-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Meopta compared to Alpha glass? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter sidpost
- Start date
eitanaltman
Well-known member
Gwen, I can't remember if it was you or GG that owns/likes the old Swaro CL? Those are also cursed with too-small eyecups, so maybe there's a pattern 
A2GG
Beth
We both had the original CL. I had mine for about a year and a half and then replaced it with the Monarch HG 8x30. I really do like the old CL. I wear glasses and it worked fine for me.Gwen, I can't remember if it was you or GG that owns/likes the old Swaro CL? Those are also cursed with too-small eyecups, so maybe there's a pattern
I also think that people who buy alphas are only looking for Swaro or Zeiss ......if Meopta came out with one, it would take quite the marketing to pull buyers away from those big two. That being said....I agree with what has been stated on this thread. "AS IS'...they are quality and match up well to the Alphas. I only have a 8x32 but can say it outshined all other 32's I tried and that includes Swaro CL and Zeiss Conquest line up (not the SF, haven't tried that one yet). I look forward to the next few years to see what Meopta comes out with.
Yes I also owned the old Swarovski 8x30 Cl. I liked them a lot. They also had the smallish size eye cups which worked well for me. I had them for a few months. I then sold them and purchased the Meopta Meostar B1.1 8x32. I found the Meopta’s view/build construction better than the Old Swarovski. Even though the small eye cups/oculars of both binoculars were almost identical in size, the little Meopta’s fit my eye/facial characteristics better than the Swarovski 8x30 CL. I still have and use the Meopta Meostar 8x32 B1.1 but I am using my Custom Maven 6x30 B3. more often. I have always found a ... 6-7x power binocular more pleasing to use, especially now due to my age.Gwen, I can't remember if it was you or GG that owns/likes the old Swaro CL? Those are also cursed with too-small eyecups, so maybe there's a pattern
When you start talking about bins above $1500 and $2K, the true optical performance differences are subtle in most cases with mainstream choices. Final fit and finish along with weight will vary but, they all use good glass and coatings so, if you understand what you want you have good choices to pick from.
For $3500 you can get the newest bin tech but, that is true for the latest iPhone or laptop too. I'm happy with a $500 cellphone that will do ~98% of what a $1200 one will do.
A $3500 NL, Noctovid, or SF or, in my case probably an EL, UV+ or, HT, with a Meopta being another viable choice optically for ~25% less.
For $3500 you can get the newest bin tech but, that is true for the latest iPhone or laptop too. I'm happy with a $500 cellphone that will do ~98% of what a $1200 one will do.
A $3500 NL, Noctovid, or SF or, in my case probably an EL, UV+ or, HT, with a Meopta being another viable choice optically for ~25% less.
If it is superior in optics, ergonomics, reliability, and durability, I think people will pay Alpha prices for a Meopta. Just like birders buy the Kowa TSN883 or TSN884 en masse. But I guess the Kowa's price undercuts and the competition while the optics overperform. And Meopta's warranty (as long as it's registered) is as good as any. Meopta should step it up and not require warranty registration. Then it could compete with Zeiss and Swaro on that front. What people won't buy are products which don't live up to the hype or price or substandard customer service on a product designed to last for decades.
If I looked through a Meopta and I got the WOW effect of looking through a Swarvo or Zeiss SF, with great reliable handling, I wouldn't hesitate to plunk down the cash. Hunters and birders care more about performance and also want to know that the company stands behind the product with excellent service and warranty. The brand reputation is earned and Meopta's reputation is just fine in my book.
Last edited:
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
I agree with statements that Meopta is undervaluated quite often. Let me show it with the following example (you can find it in my test report of the SW NL pure 8x42 and the Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor.
Meopta Meostar 8x32 (2016) : weight 588 g. eyerelief 15,5 mm, FOV 139m/1000m, transmission 500nm=86,1%, 550 nm=89,9%, price 879 euros
Leica Ultravid HD-plus 8x42 (2016): weight 531g, eyerelief 13,3,mm, FOV 135m/1000m, transmission 500nm=86,8% 550 nm=89,2%, price 1880 euros
Of course there are differences in handling etc. but that is something you have to find out yourself.
Gijs van Ginkel
Meopta Meostar 8x32 (2016) : weight 588 g. eyerelief 15,5 mm, FOV 139m/1000m, transmission 500nm=86,1%, 550 nm=89,9%, price 879 euros
Leica Ultravid HD-plus 8x42 (2016): weight 531g, eyerelief 13,3,mm, FOV 135m/1000m, transmission 500nm=86,8% 550 nm=89,2%, price 1880 euros
Of course there are differences in handling etc. but that is something you have to find out yourself.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
I forgot to mention the close focus differences:
Meopta 8x32 = 1,6 m
Leica Ultravid HD-plus 8x32 = 2,1m
Gijs van Ginkel
Meopta 8x32 = 1,6 m
Leica Ultravid HD-plus 8x32 = 2,1m
Gijs van Ginkel
I've noted some observations re some Meostar models made last year at the last Birdfair here and here. In short - generally very good indeed optically, slightly behind the alphas in areas such as field of view; handle well, and are solidly built, although in terms of "fit and finish" are not as refined as something like a Swarovski EL or Leica Noctivid (but fair enough given the price differential). To me their image is the most alpha-like in terms of colour rendition and overall "look" of the sub-alpha group (Conquest HD, Monarch HG, Canon 10x42 IS-L - I didn't try the Kowa Genesis models). When I compared Nikon's EDG to the Monarch HG I could see that the former just had something the latter, good though it was, had not. Meostar's HD models, the 10x42 especially, seem to me to have that "something" more than any of the other sub-alphas - but the others, which are all really good in their own right, outperform the Meostar in areas like field of view.
I'd definitely recommend you give them a serious trial if looking for a birding binocular in that price range. For marine use, though I tried. and liked, their 7x50 roof model (written up in more detail by Roger Vine at Scopeviews.co.uk) I'm not sure if they can be justified over a good marine 7x50 porro eg. Fujinon FMT. Astro/hunting - no idea.
One will not have a problem finding these Orange in the DarkOrange version is really cool ☃️🎄
(even mist freezes around it
Meopta used to make military optics for the Warsaw Pact and after the fall of the Berlin Wall, were bought by a Czech-American businessman. They still make military optics, just for NATO now and also optics assemblies for others. The previous-gen Leica APO-Televid spotting scopes were made by Meopta, and I believe some Zeiss-branded ones as well. I have their Meostar S2 82 HD spotting scope with the 30-60x wide eyepiece, and it is an outstanding instrument.
and also optics assemblies for others. The previous-gen Leica APO-Televid spotting scopes were made by Meopta, and I believe some Zeiss-branded ones as well. I have their Meostar S2 82 HD spotting scope with the 30-60x wide eyepiece, and it is an outstanding instrument.
I agree that the S2 scope is outstanding and great value for money too. The scopes made by Meopta for Zeiss were not simply Zeiss-branded, they were designed by Zeiss.Meopta used to make military optics for the Warsaw Pact and after the fall of the Berlin Wall, were bought by a Czech-American businessman. They still make military optics, just for NATO now
