central europe market into gates of alpha class known globally. Still Swarovski is market leader, no objections. I like them both, due they are made in house, and in my neighboring countries, which makes potential aftersales support easy and cheap.

Thanks

 

[sidpost]

kestrel1

Great post and very informative!

 

[eitanaltman]

Is Meopta a "diamond in the rough" or, is it really just strong marketing for a good set of bins into the near "Alpha" realm over similar competition from other brands?

I would say it’s basically the opposite of your latter suggestion. They are a great optics maker with very poor marketing so they are little known in the USA market.

What makes them different from most mid level offerings is they design and manufacture their own binoculars. They have decades of expertise in optical design (and yes they did produce some optics for bigger brands like) and the Meostars are not outsourced Asian optics like most of the “sub alpha” European class. The Meostars are SOLID, legit eastern European optics, very high quality. It’s the type of binocular you feel like you could run over with a truck and they’d still work fine. They are as close to alpha optics as you can get without buying an alpha, and many here consider them alpha quality. Their S2 spotting scope is for sure alpha level.

Two things (besides marketing) have limited their appeal to the birder market: (1) they are heavy and (2) they have mediocre close focus specs. They also don’t have flat field optics or the fanciest dielectric coatings (so they tend to be a little more warm/yellow in color balance). In that way they feel kind of “old school” like older Swarovski SLC, just beefy tanks of a binocular with a relaxing, wide, warm view, very large sweet spots, but plenty of curvature / pincushion and softening at the edges.

The 32mm Meostar offerings are lighter and have better close focus but 42mm binoculars are the most popular with birders... and the 42mm Meostar weighs over 30oz (900g) and has a 10’ (3m) close focus. When a border compares options like Nikon Monarch HG, Vortex Razor HD, or Zeiss Conquest HD, they are all lighter and have superior close focus (plus they recognize the brands).

So I think they have more appeal to hunters who seem more amenable to that indestructible brick like feel of the old SLC at the cost of more weight (and don’t care about sub-3m close focus).

Bottom line - Meopta is a great brand, they design and make their optics in house (at least the Meostar line), they have great warranty and service, but they are a bit behind the more modern options in the things birders care about. But I think they present a great value on the used market if you can’t afford an SLC, since used Meostars are less than half the price (and Meopta will service used binoculars, just avoid the Cabelas branded versions).

 

[Ries]

Disadvantages of Meostar are weight (although that's a real plus for stable handling), bit long close focus (no problem for birding) and a somewhat stiffer and slower focus than some or most (Swaro el/slc is just as slow as far as I have read) because it's made mainly with hunting in mind. For the rest...indestructible build and optically way above their price point. Beats price-competitors Nikon MHG easily, don't know about Conquest (yet) or Kowa Genesis. And secondhand often for almost half the new price, know a few for €550-600 right where I live, and I've seen for €400-500. Tempting to get a 10x42hd back, already obtained their 7x42, 8x32 didn't fit my face sadly enough because optically and sizewise it was awesome.

 

[sidpost]

The KOWA GENESIS 44 PROMINAR series looks interesting in comparison to the Meostar and look like they are in the same basic price range.

 

[bkdc]

Meopta is easily capable of producing a binocular at the highest level but from a marketing standpoint, the question is whether consumers are willing to pay 2k+ for a Meopta. I am eagerly awaiting the B2. The same for Kowa. Is there a market for a Kiowa that costs 2400 US dollars?

Even Kamakura Koki could produce an alpha level bino but if it costs 2k, buyers will probably just go with Zeiss, Swarovski, or Leica.

 

[sidpost]

Yes, the over $2K USD market gets pretty crowded fast due to relatively small sales volumes. I suspect a lot of consumers also want a brand name recognized as super-premium to impress other random people in many cases.

