• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

I’ve been duped..... (1 Viewer)

Pronghunter

Active member
I’ve been duped....ok maybe not really.

I’m sure I’m going to get all sorts of corrections from people and “you don’t know what your taking about” comments and so on. I’m not a professional. Just giving a brief review of my last two months observations with four different binoculars so maybe for some...relax. Feel like I’ve been overpaying paying a little here for optics. I guess the retailers have to make some coin too, but dang. I’ll keep this pretty short and to the point. Let me explain. So, in the last 2 months, I’ve spent no less than an hour and up to 2 hours behind 4 different bins. 2 solid months to be exact and not a day missed. 4 binos that I think are the absolute best on the market. I realize there are variations from each brand, newer and older models which some will argue an older model may be a “better” model and so on. I decided to go with each brand’s latest and greatest 2018 to keep “my” non professional amateur test somewhat even, and while I’m not an optics geek, I’m really trying hard to be one. I’m not that familiar with all the optic terminology, yet I’m learning and have became familiar with most.

The binos. Swarovski 10x42 EL. Zeiss 10x42 SF. Leica 10x42 Noctivids. Maven 11x45 B2’s. Yes, I realize there’s a slight advantage and disadvantage with the Mavens being 11x45.

I get there are many other brands out there; Vortex, Leupold, Nikon, Kowa, Meopta, etc. I’ve owned most and while all are wonderful and have a purpose, I don’t feel any of them compare optically to the four I tested.

Each pair have been observed setting on top of a solid Manfrotto tripod. I’ve stared through each during early morning sunrises glaring almost into the sun, away from the sun, high noon, sunsets, into shadows, bright snow, near and far, several star test, staring at a resolving chart at 45 yards, dark timber, high glare areas and so on. 2 month everyday. While I spent that much time doing all these amateur test, I knew after the first day how I felt. Without trying to sound like I know what I’m talking about, I tried taking note of pin-cushioning or distortion, contrast, brightness, resolution, glare and so on. The Swaros as expected were exceptional at everything but surprised me when staring at a star that was put at the very edge of the FOV or the last 15 percent of the outer edge....it became more distorted or blurred than I would have expected. Once on the edge, I would again try to focus but it never would quite come in clear. I also noticed it takes quite a bit of turning or revolutions to go from near to far and back. Changing the focus took some turning. A lot it seemed. I do much prefer the eye pieces on the EL’s vs all the others. To compare, the Leicas appeared about the same when doing the star test. All other test though, I would say the EL’s outperformed the Leica but ever so slightly. The Leica’s did seem a little bolder or had a “pop” at times when viewing darker objects. Maybe a false brightness if you will...but a very pleasant picture. At times seemed the best. I do enjoy the Leica’s feel and prefer the slightly quicker focus adjustment. With that said, I would say the Zeiss is just slightly behind the Leica in every test. Even more so in the star test. To be honest, I did not like looking through the Zeiss while viewing stars. It just never looked all that clear in the outer 20%, but was definitely bright enough. I also noticed that the Zeiss had the warmest picture. Not sure I cared too much for that. The focus was also quicker than the Swaros so that was a plus. For the most part, it was very hard to see a significant difference between the Leica’s and the Zeiss during daytime use. There was a noticeable difference between the Zeiss and Swaros though. The Zeiss also seemed to have a very slight blue hue on the edges as well. By no means do I want to sound like the Zeiss disappointed. They did not. Still exceptional in every aspect and wonderful glass. So in a nutshell in the order I see things from best to worst focusing mostly on the optics and not on fit, feel, function or overall build, the EL’s, Leica and Zeiss as far as these in that order. I will also mention, that it seemed like Swaros had the most glare when viewing in bright sunlight. I tried this particular test over and over with all four bins and each time it seemed like the Swarovski‘s had the most noticeable glare.

Now here I’m sure I’m gonna catch some flak. I know there are absolutely diehard Zeiss, Swaro, Leica fan boys out there with each of their own favorite. Mine being Swaros. I was no different.

