Kowa BDXDII 6.5x32 vs Vixen Atrek 6x30, Nikon AE 7x35, Zeiss FL 7x42 (1 Viewer)

A strange comparison? Well, maybe. I hope it can be useful and fun (at least as half as much as I enjoyed making it).

I’m a big fan of lower power binoculars (7x, 6x) ever since I discovered the stable and comfortable view. Furthermore, the binoculars I tend to enjoy the more, are those with generous FOV, so the new Kowa was a much anticipated choice.

To complement other reviews by knowledgeable forum members that have given very interesting (and more technical insights) I have made a series of comparisons among some low power binoculars which I enjoy using very much, each for its own reason (mind you, I have no expertise in optics whatsoever other than being very fond of binoculars):

Vixen Atrek 6x30 (sibling of Kowa YF, Leupold Yosemite, etc.): 500 g, 8,0º FOV (140/1000 m), 45,5º AFOV, eye relief 18 mm
Nikon Action Extreme 7x35: 800 g, 9,3º FOV (163/1000 m), 65º AFOV, eye relief 17,3 mm
Zeiss Victory FL 7x42: 740 g, 8,5º FOV (150/1000 m), 60º AFOV, eye relief 16 mm.
Kowa BD XD II 6.5x32: 535 g, 10º FOV (175/1000 m), 66º AFOV, eye relief 17 mm.

As I said previously, this won’t be a technical comparison, but a casual talk about the things that I’ve discovered while comparing the above mention models. Since I know those models are quite popular, I hope to raise some interesting points.

Size, shape, ergonomics.
Very nice, the Kowa seems very well put together (just as their predecessor, which I have in 8x32), the feeling is of something more expensive than 300 €. Actually, maybe because of this subjective “feeling of quality” they felt heavier in the hand than what the specs say.
Two minor comments: I find the rubber to be too grainy. Since the rubber is harder than in other models, it could even feel a bit like sandpaper (well, not that abrasive, but not the most comfortable to touch, IMHO). The strap loops: because the Kowa are very short and stubby, if I hold the tubes with my middle-size hands so that my index finger rests on the focus wheel, the strap loop sinks in the soft flesh of the area where you tweeze/pinch/flex your palm. A little annoying. I have to slip the hand half and inch, but then my pinky has nowhere to rest.

Eyecups and eye comfort.
Impressive. Although I love wide field binoculars I’m usually unable to see the entire FOV of really wide field binoculars (like the 8x30 EII 8,8º or the 9,3º of the 7x35 Nikon AE), as I mentioned on this thread. I don’t use glasses, so I assume it has to do with the features of my face. Well, I can see the entire FOV of the Kowa, which is a really satisfying experience. Happy as a hippo! Furthermore, usually I struggle with narrow-ish eyecups (Meopta Meostar 8x32, Swarovski CL 8x30 -new-, Swarovski Habicht 8x30), but the eyecups in these are wide (and… quite chunky actually, see pictures). Not only is the inner space quite wide, but the entire rubber ring touching your face is wider than other binoculars. So, I didn’t particularly like the point where my hands touch the Kowas, but I love where my eyebrows and eye socket touch them.

Optical performance (to be taken with a grain of salt, just a subjective comparison here).
My first impression, on a bright day was a bit of a letdown. I was a bit underwhelmed by the lack of “punch” of the image. Given the lower power, I had expected a more vibrant and sharper image. I took the Vixen 6x30 and there it was: the image of the bark on a tree appeared way sharper on the Vixen; I could feel the texture of the wrinkles and creases in a more tactile way. And then there was the three-dimensionality. The Vixen first and then the Nikon offered an image where the objects simply popped into your eyes, like in those early XX century steroscopic images where two different images are viewed simultaneously with a weird artifact. The Kowa seemed flat in comparison, which is probably to be expected since it’s a roof. This was especially evident from 5 to, say, 20-25 m, where there was no discussion: the view through the porros was more “pleasurable”. The FL remained somewhere in the middle; probably its brightness and sharpness made up for the loss of three-dimensionality, given this sense of “enhanced reality” that very good binoculars give (I always describe very good binoculars like having a superpower in your eyesight; where you see life “more real than reality itself”.
After this initial disappointment, I have started using the Kowas on their own and the more I use them, the more I seem to like them, and the sharper I find the image. That is to say, if I hadn’t compared them with the small Vixen, I wouldn’t have been that disappointed. But this comes to show how impressive the Atrek/YF/Yosemite are. However, sharp as they are, the small AFOV (45º) on the Atrek really lets them down, since the experience is somewhat spoiled.

