Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Discover the ZEISS Digital Nature Hub

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Hawke Frontier ED 8x43!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 22 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Wednesday 21st January 2009, 00:21   #126
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,421
Kevin,

I know what you are referring to when you mention clarity. Other than the FL it seems to be porro-specific though the Zen Rays are very close as well. I think what we may often overlook, or at least fail to comment on, is the fact that the inexpensive porros compare so well to much more expensive roofs. They may not be quite at the same level but they are oh-so-close.
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 28th January 2009, 01:01   #127
Kevin Purcell
Registered User
 
Kevin Purcell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankD View Post
I know what you are referring to when you mention clarity. Other than the FL it seems to be porro-specific though the Zen Rays are very close as well. I think what we may often overlook, or at least fail to comment on, is the fact that the inexpensive porros compare so well to much more expensive roofs. They may not be quite at the same level but they are oh-so-close.
Or they compare differently.

This "transparency" in porros or "haze" in roofs seems to be independent of other characteristics (like sharpness or even contrast, though the roofs that don't show it (or show it less) seem to be brighter (so more contrasty) and sharper too (i.e. enough so that the eye's acuity is the limit).

I've still not had the chance to redo the comparative tests for "transparency" or "haze" across my collection to see if other trends appear.
Kevin Purcell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 28th January 2009, 01:17   #128
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,421
Quote:
I've still not had the chance to redo the comparative tests for "transparency" or "haze" across my collection to see if other trends appear.
Oh that I would pay to see. You currently have a large enough and varied enough selection to really do a nice comparison of this issue.
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 28th January 2009, 01:36   #129
Kevin Purcell
Registered User
 
Kevin Purcell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankD View Post
Oh that I would pay to see. You currently have a large enough and varied enough selection to really do a nice comparison of this issue.
Though I need the weather to cooperate and not to be distracted by this birding thing I seem to waste time on ....
Kevin Purcell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 28th January 2009, 01:59   #130
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,421
Ah, but the two are not mutually exclusive.



..and, as for the weather, you act as if it isn't always bright and sunny up on the upper west coast.

:-)
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 11th February 2009, 12:43   #131
matt green
Norfolkman gone walkabout
 
matt green's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Stourbridge
Posts: 5,304
It's already been mentioned in here somewhere, but can someone in the know confirm the focus speed of the Frontier ED model?

Cheers

Matt
matt green is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 11th February 2009, 13:13   #132
NoSpringChicken
Registered User
 
NoSpringChicken's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: East Norfolk
Posts: 26,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt green View Post
It's already been mentioned in here somewhere, but can someone in the know confirm the focus speed of the Frontier ED model?

Cheers

Matt
Matt, if you look at the Sherwoods Hawke page there is a link to a 'Bird Watching' review of the EDs. It's a pdf file so I can't link to it directly. I think it says 2 1/2 turns from close focus to infinity. Here is the Sherwoods' page:

http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/hawke...oculars_fs.htm

Ron
NoSpringChicken is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 11th February 2009, 16:31   #133
Kevin Purcell
Registered User
 
Kevin Purcell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSpringChicken View Post
Matt, if you look at the Sherwoods Hawke page there is a link to a 'Bird Watching' review of the EDs. It's a pdf file so I can't link to it directly. I think it says 2 1/2 turns from close focus to infinity. Here is the Sherwoods' page:

http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/hawke...oculars_fs.htm

Ron
Of course you can

http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/hawke...%20BWG0109.pdf

Of course he really likes them (see the review) but for us the interesting quotes which FrankD picked up on before:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdwatching.co.uk Review
there’s a hint of a halo, but getting your eye position right soon gets rid of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdwatching.co.uk Review
Perhaps there was a small amount of edge softness, and that halo i mentioned earlier. But that’s nit-picking, because both problems were easily fixed by taking a few moments to find the right eye position.
Interesting, I've not found that but maybe I should try again to see if that is the case.

I've found the "practical" range from 10 feet to infinity with these bins takes 1.2 turns or so.

The total amount of rotation is 2.5 turns but there is a lot of overrun and underrun there for hyperopes and myopes.

