When will the current alphas become 'obsolete' (1 Viewer)

Now, before anyone goes too crazy, I just want to clarify: by 'obsolete' I mean replaced by the next tier wonder with improved technology (e.g. image stabilization, zoom, etc.); I realize that, optically, some of the current generation alphas are about near as good as you can get, and even the "dated" alphas of yesteryear are still competent bins.

More to my point: I've currently got a pair of 8x25 Zeiss Victory Pockets (an amazing little contraption, to be honest - I'd almost consider this a technological breakthrough in regards to binoculars) to use on my walks/hikes that aren't necessarily for bird viewing but may bring about some good birds. I've also got a pair of 8x42 Leupold Golden Ring HD (currently at L&S for some repairs) that are more of my 'main' pair of binoculars for dedicated birding (though the 8x25s will probably come along as well, given their portability). I have also got a pair of Vanguard Endeavor EDIV that are my car/work binoculars.

That said, I am in the process of selling my house, and considering something I've not considered in some time: buying an 'alpha' level binocular (to replace the Leupold GRHD) as my 'main' binocular. However, the current alphas seem somewhat 'old-tech', with really the newest innovation being the Zeiss SF with it's wider than typical field. I am concerned that newer technology is just around the corner (e.g. extra wide fields, better CA control, ergonomically friendly image-stabilization, actually usable zoom) and I may be throwing my money into something soon to be rendered 'obsolete' (as defined above). Most people pride themselves on their alphas being their main binoculars for 10+ years, and I'd like the same without feeling too 'outdated'. Several of the current alphas have been around, in one iteration or another, for a quite a few years now, so I'm just wondering when the 'next big thing' will be released...

Justin

For most here (ignoring star gazers), binoculars help to see the beauty of nature. Since some decent porro bins and let’s say the Zeiss 10x40b, not many people wish for better binoculars, but rather for better observations of nature. So I reckon most will be happy with an alpha for 10-20 years because after using it for a while, you forget about the binocular and enjoy what you see.

jremmons said:

Now, before anyone goes too crazy, I just want to clarify: by 'obsolete' I mean replaced by the next tier wonder with improved technology (e.g. image stabilization, zoom, etc.); I realize that, optically, some of the current generation alphas are about near as good as you can get, and even the "dated" alphas of yesteryear are still competent bins.

More to my point: I've currently got a pair of 8x25 Zeiss Victory Pockets (an amazing little contraption, to be honest - I'd almost consider this a technological breakthrough in regards to binoculars) to use on my walks/hikes that aren't necessarily for bird viewing but may bring about some good birds. I've also got a pair of 8x42 Leupold Golden Ring HD (currently at L&S for some repairs) that are more of my 'main' pair of binoculars for dedicated birding (though the 8x25s will probably come along as well, given their portability). I have also got a pair of Vanguard Endeavor EDIV that are my car/work binoculars.

That said, I am in the process of selling my house, and considering something I've not considered in some time: buying an 'alpha' level binocular (to replace the Leupold GRHD) as my 'main' binocular. However, the current alphas seem somewhat 'old-tech', with really the newest innovation being the Zeiss SF with it's wider than typical field. I am concerned that newer technology is just around the corner (e.g. extra wide fields, better CA control, ergonomically friendly image-stabilization, actually usable zoom) and I may be throwing my money into something soon to be rendered 'obsolete' (as defined above). Most people pride themselves on their alphas being their main binoculars for 10+ years, and I'd like the same without feeling too 'outdated'. Several of the current alphas have been around, in one iteration or another, for a quite a few years now, so I'm just wondering when the 'next big thing' will be released...

Click to expand...

I think any changes (improvements) in these areas are still going to be subject to the laws of physics. ie. weight will be a big constraint. Even if the industry finally gets hep to advanced material such as CFRP, Carbotanium, or Magnesium Metal Matrix Composites, any gains are likely to be incremental (and expensive).

I think if there is a view that you really like, in an ergonomic package that fits your dreams, at a price point you can see value at - then go for it !

If there are compromises among the current alphas that you just can't live with, then the Nikon MHG might replace both your main and car bins and do double duty.

Either way, with the pace of development I've seen, I think your bet will be pretty safe for ~10 years. Life's too short not to live for now (haha - says the one who isn't satisfied with anything current or on the near horizon - but that's just me



Chosun :gh:

Quite a difference in weight and size between your pocket and GR HD.

