As long as it is good product and adds value to us consumers, they will be discussed. Maybe it is time for Big3 to drop a zero from their price tag?
-
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.
Promaster binoculars (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Tero
- Start date
As long as it is good product and adds value to us consumers, they will be discussed. Maybe it is time for Big3 to drop a zero from their price tag?
I don't think Vortex has its own shop to design and test optics from scratch. I remember someone from Vortex mentioned they do design the rubber cover and specify the requirement with their OEMs. It is probably the same model as Promaster. Of course, it again, depends on how people define "design".
Steve C
Well-known member
NWBirder,
I try not to post things I'm not reasonably sure of, but I admit it took a bit of time to find this. I'd seen this article in a couple of dealers who sell Vortex. It is a sort of long infomercial, but the fact they do design their own and build the prototype is pretty well covered.
http://www.arrowtrademagazine.com/articles/sept_07/September2007-VortexOpticsProfile.pdf
Now, I realize the term design does enter the picture. I doubt seriously they have the capacity to grind lenses and prisms from blocks of raw glass, so their design is likely limited to a certain extent by what types of lenses and prisms they can obtain. So they may well have some constraint based on the components they can obtain. It does seem to be more of a design process than sending a spec sheet and a general idea to the orient.
Last edited:
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
SteveC said:
They may well be using the same process as Promaster (as I outlined in the comments earlier).
Though as a purist I'd separate specification and testing from design though they're all part of the product development process. The process has three components. First you spec the product based one a perceived market, then you do the optical and mechanical design, then you test and accept or reject that design (and go around the loop).
Of course marketing and PR when you ask them if they "design" their own bins they say "yes" for their definition of "design" which is basically determining the feature set and specifying the optical features. But that's not really design to me.
The other route here is hiring external consultants too. You could work with them to do an overall optical design and then they work with the OEM but it seems that you need to know a fair bit about what the OEM can do (in a rather precise manner) so you can come up with a design they can actually make (and does what you want).
Obviously we need someone in the business to tell us how it's done
Steve C
Well-known member
Well, I suppose there are lots of options in the design of optics. Not trying to hijack this to a Vortex thread, but it seems that they at least "design" enough of their product to at least deliver a set of specifications along with a prototype binocular (or scope) built in Wisconsin by Vortex to the factory they will contract with to build the optic in question. That's the gist of the article I linked in my post above.
In truth, while I can speculate, I really don't know who is out there that can start with an idea for a new optic and get it from the first drawing to the first specimen sold to the public, all the while keeping the whole project "in house". On the other end of that is the OEM rebadgers who do nothing but find something they can sell with no design input.
In truth, while I can speculate, I really don't know who is out there that can start with an idea for a new optic and get it from the first drawing to the first specimen sold to the public, all the while keeping the whole project "in house". On the other end of that is the OEM rebadgers who do nothing but find something they can sell with no design input.
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
From my read, the article says that they are planning to be able to build prototypes in the future. I can't imagine how they'd pull that off to any great gain because they'd have to use off the shelf lenses, prisms etc in constructing a prototype. Doing that would require quite a bit of communication/cooperation with the maker of those optical components, so it seems to me it would be easier to have the prospective manufacturer do that. The idea of Vortex producing its own prototypes (at least those containing optics, rather than just mock-ups of the external appearence of the housings) seems like more of a dream or a ruse to me.
--AP
Tero
Retired
I looked at some Promaster specs again. I definitely do not need 8x32s, and my 10x42s are pretty good Pentax SP. So I looked at the Infinity Elite 10x32. Possibly it would offer a wider field. But at 340ft, it is not really that much to get excited about. About the same as Nikon LXL 10x32. The Swarovski 10x32 would get 360ft. Vortex Fury 10x32 gets 346ft, and is probably the best deal of the bunch, but would have to see it to get more excited.
So, no sale. The Promasters cost $170.
So, no sale. The Promasters cost $170.
20 feet difference in FOV at 1000 yards is not very significant. At 100 yards the difference in FOV between the Swaro and the Nikon is less than 2 feet. At 100 feet it is about 8 inches. If you have a good 10 x 42 with the typical 315' FOV you might as well keep it. It's hard to find a good 10 x 32 without shelling out alot of money.
Bob
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
Search for my 8x32 Promaster comments Tero ... short answer "Not for me".