The bins also use a fair amount of rotation for very close use (i.e. 10 feet to 6 feet).

Last edited by Kevin Purcell : Wednesday 11th February 2009 at 18:27.
Kevin Purcell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 11th February 2009, 17:41   #134
matt green
Norfolkman gone walkabout
 
matt green's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Stourbridge
Posts: 5,304
Thanks for the replies Ron and Kevin

Most helpful!!

Matt
matt green is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 12th February 2009, 00:23   #135
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,421
Kevin's observation of the "useful" range of the focusing is spot on. Though the focus knob does complete a full 2.5 turns only a small portion of that focusing range is needed for the average focus/refocus situation.

As for "correct eye placement"......what can I say? I noticed the ring when I went looking for it...as well as the field curvature. Both characteristics were most evident when panning. I will defer to Kevin for further comment as I no longer have them in my possession.
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 12th February 2009, 06:50   #136
kabsetz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,517
When comparing focus speed, it would be useful if people would specify two things to make the reports easily comparable. One is of course the amount of turning of the wheel, in rotations and fractions thereof (e.g. 1 1/4 turns) or in degrees (450, 205, whatever it happens to be), but the other and equally important one, often missing, is the distance range which that amount of turning covered. For the latter, I would suggest using 5 meters to infinity as a practical range that would give meaningful information, although the ones among you who have good memory and have read my previous stuff may recall that I have thus far used 10m-1km as the range. In just about all binoculars, the amount of focus travel from 1km to infinity is pretty minimal and does not skew the result, but focus travel past infinity to serve different levels of myopia can vary a lot between binoculars and, if not accounted for can make the reported "focus speed" meaningless. The same holds true even more for close focus distance. For example, the Hawke 10x43 ED with my eyes focuses down to just under two meters. Adjusting the focus from there to three meters takes about a full turn of the focus knob. If I now compared the "focus speed" of this binocular A by just counting the turns from minimum focus to 1km (or infinity) to binocular B that had minimum close focus at 3m, the latter would appear to have faster focus when, in truth, it could be equally possible that over a given standard range it would focus more slowly.

I'm suggesting this because it is cheap, fast and easy to do, and makes different users' reports meaningful and comparable from model to model. And, as long as the range is mentioned by the person reporting the focus speed, it doesn't even matter if the range is the same or different from what I or anyone else uses - one can always take their reference binoculars and check how fast they focus over the range someone else had reported.

Kimmo
kabsetz is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 12th February 2009, 17:44   #137
Kevin Purcell
Registered User
 
Kevin Purcell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,778
I do just what Kimmo suggests but I'd suggest use decimal notation for the turn counting. It's less restrictive ... is that 1 3/8 or 1 1/4 turns or 1.3 turns ... tenths are easy to estimate too.

And use 3m/10 feet to infinity which I feel is a more typical distance range for people who bird over a range of habitats (from woodland to open spaces). It's also a typical maximum focus distance for "older" bins. I think most people would agree 3, as a "maximum" minimum close focus for a birding bin.

Which is what I use in all of my reports (including the one on this thread )

See the new thread at

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=134000

Last edited by Kevin Purcell : Thursday 12th February 2009 at 19:16.
Kevin Purcell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 13th February 2009, 00:43   #138
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,421
Thank you for the suggestion Kimmo. You are right ofcourse. It would standardize many of the varying reports on different models. I will make it a point to include it in any further observations I have on the various models.
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 27th February 2009, 18:39   #139
matt green
Norfolkman gone walkabout
 
matt green's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Stourbridge
Posts: 5,304
Had the opportunity to try out three different models of the 8x43 Frontier ED over the last few days, on all three I found the focus action dreadfuly unresponsive and spongey to the point I was beginning to think there was a defect with the inner focus mechanism!! Also thought the slow focus wouldn't be too bad but considered it way too slow for woodland birding and insect watching etc. The image quality is awsome but the handling sucks in my opinion!! Would be interested to hear if other Hawke owners find the same?

While I was trying the last model I compared them against the much better ergonomically designed Opticron Imagic SE 8x42 and 8x32 SE, the image was almost as good (which amounts to pretty darn good!!) as the Frontier but had much better and quicker focus action, it was also a good deal smaller and appeared to have better build quality.

