Styrka Optics (1 Viewer)

WJC said:

I think it's STEERKA.

BC

Click to expand...

Thanks, Bill. I figured there was a vowel in there. "Styrka" certainly looks better, even if it makes no sense...in English...which makes no sense anyway.

My guess would be that the pronounciation may be close to "stalker" as they are addressing the outdoor/hunting market? I initially thought Bill had typed it wrong - Stryka ("striker") was how I read it first time!

Maybe they used the David Bowie Scrabble bag of lyrics technique... "Turn and face the strange" etc

Sheesh, and I thought getting people to know to call our bino "Verano" and not "Verona" was a tough call

Pete

pete_gamby said:

My guess would be that the pronounciation may be close to "stalker" as they are addressing the outdoor/hunting market? I initially thought Bill had typed it wrong - Stryka ("striker") was how I read it first time!

Maybe they used the David Bowie Scrabble bag of lyrics technique... "Turn and face the strange" etc

Sheesh, and I thought getting people to know to call our bino "Verano" and not "Verona" was a tough call

Pete

Click to expand...

I think on their web site they say it means strength or strong or something similar in some language.

Some time ago, I was contacted by a dealer acquaintance of mine, his business is Optics Camp (oddly enough http://opticscamp.com/). Brad asked me if I had ever heard about Stryka. Bill is spot on in his pronunciation by the way. This is evidently a Nordic word for strength. Anyway, he was interested in getting me a set for review. So far that has not happened. Various reasons, mostly including some nagging physical issues I have nearly behind me now. At any rate his comments on the binoculars pretty much mirror what Bill has said about the Stryka.

So this is a place that has stock if anyone is interested. They are supposed to be unveiling an S9 series high end glass. What high end is I don't know.

I wholeheartedly agree with Bill's comments about not caring much how what compares to what.

I can not disclose much, but they are not from Kamakura, eliminating the Maven clone observation.

The only thing I tend to wonder about is that the mantra..."we are getting really close to unleashing a major advertising campaign..etc" is the same now as it was some months ago.

Steve C said:

I wholeheartedly agree with Bill's comments about not caring much how what compares to what.

Click to expand...

And yet you compare what to what as much as anyone hereabouts??

Mark,

Why don't you take a run up to Williamsport and visit Optics Camp and look at one of those Styrka S7 8x42 binoculars? It isn't that far from you. Just a jog east on I 80.

They are located on 422 Louisa Street, between Lycoming College and Williamsport Regional Medical Center aka Susquehanna Health.

Bob

ceasar said:

Mark,

Why don't you take a run up to Williamsport and visit Optics Camp and look at one of those Styrka S7 8x42 binoculars? It isn't that far from you. Just a jog east on I 80.

They are located on 422 Louisa Street, between Lycoming College and Williamsport Regional Medical Center aka Susquehanna Health.

Bob

Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

They don't have a retail store but I'll give them a call and see about a visit. I've driven past the place.

I flew out of Williamsport and Optics Camp had an advertising display case set up that was full of some REALLY juicy optics, including an ATX 95mm. At the time I was looking for a full-sized scope and I said, "No, no you will not go look at an ATX 95mm." Close call though.

Mark

Kammerdiner said:

And yet you compare what to what as much as anyone hereabouts??

Click to expand...

Yes indeed I do . Mostly because it is necessary to the discussion of a review. Initially it was because I thought there had to be differences. I have evolved into the opinion, that for me personally, I see any two binoculars as being much more similar than different anymore. Not that the differences are not there and can't be seen. It has gotten to the point where when two binoculars need to be tripod mounted side by side and distances to the USAF chart need to be fine tuned to a couple of inches to see differences, and when the evaluation of those differences cause headaches even when evaluating premium instruments, the question becomes one of arriving at how much is enough. That how much question is a variable a review can't really account for.

Additionally, when reviewing a new glass like the Maven B series or a Stryka, which no one reading the review has likely ever seen before, comparisons to contemporary glass like a Zeiss Conquest HD, which many have experience with to some degree becomes necessary.

Nice review Mr Cook!

It would be helpful to have a little more information about your friends purpose. Is this an instrument purchased by a regular retail shopper, or is there the possibility of cherry picking? Perhaps because Styrka sent a particularly good pair to a potential dealer. Or maybe a dealer selected a nice pair for your review in hopes of creating buzz/demand. Or your friend just sorted through a dealers inventory and picked the acceptable one from the six on the table.

I'm not saying any of this happened, only that it's good to know the origin. Particularly since quality control seems to be a major issue in our brave new world.

Best,
Jerry

This ought to be interesting

JerryLogan said:

Nice review Mr Cook!

It would be helpful to have a little more information about your friends purpose. Is this an instrument purchased by a regular retail shopper, or is there the possibility of cherry picking? Perhaps because Styrka sent a particularly good pair to a potential dealer. Or maybe a dealer selected a nice pair for your review in hopes of creating buzz/demand. Or your friend just sorted through a dealers inventory and picked the acceptable one from the six on the table.

