Alpha question, any brand (1 Viewer)

What might be the definition of an Alpha in the bin world? I am sure this has been spoken to often and embedded within other topics. Is the quality, price or a combo of both?

I would consider the Zeiss 8x25 an Alpha in its class although it sells for under $1000US. There are many great 32's and 42's under $1000, and while good bins, they don't meet anyone's criteria of an Alpha although still good.

When does a past Alpha no longer be an Alpha? Has the HT lost it's Alpha Status when the SF came along or the SLC lost it's status as an Alpha to the EL? Is every bino over $2000US an Alpha? Can there be a 'classic' that wasn't really an alpha in a former time?

Anyhow, just a 'for fun' question as it is raining outside and something to chat about

I think there was a comment a bit back on how we forgot the Zeiss FL (still a premium glass today), how we move on to the next great and new thing. The Zeiss 8X25 is described as the best in that format, so it is a premium glass and at the top, regardless of being less than $1000. To me a premium glass is one that performs day in day out, year in and out with consistent precision, both from an optical and mechanical perspective. Premium (Alpha - I never like to use this term with glass) for some I guess is the latest and greatest.
On a sunny day in the fall, I still enjoy the Nikon HG 8X32 and 8X42, made from 2002-2004. They are a premium glass to my eyes that still perform as they did in 2002.

Andy W.

dries1 said:

(Alpha - I never like to use this term with glass)

Andy W.

Click to expand...

I agree with Andy. Alpha is just a handy general term: I'd say we all know what it's getting at but if you look too closely for a definition it falls apart, especially as there are so many competing factors to take into consideration with binoculars.

Eventually words come to mean what most people think they mean even if not many of those people are experts.