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi Sid,

For some more information see Roger Vine's reviews of the 7x50 B1 and the 12x50 HD B1 at: http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/BinoReviews.htm

As can be seen from the list, Roger has done a series of reviews of mainly high end binoculars, and the B1's compare very well


John

 

[bkdc]

Yes, the over $2K USD market gets pretty crowded fast due to relatively small sales volumes. I suspect a lot of consumers also want a brand name recognized as super-premium to impress other random people in many cases.

Competitors in this space don’t seem to last long. The Nikon EDG and the Minox APO HG would still be produced if sales were brisk. I can’t think of others that truly challenge alpha space.

 

[sidpost]

Competitors in this space don’t seem to last long. The Nikon EDG and the Minox APO HG would still be produced if sales were brisk. I can’t think of others that truly challenge alpha space.

The Minox APO HG might still be a viable choice if they had better distribution in the USA. When they moved away from New England to Blaser in Texas, their distribution really suffered IMHO. Yes, they really moved upscale but, with that, they really lost market share. With a few select premium bin dealers, they could still have a viable business at a small scale compared to the big three but, alas they seem to have chosen a different path.

Nikon as a brand is a hard sell for really expensive binoculars because most people associate them with cheaper 'value' oriented products. Their commercial camera division seems to be doing okay but, that doesn't really translate to sales in the mass consumer market.

If a relatively low-volume company like Leica can be successful suggests to me there is room for another player similar to Meopta or Minox to step up into this realm with a 'premium' line backed up by a more accessible product line similar to where Meopta is right now. While it is unlikely they will challenge the big three in market dominance, they all have a common history going back to WW II. If the Czech people had not been trapped behind the iron curtain, their history which is similar to Zeiss and Swarovski could have translated into the consumer realm like those two juggernauts today. I'm a bit fuzzy on Leica's history but, suspect it followed a similar path to modern market success as well.

 

[Troubador]

Sidpost,

I have a couple of the B1 Meostar models, (7X42 and 8X42). I think they are alpha glass, others will disagree though. However, only my eyes matter not theirs. The only beef with the Meostar line up, is the weight, they are on the heavy side for some.

Andy W.

I have 5 MeoStars, a mix of B1 and B1.1 which are not optically different from B1 Plus and they are everything Andy says including that the 42s are on the heavy side. That said they are steadier in windy conditions. The view is natural, colours realistic, and sharp. For shear pleasure they are a bargain. References to them having silver prism coatings that hint at this being a potential problem are mistaken as the silver is protected by a dielectric coating and so will not deteriorate.

Lee

 

[kestrel1]

Hi Lee
Yes, I agree as I had silver coated 2005 Trinovids (bought as demo in 2013), and even non-nitrogen purged 1987 CZJ EDF 7x40, both had no "silver-issue" at all. I found that silver coating makes watching raptors over summer grain fields very enjoyable, as the yellow/brown perception is tad richer. Tradeoff of little lower night transmission value is not that big as it looks in specs.
Meostar has better dusk performance than many "dielectric coated" roofs, because its prisms are big, the exit pupil is circular and light beam is not deteriorated.

Thanks
Best Regards/
Alex

 

[opisska]

I would just like to say that it's nice to hear for me as a Czech person (with many contacts in the local world of optics) how highly regarded Meopta is in the world. This just doesn't come very often for a Czech company as the decades of isolation were still not undone in term if international exposure.

 

[gcole]

Sidpost,

I have a couple of the B1 Meostar models, (7X42 and 8X42). I think they are alpha glass, others will disagree though. However, only my eyes matter not theirs. The only beef with the Meostar line up, is the weight, they are on the heavy side for some. I tried the 12X50 B1 also, nice glass but the eye relief was just a bit short for my eyes. Their Warranty is transferrable, so if you buy used from a seller that has them registered, the Warranty can be transferred, at least for now anyway.
I have no comment on the Meopro models.

Andy W.