On the subject of AFOV and magnification. I think I read somewhere that the magnification on the Kowa is closer to 6x than 6.5x. Well, my experience comparing directly the 6x Atrek and the 6.5 Kowa is that the different is really remarkable. I’d say it is closer to 7 than to 6, to say the least (I’m talking about the subjective impression of magnification to my eyes and brain, obviously). The image on the Atrek appears tiny in comparison. This is all the more obvious when taking into account the AFOV: the image on the Atrek is small… encircled in a small circular FOV; while the image on the Kowa appears bigger and jumps into your eyes, because the image fills your entire FOV.
If I go straight from Atrek (6x) to BDXDII (6.5) to AE (7x), I see the two latter closer between them than the two former. Actually, I’ve experienced (and later on read here on BF) that porros might seem to display a smaller image than a roof of the same magnification, although this is just a psychological effect. So, going from 6.5 roof (XDBDII) to 7x porro (AE), there is a slight difference, but actually very small (the same goes for the FL). Going from the AE to the FL, the latter appears to display a slightly larger image. But then, If I take a 8x, and watch again through the 6.5x Kowa, the difference is really obvious, and appears bigger than the difference I sometimes see between a 8x and a 10x. I wonder if the relationship between two different magnifications (e. g. 6x and 8x or 8x and 10x) is linear or follows another rhythm.
On a separate comment (#2), I’ve attached a picture of a pole and a wire to show magnification (I know it is really difficult to convey anything from pictures through binoculars). No cropping or editing, both magnification, speed, aperture, ISO and white balance are locked. But this is about magnification, so don’t pay attention to the details, only to the size.
Oddly enough, the image on the Kowa seems to show the smallest magnification (maybe due to the huge FOV), but the impression on the filed was that the magnification was way bigger than the 6x Vixen.

While we are talking about wires. That very same wire on the picture made me discover one aspect of the BDXDII that some may find objetable: CA. I don’t care much about CA. Some very nice binoculars I use show CA and I use them with joy. Simply put, these show a reasonable and evident CA when using them in high-contrast situations (like a black wire on a clear sky). Surprisingly, the Atrek showed less than the AE, that showed less than the XDBDII. As was to be expected, the FL stood in this department.

More difficult situations. I tested the binoculars when the sun was setting on a pretty bright day, this gave them a real workout. Surprise-surprise. The Kowa showed a great behaviour, while the Atrek really struggled and showed some glare, as did the AE. Surprisingly, the FL was the weakest (on this particular day with this particular sunset). I’d say the AE was closer to the Atrek. I was really impressed by the little 6.5x32. Wow.
I repeated the experiment another day, but on this occasion it was a pretty gloomy day. Pointing the binoculars towards the West did not produce such a pronounced difference between the four binoculars.

One evening, I tested the binoculars for dusk performance (I’ll omit the FL in this case, for obvious reasons). I chose a heap of branches on my backyard and I waited for darkness to come. By sunset, there was hardly any difference between Atrek, Kowa and AE. 25 minutes after sunset, still clear-ish, enough light to see "well", the Atrek hold its own against the other two binoculars with bigger lenses. It was about 35-40 minutes after the sunset when you could spot a difference; the Atrek started to lag behind. Again, some more time had to pass to see some difference between the 6.5x32 and the 7x35. This was really remarkable: a lighter roof with smaller objectives really its ground against the bigger and heavier porro. I really expected to see more of a difference,
Night finally came, and the difference between the four binoculars was made more obvious. Trying to watch Orion’s sword with the Atrek and the Kowa, the latter showed a clear difference, but then the Nikon performed better than the Kowa. On the one hand the Kowa has a wider FOV and I’d say a wider sweet spot than the Nikon, which is great for stargazing… but on the other hand, the Nikon feel brighter and I found them easier to hold steady. So the softer edges of the Nikon are a tradeoff I would take if I was to choose a binocular solely for stargazing.
One minor detail for night use. While the glare resistance of the Kowa was really remarkable on a bright day, for night use, the light coming from street lights really made the Kowa struggle. The FL was great, no reflections, the AE and Atrek had some minor strange reflections, but the Kowa picked light from lamps out of the FOV and created inner reflections that were quite distracting. I have attached two pictures (post #3); again, don’t pay attention to the quality, but to the reflections. Actually, if you compare the two images of the pole in the darkness, you can see a pretty visible difference in magnification between the 6x30 and the 6.5x32.

Conclusion.
These are some initial findings. Obviously, one needs not only to get acquainted… but to really become intimate with binoculars to really appreciate their virtues and defects. Furthermore, sometimes it is precisely when you don’t have a binocular anymore that you start to appreciate its personality. In short: a little underwhelmed at first. Then, the more I use them, the more satisfied I am.
Overall I think I expected a bit more, especially in terms of sharpness, which is something I usually admire (and look for) in 6x-7x binoculars. But then I’ve realised that most 7x I’ve used have been porro, and part of the magic may lie there. However (I know it is useless to compare by memory), in my memory the 7x33 Celestron Granite ED roof had -on axis- that special “pop” I link to 7x, but then the edges were really poor, so poor that they became a hindrance for the enjoyment of the view. Well, it seems you can’t have it all! Here you have a nice shape and build quality (really handy and nimble), a binocular that is reasonably light and with a huge (and usable!) FOV. Nice.

As mentioned above, a picture through the four binoculars to show magnification (see details on previous post).

As mentioned in post #1. Nighttime performance: reflections coming from a street light on the Kowa and the Vixen.

Yarellii,

Very nice and helpful info, thanks! And not a strange comparison at all. I have been casually comparing the Kowa 6.5 with Zeiss 7x42 FL, Nikon EII 8x30 and Opticron 6.5x32 WP porro. I agree with nearly all your opinions and observations.

For me the Kowa really excels at very close and mid to long distance. Up close, the image quality is fantastic when viewing tiny wildflowers and fast moving dragonflies, sweat bees, etc. In fact image quality seems equal to the Zeiss at close focus even though the overall image quality of the Zeiss is better of course. Beginning at @ 150 to 200m the Kowa begins to show more 3 D effect, comparable to the porros.

I agree that focus and image sharpness generally can be a bit tricky, maybe in part due to the great DOF. I often think a target is in focus but then slightly tweaking the focus results in an even sharper image. As you say, after comparing them to other bins it may be best to spend additional time with the Kowa by itself to practice maximizing its particular combination of strengths - FOV, DOF, and steady image. Like you, the more I use them the more I enjoy them.

Thanks again.

Mike

Mike,
Yes, the close focus is stunning. Is one of the things I forgot to write about. I had even taken a picture to report it, but I forgot. The specs talk about 1,3 m, but I measured it to 1,03 m, a hair above 1 m. Not quite de Pentax Papilio, but really impressive. I've attached a picture of a small flower (taken while holding the phone on the eyecup and with no editing whatsoever, only compression).

Also worth mentioning is the soft action of the focus wheel.
Today it was a bright sunny days, and I've been following some sparrows and Sardinian warblers among the almond trees and bushes. Nice and crisp.

Like you, I thought about including the 8x30 E2 in the pool of binoculars for the test, but I restricted it to 7x and below, even though (for me at least) the E2 sits somehow in the spot the new Kowa is trying to excel (small, handy, huge FOV, crisp image).
I've always been curious about how good the optical qualities of the Opticron WP porro were. How would you describe it? Similar to the Leupold Yosemite?

yarrellii said:

Mike,


Like you, I thought about including the 8x30 E2 in the pool of binoculars for the test, but I restricted it to 7x and below, even though (for me at least) the E2 sits somehow in the spot the new Kowa is trying to excel (small, handy, huge FOV, crisp image).
I've always been curious about how good the optical qualities of the Opticron WP porro were. How would you describe it? Similar to the Leupold Yosemite?

