Kite Bonelli 2.0 8x42. Something very nice!! (1 Viewer)

Steve,

The idea had more than crossed my mind, specially as Kite has a B3 equivalent in the Lynx and they briefly had an AK prismed model (KSP I think) on their website, though I belive that is on hold at the moment. However I do have some doubts about the similarity of the Bonelli to the B1. At the very least, it sounds like they have picked quite different items off the option list.

Quite apart from the differences in physical appearance and details like the numbers of steps in the eyecup extension, the Rokslide review says the 10x42 has a flat view, this Bonelli definitely doesn't. (Interesting to note the ED element in the B1 doesn't sound particularly effective). If Matt is right on that, it's starting to sound like a totally different optical design as well. I'm looking forward to reading what you make of it.

David

Just out of curiosity, and knowing that the One Stop Nature Shop in N Norfolk usually stock Kite bins, i looked at the original Bonelli, which is priced at £959, so Kite is not moving too far with the new one. the MkII seems to have lost the ribbing on the body armour; a similar move to Zeiss when going from FL to HT/SF. Is ribbing the 'new retro'?

David, post 17,
No the transmission data were not ours, since I have not seen the new Bonelli's at all.
Gijs

It was the vertical misalignment thread that reminded me to mention an aspect of the Bonelli 2.0 that has puzzeled me a little. I mentioned earlier that at one time Kite had previously shown a KSP model with Abbe-Koenig prisms. The Bonelli 2.0 has Schmidt-Pechan prisms yet appears to have been mounted in what I suppose is the original KSP housing with a 2 or 3mm offset in the vertical axis at maximum IPD. The increase in stereo separation would only be a marginal millimetre or so for most users, but I think the slightly eccentric shape does help the ergonomics.

Perhaps I'm being naive but I hadn't realised it was possible to offset SP prisms.

David

The Birders Store does indeed have the new Bonelli 2.0 (8x42) in stock and 10x42 should be in stock next week. I had no hesitation in stocking them as Kite produce some superb optics. The biggest challenge for the brand in the UK is that it's still a relatively unknown quantity although the well deserved success of the Lynx HD has helped raise its profile.

The new Bonelli's are superb and far superior to anything at a similar price and arguably as good as binoculars costing almost twice the price. In response to some comments above, the 'ED' designation has become an over used marketing tool and some well known brands are offering this spec for well under £200. However, this underlines the fact that the ED glass is clearly inferior to many more expensive models which do not feature it.

As for CA, I am not overly susceptible to this and find the Bonelli's perfectly acceptable and on a par with the three market leaders. What really stands out for me are the natural warm colours lacking the coldness of some of the top tier models. Ergonomically, I find them perfect from the thumb indents, the strap lug positioning to the eyecups. They are also nicely balanced and the focusing is as good as it gets.

Of course, if you're contemplating spending £1,000 or more there is no substitute for trying before buying although that really should be the case regardless of the price.

Brian
The Birders Store

I was allowed to keep the Bonelli 2.0 for a special trip to Orfordness as a guest of the Waveney Bird Club on their annual ringing and survey weekend. I was there for optics advice but there was plenty of time to enjoy the extraordinary landscape and birds. I guess the twitchers will already know of the rarities that were ringed and spotted but the thousands of migrating brent geese, flocks of avocet, golden plover and the blackberry patches loaded with goldfinch and warblers blown in from Scandinavia were the real spectacle. I think there were around 100 species over the two days, but look out for the trip report on their website in the upcoming weeks.

For those that don't know it, Orfordness is a 10 mile long shingle bank on the east coast of England. It has an extraordinary history including various military uses, but now those facilities are in a general state of decay. Much of it is now managed as a nature reserve by the National Trust and our many thanks to the resident team for making us so welcome.