The Mavens. Yes, they are an 11 power pulling the view in closer possibly giving a more detailed view of an object. Could also be a slight disadvantage due to the smaller FOV giving you the impression that they’re not as bright I guess. Yes, they are a 45 objective. They claim the 11x45’s are at about 94.80% light transmission. I’m not exactly sure of what each brands in-depth details means when explaining their optics on their websites, but I will say this. The Mavens through my young 20/10 vision as well as several others who had spent multiple days with me can attest. The brightness in every situation was as bright if not brighter than the Swaro EL’s. The contrast/resolution etc was every bit as good as the ELs. I’m not going to say better but there was zero difference in daytime use in all situations to my eyes. Where I noticed the biggest difference between the EL’s and the Mavens was on the edges. In almost every view especially at night staring at stars, the Mavens were pretty much as clear on the edge as they were in the center. The sharpest bins I’ve ever looked through without question. They surpassed the ELs on the star test and about every other test when it came to the edge sharpness. I also much preferred the very fast focus. Quarter turn or less from 10 feet to infinity it seemed. That may be a slight exaggeration but you get the gist.

With all that said, I’m also aware that there are different samples that leave manufacturers. For all I know, the Mavens that I received were the best that have left their production, and the other may have not have been their finest. Who knows. What I do know is this. If you haven’t put yourself behind a set of Mavens high end binos, you’re doing yourself a disservice. For $1100 they absolutely cannot be beat period. Heck, If they were $2500 they still wouldn’t. I may be wrong on this, but I am pretty sure they also have the same warranty as Vortex. So to me it seems you’re getting Swaro EL’s with a Vortex warranty and at a ridiculous price. From my time spent with each model and from what I could see, the Mavens are IMO at the top.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for an interesting comparison. I own/owned all four binoculars in your post (except that the Maven was B2 9x45). My favorite for use without a tripod: Zeiss SF 10x42, which is very comfortable to handhold. Of course using these binos on a tripod may lead to a different conclusion. Anyways, I don't find any of your observations to be significantly different from mine, with the only difference that for me the Maven was not in the same class with the other three binoculars---others might disagree, everybody is different. Btw, I take it for granted that you do not have any association with Maven.
 
It’s always positive if someone rates a cheaper binocular as good as the well-known ‘alpha’ brands. I hope one day to look through a maven. It has abbe koenig prisms and a 45 mm objective lens, so the potential is there to be bright.
But I do wonder: do you watch birds mostly or watch stars / watch in daylight from a tripod? While eg difference on color could be improved, I really don’t notice it that much using a binocular hand held, with the ever changing color temperature of the outdoor light. I value a fast focusing, relatively light, wide fov binocular. I could be wrong but the maven seems a bit heavy (notwithstanding the magnesium body), has a small fov (ofcourse with that 11x, but isn’t the 9x small as well?), and how fast does it focus?
In any way, if some improvements are made, it seems to have the potential to be as allround as the big 3, and I do not wonder that some binoculars score better in specific tests.
 
Thanks for an interesting comparison. I own/owned all four binoculars in your post (except that the Maven was B2 9x45). My favorite for use without a tripod: Zeiss SF 10x42, which is very comfortable to handhold. Of course using these binos on a tripod may lead to a different conclusion. Anyways, I don't find any of your observations to be significantly different from mine, with the only difference that for me the Maven was not in the same class with the other three binoculars---others might disagree, everybody is different. Btw, I take it for granted that you do not have any association with Maven.

Correct. Nothing to do with Maven. Just know they are somewhere in Wyoming. I’ll also mention that not all their binos are equal which I’m sure your aware of. They do carry a lower end Bino that would not come close To competing with the ones mentioned. There B series are the ones I have that was being compared. Abbe-Koenig prisms and so on.
Thanks
 
It’s always positive if someone rates a cheaper binocular as good as the well-known ‘alpha’ brands. I hope one day to look through a maven. It has abbe koenig prisms and a 45 mm objective lens, so the potential is there to be bright.
But I do wonder: do you watch birds mostly or watch stars / watch in daylight from a tripod? While eg difference on color could be improved, I really don’t notice it that much using a binocular hand held, with the ever changing color temperature of the outdoor light. I value a fast focusing, relatively light, wide fov binocular. I could be wrong but the maven seems a bit heavy (notwithstanding the magnesium body), has a small fov (ofcourse with that 11x, but isn’t the 9x small as well?), and how fast does it focus?
In any way, if some improvements are made, it seems to have the potential to be as allround as the big 3, and I do not wonder that some binoculars score better in specific tests.

The 11x45 have a 314 FOV and 33oz. The 9x45 are 32oz and 377 FOV. The 10x42 Zeiss for comparison are 27.5 oz and 360 FOV. I will say the Zeiss FOV is pretty pleasant. As far as what I watch, neither birds or stars but wildlife and always from a tripod. To be honest, just viewing anything holding the binos in hand, they appear about the same too me. The Zeiss coming in as the better of the bunch for me due to its FOV...but that’s not how I usually use my binos. If I were strictly holding them, the Zeiss would be my choice because of the weight but mainly FOV. Without question the Mavens have the fastest focus. It’s the first time I’ve experienced a binocular that had such a “touchy” focus adjustment. And I like it. I do wish they were lighter though. I do a lot of packing so weight is always a concern.
 
Last edited:
I’ve been duped....ok maybe not really.t with each model and from what I could see, the Mavens are IMO at the top.

190222

Hi, Pronghunter, and welcome!:

Let the “flak” begin.

First, as a major “optics geek” ... on steroids, living just down the street from you, in Idaho, I want you to know you don’t “try hard” to be one. It comes with reading, caring, viewing, and reading (from authoritative sources) some more. Every opinion you encounter has merit. That does not, however, mean they are all equally accurate. I have talked to many experts ... who aren’t. And, the optical business(s) they own can’t make them such. Because of those businesses they often take the shortcut alluded to earlier; it doesn’t work and $$$ won’t make it so.

Next, “Testing” (capital “T”) is for those who haven’t found a life, yet or who have a need to be seen a sage in the field. The real sages very rarely visit binocular forums. Birdforum has more than its share of very optically knowledgeable members. I know because every so often they will say something that I didn’t know (don’t let that get around, ‘bad for the rep, ya know) but, across the board, they are low-key, and you have to drag their brilliance outta them because they share it slowly and judiciously. For example: Gijs van Ginkel is professor emeritus from the University of Utrecht. Poor fellow only has 70 books to his credit, but we all have to start somewhere. And then there’s Elkcub (Ed Huff) who couldn’t get a real job, so he had to take a super-geek position with NASA. I appreciate him because he has sense enough to know that a MAJOR part of observing deals with the physiological and not the optomechanical.

— Take a deep breath; there is no brass ring for being an optics geek.
— Buy ANY binocular YOU feel will serve YOUR needs.
— Don’t believe anything you hear and only half of what you see.
— With the above firmly in place, you will be free to confidently test (small “t”) others to see how they stack up to your current instrument. YOUR opinion is the only one that counts.
— “Alpha” binoculars exist only between the ears of the speaker. Many times, an equivalent may be purchased in a rarely mentioned product costing 1/3rd as much. “Alphas” change with the direction of the wind; great binoculars don’t.
— Don’t talk about hunting on this BIRD forum—I assume that with a handle like “pronghunter” you are a ... prong hunter—lest the membership see you as ...

Finally, I don’t pull the heads off baby chicks at Easter. I just walk into the valley of often being maligned in order to share a little reality with the small percentage silly enough to understand my concern, motives, and love for my bino packin’ neighbor. :cat:

Bill

PS send me your REAL email address; I have a present for you. Living in Montana this time of year, you could use it.
 
Last edited:
Wow the weight of the Mavens are heavier than a Leica 10X50 UV and the ELs in 10 and 12X50. Though I like some 10X42s, the 10X50 format just works better for me.

Andy W.
 
"
I’ve been duped....ok maybe not really. "


I like your review of these binoculars, and you have presented things
well.
Binoculars are a personal thing, so there is no best, and you seem to agree.

But you have not been duped, that is just a short term view.

Optics can be for a lifetime, and that is why there are many different
choices, some cost more than others. Values and quality differ among
all of them.

Jerry
 
Do you have any affiliation with Maven?
With two posts prior to this thread and a week long membership here, someone should ask.

No dis meant at all, just asking.
 
Do you have any affiliation with Maven?
With two posts prior to this thread and a week long membership here, someone should ask.

No dis meant at all, just asking.

Nope sure don’t. I mentioned that early on another post since someone else asked. I definitely can see why someone would think that though. I was just Beyond surprised by the Mavens that I felt compelled to do a short review . I am part of several forums like most people. Anything from vehicles to clothing, to sports etc. I never do reviews on anything. Period. But I was so impressed by what we found with the Mavens. Especially stacking them against the ones that we did. All I was trying to get out was if you have never picked up a pair of the B2 series, you really should.

I also should state, that in my previous post or my original post, that I said the Zeiss had a bluish hue to them on the very edges. I’m sure this is a newbie error, but that bluish hue almost completely vanished with one twist of each eye cup. Again, I have noting to do with Mavens. ��
 
Last edited:
Nope sure don’t. I mentioned that early on another post since someone else asked. I definitely can see why someone would think that though. I was just Beyond surprised by the Mavens that I felt compelled to do a short review . I am part of several forums like most people. Anything from vehicles to clothing, to sports etc. I never do reviews on anything. Period. But I was so impressed by what we found with the Mavens. Especially stacking them against the ones that we did. All I was trying to get out was if you have never picked up a pair of the B2 series, you really should.

