Kite Lynx HD 8x30 arrived (1 Viewer)

Kite Lynx HD 8x30

Kite Optics was so generous to send me this bino for a review.
It arrived yesterday and so I cant comment on optics yet, a couple of pictures - to show how small it is - will have to do for now.

Ok, a small hint, I am already counting my pennies.....

oetzi said:

Kite Optics was so generous to send me this bino for a review.
It arrived yesterday and so I cant comment on optics yet, a couple of pictures - to show how small it is - will have to do for now.

Ok, a small hint, I am already counting my pennies.....

Click to expand...

I'm interested to hear what you think. I tried out the Lynx briefly last weekend but unfortunately the available ER is somewhat less than the listed 15mm and consequently a show-stopper for me with glasses. I know I was OK with the preproduction sample of the Nikon M7 8x30 that wowed me last summer, but the shop in question was out of stock so can't say how the production version compares.

David

oetzi said:

Kite Optics was so generous to send me this bino for a review.
It arrived yesterday and so I cant comment on optics yet, a couple of pictures - to show how small it is - will have to do for now.

Ok, a small hint, I am already counting my pennies.....

Click to expand...

Sorry to disappoint you Oetzi but pfennigs are no longer legal money in the EU :C

Lee

Lee, I am old enough to use expressions like "auf den Pfennig achten"

Ok, here we go with the Lynx. I will post my experiences as they happen, so please dont expect anything stringent or in an orderly fashion. There will be a thorough review at the end, on my website, but here I will write down on the go. Please bear in mind that english is not my mother-tongue.

First of all, why the Kite Lynx HD 8x30? Quite simple, I read about it here and in another german bino forum. I got interested in it, because it was claimed to be small, lightweight and of very goog optical quality. Even more, it had this lovely, huge FOV of 151m and I do crave large FOVs.

So I contacted Kite Optics in Belgium and the agreed in sending me one for a limited period.

Let me explain my personal preferences with binoculars, as they may be of importance for you when reading my statements:

8x30/32 is my preferred class of bino because of size and weight. Compacts are difficult to look through and large, heavy binos are too much of a hassle to carry around.

I do like a large FOV and am quite sensitive to CA.

Very important, not many binos fit my eyes: Deep set ones with large eye-sockets, only a few binos make it easy for me to look through without constant re-adjustment and lots of kidney-beaning. ER and the diameter of the eyepieces seem to be the factors of importance for me, (see atattched file). The Kite does not score in this department, it takes me some effort to get a perfect view through it.



Yesterday I spend a leisurely hour in the garden, looking alternately through Nikon 8x30 EII, Swaro 8x32 EL WB and this Kite:

CA-wise the kite is on a level with the Nikon. Visible, but not hindering me having a good view.

There is a slight field curvature to be seen with the Kite. But on a level where it does not prevent me using the whole FOV by having the eyes roam around as with the Nikon. (Roam around in the inner 75% before kidney-beans appear, as with all my binoculars)

Sweet spot is about 80%. Outside this sharpness drops off considerably, but can be re-focused. Enough to, for example, read a traffic sign and the letters printd on it. Not that I use the outer third of any FOV willingly, I like to center the bino on my target. But for what I call "peripheral viewing" this large FOV is perfectly usable.

As for watching fine details on-axis, I found cobwebs on a tree, 5m away, for that purpose. Leftover strands, about 2-10cm long against a noisy background of dark green foliage. With all three binos, I could isolate the single strands from the surrounding environment. Best with the Swaro, then the Nikon followed closely by Kite. These were very fine differences, but visible ones. The Kite isolated the strands not as clearly as the Swaro and nearly up to the level of the Nikon. However you may call this: sharpness, resolution, micr-contrast, there were differences to be seen when watching fine details.

Ok, thats it for now. I am off into the woods with Nikon and Kite for having a look into the hazy distance of the Rhine valley.

Oetzi

And I am old enough to say " take care of the pennies and the pounds (£) will take care of themselves"

But are you old enough to remember " Ich bin vom himmel gefallen" ? :-O

Lee

One thing that excited me about the pre production M7 I tried was that it was sharp. Not up with the very best but much better than I was expecting for the price. Perhaps too good to be expected for a production run.

I'd agree with Oetzi that the Lynx, though not shabby on sharpness, did not particularly impress in the same way. I compared it to few other binos in the £200-£400 range to be sure and it was about midpoint on the sharpness scale. It couldn't match the Kite Petrel 8.5x50 for example which I've tried a few times and think very sharp for the £400 price tag. Definitely couldn't put that one in your pocket though.

I'd agree with Oetzi's comments on the other points as well.