Matt
matt green is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 27th February 2009, 20:18   #140
Tero
Retired
 
Tero's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 8,625
Yes Matt, the ultimate test is the field test. 200 lifers with my Monarchs. I would buy them again if that is all they sold for under 400.
__________________
humorblog
http://esabirdsne.blogspot.com/
Last in ABA list: 377 Least Bittern
Tero is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 11th May 2009, 19:57   #141
Kevin Purcell
Registered User
 
Kevin Purcell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,778
SteveC mentioned to me that Koshkin's Hawke ED review is up at Optics Talk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveC
Apparrently he thinks quite highly of it.
He does indeed.

http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=17109
Kevin Purcell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 11th May 2009, 20:28   #142
Veracocha
Registered User
 
Veracocha's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell View Post
SteveC mentioned to me that Koshkin's Hawke ED review is up at Optics Talk.



He does indeed.

http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=17109
Thanks for the link, great review.
Veracocha is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 13th May 2009, 00:49   #143
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,421
Ahh, finally. I have been eagerly waiting to hear what Koshkin had to say about the Frontier EDs!
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 25th July 2009, 08:05   #144
JohnnyH
Aldershot till I die!
 
JohnnyH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Aldershot, N.E Hants
Posts: 1,192
2nd Gen Hawke Frontier ED?

Just got a pair of the 8x43's, as good as the reviews say, mine have a click stopped dioptre & no sign of the famous halo. Could there have been a revision of the original in response to customer feedback as with the Zen Rays??

John.
JohnnyH is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 25th July 2009, 19:39   #145
Kevin Purcell
Registered User
 
Kevin Purcell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyH View Post
Just got a pair of the 8x43's, as good as the reviews say, mine have a click stopped dioptre & no sign of the famous halo. Could there have been a revision of the original in response to customer feedback as with the Zen Rays??
Look slike they've made a revision ... the original didn't have the click stop.

Nice to see they made some changes.
Kevin Purcell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 26th July 2009, 01:01   #146
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,421
I would agree. There was very little separating any of the open-bridge EDs. It would appear, based on your comments and those of a few others who have recently checked out the Frontier ED, that they have made some upgrades.
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 7th August 2009, 17:40   #147
Veracocha
Registered User
 
Veracocha's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 572
Got my third pair of Frontier EDs today and was surprised to find that one of the changes is the omission of the half case. They say that the packaging process caused the case to mark the bodies so they have decided to leave them out from now on.
Veracocha is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 7th August 2009, 18:19   #148
shaocaholica
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: L.A.
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell View Post
Look slike they've made a revision ... the original didn't have the click stop.

Nice to see they made some changes.
Do they have any outlet for info on their products when they do stuff like revisions? I went to their website and theres no "news" type section to notify customers of upcoming products or product updates.
shaocaholica is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 7th August 2009, 22:08   #149
matt green
Norfolkman gone walkabout
 
matt green's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Stourbridge
Posts: 5,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veracocha View Post
Got my third pair of Frontier EDs today and was surprised to find that one of the changes is the omission of the half case. They say that the packaging process caused the case to mark the bodies so they have decided to leave them out from now on.
Do they still have the slow, spongey focus?

Matt
matt green is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 8th August 2009, 00:06   #150
Kevin Purcell
Registered User
 
Kevin Purcell's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,778
Hmmm, mine has "the usual" slow focus (original model) but it's not spongey.
Kevin Purcell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hawke Frontier loud robin Spotting Scopes & tripod/heads 1 Monday 6th April 2009 10:16
Hawke Frontier ED: another open bridge ED bin from China Kevin Purcell Hawke Optics 104 Thursday 22nd January 2009 03:17
Pentax 8X43 DCF ED or 8X43 DCF SP? jmepler Pentax 2 Saturday 6th September 2008 00:22
Hawke Frontier 8x42 sf01457 Hawke Optics 2 Sunday 11th March 2007 09:40
Pentax DCF SP 8x43 vs. Swift 8.5 x 44? 19cal91 Pentax 6 Monday 12th February 2007 18:52



Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.22418189 seconds with 40 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:54.