Vortex Diamondback HD 8x32 issue? (1 Viewer)

[Viraj]

Hi All,

I am new here and a novice birder. I wanted to have a binocular with reasonable price and performance to keep with me every time and after reading many reviews I have ended up buying Diamondback HD 8x32. It is very bright during daylight and has a very sharp sweet spot at the middle even though the sharpness is not evenly spread across the entire field of view. It is rugged and very well suited to keep with me all the time when I am walking along with small forest patches in my area.
However, I have encountered an issue in it as there is a bright circle of light appears around the field of view of the binocular and it really distracts my vision. In bright sunlight, there is a reflection-like thing that can be seen in the corners of the field of view. Does anyone of you have experience with such an issue in this model? Is it a defect in my model and should I send it back to claim the warranty? Please give me your valuable suggestions.
I had few pairs of inexpensive Olympus and Celestron binoculars and didn't experience such an issue with them.
Thank you
Your valuable advice is highly appreciated

 

[yarrellii]

Hi Viraj. I know you posted this question also in a general thread about the Diamondback HD 8x32. But, since this is a very particular issue, I thought I might as well place my answer here.
I've recently received a pair of 8x32 Diamondback HD (I'll write my impressions about the use on the other thread once I've used them for a longer period), and I'm afraid I've found exactly the issue you are referring to. It's a circle of light on the outside of the field stop. It's really distracting, because it somehow works as a kaleidoscope: when you pan you get a constantly moving ring of light. It's always difficult to capture on shot what our eyes see through a binocular, but in this case I've place my smartphone camera on the eyepiece, and there it was:



I think the image shows what's happening. I have an extremely limited knowledge about binocular building technology, but probably because of a lack of blackening/baffling, or maybe because of some exposed shiny/metal parts the edge of the image is reflected on what should be a black background beyond the field stop.

In this second image you can see that what's reflected is directly the area of the image closest to the field stop. Pay attention to the area around 4 o'clock (I've highlighted it). There is a satellite TV dish on the very edge of the image, and its reflection can seen clearly reflected on the outside of the field stop.



In the other thread you state that this happens with other DB HD of people you know. I wonder if you managed to find out if this was a defect (and can be corrected/replaced by Vortex) or it's just the way it is.

Background:
I don't use spectacles (have used the binoculars with eyecups all the way down and the issue remains the same.
Over the years I have had nearly 25 different 8x32/30 binoculars, from cheap stuff to top-of-the range devices. Never had this issue with any of those.

 

[Viraj]

Hi Viraj. I know you posted this question also in a general thread about the Diamondback HD 8x32. But, since this is a very particular issue, I thought I might as well place my answer here.
I've recently received a pair of 8x32 Diamondback HD (I'll write my impressions about the use on the other thread once I've used them for a longer period), and I'm afraid I've found exactly the issue you are referring to. It's a circle of light on the outside of the field stop. It's really distracting, because it somehow works as a kaleidoscope: when you pan you get a constantly moving ring of light. It's always difficult to capture on shot what our eyes see through a binocular, but in this case I've place my smartphone camera on the eyepiece, and there it was:

View attachment 1409385

I think the image shows what's happening. I have an extremely limited knowledge about binocular building technology, but probably because of a lack of blackening/baffling, or maybe because of some exposed shiny/metal parts the edge of the image is reflected on what should be a black background beyond the field stop.

In this second image you can see that what's reflected is directly the area of the image closest to the field stop. Pay attention to the area around 4 o'clock (I've highlighted it). There is a satellite TV dish on the very edge of the image, and its reflection can seen clearly reflected on the outside of the field stop.

View attachment 1409386

In the other thread you state that this happens with other DB HD of people you know. I wonder if you managed to find out if this was a defect (and can be corrected/replaced by Vortex) or it's just the way it is.

Background:
I don't use spectacles (have used the binoculars with eyecups all the way down and the issue remains the same.
Over the years I have had nearly 25 different 8x32/30 binoculars, from cheap stuff to top-of-the range devices. Never had this issue with any of those.

