saidentary
Active member
Andy,
Of those you mention that fall short of the WX 10x50, which is the runner-up?
This is a really, really good point. Still, there's something intriguing about it.
-
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.
Nikon WX 10x50 IF (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter typo
- Start date
Andy,
Of those you mention that fall short of the WX 10x50, which is the runner-up?
This is a really, really good point. Still, there's something intriguing about it.
I was fortunate enough to have a look through the 10x50 WX yesterday, albeit not in ideal viewing conditions being indoor in a large showroom (not that being outside would have helped as it was a typically UK grey/drizzly day!).
The WX I think is one of these very few cases that really meets or exceeds every expectation about just how good they are even despite all the superlatives that have been levelled at them and are, as succintly stated by the OP, quite extraordinary. The clarity, sharpness and overall image quality nevermind the immense apparent field of view was so far superior to any other binocular I have ever looked through it almost beggared belief and made my 8.5x SV and 10x56 SLC HD seem very very mediocre afterwards.
The WX I think is one of these very few cases that really meets or exceeds every expectation about just how good they are even despite all the superlatives that have been levelled at them and are, as succintly stated by the OP, quite extraordinary. The clarity, sharpness and overall image quality nevermind the immense apparent field of view was so far superior to any other binocular I have ever looked through it almost beggared belief and made my 8.5x SV and 10x56 SLC HD seem very very mediocre afterwards.
edwincjones
Well-known member
edwincjones
Well-known member
Some size comparisons in this review of the WX 7x50 (Google translation from Japanese)
http://translate.google.com/transla...ivedoor.jp/forrest1437/archives/73150102.html
I wonder how many Nikon will manage to sell of such a specialized instrument.. The serial numbers are sequential so time will tell.
http://translate.google.com/transla...ivedoor.jp/forrest1437/archives/73150102.html
I wonder how many Nikon will manage to sell of such a specialized instrument.. The serial numbers are sequential so time will tell.
Attachments
Last edited:
The Nikon WX 7x50 seems to be a strange beast. I think that more WX 10x50s would be sold.
I read the review mentioned in post 45.
As I suspected, so far as resolution is concerned, almost any Canon IS, with the IS switched on, will beat the 10x50 Nikon WX hand held.
I have also found that my very old Canon 18x50 IS actually has steadier images than the Canon 10x30 IS Mk 2 hand held, even though the 10x30 Mk 2 has the better stabilizer. This is because of the weight and inertia of the 18x50.
This all fits in with the review and Kimmo's comments.
If a Nikon 10x50 WX turned up at a low price I would consider it. But nowadays it is basically too heavy for me, although it should be fine for a fit strong person hand held.
I still see no point in tripod mounted binoculars, although I can see the suitability for extended bird watches.
From a light polluted site I see even fewer reasons to buy a Nikon WX for astronomy.
It is possible that a 12x50 Nikon WX could have an even larger AFOV than the 10x50 WX.
I read the review mentioned in post 45.
As I suspected, so far as resolution is concerned, almost any Canon IS, with the IS switched on, will beat the 10x50 Nikon WX hand held.
I have also found that my very old Canon 18x50 IS actually has steadier images than the Canon 10x30 IS Mk 2 hand held, even though the 10x30 Mk 2 has the better stabilizer. This is because of the weight and inertia of the 18x50.
This all fits in with the review and Kimmo's comments.
If a Nikon 10x50 WX turned up at a low price I would consider it. But nowadays it is basically too heavy for me, although it should be fine for a fit strong person hand held.
I still see no point in tripod mounted binoculars, although I can see the suitability for extended bird watches.
From a light polluted site I see even fewer reasons to buy a Nikon WX for astronomy.
It is possible that a 12x50 Nikon WX could have an even larger AFOV than the 10x50 WX.
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
Could you post a link please, if thats allowed.
I'm not a member of that forum.
Thank you.
Last edited:
JerryLogan
Well-known member
Pyrtle,
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/633868-wx-10x50-a-brief-review/
Got to love it, if only for the photos.
Best,
Jerry
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/633868-wx-10x50-a-brief-review/
Got to love it, if only for the photos.
Best,
Jerry
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
Thank you Jerry.
edwincjones
Well-known member
APM is reportedly working on a 50mm and a 70mm WX-like model
edj
edj
That's because they pay an (IMHO) unreasonable attention to distortion. Inexplicably, they seem to be unaware of the rolling-ball effect and the intentionally added pincushion distortion to combat this, as some people find that a perfectly distortion-free binocular can induce nausea. I e-mailed them about this several times, telling them the distortion had been inserted intentionally, but to no avail.
It's truly bizarre, considering that at least one main guy who runs that web site is AFAIK an astrophysicist, so that sort of thing ought to be second nature to him. I mentioned that their scoring system's unreasonably heavy weighing of distortion causes major confusion on many Internet forums and depresses their value as a professional review site. No answer to that either.
A mystery.
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Jan:
I have a simple answer for your question about the review site. They do
things as they wish. I agree with much of how Allbinos does their reviews
and the order of binocular performance is pretty much in line of what I have
seen, in the models I own, and for general ranking.
You are free to see things as you want, but the rolling ball issue is certainly not
a universal problem or issue with most people.
So this makes it easier to score distortion. Those numbers can be measured.
Your personal preference is well taken.
Jerry
Last edited:
B&H Photo is listing the 10x50 WX as discontinued.
Holger Merlitz
Well-known member
Dear Jan,
I agree that distortion is incorrectly scored here. Apart from the globe effect, the problem with wide-angle distortion-free optics is that angular distances between objects get distorted toward the edge of field (angular magnification distortion, AMD). A star cluster then turns squeezed when it is moved away from the center of field. Since the Nikon WX is supposed to be designed primarily for astro use, AMD should be controlled, as is also done with Nagler eyepieces which display a lot of pincushion distortion. In my opinion, the distortion implemented in the 10x50 WX is beneficial.
Now, Arek & Co are of course free to score as they wish, and that is why I would not pay too much attention to these final scores and rather evaluate things my own way. It would not be easy to change the scoring system on such a web-site: That would affect a hundred of previous tests which would have to be re-evaluated to remain consistent. All in all, I think Arek and his colleagues are doing a great job, perfection is neither possible nor necessary ...
Cheers,
Holger
Right. It’s back, but the $1400 off deal on the 10x50 is gone (still available on the 7x50). I was sorely tempted, but I guess it wasn’t meant to be.
Well... some weeks ago I finally tracked down the beast - and was able to spend some time getting to grips with (not without some considerable trepidation I have to admit) and looking through the beast.
...and better yet, I had the great good fortune of having something really, really good to compare it with. Comparisons are odious, as the saying goes - but oftentimes comparisons are the best way to highlight the true excellence of what you are enjoying.
To be continued once I have my notes in order... :cat:
...and better yet, I had the great good fortune of having something really, really good to compare it with. Comparisons are odious, as the saying goes - but oftentimes comparisons are the best way to highlight the true excellence of what you are enjoying.
To be continued once I have my notes in order... :cat:
Attachments
Last edited:
