DCF WP vs. DCF SP (1 Viewer)

I have DCF WP and I am consedering replacing it with same 8x DCF SP model, have seen some good deals out there. Is there any optical advantage in favor of SP or no?

THANKS.

Not too sure how this varies across the models but I have both a WP 8x32 and a SP 8x32.

And I'm amused/annoyed to say I prefer my WP to the SP even though the former was $50 NOS and the latter was $275 second hand.

The differences are: newer coatings, a different EP design (with an aspherical hybrid (glass/plastic) lens) and a slightly different mechanical design. Oh and the case is different (a sort of interesting nylong with bronze highlights!).

With my two samples (product variation is probably an issue here).

Mechanical difference: the SP has a locking continuous diopter setting. The WP has a notched (discrete) non-lockable diopter setting. As I've not noticed my WP diopter to drift this is not a huge point but the continuous setting is nice (though the notches give a nice "opticians" "This one or ... this one" feeling. The SP now has thethered rubber objective covers that attach at the tripod adaptor. For the 8x32 models the new SP covers will fit the WP so you could get those as spare parts for an upgrade.

Sharpness: My WP is sharper in center of field. I checked this out quite a few ways but it certainly has something (5km christmas lights that were points in the WP are not quite in my SP).

Edge of field: the aspherical lens should reduce field curvature and it does. If you spend time looking a the edge of field there is less curvature in the SP. But I've never found the difference to be noticeable. In fact I just had to get both bins out and try them to see this effect I hadn't really noticed before. Though given the Pentax design style in their large bins (small FOV with sharper edges) I can see why they would do this.

Coatings: The WP has a slightly bluish or cold quality to the view. The SP has a warmer view (more of what I consider a later Pentax "redder" bias).

View: I think the SP may have a bit more eye relief too. Not that I need any. But I recall with my tight fitting glasses the SP was less relaxed. Unless you are a myope with tight fitting glasses I suspect this isn't going to be a problem for anyone else! And With the way my glasses are currently set I don't notice the issue any more.

I suspect they updated their multilayer coatings AR and phase-compensating and perhaps even the mirror coating so the transmission could be higher to but I don't see it. It's certainly not clearly obvious.

So between my two I don't find a huge difference. But bins are always a compromise so you balance of features might find the difference to be larger.

Not seen an SP ED which might help. But I think there are other bins that might give you better performance (though they would not be made in Japan).

Where are you seeing the good SP deals?

It is interesting you made these comments but definitely not a surprise. I did own the 8x43 SP and had the chance to use the 8x43 WP extensively at one time. I, too, prefered the optical performance of the WP, slightly to the SP. The image seemed more realistic with slightly higher apparent sharpness (color representation and contrast maybe?). I did prefer the physical design of the SP though especially the eyecups and diopter.

scopecity on ebay sells 8x43 SP for 299, they had same price for 10x model, which is now gone.

I also have 8x32 Wp that I bought from EO and it is opticaly excellent and it is better than WP 8x42, sharper, better colors better crispness. That bin is the best deal ever.

correction, yhat is scopestop not scopecity'
http://cgi.ebay.ca/NEW-PENTAX-DCF-S...hZ024QQcategoryZ31711QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem

Thanks for the link. If you see anything pop up on the WPs then please post it. I would be interested in securing another of those eventually.

Interesting comment on another thread

Kammerdiner said:

I had the 8x42 WP for ten years and loved it. I recently sold it for a Nikon 8x32 SE and a Leica 8x20. It it weren't for the money I would have kept the WP because it was SHARP, dead center anyway. Not a flat field, not a wide FOV, but sharp for birding.

Last year I bought the Pentax 8x32 ED and it's got a much flatter, wider field but it is not as sharp dead center. It's brighter (daylight anyway), has much better color and contrast, less CA, but I do miss that extra edge of sharpness for birding.

Click to expand...

I though that was just product variation in my case.

But Frank made a similar (sort of) comment: WP sharper than SP or ED.

And now a third ... maybe it isn't product variation after all! Maybe there's a trade off in the center field sharpness for the edge curvature with the hybrid aspherical lens?

...and I hope to revive the XP comparison as well. I don't expect it to be as good as the original WP but still......

Christpher's (Astronomics) is also selling the DCF XP 8 x 33 and 10 x 33 at closeout prices below dealer cost.http://www.astronomics.com/main/pro...me/KBQKGBCAW1BK9MC3XEDLNL4N57/product_id/P833

Bob

Frank et al.

As it happens, I tried an 8x33 XP last year (bought new on Ebay at a great price). The size and weight were a treat: smaller and lighter than a Zeiss 8x32 FL and great for hiking and kayaking, but the optical performance struck me as a notch down from both the 8x42 WP I had, and the 8x32 ED I still have. They were reasonably sharp in the center but it dropped off in a hurry at the edges. In addition, they had more CA than either the WP or ED. Overall, the image just didn't have much "snap" to it, in terms of color, contrast, etc. In the end I sold them to pay for a Nikon SE, but I rather wish I had kept them, mostly for kayaking. I'm not hauling the SE's around in a kayak, so I'm back to using beater 8x25 reverse porros for that.

Bob,

That definitely is an attractive price considering what they originally sold for. However, I found them through Amazon for $208 plus $2 shipping. That was after going through 100 pages of Amazon's binocular selection.

KD,

I did own the 8x33 XPs previously. I cannot honestly say if my previous impressions were similar to yours or not. It has been some time since I owned. I do remember being happy with their size and overall function....and reasonably happy with the optics as well. I am looking to compare them directly to my Bushnell Legend 8x42s for a warbler glass. If the XPs have slightly more "snap" then the Legends are going up on Ebay.

I should have mentioned that I had the 8x33 XP head to head with the Pentax 9x28 DCF LV for about a week and slightly preferred the XP. As I recall, the only real difference was FOV (XP 341, LV 294). Brightness, sharpness, etc. struck me as about the same. I don't recall how the CA compared. I liked the LV's a lot because they were even lighter than the XP's, but the extra FOV swayed me. I used the XP's for warbling last spring, and used them most of the summmer as well, and I did like them. As I said, I kind of regret selling them, but I'm trying to limit the number of binocs I own.

BTW I notice that Pentax has new 8x36 and 10x36 NV's out there. 22.6 oz., which is a bit lighter than their 8x32's. Price is nice, too: $200-210. Could be interesting.

Kammerdiner said:

BTW I notice that Pentax has new 8x36 and 10x36 NV's out there. 22.6 oz., which is a bit lighter than their 8x32's. Price is nice, too: $200-210. Could be interesting.

Click to expand...

Yeap, we've talked about them at the beginning of the year when they apppeared at the SHOT show. They seem to be waterproof (JIS6) upgrades for the water-resistant (JIS4) Pentax HS 36mm bins.

I like the HS but they're narrower FOV than 32mm bins an of course rather larger. But they're an interesting optically simple design.

Search for "Pentax NV" and "Pentax HS" (include the quotes) for reviews and comments.

The problem with the XPs is that they have narrow FOVs (compared to other bins even Pentax bins) which is a big trade off for their light weight.

Well, I received the XPs today. They are smaller than I remember. I still enjoy the physical size, fit and finish and handling. The optics have me torn. I want to like them because of the rest of the package but the optics just aren't cutting it for me. They do have some things going for them. They are a hair brighter and sharper than the 8x42 Legends but I just don't get that relaxed feeling when I look through them. I would like to say that they were out of alignment but I don't get eyestrain. It is more of a general sense of having difficulty relaxing with them. Maybe their light weight and short physical length are making me focus more on trying to settle them and get a steady image.

I just don't know.

I am going to give them another day or two of comparisons but I think they are going back.

My wife likes the XP's? I have compared them to alot of my others, I think they are a tad better than say for example Bushnell Legend 8x32's and the like? I originally bought these to replace my SP 32 I sold ( since aquired another ) but it isn't an SP for sure! The first thing that comes to mind is with the pr I have it won't resolve as much detail at longer distances? I haven't used them for quite some time but, I know they are also shorter than the SP's. It's not that they are bad but, I remember what they used to sell for! I wouldn't trade my SP 32 that I have now for anything! I believe it is a cherry piece of glass!!! Better than the first pr I had! I think the XP would make a fine Warbler glass though, quick focus lite weight fairly bright etc... You're hands might be to big? Lol!!! I don't know what you gave for them, I have seen some prices that were less than half than what I paid! In that respect they would be a good bargain! Hope they work for your intended purpose! Bryce...