Hi yarrellii. Thank you very much for sharing your experience about this issue in detail with sample photographs. As an experienced binocular user and a well-known member of the BirdForum, your explanation was perfect about the issue that I have experienced too.

In the first place, I was not sure whether this is an issue or not. I tried to find information about this in different websites, forums and tried to contact people who used this model. But mostly, this model was described as one of the bests in this price class and well worth the price you spend while no such issue was mentioned anywhere. “Traditional Bowhunting And Wilderness Podcast” YouTube channel is also highly recommended this DB 8x32 model, and he said his unit is working perfectly and never encountered such an issue. However, I found only one user had the same issue with a bigger DB HD binocular (x42) and he changed it to a Viper HD that had no such issue. Now with your experience, this is certainly a defect of our units. I personally think this happened due to a miss-alignment of the optical components inside the bins. Additionally, my DB HD unit had poor collimation that has not been observed in any of my 7, even cheaper bins.

Finally, I sent the bins back to the Amazone.de expecting a repair/ replacement however, even though I have exceeded the one-month period to request the money back, the seller refunded the full amount of money.

Additionally, I would like to share a bit of my thought about DB HD in comparison to my current pair of bins, M7 8x30. If I compare the units I had (we know the experience with bins are subjective and differences exist even among different units of the same model), I would definitely go for DB HD over M7 except for the issue we mentioned and poor collimation observed in DB HD. I found DB HD had a noticeable amount of higher center sharpness and the green, yellow, and orange had pop into them (that I like) while M7 has more even sharpness across the entire FOV and more neutral color profile. Additionally, for me, DB HD is bit brighter than M7 and I don’t like the rubber armoring in M7 that has been reported to be worn out with time.

Thank you again yarrellii for your reply and wish you a happy birding time 😊

 

[yarrellii]

I finally took some time to write Vortex about this. I got a reply in a matter of minutes (again, Vortex customer service showing that not only central European brands can boast care and attention). I send the picture from post #2 and got a reply from a member of the "Sales & Technical" department who took his time to grab a DBHD 8x32 and take a picture of his unit. He has sent me the picture and it shows exactly the same ring of reflection. He commented that "this type of glare indicates the absence of low-reflectivity baffling on the interior of the optic — probably done to keep the cost down, which is unfortunate". And then went on to offer a refund if I wasn't satisfied with the binoculars. I found the honesty in the reply and the refund offer most convincing. I mean, the reflection is a flaw, but I rather have the manufacture acknowledge it than deny it and look for some excuses.

All in all, I consider the DBHD to be a small "value wonder". Today I've been comparing it against the Opticron Traveller ED 8x32, and while the Opticron was slightly better in some areas (at nearly twice the price this is expected), the DBHD held its own and surprised with a more "poppy" image (like in more "bokeh", and an enhanced level of contrast). Really impressive for the price.

 

[Viraj]

I finally took some time to write Vortex about this. I got a reply in a matter of minutes (again, Vortex customer service showing that not only central European brands can boast care and attention). I send the picture from post #2 and got a reply from a member of the "Sales & Technical" department who took his time to grab a DBHD 8x32 and take a picture of his unit. He has sent me the picture and it shows exactly the same ring of reflection. He commented that "this type of glare indicates the absence of low-reflectivity baffling on the interior of the optic — probably done to keep the cost down, which is unfortunate". And then went on to offer a refund if I wasn't satisfied with the binoculars. I found the honesty in the reply and the refund offer most convincing. I mean, the reflection is a flaw, but I rather have the manufacture acknowledge it than deny it and look for some excuses.

All in all, I consider the DBHD to be a small "value wonder". Today I've been comparing it against the Opticron Traveller ED 8x32, and while the Opticron was slightly better in some areas (at nearly twice the price this is expected), the DBHD held its own and surprised with a more "poppy" image (like in more "bokeh", and an enhanced level of contrast). Really impressive for the price.

Thank you very much @yarrellii for letting us know about this new information. Honestly, I thought it was a problem in my unit and wanted to give a try for a new one. So, it seems to be a general issue. I really liked the view trough DB HD 8x32 however, I couldn't tolerate that reflection issue. As you said it has a poppy image that I liked much more than the view through monarch 7 8x30 which has replaced my DB HD.