Click to expand...

Simpatico

Yes I included the 8x30 E2 in my comparison because I agree the Kowa seems to be somewhat comparable - trying to fit in the same spot as you say- in terms of convenient handling, wide FOV and price. IMO either one could reasonably substitute for the other. The E2 does have a slightly higher quality image as would be expected from a porro at the same price while the Kowa has an even wider FOV, greater DOF and steadier
image.

I have never seen a Yosemite but bought the excellent Kowa YF 8x30 as a present for a friend and had the chance to test it for a week before giving it to him. But at the time I did not have the Opticron WP 6.5 x32 porro for direct comparison so it would be hard for me to compare the two realistically. But below may be helpful.

The Opticron is a solidly constructed and extremely attractive binocular. In size and shape it is a very slightly larger copy of the E2 8x30 which is a good thing. With a 9.2 degree FOV the Opticron (currently selling in the US at $100) would be a good low cost substitute if necessary for either the Kowa 6.5 or the 8x30 E2. It has a clear bright sharp image within a sweet spot of @ 50 to 60%. Outside the sweet spot the image is not great but for me is good enough for context, immersion effect and spotting movement at the periphery. But, comparing the two today, the Opticron image is very similar in this weak performance outside the sweet spot to the 7x33 Celestron Granite which you eventually did not like so the Opticron may not be a good choice for you.

Hope this helps.

Mike

Mike, thank you so much for taking your time and explaining in such detail.
On the subject of weak edge performance, I understand most widefield binoculars are prone to suffering from soft edges (my 7x42 FL has soft edges, and was once a top-of-the-line device, and I like it either way). What made me get rid of (my copy of) the Celestron 7x33 was that my impression was that of a fuzzy doughnut where only the "hole" was sharp. Actually, it was pretty sharp and the image was full of contrast (if a bit on the yellowy side of colour). I found that the transition between sweet spot and edge was so abrupt, that the outer edge was a clear fuzzy ring, while on the Kowa I find it fades in a more subtle way (the same goes for the E2, FL and, to a lesser extent, 7x35 AE). Basically, I found it distracting: in the AE it is there, it's impossible to deny it, but it does not bother me so much. In this particular aspect the Kowa 6.5 has overwhelmed my expectations (after reading some reviews): yes it has soft edges, but given the huge FOV I find them acceptable. It is true that while panning, you can feel the fuzzy edges creating a funny effect. Actually, the mix of wide FOV, curvature of the image and fuzzy edges makes for a somewhat unexpected and more pronounced sense of depth and three-dimensionality when panning or scanning the branches of a tree.
I haven't tried the Yosemite either (I used it since I know many people in the US are more familiar with that member of the family; I have the 8x30 YF as well ).

Really nice reviews and discussions. Thanks for posting.
With the little Kowa I find if I grip the binos so that my first finger falls on the focus wheel, the web of skin connecting my thumb and first finger just rests against the strap lugs isn't pressed against them at all. In fact I hadn't noticed that they were touching the strap lugs unitl I read the comments about this causing discomfort. I guess these differences are due to us having different hand shapes.

Lee

Troubador said:

Really nice reviews and discussions. Thanks for posting.
With the little Kowa I find if I grip the binos so that my first finger falls on the focus wheel, the web of skin connecting my thumb and first finger just rests against the strap lugs isn't pressed against them at all. In fact I hadn't noticed that they were touching the strap lugs unitl I read the comments about this causing discomfort. I guess these differences are due to us having different hand shapes.

Lee

Click to expand...

The strap lugs on my KOWA 6.5x32 also cause me some discomfort in the webs between my thumbs and forefingers. I was wondering if other people had this annoyance. The binocular is quite compact and I have rather big hands. I wear size 2XL gloves.

I also suffer similar annoyance or discomfort from the hinge Pins on my Swarovski 8x30 CL Companion which I am always checking to see that they haven't come loose.:eek!:

Despite this they both are currently my most used binoculars.

