3 x Meopta 10x42 HD - MeoStar, MeoPro, Optik (1 Viewer)

I was able to compare the MeoPro 10x42mm against the Meostar B1 10x42mm binoculars at Kittery Trading Post. Apples and oranges, but the Meostars shined compared to the MeoPros. The exit pupil seemd small on the MeoPros, but good sharp, and good contrast. The Meostars were outstanding, and I think better than my old Swaro SLCs.

3 x Meopta 10x42 HD - MeoStar, MeoPro, Optika

A brief first look at the new Meopta Optika 10x42 HD

A number of binocular producers have three or more different 10x42 models in their product portfolio. With the introduction of the new Optika line, Meopta is one of them: MeoStar 10x42 HD, MeoPro 10x42 HD, Optika 10x42 HD.

Here are some basic data on the three Meopta 10x42 HD models:

MEOSTAR 10X42 HD
Objective diameter: 42 mm
True aperture (measured): 42mm
Magnification: 10 x
Exit pupil: 4.2 mm
Eye relief (acc. to spec): 15 mm
Useful eye relief (measured, from rim of eyecup): 13 mm
IPD (measured): 56 - 74 mm
RFOV: 6.3 degrees = 110 m
Focus type: CF
Prism system: Schmidt-Pechan
Waterproof: yes
Weight (measured, with eyepiece cover and strap): 1‘040 g
Price: USD 999.95 (B&H), € 1’149.00 (Intercon Spacetec)

MEOPRO 10X42 HD
Objective diameter: 42 mm
True aperture (measured): 42mm
Magnification: 10 x
Exit pupil: 4.2 mm
Eye relief (acc. to spec): 17 mm
Useful eye relief (measured from rim of eyecup): 14.5 mm
IPD (measured): 56 - 75 mm
RFOV: 6.7 degrees = 117 m
Focus type: CF
Prism system: Schmidt-Pechan
Waterproof: yes
Weight (measured, with eyepiece cover and strap): 794 g
Price: USD 449.00 (B&H), € 589.00 (Intercon Spacetec)

OPTIKA 10X42 HD
Objective diameter: 42 mm
True aperture (measured): 41mm
Magnification: 10 x
Exit pupil: 4.2 mm
Eye relief (acc. to spec): 15 mm
Useful eye relief (measured from rim of eyecup): 11 mm
IPD (measured): 56 - 75 mm
RFOV: 6.0 degrees = 105 m
Focus type: CF
Prism system: Schmidt-Pechan
Waterproof: yes
Weight (measured, with eyepiece cover and strap): 832 g
Price: USD 299.95 (B&H), € 310.00 (Intercon Spacetec)

So basically, Meopta has now three categories of 10x42 models on offer, one for roughly $1’000, one for $500, and one for $300.
How do they compare? Is the most expensive one (MeoStar) clearly the best, followed by the middle one (MeoPro), which in turn is followed by the cheapest (Optika)?

Lee just published a very nice, well written review of the MeoStar 10x42 HD:
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3899427&postcount=1
to which I have nothing to add. I agree with almost everything he writes.

The MeoPro 10x42 HD got reviewed by allbinos in early 2017:
https://www.allbinos.com/311-binoculars_review-Meopta_MeoPro_HD_10x42.html
and I disagree with several of their findings. In particular, the sample in my collection does not exhibit the bright areas around the exit pupils shown in allbinos’ review, and I consider the edge sharpness actually quite satisfactory. In contrast to the MeoStar, which exhibits just a tiny bit of field curvature, the MeoPro doesn’t show any of it, and its field of view is larger than that of the MeoStar.
Other reviews of the 8x42 and 8x32 MeoPro models (including the always informative reviews by Gijs) are overall quite positive, esp. when the price of the MeoPro is taken into account.

I have not found any reviews of the Optika yet. Here is what I think about it.

Where the Optika shines:
• Impeccable finish
• Nice haptics, good grip of the armour (dry or wet)
• All things mechanical work well, smoothly and precisely, the central hinge and the diopter adjustment (on right eyepiece) sufficiently firm
• Well-made screw-in eyepieces with 4 positions (in, two intermediate stops, out) and clear click stops
• Very little vignetting
• Good image brightness (comparable to MeoPro)
• Good color fidelity (similar to MeoStar, slightly better than MeoPro)
• Good central (not as good as MeoPro) and decent off-axis sharpness (comparable to MeoPro)
• Almost no spikes on bright light sources (better than MeoStar, and much better than MeoPro)
• Very satisfactory stray-light suppression

Where the Optika shows why it is cheaper than the MeoPro:
• Distinct false pupils (this may affect twilight performance under certain conditions, to be verified)
• Field of view is clearly narrower than MeoPro (and also narrower than MeoStar)
• Reflections on bright objects outside the field of view are slightly more pronounced than in the MeoPro or MeoStar
• The true aperture is just a tiny bit (1mm) narrower than the 42mm of the objective lenses
• Impossibly long neck strap (of the three Meoptas, only my MeoPro came with an acceptable neck strap, the others seemed made for giants)

Overall, when it comes to image quality, it seems to me that the price is a good indicator, also at Meopta. The MeoStar is at the top, an excellent 10x42 as confirmed by Lee; the MeoPro is a good middle class binocular and competes well with its peers; and the Optika appears to be a competitive lower midle class bino. All three share excellent finish and mechanics.

Of course, the Optika needs now to be further reviewed under “field conditions” and compared with competitors. A first tentative side-bx side with the same size Zeiss Terra would indicate more sharpness / contrast in the image of the Optika (although in terms of price, the Terra compares with the MeoPro, not the Optika).

This would indicate that for those with a limited budget, the Optika may be an option to seriously consider. I like it quite a bit.

fwiw
Canip

Very nice comparison Canip.

Lee

Thank you, Lee!

Two things I had also noted but then forgot to write in the post:

Chromatic aberration - it is a bit more pronounced in the Optika than in the MeoPro, when looking for it, you may find traces even at the center of the image. This may be one of the reasons why the image appears slightly less sharp. HD glass and HD glass may not always be the same thing.

And:
On the Optika, the useful eye relief (see spec in post #1) is a bit tight for people observing with eye glasses. I don‘t, but tried it out anyway and found that it was not easy to see the entire fov with the glasses on.

Catnip,

An interesting comparison. I had a look at the B1.1 HD 10x42 and both the Optika 8x and 10x42 at Birdfair last month. Obviously rather different levels of mechanical and optical refinment, but I rather liked the Optika. The 10x was OK with my glasses, but I spent more time with the 8x which had excellent centre sharpness, and no on axis CA that I could detect. The colour balance and colour contrast appeared somewhat unusual and there was some issue stray light, but overall I thought they did a rather fine job of picking out the LBJs in dense foliage.

David

Thank you, David, for sharing your view of the 8x Optika!
And:
I didn‘t know former US presidents have a habit of hiding in dense foliage

Canip said:

........ I didn‘t know former US presidents have a habit of hiding in dense foliage

Click to expand...

Possibly not the most likely candidate.

David

Canip said:

Thank you, David, for sharing your view of the 8x Optika!
And:
I didn‘t know former US presidents have a habit of hiding in dense foliage

Click to expand...

Thanks for the laugh!! :t: