Steve C
Well-known member
This is the newest series of binoculars released by Opticron. The all price at approximately $600.00 US. The optics are pretty typical for this price level. These are good and useful images, but there are a couple of issues that will mitigate against the realization of the potential that exists.
I refer you to the Opticron data sheets for these binoculars, links found here:
Verano BGA VHD 8x42 | Opticron
Verano BGA VHD 10x42 | Opticron
This has been, shall I say, an interesting review. On one hand I am tempted to just send these back to Opticron. On the other hand, I feel it is incumbent to report what I have to report on. It seems that one of the basic points of contention with binoculars in general centers on the eye cup. That is the issue at hand here, the eye cup assemblies on these binoculars. I first had to sort out how much of the issue was just me finally meeting a binocular that just would not work for me. I have had lots of binoculars to my eyes and until now, I have NEVER had a binocular rendered unusable because of the eye cup. To be sure, there are some I have liked better than others. On the other hand I needed to sort out why in the world would something like this ever get in to a position to be sold in the first place.
Out of the box the first issue to note was too much glue on the rubber ring. Like the 32 sibling, there was a lot of glue squished out into the adjustment slots. That essentially glued the eye cup into the retracted, or partially retracted mode. When I figured that out, it was my hope that that was all it took, as was the case with the 32. Well, no such luck. It helped, but only a little. I’m afraid there is just not enough upward travel left with the shallow adjustment angle these appear to have.
Moving on, I will address the 8x42 first. Eye cups retracted, this binocular works fine for eye glass wearers. I do not have prescription glasses, but I do use non prescription reading glasses. With these or with sunglasses, the 8x was easy to get the full fov. Fully extended was a completely different story. To get proper extension for my eyes, I had to remove the rubber ring, go out to the shop, dig through the O-ring selection and use a 3 mm thick specimen under the upper edge of the eye ring. At this point I could adequately use the view. If this hack proves necessary for others, it is up to the individual to decide if they wish to do this or not.
Going to the 10x, the issue is mostly the opposite of the 8x. With then eye cup retracted (down) the ocular lens sits 8 mm below the upper edge of the eye ring. With the same glasses I used with the 8x, all I could get was the sort of figure eight movie screen binocular view. I have no idea how to hack this one in order to get it to work. The issue can be clearly seen in the images from the Opticron site, linked above. This seems to be a no go if you use glasses and want a 10x. Screwing the eye cup up, there is too much extension and fov is lost and there is a significant increase in the blackness outside the image. Like looking through a tire. Eye cup in mid position works fine. Again adequate views were attained.
Sorry, I’m not done with these eye cups just yet. The final issue here is the overall diameter if the eye cup assembly. It is just too large in diameter. Moving the eye cup extension upward by the 3mm in the 8x puts my nose in contact with the eye cup ring. My IPD is 64 mm. If it were much less than that, even the O-ring hack would not have worked. Not only are they too big in diameter, the square edge they have is exaggerated. The 10x is nowhere near as bad as with the 8x, IF you don’t wear glasses.
OK. Now it probably seems like I have it out for Opticron here. I do not. I have several of their binoculars and have never had anything like this on any of them. I have had several lengthy communications with Pete Gamby on this issue. He tells me they have sold several hundred of these 42 mm Verano binoculars and have not had any sort of this kind of feedback. This leads me back to just how much of this is an issue distinct to me. As I said, I have never had this sort of an issue and try as I might I can not assign more than partial blame to that here. On the other hand it is hard to believe a fault like this ever got off the bench and into a retail box. So there it is. I can’t recommend this based on the eye cup issues.
Away from the eye cups, and onto the rest of the binocular, It has the same case style and accessories as does the 32, with the exception of the rain guard. This one is the typical harder, slick, Opticron labeled style. It has been sized to the eye cups. While I’d like to see it a little bit wider, it comes off as intended. The binocular is clearly marked as Made in Japan, both on the end of the focus wheel, and under the hinge on the right barrel.