I don't think anything manageable in terms of size/bulk, weight, ergonomics will
be around the corner for quite a while having switch power/zoom, IS capabilities.
At least I doubt anything that would fit my needs in a handheld binocular.
I do think you have plenty of time in general though.

I would swap out the Loopy GR just for the weight alone. I think you can get a top level
binocular (image quality and build) to replace your Loopy without having to spend $2700 or so.
My recommendation is a non-flat field "alpha"; a brand new Swaro SLC or Zeiss HT.
New SLC and HT are about 700-800 bucks cheaper than the very top models. But, HT may be more difficult to
find brand new. I would suggest Uvid+, but those are still more expensive than SLC and HT unless you can find a holiday deal or demo unit.

Otherwise, you can go very top and splurge for SF, EL SV or NVid ... OR go mid near-alpha level with
Conquest HD or something on that level if you think perhaps you'll want to replace with latest and greatest in under a decade or so from now. I think even Conquest HD may rival your Leupold GR...just a guess there. I'm suggesting Conquest HD or something equivalent for the lighter weight (than the GR HD) and cost savings.

I dont think that any " alpha" binocular model opts for zoom technology or I.S. / Auto focus systems.
There is always going to be something in the pipeline but why wait? As you've said, better off using something right up to date for the next 10 years or longer. Any further visual mprovements will be marginal and probably undetectable by the user in years to come unless hooked up to a machine.

I have owned several of the current/previous gen alphas and they are, as mentioned, great optically but my point more is that are certain technologies (such as those CJ bolded in the quoted message) going to arise that are vast improvements over the current offerings? In terms of image quality, there is little that could be done to improve what you'd get from current top of the line or mid-tier models.

To Expound on my thinking: Look at the current generation alphas stats, e.g. transmission, FoV, distortion profiles, etc. and then look back at the previous gens (or even farther back); simply put, there has been little innovation, just minor improvements. When will we see the next major 'leap' forward? The Zeiss Victory SF and original Swarovision are two of these 'leaps' in recent times, as they provided something new (Very wide FoV w/ limited distortion and an entirely flat field w/ relative ease of viewing). If we could get usable IS in something, an even wider FoV (e.g. 500'?), 100% transmission (the Docter Nobilem was measured to be close to this), variable zoom (that wasn't garbage), etc.

Justin

A salesman in a camera store told me that some people were buying the Nikon P1000 to use as a telescope and camera for birding instead of a standard spotting scope and separate camera. It has a very good high resolution electronic view finder (EVF). So I can imagine a similar thing for binoculars - stick two high res EVFs with adjustable ipd on a bridge camera and you have an image stabalised, zoomable binocular-like device. However, it's gonna need batteries and won't match the viewing experience of binoculars and so won't compete with alphas. But it would be a nice thing in itself (if they design it well-enough). If something like that comes out, will it make traditional binoculars obsolete? - very unlikely. I guess diffraction optics like those used in some canon lenses could make more compact binoculars, but they'd be massively expensive and only save size and perhaps a bit of weight, but not necessarily improve image quality. I think alphas are safe for a long time and there's enough choice out there to find a pair that fits your needs extremely well for year's to come.

jremmons said:

I have owned several of the current/previous gen alphas and they are, as mentioned, great optically but my point more is that are certain technologies (such as those CJ bolded in the quoted message) going to arise that are vast improvements over the current offerings? In terms of image quality, there is little that could be done to improve what you'd get from current top of the line or mid-tier models.

Click to expand...

Don't hold your breath !
* Extra wide fields = weight, expense
* Better CA control = expense
* Ergonomically friendly image-stabilization = weight, expense, technology transfer, and redesign required ..... pull up a rocking chair !
* Actually usable zoom - apart from the Leica Duovids, and Leupold Switch Powers ...... = weight, expense, image quality difficulties, technology, redesign, and vision and will ...... grab a pipe and place it in an Indian DreamCatcher, and then retire to the rocking chair to look at stuff with your 2018 alphas/ MHG's :t:




Chosun :gh:

jremmons said:

I have owned several of the current/previous gen alphas and they are, as mentioned, great optically but my point more is that are certain technologies (such as those CJ bolded in the quoted message) going to arise that are vast improvements over the current offerings? In terms of image quality, there is little that could be done to improve what you'd get from current top of the line or mid-tier models.