David

A short note before I am off to bed.
Did the "paper test". In comparison to the Swarovski EL 8x32 WB, the Kite showed a slight redish tint.
Ordered some rubber O-rings in 32mm to prevent the eyepieces from sliding down when carrying the bino in a jacket´s pocket.
I am still amazed at the amount of bang-for-buck (€ 520,- over here) in such a small package. The Kite blows the CL Companion out of the water, even when ignoring the difference in price.

oetzi said:

The Kite blows the CL Companion out of the water, even when ignoring the difference in price.

Click to expand...

That doesn't surprise me at all.

I only tried the Lynx in quite bright conditions, mid morning. How have you found the glare resistance with the sun low in the sky?

David

David (or other!), what are the most likely reasons why the 8x30 Nikon M7 is sharper than the Kite Lynx (both being from the same generic maker)? Thanks.

Pomp.

I've noted sample variation in a lot of models, even alphas. I would assume the Nikon/Kite is no different. It may well have been that the Nikon had be cherry picked for the launch. I've believe I've seen that before.

David

David,
For the sake of clarity in your post: what is your definition of sharpness, since a difference in contrast transfer is just as important as resolution and lower contrast transfer can be interpreted as a difference in resolution.
Gijs

typo said:

Pomp.

I've noted sample variation in a lot of models, even alphas. I would assume the Nikon/Kite is no different. It may well have been that the Nikon had be cherry picked for the launch. I've believe I've seen that before.

David

Click to expand...

I would agree with David in reference to apparent sharpness (a combination of contrast and resolution). The two units of the Monarch 7 8x30 that I have in my possession are a perfect example. The second unit I purchased (with the higher serial number coincidentally) has notably better apparent sharpness though the apparent contrast is not what I anticipated.

Gijs van Ginkel said:

David,
For the sake of clarity in your post: what is your definition of sharpness, since a difference in contrast transfer is just as important as resolution and lower contrast transfer can be interpreted as a difference in resolution.
Gijs

Click to expand...

Gijs,

I used the term sharpness as in this case it's a judgement by eye. In each case it was comparison to other binoculars including my usual pair. In the case of the Nikon the edge definition and discernible detail was at least the equal of my usual pair, and pretty close to the Nikon EDG. In the case of the Lynx, it was clear the edge definition in particular was a little softer than the Kite Petrel I mentioned and my regular pair but better than a Celestron Trailseeker for example I also tried. I didn't have a Swarovski CL to compare on these occasions, but all the dozen or so I've tried have done badly in similar comparisons.

I don't have the instrumentation to measure MTF and it can be difficult to distinguish between contrast loss and optical resolution limits by boosted resolution testing. However I would offer the opinion that with modern fully multicoated binoculars the effective optical resolution is frequently the principle component of reduced sharpness. In very, very cheap roofs or vintage uncoated or basic coated binoculars I suspect the reverse is often true. I've only played with a few but masking down the objectives has both increased the contrast visually and improved the boosted resolution values.

Hope that helps.

David

David, I had written up what follows, on the earlier posts, and am about tosend when I see your last above. No queries on it here as that may lead to bigger tangents!

David, I'd suppose the degree of sample variation in "alphas" is tiny - hardly noticeable without a lot of scrutiny?

Frank, I remember recent posts by you on those Nikons, but don't remember if the difference was due to the shiny metal ring problem.

Gijs, the word "sharpness" has been discussed a lot in Bf. Here's a simple glossary reflecting actual usage in this forum:
- sharpness:
- (a) the degree of detail shown as a result of resolution and contrast, maybe even other factors, or
- (b) just resolution.
- clarity:
- 'a' above, or
- one of a suite of more subjective words, like "crisp", "sparkling".
Personally, I avioid "sharp" because ofthe ambiguity, convey sense 'a' by the phrase "shows more /less detail than", and sense 'b' by using the word resolution.

pompadour said:

David, I'd suppose the degree of sample variation in "alphas" is tiny - hardly noticeable without a lot of scrutiny?

Click to expand...

Pomp,

At the last BirdFair I visited the Swarovski stand with another forum member. Comparing notes afterwards we both ranked the ELSV 8x32, SLC 8x42, ELSV 8.5x42, and CL 8x30 identically. Same story on the Zeiss stand. In the overcast conditions I was a bit slower than he was but it really didn't take long. For me it was much more obvious when it brightened up later. How typical we were I don't know but eyesight does vary.

David

Pomp,

Normally that is the case. In my comparison of both of the Nikons though, they both have uncoated components internally and yet the second unit does offer notably better apparent sharpness.

Since the question of a definiton of sharpness was raised, here is my approach:
I only care about how much I can see with a bino. Whether this is caused by "sharpness", resolution, contrast or whatever, doesnt matter. In the end, the bino delivers and I see or not.

During the week I used Nikon 8x30 EII and the Kite to view landscape over longer distances (15-60km) and depending on the atmospheric conditions had varying results. The Nikon is my personal reference when reviewing binoculars, becaus you get a lot of optical performance for the money. Also, it is a well-known binocular over here and you have yur own benchmark when reading my comments.

