• 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.

New kid on the block ... Theron Questa (1 Viewer)

@brockinroller - I didn't notice any CA, but then again I wasn't searching for it. I would have noticed had it been pronounced. I stepped outside a bit ago with the LM and viewed twigs and thin branches backlit by sunshine (hello, sun!). Not sure if that's a good test. There may have been some CA at the periphery, but your eyes are probably more attuned to CA than mine are. I would say that it's very well controlled. I've returned the others already so I can't double check them on this.
I just spotted a pair of LMs for $289 (free shipping) on ebay. That's a lot of performance for very little moola. One might never be satisfied with these if he was accustomed to using alphas, but they're without question a real bargain and likely to be very popular. With the likes of these and the Questas, I think there's suddenly a lot of pricing pressure coming to bear on legacy manufacturers in the sub $1K segment.

videns credenti

Don't search for it! As Stephen Ingraham once said when he was writing for Better View Desired, if you look for CA, you may never be able to stop seeing it. But if you stumble upon it, that's a horse of a different color.

A lot depends on how sensitive you are to CA. Some people are completely oblivious to CA even in roofs with negative focusing elements and no ED glass. Nada. Nichts. Zip. Their brains have a built-in CA filter.

Others, who have become bin testers and are sensitive to it, can't use a bin without ED glass w/out noticing it and even notice it in some ED bins. So you have birders on here who span the spectrum. Me, I tend to be on the "red and green" tinge parts of the spectrum, particularly in the winter with its dismal gray skies and bare tree limbs. So I prefer bins with ED glass, but as I have found out, not all ED glass is created equal (no constitutional rights for glass), or perhaps it's the fact that the other elements are producing more than other bins that makes the final output less "clean" than other bins or in the opposite case, it has a positive focus element that doesn't add CA.

The point is that some bins work better than others to control ED even when they have ED elements in their objectives.

Est omnia in mente -Ringo Stellata
 
Time to bump the thread. Surely there's another w/new review. I'm leaning towards the 10X because they don't have a 14X.

After playing w/Vulture HD 15X56 I've since decided that 14X is the prefered High magnification. Twelve isn't quite there and 13, well it's too close to twelve.

I see Leupold running an 11/15X45. Perhaps I could convince them of the dire need for non IS 14X. Fourteen forty-five. Sounds as an old black cartridge round.

Discount is still available on el questo grande de la view no mas mucho dinero.

Should I pull the trigger?
 
Nix,

The 10x version don't impress me near as much as the 8x....and not just because of the usual 10x vs 8x differences.
 
Thanks Frank I'm just proud that I managed to slip in a post prior to 10K views.

I had read that you didn't care for the 10X from an earlier post. I tend to gravitate to the higher powers. If they made a 12X I would want that one. The smaller FOV doesn't bother me in the least. I think the Conquest 10X40T has 315' and the Viper 8.5X50 barely cracks the trey at 305'. Seems they can tighten up the edges at times if one isn't objectionable to tunnel vision.

So, do you feel your preference of 8X played more of a role in your impressions or was it something beyond the smaller FOV? I've been snooping around for something modestly priced w/field flattening lens and centre focus. It's a short list and the Questa appears to be the pick of the litter by a nose.

I rarely peer through anything under double digit power. My go to bin is the Conquest 12x45 T though I still enjoy the light Habicht 10x40W. Yet the 8X sounds interesting for casual viewing of night skies. Are the stars pinpoints and how far across do they stay in focus?
 
My honest opinion of the Theron Questa when I compared it to a Swarovski SV was that it is a pretty good knock off. Kind of like one of those Ferrari or Lamborghini Kit cars. The Theron tries real hard to imitate the original but just doesn't quite make it. This one is a Dodge Neon underneath(Theron Questa). You get what you pay for.(Except in porro's you get 4x times you money). Take my word for it. Buy the REAL thing. Get a Swaro. Honestly, I have tried all of Frank's binoculars and they are maybe 75 to 85% of the performance and quality of the real thing so if you are not limited by budget save your time and money and above all avoid the frustration and get a Swaro SV, Leica Ultravid + or Zeiss SF. Those are words to the wise.
 

Attachments

  • lamborghini.jpg
    lamborghini.jpg
    117.4 KB · Views: 71
Last edited:
A kit car? I was hoping for more of a Ferrari/vette comparison.

"... a small zone where the image loses a very small amount of sharpness. I would estimate the inner 3/4ths of the field of view is sharp and then there is about 10% of
the field of view is slightly less sharp followed by the remaining 15% of outer edge of the image being as sharp as the central 75%. As has been discussed previously
this “ring” is possibly where the AMD and pincushion distortion overlap within the image."


FOV 425' From 318'-361' it isn't quite as sharp, but then resumes from 361-425. So, at 1000' 159' on either side of a target is clean as a whistle and sharp as a tack. Now, does that translate the same to the 10X?

FOV 336' 252'-285' 126' either side of a target at 1000' The 10X is roughly 80% FOV the 8X enjoys.

If it follows the same formula, center-75/85-edge then the ring of novelty might be more apparent not blending in as quietly as in the larger field of the 8X.

As I understand the ring would be at the same angle, regardless of power, but could come into play quicker, due to smaller FOV, especially on closer targets that would fill up the view.

Or is this a notion I merely dreamed up?

As has been discussed previously this “ring” is possibly where the AMD and pincushion distortion overlap within the image.

I would have loved to compare a prototype that had less PC w/the final product.
 
Last edited:
Nix,

You figured out the reason why I don't prefer the 10x as much. It would seem with this design that AMD and the subsequent rolling ball become more pronounced as you move up the magnification range. As a result the image does not look as natural in the 10x as it does in the 8x especially when panning....plus that percentage zone you referenced is more noticeable.
 
Last edited:
Yes indeed whatever the prior issue it's up and running again.

I don't know what I'll buy next. I wanted a field flattener in 10X, but I'm not sure.
Then I considered the EII as a classic, but I don't really need a 8X or a 10/12/15 either for that matter.

Now I'm on the brink of ordering the Monarch 5 in 16x56 or 20x56, grey market at that mind you.
I like the Vulture HD 15x56 and though the M5 is only one power more it does seem to be regarded highly as price appropriate in the big eyes market.

So, then I think maybe the 20x56. I have an old porro 22x80 that I pull out to follow jets/soaring birds. On one hand I think two less power, easier perhaps to hold w/way better coatings. Since I've been playing w/22x80 I do much better holding the 15x56.

Maybe instead of 14X being the highest best handheld it should be 18X. Which I'd love to try but I cannot afford the astrolux though I've used the Ross 12x60 IF stepray managing to get the knack of twisting two focuses somewhat suitable.

Which naturally brings me to the Fujinon 16x70 FMT‑SX which does have a field flattener. But I'll not be able to manipulate the IF on that beast as the lightweight porro II.

Every thrust extended by me right is inevitably parried by me left. What's beyond paralysis by analysis?
 
I have had on loan from Frank D the Theron Questa 8x42. I would have to agree with Frank on a lot of what he has said , wide field of view , nice focuser etc. I found I had to tilt the binocular when not wearing glasses with the eyecups in any position. While using glasses I fount this binocular worked pretty good with eyecups pushed in the whole way. 95% of my use of optics is W/O glasses.

I compared the Questa to my Nikon 8x32 SE using resolution charts , using my Bushnell 2 1/2 extender and without the extender. I found the Nikon was slightly better at reading these charts. I tried this 2 different times. This was outdoors , so not the nicest thing to do this time of year, esp. with the high winds we have been having.The 2 1/2 extender did not fit the Theron Questa very well, the eyecups were slightly larger. The eyecups on the 8SE were a very good fit for this extender.

I also tried to read a road sign over 200 yds. from my back porch with these binoculars at 8x only. I used the 8x42 Questa, Swarovski 8x30 SLC neu, Kenko 8x32 Ultraview EXO DH II and the Nikon 8x32 SE. I thought the sign was reading SR 007 and when I used the 8SE found that it was SR 1017, after that I tried all these other binoculars and could read SR 1017. I guess I was not looking real good or something or the SE 8x32 was that little bit better . I did try my Fridge binocular The Bausch & Lomb 8x36 Custom Nation Audubon Society and found that I could see this sign better than even the 8SE. I will have to try this out again.

I really like the Theron Questa 8x42, I like the wide field and it gave me a slightly better view of the almost full Moon. This was comparing to the 8SE.

Which of these binocular would I grab if it is not real cold out, the Kenko 8x32 just for the light wt. of it and it has a very good view.
 

Attachments

  • Theron Binocular 4-4-16 019 (1280x960).jpg
    Theron Binocular 4-4-16 019 (1280x960).jpg
    145.1 KB · Views: 137
  • Theron Binocular 4-4-16 020 (1280x960).jpg
    Theron Binocular 4-4-16 020 (1280x960).jpg
    268.1 KB · Views: 129
  • 4-5-16 binoculars 007 (800x600).jpg
    4-5-16 binoculars 007 (800x600).jpg
    248.1 KB · Views: 119
  • 4-5-16 binoculars 015 (1280x960).jpg
    4-5-16 binoculars 015 (1280x960).jpg
    326.1 KB · Views: 129
  • 4-5-16 binoculars 002 (800x600).jpg
    4-5-16 binoculars 002 (800x600).jpg
    149.6 KB · Views: 170
Last edited:
more photos
 

Attachments

  • Easter 2016 008 (1280x960).jpg
    Easter 2016 008 (1280x960).jpg
    524.9 KB · Views: 180
  • Theron Binocular 4-4-16 022 (1280x960).jpg
    Theron Binocular 4-4-16 022 (1280x960).jpg
    225.5 KB · Views: 142
  • Theron Binocular 4-4-16 023 (1280x1118).jpg
    Theron Binocular 4-4-16 023 (1280x1118).jpg
    308.4 KB · Views: 174
I hope somebody tries one and you guys seem to get them cheaper stateside.

I'd prefer dialectric prism coating but I still think I will be wanting one of these since I like my Viking Vistron 8x25 so much and this Vixen seems to be the same model or closely based but the Vistron already has a very flat sharp (well it's not very sharp overall) to edge at 7 deg and they now Vixen seem to have increased it to 7.5 and introduced the flatner. I really don't know why they don't make a high end model of this as I think it would be superb as a small go anywhere bin but one with a proper decent view for a compact such as I get with the Vistron and hence why I use it regularly and will continue to do so and it's really amazingly glare resistant also somehow. I couldn't even induce any in low strong evening sun.

I'd say there will eventually be such a model. Maybe another year or so. Perhaps NIkon will do a 25mm M7 version if they know whats good for them otherwise the Chinese will certiainly and take a lot of sales.

I have the M7 30mm but it's just not really a compact, more a small midranger but the Vistron 8x25 is a compact and could easily be upgraded to M7 standard in fact even that Vixen 8x32 is virtually a compact, smaller and lighter than the M7 30mm.

There definitely is a lack of good compacts whereas it's easy to get any number of good mid and large size bins.

Not to hijack the Theron thread, but I'm gettin' nuttin' on the Vixen ATREK II in 8/10x32. Not a peep much less a review.

I'm searchin' and all I'm hearin'

is crickets.
 
Not to hijack the Theron thread, but I'm gettin' nuttin' on the Vixen ATREK II in 8/10x32. Not a peep much less a review.

I'm searchin' and all I'm hearin'

is crickets.

Can't remember who or what thread but there was mention of some-one owning the old Vixen 8x25 who tried the new versions of both the 25mm and 32mm size but preferred the old. I think they changed the focus direction in the new model to anticlock to infinity. It didn't sound like they were worth persuing any longer to me then and I've never heard tell of them since.

Found it Pesto post #6
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=315730&highlight=vixen+atrek
 
I'd like to thank FrankD for starting this thread, his excellent review and the many informative reviews and discussions in this thread.

I found the thread while researching on birding binoculars for glasses wearer. My husband needs a new pair to replace his broken one.

We have recently joined a local birding club. The one which many members use is the Swarovski Optik El 8.5x42mm. A new one cost ~ $2700 which is a bit too rich for my blood.

After reading this thread and other very positive user reviews of the Theron Questa, we are convinced that we will get the most bang for the buck with the Theron Questa.

Since the Questa appears to be available from only one source through mail order, we had to take a chance and order it. We ordered it last Saturday and it arrived last Monday.

My husband immediately took his new toy out for a backyard 'field' test. He was very impressed with the performance and quality. I liked it too but it is a bit too heavy for me in comparison to my Steiner Predator Pro 8x30.

We also ordered a binocular harness which has not arrived. I will try the Questa with the harness to see if it is more comfortable and may order a second one for me.
 
Congrats on the new binocular! I hope it serves you long and well. Or well and long. Or any combination thereof...

At any rate -- if you decide that you need another harness, I would suggest that you investigate the Rick Young harness, which can be found at the Rick Young Outdoors website. These are extremely light in weight, extremely compact in storage, and most importantly extremely comfortable. You can also get extra clips too, so that you can put a set of female clips on your neckstrap and then have the choice of clipping the bino into either the harness or the neckstrap. They are a good group to deal with as well.

If you decide that you have to have a more traditional webbing harness, then consider the items from Op/Tech. Not that their harness works any better than any other maker, but they are part of an entire system of straps and connectors that allow you to configure many different binos/cameras in many different ways. They also have a website.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 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