Click to expand...

"extra wide fields, better CA control, ergonomically friendly image-stabilization, actually usable zoom"

Nobody here knows the answer to this. Based on reading previous threads over the years pontificating about new technology advancements, I think the consensus is that it's not happening soon and still a long wait. I hope that doesn't sound snarky (not my intention). I say go for something you haven't owned yet that you think will be an improvement over the Leupold in terms of image, weight, handling and enjoy for a decade then see what new gizmo you may want to replace your old timey alpha with. Maybe there will finally be a decent IS that looks and feels like a lightweight traditional binocular or maybe still no big advancements.

Gilmore Girl said:

Nobody here knows the answer to this. Based on reading previous threads over the years pontificating about new technology advancements, I think the consensus is that it's not happening soon and still a long wait. I hope that doesn't sound snarky (not my intention). I say go for something you haven't owned yet that you think will be an improvement over the Leupold in terms of image, weight, handling and enjoy for a decade then see what new gizmo you may want to replace your old timey alpha with.

Click to expand...

Yes, I suppose this is both my concern and what spurs my interest in a unique model such as the Zeiss SF or the Swarovski Swarovision: unique optical qualities that aren't easily found elsewhere; that said, something like an even wider FoV w/ limited distortion or more user-friendly IS could be just around the bend (though unlikely)...
If the Zeiss SF was made in 7x42 w/ a 480'+ FoV, I'd probably jump on them this instant, but such is not the case.
The SLC-HD, Victory HT/FL, Leica Ultravid etc. are all excellent choices, but not so superior (to my eyes) to the Meopta Meostar/Leupold Golden Ring/Kowa Genesis to warrant me to jump to them without strong consideration of the money involved (even if my finances are quite stable/positive, as is soon to be the case).

jremmons said:

Yes, I suppose this is both my concern and what spurs my interest in a unique model such as the Zeiss SF or the Swarovski Swarovision: unique optical qualities that aren't easily found elsewhere; that said, something like an even wider FoV w/ limited distortion or more user-friendly IS could be just around the bend (though unlikely)...
If the Zeiss SF was made in 7x42 w/ a 480'+ FoV, I'd probably jump on them this instant, but such is not the case.
The SLC-HD, Victory HT/FL, Leica Ultravid etc. are all excellent choices, but not so superior (to my eyes) to the Meopta Meostar/Leupold Golden Ring/Kowa Genesis to warrant me to jump to them without strong consideration of the money involved (even if my finances are quite stable/positive, as is soon to be the case).

Click to expand...

7x SF, EL SV or Noctivid would be nice ! I'd like to see 7x32 or 7x35 offered by a top brand someday (not likely).

The big three top flagship models each offer something a little extra; SF with super wide FOV, EL SV with 8.5x and Noctivid with already a reputation for dazzling view (great contrast, colors, sharpness). So knowing a bit more now I say take long looks through each of these and decide. You should be happy with one of those until something game changing comes along.

I have a feeling that my mention of "obsolete" was maybe not correct - but I am not sure how exactly to phrase it simply enough.

Two of the three biggest binocular mistakes I ever made in my life involved doing something similar to what you are thinking about. I decided that getting a Swarovsion SV EL would be the last binocular I'd ever need. I also had the idea that since I'd fallen into reviewing binoculars, an unquestioned reference standard would be beneficial. It looked to me like the edge distortion had been changed a little and I didn't see the rolling ball in the models of the last couple of years. At any rate I hadn't seen RB in the several times I'd had them to my eyes since the original SV made me sick in 2010. My Leupold GRHD was getting to the point where it faced a situation of the possibility of Leupold not being able to get certain spare parts to fix it if it ever needed them. This one I got straight out of Leupold's optics lab where it had lain unused for a couple of years. It had been adjusted every way an optical lab could fine tune a binocular. The only people who ever complained about the weight were people who never owned one.

So after very little time the rolling ball came rolling back in with more than vengeance, leaving me with little more than a very expensive paperweight. I sold the Leupold to finish of the SV EL purchase. Happened to have the Maven B2 at this time, so I still have quality glass, just not alpha.