During the weekend there were many opportunities to compare and contrast different binoculars and discuss what might suit needs and budget, including the top marks of course. No test targets, tripods or boosting, just watching birds in a wide range of, and sometimes challenging, light conditions. I wouldn't have swapped the Bonelli for any of the others including the Swarovski and Zeiss I tried. I'm sure others would see it differently, but I thought the colours were so much better than the FL and HT and perhaps preferable to the Swarovskis. The fine and particularly coarse detail (sharpness) definition I thought beat them all, and the field curvature and lack of astigmatism meant the perceived depth of field was better than the rest and simply wonderful in the situation. I found it a real joy to use, whether watching the skeins of geese a mile out or goldfinch refueling in the blackberry bushes at six feet. It really added to a fantastic weekend.

Yes, it trailed a number of others on CA performance. Against a bank of gray cloud I could see fringing, particularly in the outer 30 or 40%, but it never once intruded on my enjoyment of the weekend. I also had a very good 10x42 ED with me which I thought might be good for the terraIn. Others may see it differently of course but everyone there who made the comparison preferred the Bonelli. I don't think any of the alpha owners were quite ready to give up their own prized possessions, but I think there is little doubt the Bonelli was quite a hit over the weekend.

A big, big thank you to everyone at Waveney Bird Club for a fantastic weekend.

The sad thing is, the Bonelli is now boxed up ready for return. I'll miss it.

David

You could always send it to me by mistake

I'm quite adverse to CA so would be the ideal person to appraise it.

If I could live with it then I think it should be basically ok for anyone.

Just a suggestion but then if it was a whole lot better than my Sapphire I wouldn't be so happy and then if my Sapphire was better than it I don't think Kite would be to pleased but since my Sapphire has no CA they may be different types of bin although my Sapphire has all that you describe in great colour and sharpness and some dof so I suspect the Kite would have some tough opposition and it would certainly be amazing if it was even better than my Sapphire which I don't doubt is a possibility but that would certainly be very amazing indeed.

The only bin I ever recall giving me a more astounding yet similar view to my Sapphire was an 8x56 Swaro SLC but not otherwise a very practical binocular for general use but I did like the more flatter even view of the big SLC.

As part of the WBC Orfordness 'away team' and a contributor to some of the comparative tests David referred to above, i can certainly support his findings.
The Bonelli presents a wide, colour-neutral and relaxed view, with outstanding resolving powers -and it's bright! My everyday bin is a Zeiss Victory FL 8x32, and it couldn't keep up with the Kite for DoF or the interesting experiment focusing on individual pebbles around 150m away.
I too am prone to CA and can see it where others don't. What CA there is in the Bonelli is small, and to the edge of the view. It is certainly not the disruptive fringing i have seen in other optics (some more expensive than these).
The underside thumb indents don't fall where my thumbs go, although there were no problems holding it as a result. I found it a little front-heavy and its wide-shouldered, square, robust physique should find fans amongst American football followers; but the view - well, it's really first-rate!
If Kite can wangle the UK price down to somewhere just north of the Conquest, Zeiss are going to have a battle on their hands, as optically - this beats it hands down. And much else besides, some them much pricier.

How does the Bonelli compare to the Kowa Genesis? To me, the Kowa presents the best optics of any in the ~$800-1200 range that encompasses the Conquests, Razor HDs, and Trinovids. CA control and brightness are the Kowa's strongest traits, with incredible sharpness a result.

Justin

CliveP said:

You could always send it to me by mistake

I'm quite adverse to CA so would be the ideal person to appraise it.

If I could live with it then I think it should be basically ok for anyone.

Just a suggestion but then if it was a whole lot better than my Sapphire I wouldn't be so happy and then if my Sapphire was better than it I don't think Kite would be to pleased but since my Sapphire has no CA they may be different types of bin although my Sapphire has all that you describe in great colour and sharpness and some dof so I suspect the Kite would have some tough opposition and it would certainly be amazing if it was even better than my Sapphire which I don't doubt is a possibility but that would certainly be very amazing indeed.

The only bin I ever recall giving me a more astounding yet similar view to my Sapphire was an 8x56 Swaro SLC but not otherwise a very practical binocular for general use but I did like the more flatter even view of the big SLC.

Click to expand...

Not sure what I can say in reply to that Clive.