 

[yarrellii]

@Viraj I was talking with another forum member who doesn't know the DBHD and was curious about it. So I've done a quick and unscientific comparison with the Opticron Traveller 8x32 ED. Honestly, I've been surprised by the "strenght/punch" of the image compared to the Traveller. It somehow reminded me of the difference in image properties comparing Leica and Swarovski or Zeiss. Leica usually has more "bite", more contrast, and in comparison sometimes the image from a Swarovski (with its superbright image) or a Zeiss FL might look a bit washed. The reflection ring is really unfortunate, because the incredibly compact size, image quality, price and warranty make the little DB a very interesting proposal at 200 $. I was thinking of selling mine (I have other 8x32), but actually I like them so much that I probably keep them, at least for a while, as a backup.

 

[yarrellii]

More on this topic. Not sure if it's a common issue with the whole of the Diamondback HD line, but just got myself a 10x50 Diamondback HD, which is quite nice actually, light and nimble for a 10x50, image is sharp and contrasty, there's lower CA than expected (in fact, nothing to complain about here), sweet spot is not massive though. However, the same reflecting ring appears. In my unit of the 10x50 it is not as obvious as in the 8x32. As a matter of fact, if I keep my eyes well aligned with the EP and get my IPD right, I don't think I can see it on "steady/still" observations, but if I move the binoculars (like following a bird), or if I change the eye relief distance, or if I "scan2 the field of view, as soon as my eye misses the axis, it's there. Again, nothing like in the 8x32, but probably a design trait (or flaw) of the the DBHD. As Mike McDowell from Vortex told me, most likely a result of keeping the cost down.

If I try to replicate the picture I took trough the 8x32 with my 10x50, by carefully placing the smartphone camera on the eyepiece at the right place, the field stop shows nice and crisp with no hint of of "reflection ring" (which mirrors the experience when you use the binoculars). If you move the smartphone a little off-axis, there you have it.



Probably if I dind't know it was there and if I hadn't looked for it out of curiosity, I wouldn't have found it so easily.

 

[Viraj]

More on this topic. Not sure if it's a common issue with the whole of the Diamondback HD line, but just got myself a 10x50 Diamondback HD, which is quite nice actually, light and nimble for a 10x50, image is sharp and contrasty, there's lower CA than expected (in fact, nothing to complain about here), sweet spot is not massive though. However, the same reflecting ring appears. In my unit of the 10x50 it is not as obvious as in the 8x32. As a matter of fact, if I keep my eyes well aligned with the EP and get my IPD right, I don't think I can see it on "steady/still" observations, but if I move the binoculars (like following a bird), or if I change the eye relief distance, or if I "scan2 the field of view, as soon as my eye misses the axis, it's there. Again, nothing like in the 8x32, but probably a design trait (or flaw) of the the DBHD. As Mike McDowell from Vortex told me, most likely a result of keeping the cost down.

If I try to replicate the picture I took trough the 8x32 with my 10x50, by carefully placing the smartphone camera on the eyepiece at the right place, the field stop shows nice and crisp with no hint of of "reflection ring" (which mirrors the experience when you use the binoculars). If you move the smartphone a little off-axis, there you have it.

View attachment 1453609

Probably if I dind't know it was there and if I hadn't looked for it out of curiosity, I wouldn't have found it so easily.

Thank you @yarrellii for the information. It is nice to hear how lower-priced binoculars perform well beyond their price tag. However, don't you think that 'ring of fire' is somehow associated with reduced eye relief? I had a similar kind of experience with my recently bought Habicht 10x42 GA. The problem has been mostly solved after using an eye shield. However, I couldn't do a further check in extreme conditions. I think you also had some similar problems with Habichts. Did eye shields on them work for you? Honestly, today morning I was thinking to buy another pair of DBHD 8x32 and give them a try with eye shields.
And I am curious to know how Diamondback HD and Viper 10x50 compare. I think you had Viper 10x50 earlier. What made you go down to the Diamondback line from the Viper line?