Bob

Lee, post 8,
It was the first thing that struck me when I took the Kowa in my hands: the position of the strap lugs and how annoying that can be. It is however very well possible to overcome it by positioning the binocular a bit different in the hands.
Gijs van Ginkel

Gijs van Ginkel said:

Lee, post 8,
It was the first thing that struck me when I took the Kowa in my hands: the position of the strap lugs and how annoying that can be. It is however very well possible to overcome it by positioning the binocular a bit different in the hands.
Gijs van Ginkel

Click to expand...

Yes Gijs I remember your comments. For me it is not a problem at all. I do not feel the presence of the lugs and had to look to see how close my hand was before posting. It is small differences like this that cause such different reactions from different people about how they feel about a bino's handling.

Lee

Lee, Gijs, Bob.
This was, as Gijs noticed as well, one of the first things that I could feel as I held the Kowa for the first time.

For comparison, I've made a simple test with a very similar binocular (in terms of tube length), the Nikon M7 8x30. Actually, while doing this test I've realised just how similar the height was (with eyecups up) in both models; see picture number 2.

The first picture (Nikon on the Left, Kowa on the right) shows the way I "naturally" hold the bins, so that the index finger rests naturally on the focus wheel, and also my entire palm holds the tube so that my pinky is not "hanging on the edge". This is my natural hold without further repositioning or thinking. As you can see, while the loop on the M7 is clearly visible, the one on the Kowa is simply sunk beneath my skin. Not the end of the world, but the M7 is clearly more comfortable for me.
The second picture (Kowa top, Nikon bottom) shows some interesting details:

- The loop on the Nikon is a few mm hight than the Kowa, allowing a smidge more room for grip (second picture). Not only that, the armour on the Nikon is not straight, in this very point it is somehow recessed (copying, on a very far-small scale the shape of the Prostaff/EDG). This way, the lower part of the loop, its roots, are hidden by a really tiny wedge of rubber that makes it seem less tall (actually, maybe it is less tall). That little wedge of rubber makes it sit more comfortable, like the way you hold one of those ergonomic computer mouse (with its carved shapes) or the handle of a nordich-walking stick, so to speak.

- Secondly, as well as being on a lower position on the tube (closer to the objective), the loop on the Kowa is pointing in a different direction radially. If the eyepiece lens was a watch, the loop on the nikon is pointing at 4 o'clock, while the one on the Kowa seems to be ahead, say 4:30. I don't know if this is relevant at all, but maybe it is a combination of all aspects: larger loop protruding more; lower position on the tube allowing less room for grip, different direction, lack of rubber wedge to make a softer transition from armour to loop (like in the Nikon).

Again, not the end of the world, but maybe worth mentioning for people with big hands. By the way, I wouldn't say my hands are particularly big, medium size.

(Wow, I didn't know one can write so much about such a futile subject, but I think you can see my point ).

BTW, Bob. I had the (new) CL 8x30 (sold it because the eyecups were too small for me), but I found the ergonomics and didn't have this problem... and I'm not a particularly good friend of the FP loops, to say the least

Not a futile subject at all and your pics illustrate things very nicely.

I must have smaller hands than you because my grip on the Kowa looks exactly like yours on the Nikon and is perfectly comfortable.

Lee

My Kowa 6.5x32 has a much darker green color than the one shown. Was there an earlier series of this binocular?

Both my right forefinger and thumb can reach onto the focus wheel and I can turn it with them if need be while holding the binocular. My 3rd and 4th fingers cover the hinge.

Bob

PS: It says MADE IN CHINA on the inside of the Left Hinge above the Serial Number.

As far a the ruggedness of the materials used in its construction, I think that it may be the best Chinese made binocular that I have ever used. Its large eye cups move firmly and precisely through their 3 positions and brace comfortably up against and slightly under my brow ridge. In have no problem with CA. There is some veiling glare in the lower half of the view when I look in the general direction of the morning sun.

Bob,

Good catch, the armor on my 6.5 is a much darker shade of green as well, it is very close to the color and shade of SW EL armor. Yarellii, does your picture show the real color of your unit?