I'm not saying any of this happened, only that it's good to know the origin. Particularly since quality control seems to be a major issue in our brave new world.

Best,
Jerry

Click to expand...

Quality control in binoculars can be a hit or miss issue. Some companies have more hits than others do and that news does get around.

I think that I would prefer that a review from a binocular expert like Bill be of one of the best samples so that we get an idea of how good the binocular is and why. Not that he wouldn't point out any problems of this nature were they evident in the binocular he is reviewing.

We do get to see reviews from people who buy binoculars to use them from companies like Eagle Optics and sometimes they get binoculars with QC issues which they return with their comments about the problems.

Otherwise most members here do not seem to shy away from reporting these problems on Bird Forum.

Bob

Steve C said:

Yes indeed I do . Mostly because it is necessary to the discussion of a review. Initially it was because I thought there had to be differences. I have evolved into the opinion, that for me personally, I see any two binoculars as being much more similar than different anymore. Not that the differences are not there and can't be seen. It has gotten to the point where when two binoculars need to be tripod mounted side by side and distances to the USAF chart need to be fine tuned to a couple of inches to see differences, and when the evaluation of those differences cause headaches even when evaluating premium instruments, the question becomes one of arriving at how much is enough. That how much question is a variable a review can't really account for.

Additionally, when reviewing a new glass like the Maven B series or a Stryka, which no one reading the review has likely ever seen before, comparisons to contemporary glass like a Zeiss Conquest HD, which many have experience with to some degree becomes necessary.

Click to expand...

I could not agree more. When I asked WJC a question regarding this, I was greeted by two smartasss answers. I deem it relevant, they obviously did not.

ceasar said:

Quality control in binoculars can be a hit or miss issue. Some companies have more hits than others do and that news does get around.

I think that I would prefer that a review from a binocular expert like Bill be of one of the best samples so that we get an idea of how good the binocular is and why. Not that he wouldn't point out any problems of this nature were they evident in the binocular he is reviewing.

We do get to see reviews from people who buy binoculars to use them from companies like Eagle Optics and sometimes they get binoculars with QC issues which they return with their comments about the problems.

Otherwise most members here do not seem to shy away from reporting these problems on Bird Forum.

Bob

Click to expand...

Well, ... no! An extreme example - a manufacturer may pay a lower price for their optical glass by accepting a larger number of defects in the delivered product (bubbles, intrusions and such). By choosing carefully they may select the few examples with zero defect and distribute binoculars produced with this superior sample as their demonstration models. It is not very useful to know that the company is capable of producing good results three times out of a thousand because in practical terms, 997 buyers are never going to see the optics with the specially selected glass.

So it's a simple question. What is the nature of the test model - likely a representative sample or a specially picked unique specimen produced and distributed to creat an incomplete picture of likely quality.

Sure, there will be reports from buyers - but the whole point is that few are going to be able to check before they part with hard earned currency. A bitter warning on Bird Forum is cold comfort. So before stampeding to the next bargain alpha, why not check a little further? Aren't you just a little curious about how this all happened? So far, Mr Cook has chosen his words and tests carefully so there's no harm in us being careful as well.

Best,
Jerry

JerryLogan said:

Well, ... no! An extreme example - a manufacturer may pay a lower price for their optical glass by accepting a larger number of defects in the delivered product (bubbles, intrusions and such). By choosing carefully they may select the few examples with zero defect and distribute binoculars produced with this superior sample as their demonstration models. It is not very useful to know that the company is capable of producing good results three times out of a thousand because in practical terms, 997 buyers are never going to see the optics with the specially selected glass.

So it's a simple question. What is the nature of the test model - likely a representative sample or a specially picked unique specimen produced and distributed to creat an incomplete picture of likely quality.

Sure, there will be reports from buyers - but the whole point is that few are going to be able to check before they part with hard earned currency. A bitter warning on Bird Forum is cold comfort. So before stampeding to the next bargain alpha, why not check a little further? Aren't you just a little curious about how this all happened? So far, Mr Cook has chosen his words and tests carefully so there's no harm in us being careful as well.

Best,
Jerry

Click to expand...

I suspect Bill is pretty thorough on his end, I doubt he gets hoodwinked too often and I have never read anything from him on favorites. He's also crabby as hell and would not hesitate to tell some one what he thinks. LOL

What Bill would tell you is to try any pair before you buy them, and put little faith in what someone else tells you of them, of that I'm pretty sure.

perterra said:

I suspect Bill is pretty thorough on his end, I doubt he gets hoodwinked too often and I have never read anything from him on favorites. He's also crabby as hell and would not hesitate to tell some one what he thinks. LOL

What Bill would tell you is to try any pair before you buy them, and put little faith in what someone else tells you of them, of that I'm pretty sure.

Click to expand...