I went from "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" to "if it ain't broke, I can fix that". So while I realize full well that there is likely a minority (how small I don't know) that will react to the SV like I did, there was not nearly enough optical improvement in the stationary view of the SV to make it worth the money to me. One of my prime values is not having my buyer's remorse kick into high gear. In this instance, I sold a Cadillac, bought a clunker. I will always regret that.

Having said that I'm still pretty interested in looking over the Leica Noctovid and the Zeiss SF. My reason being is when/if I do that move, it will be the last binocular I'll ever purchase. I'll not do that with the expectation of much optical improvement. I'll do that with the idea this will be the last time I'll buy optics.

With my luck, the day after I buy, along will come the newest big deal that will give me the WOW I got out out of the Leica Trinovid I looked at all the way back in 1993. Actually the Zeis or the Leica will have to give me that WOW. I'm not holding my breath expecting that to happen.

jremmons said:

Now, before anyone goes too crazy, I just want to clarify: by 'obsolete' I mean replaced by the next tier wonder with improved technology (e.g. image stabilization, zoom, etc.); I realize that, optically, some of the current generation alphas are about near as good as you can get, and even the "dated" alphas of yesteryear are still competent bins.

More to my point: I've currently got a pair of 8x25 Zeiss Victory Pockets (an amazing little contraption, to be honest - I'd almost consider this a technological breakthrough in regards to binoculars) to use on my walks/hikes that aren't necessarily for bird viewing but may bring about some good birds. I've also got a pair of 8x42 Leupold Golden Ring HD (currently at L&S for some repairs) that are more of my 'main' pair of binoculars for dedicated birding (though the 8x25s will probably come along as well, given their portability). I have also got a pair of Vanguard Endeavor EDIV that are my car/work binoculars

That said, I am in the process of selling my house, and considering something I've not considered in some time: buying an 'alpha' level binocular (to replace the Leupold GRHD) as my 'main' binocular. However, the current alphas seem somewhat 'old-tech', with really the newest innovation being the Zeiss SF with it's wider than typical field. I am concerned that newer technology is just around the corner (e.g. extra wide fields, better CA control, ergonomically friendly image-stabilization, actually usable zoom) and I may be throwing my money into something soon to be rendered 'obsolete' (as defined above). Most people pride themselves on their alphas being their main binoculars for 10+ years, and I'd like the same without feeling too 'outdated'. Several of the current alphas have been around, in one iteration or another, for a quite a few years now, so I'm just wondering when the 'next big thing' will be released...

Click to expand...

There is always something "just around the corner" and doing what you are doing means that you never buy anything.

Choose one, plunk down your money, and use it.

Steve: Your response is exactly what concerns me. The Leupold HD are very good optics, comparable in my mind to the SLC-HD and Victory HT. It is in the shop to get repairs, so I am hoping they are able to do so (having owned both, I do not consider the BX-4 to be a 1:1 in the event they offer that instead of a repair).

If I proceed, I do not necessarily know it will be with my 'last' binocular, but it will be one I plan to hold onto for as long as possible (given the price). Of the current top ends, really only the 8.5x42 and 10x50 Swarovision and 8x42 Zeiss Victory SF seem to offer enough, in terms of unique attributes, to warrant the cost and replacement of my GRHD (which I will either sell or keep as a car bino). The weight of the GRHD does not much concern me, as I now have the 8x25 Victory Pocket for when weight is a bigger concern, but it does have a slightly warm view with a narrower FoV than I'd prefer, and is not a "low distortion" binocular, per se.

The 8x56 format is also intriguing (particularly the SLC with its exceptionally wide FoV), but I've never seen them in stores.

Andy, post 15,
As far as I know Leupold does not make any binoculars anymore, that is my conclusion from the information we got when we wanted to visit the factory a few years ago. If that is the case, who does the repairs?
Gijs van Ginkel

jremmons said:

Steve: Your response is exactly what concerns me. The Leupold HD are very good optics, comparable in my mind to the SLC-HD and Victory HT. It is in the shop to get repairs, so I am hoping they are able to do so (having owned both, I do not consider the BX-4 to be a 1:1 in the event they offer that instead of a repair).