Atattched is a picture of the Rhine valley, viewed from Frankenstein Castle looking in a northern direction. In the foreground you see a terrace with tables and chairs, there I stood on day one in the shadow of the building to the right. Day two found me where the picture was taken, on an more elevated place.

Day 1
A bright sky with an occasional cloud. Limited visibility as the air was heavily polluted and very hazy/gloomy in the distance. At about 15km in the distance, objects became "unvisible".

With the Nikon I found a large industrial chimney, more or less hidden in the haze at max distance. I could identify it for what it was, but only the general shape of it, no details. With the Kite, this was not possible. I saw, that there was something, but identifying as the chimney it was, wasnt possible. In such adverse conditions, the Nikon delivers more detail than the Kite.

Furthermore, overall contrast of the Kite was a bit lower that day, the landscape looked rather bland. The Nikon delivered more contrast and livelier colours, there was more of a punch in it, so to speak.

Day 2
Heavy rains and strong winds had cleared the air. Fantastic visibility, I could watch for 60km. On a hilltop opposite the rhine valley I discovered a radio tower. On this very day, there was no discernible difference to be found when alternating between Kite and Nikon. On the very edge of visibility (distance wise) both delivered the same amount of details of the radio tower. So I might say, the worse the conditions, contrast-wise, the better the Nikon over the Kite.

Btw, on this clear day, the Kite still wasnt as colourful and contrasty as the Nikon. It was a little bit behind.

How does the Kite perform when looking into deep shadows?
The tower pictured was a good way to judge. On both days I looked through the windows, trying to see as much as possible inside. The Kite was always a tiny bit behind the Nikon, when it came to delivering the fine details of the walls and wooden staircase. The higher micro-contrast of the Nikon made the shadows less murky.

How about glare?
Thats a very complex topic with the Kite and I have yet to fathom it. Outside day one, when standing on the terrace in the deep shadow, I very often found a veil of glare, at least in the lower third of the FOV. I yet dont understand what causes it, as it happened on so many different occassions (sunny/cloudy or position of the sun). I even noticed a change of this glare when repositioning my eyes at the eyepieces. So I cant say more than that the Kite is prone to glare as compared to the Nikon.

When all this sounds as if the Kite is a bad bino, it is not.
First, I decided to compare it to the Nikon 8x30 EII, which is a truly excellent bino, giving top roofs a run for the money. The Kite is selling for € 520,- over here, keep that in mind.
Third, its dimensions surely restricted the development of its optical qualities. There is always a price to pay and every bino (even an alpha) is always a compromise. Maybe that glare is the price to pay for a compact construction?

For now, my opinion ist that the Kity Lynx HD 8x30 is a truly excellent binocular when judging the whole package. Close enough to the Nikon 8x30 EII in optical quality to feel comfortable using it, still quite cheap and also very small and lightweight.

I havent used it enough to be truly familiar with it, I need to use it in the dark and try to understand the factors leading to the above mentioned glare. But I already dread the day when I have to return it. I got used to this handy package of optical quality.

More will follow.

Excellent observations Oetzi.

Lee

Oetzi, Thank you for the detailed account. Enjoying the journey.:t:

oetzi said:

How about glare?
Thats a very complex topic with the Kite and I have yet to fathom it. Outside day one, when standing on the terrace in the deep shadow, I very, very often found a veil of glare, at least in the lower third of the FOV. I yet dont understand what causes it, as it happened on so many different occassions (sunny/cloudy or position of the sun). I even noticed a change of this glare when repositioning my eyes at the eyepieces. So I cant say more than that the Kite is prone to glare as compared to the Nikon.
.

Click to expand...

Unlike your extensive testing, I only spent a few minutes with the Lynx and couldn't really figure out the random nature of the glare, but like you describe, I found it fine most of the time and then it would suddenly intrude. Distance of the eye from the eyepiece appeared to part of the story. Even without glasses I still found it a little tricky to get the ER right and stable.

Henry has often suggested that glare often travels round the exterior of the light path. If it is so with the Lynx than perhaps the glare may be less avoidable in lower light when the pupil is dilated. Something I couldn't try.

David

For now, my opinion ist that the Kity Lynx HD 8x30 is a truly excellent binocular when judging the whole package. Close enough to the Nikon 8x30 EII in optical quality to feel comfortable using it, still quite cheap and also very small and lightweight.

Click to expand...

This is pretty much the exact opinion/experience I have had with the Nikon Monarch 7 8x30. As a "whole package" the binocular is certainly something to own. My only complaint is the lack of its ability to resolve the finest details...most likely because of the previously mentioned contrast issues.

After further comparison of two units of the M7 I did find one unit slightly sharper in the center of the field than the other and decided to keep it. All in all a great little package that only needs a little "tweaking" to make it truly impressive optically. I am guessing much the same could be said of the Kite model.