I like the Sapphire, I like the 10x42 ED I took better, and I just like the Bonelli better still. I didn't have a Sapphire to hand over the weekend so I don't know which the others present would have preferred.

David

paddy7 said:

As part of the WBC Orfordness 'away team' and a contributor to some of the comparative tests David referred to above, i can certainly support his findings.
The Bonelli presents a wide, colour-neutral and relaxed view, with outstanding resolving powers -and it's bright! My everyday bin is a Zeiss Victory FL 8x32, and it couldn't keep up with the Kite for DoF or the interesting experiment focusing on individual pebbles around 150m away.
I too am prone to CA and can see it where others don't. What CA there is in the Bonelli is small, and to the edge of the view. It is certainly not the disruptive fringing i have seen in other optics (some more expensive than these).
The underside thumb indents don't fall where my thumbs go, although there were no problems holding it as a result. I found it a little front-heavy and its wide-shouldered, square, robust physique should find fans amongst American football followers; but the view - well, it's really first-rate!
If Kite can wangle the UK price down to somewhere just north of the Conquest, Zeiss are going to have a battle on their hands, as optically - this beats it hands down. And much else besides, some them much pricier.

Click to expand...

Paddy,

Many thanks to you, Steve and the 'away team' for making me so welcome.

Ah yes the pebble test!!! That one surprised me. I knew the Bonelli was good on perceived sharpness but the difference to your FL did surprise me. Pitty I couldn't round up a few more for that one, but I think I got trumped by a Balearic Shearwater or something.

David

jremmons said:

How does the Bonelli compare to the Kowa Genesis? To me, the Kowa presents the best optics of any in the ~$800-1200 range that encompasses the Conquests, Razor HDs, and Trinovids. CA control and brightness are the Kowa's strongest traits, with incredible sharpness a result.

Justin

Click to expand...

Justin,

The Kowa is the king of CA control to my mind. It's the best I've seen. I'd pick out the Razor HD 10x50 as the only real challenger to the Kowa from your list in my view. I think the Vortex has the better colour and more window like view but it is still a smigen behind on contrast and CA, but then so are most of the alphas. I've not done the direct comparison, but I'd say the Bonelli is quite different. The Kowa has an analytical, perhaps rather clincal precision. The Kite is at least as good on delivering detail, just in a more informal, easy going way with at least one bad habbit which might annoy some.

David

typo said:

Not sure what I can say in reply to that Clive.

I like the Sapphire, I like the 10x42 ED I took better, and I just like the Bonelli better still. I didn't have a Sapphire to hand over the weekend so I don't know which the others present would have preferred.

David

Click to expand...

So it's spoiled your 10x42 rather and the bins of a lot of others by the sounds of things.

I think I'll rescind my offer to test the Bonelli. When I think about it if I can't afford it at the moment then no point really and this new Sapphire I have certainly meets my needs and more for now.

I wish Kite continued success with the great models they seem to be introducing.

Paddy,

Many thanks to you, Steve and th 'away team' for making me so welcome.

Ah yes the pebble test!!! That one surprised me.I knew the Bonelli was good on perceived sharpness but the difference to your FL did surprise me. Pittly I couldn't round up a few more for that one, but I think I got trumped by a Balearic Sherewater or something.

David[/QUOTE]
Indeed - and two long-tailed skuas, arctic skua and leach's petrel - and you're very welcome!
The pebble test is one i'll use again for comparative resolution, as it's easily achieved and very revealing. I would have liked to have grabbed the 42mm FL to put that up against the Kite too! 'One bad habit' doesn't seem too bad in the context of the plusses; which set of bins hasn't got at least one?
I'm taking the Vanguard EDII out against the FLs versus the pebbles next!

typo said:

Justin,

The Kowa is the king of CA control to my mind. It's the best I've seen. I'd pick out the Razor HD 10x50 as the only real challenger to the Kowa from your list in my view. I think the Vortex has the better colour and more window like view but it is still a smigen behind on contrast and CA, but then so are most of the alphas. I've not done the direct comparison, but I'd say the Bonelli is quite different. The Kowa has an analytical, perhaps rather clincal precision. The Kite is at least as good on delivering detail, just in a more informal, easy going way with at least one bad habbit which might annoy some.