When gripping the Kowa with my dominant right hand, my index finger naturally falls on the bottom two thirds of the focus wheel, middle and ring finger cover the bridge and little finger wraps around the bottom of the barrel without any overhang blocking the objective. I do feel the presence of the strap lug but it is not uncomfortable nor even a distraction. I generally take a size large glove so I can see how someone with XXL hands might have to adapt their normal grip or find it problematic.

Mike

Lee, hehehe, on the subject of big or small hands, as it seems, from now on we could establish the Kowa BD II 6.5x32 XD as an international measure of how big or small hands are. We could write to the International System of Units with this proposal

Bob, Mike. I'm afraid the issue with the colour on the rubber armour of my BD XD II probably has more to do with the picture itself. Colours in pictures can be pretty tricky at times (even with nice cameras, let alone with a smartphone), so take the colour representation on my pictures with a grain of salt. When I got the Kowas I think the colour matched what I had seen on Kowa's advertising and on reviews. It is actually a particular shade of green, and the fact that the rubber is matt/grainy probably helps with the confusion. I have made a picture with the Kowa and other three well known binoculars of different colours, to see if I can shed a bit of light. Clockwise from top left: the black faux-leatherette of the Nikon E2, the grey rubber of the Nikon SE, the darker green of the previous Kowa BD XD Prominar and finally the new Kowa BD XD II. Let's see if the picture attached can help with this. By the way, the serial number of my unit is 3900253.

While taking the first picture I've just realised that the loops on the old Kowa BD XD are pretty much in the same exact position than the Nikon M7 I pictured yesterday. In my case, those millimeters between the old and the new BDXD mean the barrier between perfect grip from start (in a natural holding position), to having to slightly reposition my hands. See second picture. I guess this was a natural solution for the engineers at Kowa, given the short tubes.

Gijs van Ginkel said:

Lee, post 8,
It was the first thing that struck me when I took the Kowa in my hands: the position of the strap lugs and how annoying that can be. It is however very well possible to overcome it by positioning the binocular a bit different in the hands.
Gijs van Ginkel

Click to expand...

I think this is right. I remember being bothered by this when I first got these but now I don't even notice. Maybe I have started holding them differently (I don't have them handy right now).

My main gripe is about the radial position of the lugs, as yarelli mentioned. They make it so the binoculars do not sit flat against the chest when worn.

Hello everyone. I’m really interested in the Kowa YF II 6x30 or 8x30 and Nikon AE 7x35. I can only get one, could anyone tell me which is better? I’m really a novice but am interested in Porro for the 3D effect. Nikons seem to be more popular and have more reviews. Wondering if Kowas have better lenses with less Chromatic Aberrations.

I’d appreciate any info anyone can give me. Thanks in Advance.

I'm not an expert, just an enthusiast. As you have probably read, the best thing if possible is for you to try all three side by side to confirm which is "better" for your purposes both in terms of optics and handling. I have the Nikon and have used/tested the Kowa 8x30 and have an old 6x30 porro. Generally all are very good for the price. The 6x will have the steadiest view and greatest DOF which IMO enhances the 3D effect. But the Kowa 6x may have the smallest AFOV which is a pet peeve of mine (doesn't bother many others apparently). The Nikon has the widest real FOV by far as I recall but you can check the specs. The quality of the lenses from memory is too close to call. One big difference, the Nikon is considerably larger and heavier and feels much more robust. The Kowa are easier to carry in use, pack for travel, et. cet.

Not to complicate your decision but you might also consider and test if possible the Opticron 6.5x32 WP porro which has a wide FOV very close to the Nikon and a bit more magnification than the Kowa 6x which may be a bit inadequate if you will be doing a lot of glassing at ranges greater than 100 to 150 yards. The Opticron is a beautifully made bin in the middle in terms of size and weight. It does have rubber fold down eye cups as opposed to the twist up eye cups of the others.

Hope this helps.

Mike

Thanks for the help sir. I will look into the Opticrons. So far the specs I saw are very favorable. Huge field of view like the Nikons so a big plus!