I agree with everything Andy just quoted and with all the others here who rank the top of the line Meopta right up there with the current Alphas. My eyes get the impression of Alpha Glass every time I bring my 8x32 B1.1 to view. It’s about time the Leica/Swarovski and Zeiss fans get over the COST ISSUE ..... it’s not the Meopta owners (are fault) that we have more money left in our pockets after the transaction purchase is finalized.

 

[eitanaltman]

I agree with everything Andy just quoted and with all the others here who rank the top of the line Meopta right up there with the current Alphas. My eyes get the impression of Alpha Glass every time I bring my 8x32 B1.1 to view. It’s about time the Leica/Swarovski and Zeiss fans get over the COST ISSUE ..... it’s not the Meopta owners (are fault) that we have more money left in our pockets after the transaction purchase is finalized.

Indeed, when I first got the 8x32 EuroHD it blew me away how clear and "deep" the image felt, there's a little extra something to the view that even the really good Japanese "sub alphas" don't have (referring to the Kamakura zone, not the Kowa Genesis which is a cut above as well). I don't know what it is, perhaps it's that they don't skimp on the size of the prisms even if it means a little more weight, perhaps it's just excellent precision and alignment in the manufacture of the optical system, perhaps it's just the slightly warmer colors, perhaps the "classic" distortion with well managed curvature / pincushion creating a huge sweet spot and falling off gently towards the edges... or maybe all of the above...

I remember when I first posted my impressions of the EuroHD it struck me that you could slap a silver eagle on there and call them SLC "New Neu" and sell them for 50% more money without changing much of anything and people wouldn't blink.

My ONLY issue with the little 8x32 Meostar/Euro is those blasted eyecups 😓 ... I don't understand why they are SO small diameter, when they could easily be thicker and wider without looking out of place vs the thickness of the barrels. Combined with the fact that they don't extend far enough for the eye relief, it ended up being too much of an ergonomic hurdle for me to overcome vs other binoculars I owned, otherwise I would still own them.

 

[A2GG]

I owned the 8x32 Euro HD briefly several years ago and thought it was great. I especially liked the ergonomics/feel and the simple diopter. I still think it was the very best diopter I ever used for its simple design and ease of use; it was so quick and easy to set it. Now they went and changed the diopter to something fancier. I think they should have left it alone, but I guess people wanted a locking diopter.

Anyway, I didn't hang on to it because of short eye relief with the thicker eyeglass frames I had back then; I wasn't able to see the full FOV which began to bother me after a couple weeks or so. But, I recognize its greatness even though it didn't work for me.

The new Euro HD looks hideous. I don't know why they feel the need to change the aesthetic design constantly. The original Euro HD had a cleaner and more refined look IMO; I'm referring to the Cabela's branded Meostars.

 

[gcole]

I owned the 8x32 Euro HD briefly several years ago and thought it was great. I especially liked the ergonomics/feel and the simple diopter. I still think it was the very best diopter I ever used for its simple design and ease of use; it was so quick and easy to set it. Now they went and changed the diopter to something fancier. I think they should have left it alone, but I guess people wanted a locking diopter.

Anyway, I didn't hang on to it because of short eye relief with the thicker eyeglass frames I had back then; I wasn't able to see the full FOV which began to bother me after a couple weeks or so. But, I recognize its greatness even though it didn't work for me.

The new Euro HD looks hideous. I don't know why they feel the need to change the aesthetic design constantly. The original Euro HD had a cleaner and more refined look IMO; I'm referring to the Cabela's branded Meostars.

I keep reading comments about those awful small eyecups of the little Meopta Meostar 8x32. They work for some and not for others ? I am glad they work with my eye/facial characteristics with or without my glasses. If they did not, to equal or better the Meopta I would have had to go to the Zeiss 8x32 FL’s. The cost to me would more than have doubled for what I paid for the little Meostar at the current lowest Zeiss discounted prices now being offered. So I give my condolences to all those who can not live with those awful small dreaded eye cups of the Meopta Meostar 8x32 but I am glad I got to keep more money in my pocket with my purchase.