David

Click to expand...

David,

Interesting - from your description, the Kite reminds me of the experiences I've had with the old Leica Trinovid Ultra and Bausch & Lomb Elite.

Thanks for your detailed review and follow-ups.
Justin

Justin,

Coincidentally, one of the guys last week had an old Elite. I couldn't see either a B&L or a Bushnell label. Perhaps the fov and colour showed it"s age but a very classy binocular all the same. The owner was very keen on the Bonelli. I don't think I've seen a Trinovid Ultra, but the Bonelli's colour balance is probably closest to the Ultravox HD plus out of the alphas.

David

typo said:

Justin,

Coincidentally, one of the guys last week had an old Elite. I couldn't see either a B&L or a Bushnell label. Perhaps the fov and colour showed it"s age but a very classy binocular all the same. The owner was very keen on the Bonelli. I don't think I've seen a Trinovid Ultra, but the Bonelli's colour balance is probably closest to the Ultravox HD plus out of the alphas.

David

Click to expand...

Ultravox HD Plus? Must be made in Vienna!!
I did actually think of the Trinovid when i handled it - not just Leica-like colour, but a similar solid feel in the hand.

paddy7 said:

Ultravox HD Plus? Must be made in Vienna!!

Click to expand...

:t:

David

typo said:

Paddy,

Many thanks to you, Steve and the 'away team' for making me so welcome.

Ah yes the pebble test!!! That one surprised me. I knew the Bonelli was good on perceived sharpness but the difference to your FL did surprise me. Pitty I couldn't round up a few more for that one, but I think I got trumped by a Balearic Shearwater or something.

David

Click to expand...

ah yes the pebble test???

So come on then. How many "perceived" arcpebbles could it resolve or what was the arcpebble resolution.

What is the pebble test? Skiming the bins across the water, stoning the binocular, saying hey can you see that pebble there, which one? the one just over from the 10millionth on the right....

what8-P:t:

CliveP said:

ah yes the pebble test???

So come on then. How many "perceived" arcpebbles could it resolve or what was the arcpebble resolution.

What is the pebble test? Skiming the bins across the water, stoning the binocular, saying hey can you see that pebble there, which one? the one just over from the 10millionth on the right....

what8-P:t:

Click to expand...

Clive,
In this case an arcpebble was around 4 to 9 arcminutes.

I know how much you love this stuff so I suggest you stop after the next paragraph.

The simple answer is that Paddy and I were standing near the sea looking across to the old lighthouse where I'd seen the Perigrine earlier. In between there was a ridge in the shingle with medium sized pebbles at the top. With the Bonelli, the individual pebbles were sharply defined and random patterning clear and unconfused. It was quite obvious that the contrast defining the pebbles was somewhat reduced with the FL and there were areas where the pattern was indistinct and it was difficult to separate individual stones. I would say the Bonelli appeared sharper, but this was with objects that were significantly bigger than the effective resolution limit of both binoculars.

Both the Bonelli and the Zeiss should be delivering effective resolutions which are greater than that of the eye. I don't know Paddy's acuity but we both should be in the 60 to120 arcsecond range of normal acuity. We estimated the shingle ridge to be 150m away. If we were looking at line charts we should be separating line patterns with 2.5 to 5mm widths and see sub-10mm features quite clearly at 8x. The pebbles were typically in the 25 to 50mm range and would be seen quite clearly in isolation. 25-50mm with an 8x binocular would be about 4.5 to 9 arcminutes. I believe it was a Zeiss scientist, who's name escapes me, that determined that the eye perceives optimal 'sharpness' of an image by the contrast in the 5 to 10 arcminute range. (This is regularly exploited in photography.) I don't know if there were differences in the effective resolution of these binoculars but the Bonelli looked distinctly sharper viewing objects in a very similar 4.5 to 9 arcminute range.

David