Getting to the point of actually having hands on with this binocular it is immediately apparent that these have a distinct ergonomic feel. As it is shorter than either the Imagic or the Aurora, it gives the tubes a decidedly short, tapered appearance. It apparently has the same thick, textured armor of the 32. When at minimum IPD the barrels come within a mm of touching. The eye cups are less than 10 mm apart at this point. While it feels different, the feel is not objectionable. It is I suppose, possible Opticron was looking for a distinct sort of feel here.
They have the same thick, soft textured, grayish black rubber armor as does the 32. I am beginning to realize that will show dirt quite readily.
The focus is clockwise to infinity. Close focus, 4 feet, is shorter than the 32 as indicated on the data sheets. The focus action here is different from the 32. The 42 has three total turns of the wheel with just a half turn of over travel past infinity. There is about twice the movement of the wheel needed to move any distance with the 42 than with the 32. The diopter is typical Opticron, a solid, smooth, right side ring with a knob. Like all Opticrons of my acquaintance, the adjustment is flawless.
The image is just about a ringer for that of the 32. It seems a little brighter and I put that to the extra light from the larger objective. It is a crisp, clean, sharp image with good contrast. Like the 32 it hangs with the Aurora in resolution. It is not quite as bright as the Aurora, but will serve its purpose very well. This is not a flat field binocular, like the 32 there is some curvature at the edge that does not seem to effect peripheral vision. Straight lines tend to stay straight as moved down through the field from top to bottom. Another good example of the quality image we can expect to see these days from this price class binocular. CA correction is good, veiling glare not much of an issue, and the anti reflective coatings seem to work. Just keep in mind my eye placement was not ideal.
Ultra wide fields seem to be in vogue lately. The 8x has a 7.5* field as does the 8x32. The 10x42 has a 6.2* field. These all qualify for the wide field designation by the old fashioned afov method. There seems to be the hint of a large black ring around the periphery of the view here that with the 832. This may seem like it is somewhat restrictive. However personal taste will see if this is wide enough.
This seems like a decent binocular that is handicapped by the ultimate choice of eye cup. A properly dimensioned eye cup with rubber eye rings on the style of the Aurora, I think would transform this. If you have a Verano and if this issue is present, contact Opticron with it. If this is real they need to know. If you don’t, I’d like to know here too.
I refer you to the Opticron data sheets for these binoculars, links found here:
Verano BGA VHD 8x42 | Opticron
Verano BGA VHD 10x42 | Opticron
This has been, shall I say, an interesting review. On one hand I am tempted to just send these back to Opticron. On the other hand, I feel it is incumbent to report what I have to report on. It seems that one of the basic points of contention with binoculars in general centers on the eye cup. That is the issue at hand here, the eye cup assemblies on these binoculars. I first had to sort out how much of the issue was just me finally meeting a binocular that just would not work for me. I have had lots of binoculars to my eyes and until now, I have NEVER had a binocular rendered unusable because of the eye cup. To be sure, there are some I have liked better than others. On the other hand I needed to sort out why in the world would something like this ever get in to a position to be sold in the first place.
Out of the box the first issue to note was too much glue on the rubber ring. Like the 32 sibling, there was a lot of glue squished out into the adjustment slots. That essentially glued the eye cup into the retracted, or partially retracted mode. When I figured that out, it was my hope that that was all it took, as was the case with the 32. Well, no such luck. It helped, but only a little. I’m afraid there is just not enough upward travel left with the shallow adjustment angle these appear to have.
Moving on, I will address the 8x42 first. Eye cups retracted, this binocular works fine for eye glass wearers. I do not have prescription glasses, but I do use non prescription reading glasses. With these or with sunglasses, the 8x was easy to get the full fov. Fully extended was a completely different story. To get proper extension for my eyes, I had to remove the rubber ring, go out to the shop, dig through the O-ring selection and use a 3 mm thick specimen under the upper edge of the eye ring. At this point I could adequately use the view. If this hack proves necessary for others, it is up to the individual to decide if they wish to do this or not.
Going to the 10x, the issue is mostly the opposite of the 8x. With then eye cup retracted (down) the ocular lens sits 8 mm below the upper edge of the eye ring. With the same glasses I used with the 8x, all I could get was the sort of figure eight movie screen binocular view. I have no idea how to hack this one in order to get it to work. The issue can be clearly seen in the images from the Opticron site, linked above. This seems to be a no go if you use glasses and want a 10x. Screwing the eye cup up, there is too much extension and fov is lost and there is a significant increase in the blackness outside the image. Like looking through a tire. Eye cup in mid position works fine. Again adequate views were attained.
Sorry, I’m not done with these eye cups just yet. The final issue here is the overall diameter if the eye cup assembly. It is just too large in diameter. Moving the eye cup extension upward by the 3mm in the 8x puts my nose in contact with the eye cup ring. My IPD is 64 mm. If it were much less than that, even the O-ring hack would not have worked. Not only are they too big in diameter, the square edge they have is exaggerated. The 10x is nowhere near as bad as with the 8x, IF you don’t wear glasses.
OK. Now it probably seems like I have it out for Opticron here. I do not. I have several of their binoculars and have never had anything like this on any of them. I have had several lengthy communications with Pete Gamby on this issue. He tells me they have sold several hundred of these 42 mm Verano binoculars and have not had any sort of this kind of feedback. This leads me back to just how much of this is an issue distinct to me. As I said, I have never had this sort of an issue and try as I might I can not assign more than partial blame to that here. On the other hand it is hard to believe a fault like this ever got off the bench and into a retail box. So there it is. I can’t recommend this based on the eye cup issues.
Away from the eye cups, and onto the rest of the binocular, It has the same case style and accessories as does the 32, with the exception of the rain guard. This one is the typical harder, slick, Opticron labeled style. It has been sized to the eye cups. While I’d like to see it a little bit wider, it comes off as intended. The binocular is clearly marked as Made in Japan, both on the end of the focus wheel, and under the hinge on the right barrel.
Getting to the point of actually having hands on with this binocular it is immediately apparent that these have a distinct ergonomic feel. As it is shorter than either the Imagic or the Aurora, it gives the tubes a decidedly short, tapered appearance. It apparently has the same thick, textured armor of the 32. When at minimum IPD the barrels come within a mm of touching. The eye cups are less than 10 mm apart at this point. While it feels different, the feel is not objectionable. It is I suppose, possible Opticron was looking for a distinct sort of feel here.
They have the same thick, soft textured, grayish black rubber armor as does the 32. I am beginning to realize that will show dirt quite readily.
The focus is clockwise to infinity. Close focus, 4 feet, is shorter than the 32 as indicated on the data sheets. The focus action here is different from the 32. The 42 has three total turns of the wheel with just a half turn of over travel past infinity. There is about twice the movement of the wheel needed to move any distance with the 42 than with the 32. The diopter is typical Opticron, a solid, smooth, right side ring with a knob. Like all Opticrons of my acquaintance, the adjustment is flawless.
The image is just about a ringer for that of the 32. It seems a little brighter and I put that to the extra light from the larger objective. It is a crisp, clean, sharp image with good contrast. Like the 32 it hangs with the Aurora in resolution. It is not quite as bright as the Aurora, but will serve its purpose very well. This is not a flat field binocular, like the 32 there is some curvature at the edge that does not seem to effect peripheral vision. Straight lines tend to stay straight as moved down through the field from top to bottom. Another good example of the quality image we can expect to see these days from this price class binocular. CA correction is good, veiling glare not much of an issue, and the anti reflective coatings seem to work. Just keep in mind my eye placement was not ideal.
Ultra wide fields seem to be in vogue lately. The 8x has a 7.5* field as does the 8x32. The 10x42 has a 6.2* field. These all qualify for the wide field designation by the old fashioned afov method. There seems to be the hint of a large black ring around the periphery of the view here that with the 832. This may seem like it is somewhat restrictive. However personal taste will see if this is wide enough.
This seems like a decent binocular that is handicapped by the ultimate choice of eye cup. A properly dimensioned eye cup with rubber eye rings on the style of the Aurora, I think would transform this. If you have a Verano and if this issue is present, contact Opticron with it. If this is real they need to know. If you don’t, I’d like to know here too.
Last edited:
