Yesterday, I went to my local optics store to check out and try some bins, mainly intended for astro use/low light/extended ranges.
As some side info, my other bins are an EL8x32SV, and a recently purchased new Leica Trinovid 8x42, both very nice bins, and a joy to use.
I was looking into the 10x50/56 range, and went to the store with the Conquest HD 10x56 or something similar in mind.
First thing I noticed when the salesman took it out of the cabinet, was it's size. Man that thing is HUGE! Anyway, took it outside to test it.
Long story short, I liked it. Sharp and bright, certainly a nice bin for the money. But it's also a specialists bin because of it's size and weight.
Because the Conquests size and weight kind of scared me off a bit, I think It would only see use for astronomy, and most likely, I would not carry it with me on a full day in the field.
That's actually not really the plan. When I spend my money, I want to use things as much as possible.
So, I got an idea. If I could find a bin which could partly replace the Trinny 8x42, and partly the Zeiss CHD, then I would get the best of both worlds with limited concessions.
Looking for a premium 10x42 was not an option, the 4.2mm EP is too small for me in low light use. When looking into the Swarovski cabinet, the 10x50SV caught my attention.
Man, that thing is small compared to the Conquest, it's only slightly larger than the 10x42SV. Very nice, I'm sure I can use the 10x50SV a full day in the field, AND it's very good for astronomy.
Seemed like the perfect compromise to me, so let's take it outside to compare it with the Conquest.
First glance through the SV felt like coming home. What a nice, warm, comfortable view. Put it to your eyes, and bam, there it is. Amazing.
I know it's not fair to compare a top tier bin with a second tier, but the SV made the Conquests image look cold and emotionless. I guess that difference is exactly the part which cost you a lot of extra money.
My mind was made up in a heartbeat the moment I put the big SV to my eyes. I didn't mind having to sacrifice the not even 2 months old 8x42 Trinny in favour of the SV, although I really liked the Trinny a lot.
Long story short, I came home with the 10x50SV, and without the Leica. So, still 2 bins, but they complete each other. My range of useage is more then covered now, without having to sacrifice too much regarding the need for a big EP.
When I arrived home, I instantly started to play around with my new toy. A 40yo, as happy as a little kid during christmas time.
I like it even better than the 32SV, the glare which the 32 sometimes shows, is almost non-existent. I tried to provoke it, but I could not see any.
Even when looking around towards a street light I could not see any weird spikes or glare.
The focuser is as good as it gets to me, a nice, smooth, even resistance clockwise and anti-clockwise. Definitely better than the SLC I had, and the 32SV.
Contrast and sharpness is very good, it appeared to be sharper than the Conquest, but maybe that's due to the better contrast of the SV.
What also came to mind is the fact it actually feels lighter than it is. It's also very nicely balanced and stable. Not difficult at all to hold still. Even my wife said it is easier to hold still than the 32SV, despite the higher magnification.
CA is also nicely controlled, and the big EP makes it very easy on the eyes. Apparent FOV is high, so it actually makes you feel "you're there"
Before I forget, when moving from the 32SV to the Leica, I really had to get used to the regular view of the Leica. So I happen to be more comfortable with a "rolling baller":-O
Kind regards,
Gijs
As some side info, my other bins are an EL8x32SV, and a recently purchased new Leica Trinovid 8x42, both very nice bins, and a joy to use.
I was looking into the 10x50/56 range, and went to the store with the Conquest HD 10x56 or something similar in mind.
First thing I noticed when the salesman took it out of the cabinet, was it's size. Man that thing is HUGE! Anyway, took it outside to test it.
Long story short, I liked it. Sharp and bright, certainly a nice bin for the money. But it's also a specialists bin because of it's size and weight.
Because the Conquests size and weight kind of scared me off a bit, I think It would only see use for astronomy, and most likely, I would not carry it with me on a full day in the field.
That's actually not really the plan. When I spend my money, I want to use things as much as possible.
So, I got an idea. If I could find a bin which could partly replace the Trinny 8x42, and partly the Zeiss CHD, then I would get the best of both worlds with limited concessions.
Looking for a premium 10x42 was not an option, the 4.2mm EP is too small for me in low light use. When looking into the Swarovski cabinet, the 10x50SV caught my attention.
Man, that thing is small compared to the Conquest, it's only slightly larger than the 10x42SV. Very nice, I'm sure I can use the 10x50SV a full day in the field, AND it's very good for astronomy.
Seemed like the perfect compromise to me, so let's take it outside to compare it with the Conquest.
First glance through the SV felt like coming home. What a nice, warm, comfortable view. Put it to your eyes, and bam, there it is. Amazing.
I know it's not fair to compare a top tier bin with a second tier, but the SV made the Conquests image look cold and emotionless. I guess that difference is exactly the part which cost you a lot of extra money.
My mind was made up in a heartbeat the moment I put the big SV to my eyes. I didn't mind having to sacrifice the not even 2 months old 8x42 Trinny in favour of the SV, although I really liked the Trinny a lot.
Long story short, I came home with the 10x50SV, and without the Leica. So, still 2 bins, but they complete each other. My range of useage is more then covered now, without having to sacrifice too much regarding the need for a big EP.
When I arrived home, I instantly started to play around with my new toy. A 40yo, as happy as a little kid during christmas time.
I like it even better than the 32SV, the glare which the 32 sometimes shows, is almost non-existent. I tried to provoke it, but I could not see any.
Even when looking around towards a street light I could not see any weird spikes or glare.
The focuser is as good as it gets to me, a nice, smooth, even resistance clockwise and anti-clockwise. Definitely better than the SLC I had, and the 32SV.
Contrast and sharpness is very good, it appeared to be sharper than the Conquest, but maybe that's due to the better contrast of the SV.
What also came to mind is the fact it actually feels lighter than it is. It's also very nicely balanced and stable. Not difficult at all to hold still. Even my wife said it is easier to hold still than the 32SV, despite the higher magnification.
CA is also nicely controlled, and the big EP makes it very easy on the eyes. Apparent FOV is high, so it actually makes you feel "you're there"
Before I forget, when moving from the 32SV to the Leica, I really had to get used to the regular view of the Leica. So I happen to be more comfortable with a "rolling baller":-O
Kind regards,
Gijs