 

[yarrellii]

@Viraj Interesting what you mention about eye relief, it's one of the causes I've noticed (as I wrote above). If I move the binoculars slightly towards/away my face I can induce it. But here's a thing. With the eyecups fully extended it's harder to see, it's somehow on the outer periphery. However, with the eyecups fully out I can hardly see the full FOV, I barely reach to see the field stop (which is something that happens to me with wide angle binoculars, like the Nikon EII 8x30, for example). So to get the full FOV on these DBHD 10x50 I have to lower the eyecups one click. Then I see the entire FOV, but I get the dreaded ring of fire

As for why I sold the Viper HD and got the DBHD? Well, these are two different events. I tried the 10x50 Viper HD in my quest for a 10x that fitted me. I'm a 8x person (although my favourite is 7x, but there are not that many nice 7x32, so I use 8x32), I've never quite grasped the 10x format. I don't feel I gain a lot in terms of detail (my first glances through 10x were real disappointments), but I lose quite a lot in FOV, depth of field, increased shake (less relaxing view), etc. So I've always thought 10x were not worth it for me. I tried 12x and there I could somehow see a clear difference compared to 8x, but 12x is very nervous to handheld, so I abandoned it. My first "loved" 10x were the Nikon SE 10x42, which are terrific binoculars, just like the 8x32. However, I tried to get a more "rounded" package, with a bit more FOV, more weatherproofness, etc. So I ended up in the Viper HD 10x50 which is really compact, nearly as many 10x42 and offers remarkable image quality and perceived build quality, I really liked it. However, in my quest for "my 10x" I finally landed on IS, and I got a Canon 12x which basically fulfilled all my expectations as far as a "long reach" device (what I want a 10x for) and then some. Now I'm going down that road trying the 8x20 IS and the 10x30 IS II, which I'm liking a lot.
Back to topic: I like to take walks at night, look for owls, etc., so a dedicated night device is an attractive proposal. I have a very nice 8x56, a Vixen Foresta with AK prisms which works very well and is really bright, but then...



... the Vixen 8x56 is a bit of a beast, at 1230 g. So I'm considering whether or not a 10x50 could be a viable alternative. The DBHD 10x50 weights 838 g... against 1230 g... and then there's the size of it. Both the Viper HD and the DBHD 10x50 are really handy 10x50's, I love how they fall on your hands. So there you have it, I've had a Viper HD 10x50 and now I have a DBHD 10x50 but in different moments for different purposes.

As for now, I'm covered in the long range area with IS, which simply kills no-IS in that department, showing an awful lot of detail (my Canon IS 8x20 shows more detail than my ELSV 8x32, even more than a non-IS 10x, so my 10x IS sits probably in 12x non-IS-handheld territory, and my 12x36 IS III is nearly a tiny scope), so I have no use for a +500 € non-IS 10x50 like the Viper HD, I simply can't justify it. But if a cheaper 10x50 like the DBH can work as my "night glass", I'll be happy. I haven't done any direct comparisons between the 8x56 and the 10x50 yet. But if I see it doesn't work, I'll sell it and look for something else (if I ever come across a good offer on a used Viper HD 10x50 in the future, I might as well buy it, but at very discounted price).

Using the DBHD and the Viper HD 10x50 (I haven't been able to compare them directly), it's clear where your money goes: I remember the Viper had a more satisfying image: sharper, more pop, more contrast, way easier to snap into focus (the DBHD struggles a bit there), and the build quality is on another level: the diopter ring on my 8x32 DBHD is very hard, on my 10x50 DBHD super loose, the focus wheel is way worse, etc. Both great performers at their price points, and exceedingly pleasurable to use given their compact size and reduced weight.

 

[henry link]

The ring of reflection in post #7 looks like it comes from an insufficiently blackened or baffled spacer within the eyepiece, which is reflecting glancing light from the front of the binocular into the observer's eye. Eye shields for the eyepieces are only effective against light reaching the back glass of the eyepiece from behind the observer, then reflecting into the eye.

It's easy enough to test. Just seal the space between the eyepiece and your face with your hands to block light from behind reaching the eyepiece. If you still see the reflection eye shields won't help.

 

[Viraj]

@Viraj Interesting what you mention about eye relief, it's one of the causes I've noticed (as I wrote above). If I move the binoculars slightly towards/away my face I can induce it. But here's a thing. With the eyecups fully extended it's harder to see, it's somehow on the outer periphery. However, with the eyecups fully out I can hardly see the full FOV, I barely reach to see the field stop (which is something that happens to me with wide angle binoculars, like the Nikon EII 8x30, for example). So to get the full FOV on these DBHD 10x50 I have to lower the eyecups one click. Then I see the entire FOV, but I get the dreaded ring of fire

As for why I sold the Viper HD and got the DBHD? Well, these are two different events. I tried the 10x50 Viper HD in my quest for a 10x that fitted me. I'm a 8x person (although my favourite is 7x, but there are not that many nice 7x32, so I use 8x32), I've never quite grasped the 10x format. I don't feel I gain a lot in terms of detail (my first glances through 10x were real disappointments), but I lose quite a lot in FOV, depth of field, increased shake (less relaxing view), etc. So I've always thought 10x were not worth it for me. I tried 12x and there I could somehow see a clear difference compared to 8x, but 12x is very nervous to handheld, so I abandoned it. My first "loved" 10x were the Nikon SE 10x42, which are terrific binoculars, just like the 8x32. However, I tried to get a more "rounded" package, with a bit more FOV, more weatherproofness, etc. So I ended up in the Viper HD 10x50 which is really compact, nearly as many 10x42 and offers remarkable image quality and perceived build quality, I really liked it. However, in my quest for "my 10x" I finally landed on IS, and I got a Canon 12x which basically fulfilled all my expectations as far as a "long reach" device (what I want a 10x for) and then some. Now I'm going down that road trying the 8x20 IS and the 10x30 IS II, which I'm liking a lot.
Back to topic: I like to take walks at night, look for owls, etc., so a dedicated night device is an attractive proposal. I have a very nice 8x56, a Vixen Foresta with AK prisms which works very well and is really bright, but then...

View attachment 1453640

... the Vixen 8x56 is a bit of a beast, at 1230 g. So I'm considering whether or not a 10x50 could be a viable alternative. The DBHD 10x50 weights 838 g... against 1230 g... and then there's the size of it. Both the Viper HD and the DBHD 10x50 are really handy 10x50's, I love how they fall on your hands. So there you have it, I've had a Viper HD 10x50 and now I have a DBHD 10x50 but in different moments for different purposes.

As for now, I'm covered in the long range area with IS, which simply kills no-IS in that department, showing an awful lot of detail (my Canon IS 8x20 shows more detail than my ELSV 8x32, even more than a non-IS 10x, so my 10x IS sits probably in 12x non-IS-handheld territory, and my 12x36 IS III is nearly a tiny scope), so I have no use for a +500 € non-IS 10x50 like the Viper HD, I simply can't justify it. But if a cheaper 10x50 like the DBH can work as my "night glass", I'll be happy. I haven't done any direct comparisons between the 8x56 and the 10x50 yet. But if I see it doesn't work, I'll sell it and look for something else (if I ever come across a good offer on a used Viper HD 10x50 in the future, I might as well buy it, but at very discounted price).

Using the DBHD and the Viper HD 10x50 (I haven't been able to compare them directly), it's clear where your money goes: I remember the Viper had a more satisfying image: sharper, more pop, more contrast, way easier to snap into focus (the DBHD struggles a bit there), and the build quality is on another level: the diopter ring on my 8x32 DBHD is very hard, on my 10x50 DBHD super loose, the focus wheel is way worse, etc. Both great performers at their price points, and exceedingly pleasurable to use given their compact size and reduced weight.

Thank you for your lengthy but detailed explanation. I still think winged eyecups would allow you to keep the eye placement steady to get rid of the 'Ring of fire'. However, it seems that is not the point here as the ring of fire in DBHD 10x50 is not as worse as in 8x32.

I fully understand that you had different use cases to buy DBHD and Viper. As an 'optics novice' I don't have extended experience with many binoculars. I appreciate the beauty of the image as well as the detail it shows. I like canon 12x36 is III but used only one time for birdwatching and now it is resting in a box. It simply shows more details but the pleasure we get is less. I also thought x10 doesn't show many details compared to x8. However, now I see clear magnification deference in NL 8x42 vs Habicht 10x40 and I enjoy the Habicht a lot. I can keep it steady enough to see more details than 8x42. and more magnification WOW me. Now I kind of regret not buying NL 10x42 which was the original plan. I understand different individuals weigh different facts differently. I would also love to give a try 10x50 or 10x56 but currently, I don't do nighttime observations. I will keep in mind DBHD 10x50 as a good option whenever I buy a 10x50/56 🙂🙂

 

[Viraj]

The ring of reflection in post #7 looks like it comes from an insufficiently blackened or baffled spacer within the eyepiece, which is reflecting glancing light from the front of the binocular into the observer's eye. Eye shields for the eyepieces are only effective against light reaching the back glass of the eyepiece from behind the observer, then reflecting into the eye.

It's easy enough to test. Just seal the space between the eyepiece and your face with your hands to block light from behind reaching the eyepiece. If you still see the reflection eye shields won't help.

That's very interesting to know. Actually, as I mentioned above, I have a similar issue with Habicht 10x40. Now it is better after the use of eye shields however I can still see some. Do you think I should send it back or send it for repair? or Habicht also has the issue of an insufficiently blackened or baffled spacer within the eyepiece as a comment problem of that model?

 

[Pepitogrillo]

Hello,
I have had the opportunity to try the Vortex Diamond HD 8x32 during the weekend, I liked the focuser that was very smooth and friendly, very fast to focus, although it has a critical point to achieve this, you have to hit it right, too I liked its low weight and compactness, it is really small but it handles very well with the hands, it is very tactile, the image is wide... but in my humble opinion it lacks that "pop". The image is very cold, bland, I don't like it, it has a blue ring, in the field stop, close focus good, very good, for the price I'll look for an alternative
best regards
PG.

 

[Viraj]

Hello,
I have had the opportunity to try the Vortex Diamond HD 8x32 during the weekend, I liked the focuser that was very smooth and friendly, very fast to focus, although it has a critical point to achieve this, you have to hit it right, too I liked its low weight and compactness, it is really small but it handles very well with the hands, it is very tactile, the image is wide... but in my humble opinion it lacks that "pop". The image is very cold, bland, I don't like it, it has a blue ring, in the field stop, close focus good, very good, for the price I'll look for an alternative
best regards
PG.

Thanks for sharing your experience with DB HD 8x32. I agreed with all of your observations however, I observed more 'pop' in it compared to the Monarch 7 8x30. The only thing that frustrated me is the 'ring of fire'. I don't think there are many alternatives in this price range. I am looking forward to hearing from you about other alternatives that you will check in the future. Please keep us updated 🙂 Good luck 🍀

 

[Pepitogrillo]

I've one review with the Svbony 8x32 ED!!

 

[yarrellii]

Just like @Viraj I observed quite a lot of "pop" in the image through the DBHD 8x32. The image seemed to pop from the background, to be cut out in a prominent and pleasant way, like in way more expensive binoculars. I found this quite surprising, even compared to my Opticron Traveller ED 8x32, which is a more expensive device belonging to an upper category. In my case, my only complain is about the ring of reflection around the field stop. Other than that, I simply can't fault the DBHD and find that it's a terrific offering for the price... especially if you add to the mix the Vortex VIP Warranty. I've used it in a Viper HD (I wrote saying that my unit was out of alligment, sent it and got a brand new in exchange). In the case of the DBHD, like I explained in post #4, I wrote to Vortex and I got an immediate reply by Mike McDowell (you've probably seen him in Youtube videos by Eagle Optics or Vortex), where he was really nice, explained about the "ring of fire" issue and directly offered me a refund if I wasn't satisfied. In my case, I'm honestly pretty chuffed by Vortex Customer service. I think it's something to take into account in the 200 € range, I don't think you'll get that in many other brands.