If I proceed, I do not necessarily know it will be with my 'last' binocular, but it will be one I plan to hold onto for as long as possible (given the price). Of the current top ends, really only the 8.5x42 and 10x50 Swarovision and 8x42 Zeiss Victory SF seem to offer enough, in terms of unique attributes, to warrant the cost and replacement of my GRHD (which I will either sell or keep as a car bino). The weight of the GRHD does not much concern me, as I now have the 8x25 Victory Pocket for when weight is a bigger concern, but it does have a slightly warm view with a narrower FoV than I'd prefer, and is not a "low distortion" binocular, per se.

The 8x56 format is also intriguing (particularly the SLC with its exceptionally wide FoV), but I've never seen them in stores.

Click to expand...

That still concerns me too. I'm 70 and who knows from here on? So I do figure that if I need substantial service in 10 years I may well have to rely on good service to get it done. But who knows just who will be doing what in the binoculars world in ten years? Leupold has been around for a century and taught the industry about service and warranty. But they told me flat out when I got the binocular that some parts, particularly objective lenses, were getting tight.

For my part I'm not concerned with wide flat fields. If the old fashioned afov is 60*, I'm good. I may just keep my eye out for a good SLC 8x42. I about kept it when I went through all the Swarovski binoculars I had, but it could not displace the B2, so after that I guess I don't worry as much about it any more. Part of the selection process buying high end is that it takes a good bit of time to evaluate the glass to see it it warrants the outlay from the users personal perspective.

So I suppose that my answer to your original question is that the binocular becomes obsolete when it can no longer be serviced. So I do regard (and I guess I did regard so at the time) the GR HD as being obsolete. The view through that GR HD will never be obsolete.

Maybe you should look at the history. I still see Zeiss BGAT in the field sometimes, but they are rare.
So perhaps in 25-30 years the Zeiss SF and Swaro EL:s will be as rare. Maybe there will be some digital breakthroughs before that but I doubt there will me more than a marginal market for digital bins, even if they are good.

Gijs van Ginkel said:

Andy, post 15,
As far as I know Leupold does not make any binoculars anymore, that is my conclusion from the information we got when we wanted to visit the factory a few years ago. If that is the case, who does the repairs?
Gijs van Ginkel

Click to expand...

As far as I could gather from my discussion with L & S, they still repair optics in house, though supplies (as Steve mentions) are becoming limited. Mine was mostly an issue w/ the eye cups, central hinge, and armoring, so I imagine they'll be able to fix it up. They were somewhat bought on a whim, but I'd owned the 8x32s in the past and really enjoyed them aside from the limitations present in almost every 8x32 I've tried (namely: eye-placement with glasses).

Steve: A wide-angle isn't exactly a necessity, but it is something that I've come to appreciate when 'warblering' in the spring and fall, which will likely be one of the main times these will get used over the aforementioned Victory Pocket (which to me is what an 8x32 is to most, I think).

Justin

mpeace said:

A salesman in a camera store told me that some people were buying the Nikon P1000 to use as a telescope and camera for birding instead of a standard spotting scope and separate camera. It has a very good high resolution electronic view finder (EVF)....

Click to expand...

Mpeace is right.

When I hear image stabilized and zoom as 'aspirational' concepts for binoculars, then the digital superzooms already on the market provide some idea of what is possible. The Nikon p610 and p900 offer 2 affordable options for studying the practicality and potential for what might 'revolutionize' binoculars down the road. The p900 weighs in at around 31 ounces, and the p610 around 20, so present a commensurate heft to current offerings of alpha bins. These are not even state of the art with regard to viewfinder pixel count or chip size, but consider they both can be purchased for $600 or less, it might be worth trying one out.

The image quality is not there yet, nor is there a functioning dual viewfinder setup, but you can see that improvement is not impossible, and that cameras of this ilk, and size represent the template for what could be an affordable, handheld, binocular spotting scope/camera...

We're sort of in the era of the iPod, Blackberry, Newton before it all was compressed into a multi-functional wafer of sorts.

I truly enjoy great binoculars without any need for a battery, along with the ease and quality of view, so these sorts of advances aren't what I pine for with regard to birding and being in nature. However, one can see that all the pieces are being developed to serve other larger markets, but no one has yet put it together for folks like us. If Swaro does it first, they'll charge an arm and a leg for something one can see is affordable, mass-produced, and already in play at a monocular level.

-Bill