Sure, I'm certain a truthful review of what's in hand. But what, exactly, is it that is in hand? However, I also have to mention that the resolution test is not exactly rigorous. It's sort of like asking Lebron James and a college freshman to each jump a foot in the air and then exclaiming that the freshman is a new wonder - he and Labron tied on the jump test!

So a better test - how close a line pair can a Leica resolve at 15 feet? How close a pair can the Styrka resolve at the same distance? Why so studious in avoiding quantifiable comparisons?

And of course you should look for yourself first. But the fact is there aren't many places where you can try out the newest Styrka and many I'm sure, would consider taking a flyer on the strength of Mr. Cooks reputation. It is so much to ask the exact nature of what was tested? It shouldn't be a problem if there's no problem!

Best,
Jerry

JerryLogan said:

Sure, I'm certain a truthful review of what's in hand. But what, exactly, is it that is in hand? However, I also have to mention that the resolution test is not exactly rigorous. It's sort of like asking Lebron James and a college freshman to each jump a foot in the air and then exclaiming that the freshman is a new wonder - he and Labron tied on the jump test!

So a better test - how close a line pair can a Leica resolve at 15 feet? How close a pair can the Styrka resolve at the same distance? Why so studious in avoiding quantifiable comparisons?

And of course you should look for yourself first. But the fact is there aren't many places where you can try out the newest Styrka and many I'm sure, would consider taking a flyer on the strength of Mr. Cooks reputation. It is so much to ask the exact nature of what was tested? It shouldn't be a problem if there's no problem!

Best,
Jerry

Click to expand...

How would he know if what they tell him is true, pretty hard to quantify, but I doubt it really matters as long as they have a return policy.

You are dealing with the human eye, does it matter if both can resolve better than we are able to see?

I actually think Mr Cook would tell you don't take what he says as gospel, but see it for yourself.

jgraider said:

I could not agree more. When I asked WJC a question regarding this, I was greeted by two smartasss answers. I deem it relevant, they obviously did not.

Click to expand...

jgraider:

Could my "smartass answers" have anything to do with having a little fun, one West Texan to another. Or, could it be that we live in such a hateful world that the worst is EXPECTED of everyone!? Have I said anything on this thread that others have found offensive? I know that some time back, I was continually in hot water for simply adding a little reality to a thread or two that had jumped the tracks. I never mean to offend, but if reality offends, I can’t do anything about it. I just try to help the honest truth seeker from those who pontificate on errors and expect anyone addressing those errors to waste words so as to be politically correct. When I lived in West Texas, the only people who did that were recent transplants from back East.

That said, if I have offended you, I most certainly apologize!

In a recent post, Jerry referred to me as “Mr. Cook.” Behold:

Jerry, get over it; “Mr. Cook” was my dad. I toldja, I’m just Bill. Don’t do it, again.

Now then, with that, Jerry is all offended and probably crying. But, after kicking his dog, having a few beers, and perhaps taking a trip or two to the shrink, he will be good as new!

I like to be in bed by nine—it’s a stroke thing—but I have been up into the wee hours more than once trying to help a forum neighbor understand a concept he was struggling with—I’ve even done that this week.

Regrettably, I do have a weakness that comes to the surface from time to time. I’ve seen threads on BF that go on page after page after page that are either patently inconsequential or that, the aberration being discussed is known to be below the recognition threshold of those discussing it. With this being a forum for gaining optical knowledge, and seeing two or three such threads in a row, I sometimes get wrapped around the axle. But I never do so for my own benefit! I no longer have a horse in the race, and never will again. :cat:

“Seize on the truth, where’er tis found
On Christian, or on heathen ground
From our friends; From our foes
Neglect the prickle, and assume the rose
—Nickenbocker Magazine, Oct. 1836

Cheers,

Bill

Bill,

Instructions duly noted. My dad (known to his wife and children as "the colonel" was USMC (Ret). So it might be possible to hurt my feelings - if I had any :>)

He put another 30 on his big tour after the 1st stroke so we're expecting a lot out of you for the next couple decades.

Best,
Jerry

JerryLogan said:

Bill,

Instructions duly noted. My dad (known to his wife and children as "the colonel" was USMC (Ret). So it might be possible to hurt my feelings - if I had any :>)

He put another 30 on his big tour after the 1st stroke so we're expecting a lot out of you for the next couple decades.

Best,
Jerry

Click to expand...

:-O Perfect comeback. :t:

JerryLogan said:

Bill,

Instructions duly noted. My dad (known to his wife and children as "the colonel" was USMC (Ret). So it might be possible to hurt my feelings - if I had any :>)

He put another 30 on his big tour after the 1st stroke so we're expecting a lot out of you for the next couple decades.

Best,
Jerry

Click to expand...

I hope it's not money. Thanks to our mutual uncle, I'm living on first tier Social Security. 23 years of federal service and I qualify for nothing. :-C

Bill