Tero
Retired
OK. I think I found it. How about the 10x32 Vortex Fury? Or even the Viper, though now we are getting just 325 ft fov
http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/vortex/vortex-viper-10x32-binocular
http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/vortex/vortex-viper-10x32-binocular
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
I've recently got a Canon IS 10x30 and it is a very interesting bin. Only $330 from Adorama too.
If you are in the market for a compact 10x you should try it out if you haven't. Essentially a compact porro with field flattener so it's really sharp at the edge edge to with wide AFOV. The field flattener does compress the DOF too soyoudo get a camera like bokeh that I thought would be a pain but it turns out I like it (same with the sharp at the edge of field). Even without IS I can
Downside: stray color from eye placement, drifting diopter (I need the aftermarket rubber band fitted!).
Even without the IS it's an interesting bin. With IS ... wow, very nice!
Still not sure why more birders don't have one and why it too me so long to clue into them. I dismissed them (wrongly) on: too small exit pupil; 10x is not enough; close focus not great (12 feet); too expensive; extra weight. Turns out I was wrong on the first four items (though the EP is a bit tight) and the latter is OK with hand holding or putting on a harness.
If you are in the market for a compact 10x you should try it out if you haven't. Essentially a compact porro with field flattener so it's really sharp at the edge edge to with wide AFOV. The field flattener does compress the DOF too soyoudo get a camera like bokeh that I thought would be a pain but it turns out I like it (same with the sharp at the edge of field). Even without IS I can
Downside: stray color from eye placement, drifting diopter (I need the aftermarket rubber band fitted!).
Even without the IS it's an interesting bin. With IS ... wow, very nice!
Still not sure why more birders don't have one and why it too me so long to clue into them. I dismissed them (wrongly) on: too small exit pupil; 10x is not enough; close focus not great (12 feet); too expensive; extra weight. Turns out I was wrong on the first four items (though the EP is a bit tight) and the latter is OK with hand holding or putting on a harness.
Last edited:
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
The IS 10x30 is slightly better for general birding with a 12 foot close focus ... the 12x is rather more expensive and more of a longer range bin (longer close focus).
I believed I've joined the Cult of IS
I believed I've joined the Cult of IS
Tero,
(I'm waiting on the Vortex 9 x 36 too--and getting tired of waiting too! When they said they would be out in early spring, I assumed they meant this year!)
But anyway, and I've harped on this before: If you want to get a world class 10 x 32 without paying through the nose, (I own 2 other cheaper ones and they are in the minor leagues) your only option is the Nikon 10 x 32 LX L, which we all know is being discontinued. I try to buy all my binoculars at discount prices and I will tell you flat out that this is the best binocular I ever had a deal on. I've had it a year now, and I use it almost every day. I've never been more pleased with a binocular deal and I got real good prices on my Nikon 8 x 32 and 10 x 42 SE's. After using the 10 x 32 LX L, I'm convinced that it was underpriced at it's original undiscounted price. I doubt very much that the much more expensive Leica, Swarovski and Zeiss versions could be any better. My 10 x 42 SE, unsurprisingly, is optically better, but as a whole package, the 10 x 32 LX L roof is just "one fine" binocular and a real pleasure to use.
So get out your mad money and get one while you can. You should be able pick one up for about $650.00.
Bob
Last edited:
Has anyone had the Promaster Infinity Elite 8x32 for awhile, long enough to offer a good review of it? I saw one at a camera store yesterday and it seemed pretty nice - well built, good view, good specs. Thinking about getting it as a smaller, secondary bino to my 8x42 Viper. Any first hand opinions are greatly appreciated.
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
Search the forum to find my review of the Promaster Infinity Elite 8x32 ... and FrankD made some comments on one he had (IIRC). I think we both sent them back.
FrankD
Well-known member
I have/had the 8x42 configuration. I bought it off of Ebay several weeks ago and just sold it today via the same route. Nothing wrong with it optically, mechanically or cosmetically..in fact I thought it was noticeably brighter and sharper than the typical $300 Bushnell Legends, Nikon Monarchs, etc...
Overall quality/fit and finish seemed at the $300 roof level...acceptable but not stellar. I would not have a problem recommending it though I did not try to find the stray light issues that Kevin mentioned with the 8x32 model. I have seen these regularly go for right at $100 via Ebay.
Overall quality/fit and finish seemed at the $300 roof level...acceptable but not stellar. I would not have a problem recommending it though I did not try to find the stray light issues that Kevin mentioned with the 8x32 model. I have seen these regularly go for right at $100 via Ebay.