I also should state, that in my previous post or my original post, that I said the Zeiss had a bluish hue to them on the very edges. I’m sure this is a newbie error, but that bluish hue almost completely vanished with one twist of each eye cup. Again, I have noting to do with Mavens. ��
The blue edge is present in the SF...your observation was dead on. Your eye cup fix was also correct. I don't see this as a fault but rather the result of so much usable eye relief in the SF. Wearing eyeglasses, I rarely need to raise an eye cup but the SF required it. To me that's a plus.

Enjoy your Maven!
 
Last edited:
Maven

I am thinking, does this look similar to the same case design for the Maven 9X45? I think this may be a popular format/configuration in the future.

Andy W.
 

Attachments

  • 230165AEE420A5E6255DC797B61BB4CA56ECC7B1.jpg
    230165AEE420A5E6255DC797B61BB4CA56ECC7B1.jpg
    68.4 KB · Views: 59
Can't speak to the B2 11x45, but I have the Maven B2 9x45 and B3 8x30. I've been very happy with both, and I've enjoyed my interactions with the Maven company. BTW, according to their website, only the 45mm and 56mm binoculars in the B-series use Abbe-Koenig prism design.

The 8x30 is a very nice small binocular, and I've travelled with it quite a bit. The view through the 9x45 is stunning. I did a cartoon-like double take the first time I looked through it. Both have excellent fit/finish and feel like precision instruments.

I do prefer the Zeiss 8x42SF, but it is a large step in price for what I perceive as small improvements.

Alan
 
I wonder then, what the Mavens would cost if they went through the same business model as the big companies. Personally if one is looking for a premium glass, buy it used (not abused) and not at the retail asking price.

Andy W.
 
I wonder then, what the Mavens would cost if they went through the same business model as the big companies. Personally if one is looking for a premium glass, buy it used (not abused) and not at the retail asking price.

Andy W.

They say their $1100 B2’s would be $2000-$2500 if they were sold in stores. From my understanding, they are marked up minimum 100% and usually a tad more for sales, promotions and rebates.

Bold statement....but to me, the B2’s in 9x45 and 10x45 are without question better than the Zeiss SF optically. There’s no doubt, at these with the ones I have. I’ve prob had 20 different individuals compare. All agreed. I would say there are identical to my EL’s in every way... the Swaros I feel are more comfortable in the hand though, but the ELs have this terrible glare. Not sure why. I would still choose the EL’s over the Mavens if I never used a tripod
 
They say their $1100 B2’s would be $2000-$2500 if they were sold in stores. From my understanding, they are marked up minimum 100% and usually a tad more for sales, promotions and rebates.

Bold statement....but to me, the B2’s in 9x45 and 10x45 are without question better than the Zeiss SF optically. There’s no doubt, at these with the ones I have. I’ve prob had 20 different individuals compare. All agreed. I would say there are identical to my EL’s in every way... the Swaros I feel are more comfortable in the hand though, but the ELs have this terrible glare. Not sure why. I would still choose the EL’s over the Mavens if I never used a tripod

Now you are stretching things a lot. Your personal opinion is just that.

You have mentioned some things that should not be used in evaluating optics
on a forum like this.

"without question", "no doubt", "all agreed", and "identical, as those are phrases that are a big red flag. :eek!:

So, just remember that, your result does not impress in the least.

Jerry
 
I was not aware there were places we were not aloud to go on the forum. That’s why I stated “to me” or in my opinion. Sorry, but the particular pair of Zeiss SF I have do not impress. The fact that would ruffle feathers says a lot. It’s my honest opinion whether it impresses or not. Im sending the Zeiss SF in to have evaluated. I purchased them based on several reviews and opinions. They have been quite the opposite. I’m too the point of thinking these may not be of (Zeiss) quality. We spent the day and evening evaluating or comparing MY Zeiss SF to a friends Meopta Meostar B1 10x42 and the difference was undoubtedly different. Meopta was so nice in every way optically (not so much in the hand though ��) compared to the Zeiss. Sorry, but even the Meostar was clearer, brighter, cleaner and so on. At dusk they really shined. In all fairness to the forum, I probably should have joined optics talk instead simply because I don’t watch birds near enough to be part of a bird forum, although I do enjoy it. I joined for the most part, there are some experts and real knowledge on here. Good place to learn from. I’ll just quit now and no need to continue.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top