• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Hawke Frontier ED 8x43! (1 Viewer)

From Hawke online. That was their original price.

They increased the price by 11% ($50) just after the review was posted.

Read the thread to see the comments on this.
 
Last edited:
Again I am surprised by the great series of posts since I last visited this thread. I only get to hit birdforum once a day because of an internet filtering program at work. ;)

Note to self: avoid light bulbs when birding.

Tero, I genuinely laughed out loud at this comment. I will be sure to take note of that. :)

After all of the discussion on stray light and forms of reflections, etc... I want to again clarify what I am seeing with the Frontier EDs. The stray light is in the form of somewhat bright, circular "ring" around the outside of the field stop. The more I use the binocular the more I "feel" this is the result of poor baffling somewhere in the eyepiece or possibly close to the objective. Call that "instinct" rather than experience. If I had the internal binocular knowledge and experience of someone like Henry then maybe I could clarify further. The only other bin that I have owned and that I remember seeing it in was the Bushnell Discoverer 7x42.

Speaking of which, Kevin, if you see what I am describing in the Discoverer then you know what I mean when I try to describe it in the Frontier ED.

I do not notice any flare or glare but maybe an occasional "glint" when using the Frontier EDs. I have been toting them around daily at home and at work. I will be taking them out in the woods over the next few days.

tjej,

Yes, Kevin hit the nail on the head about the price increase. Still they are $21 under $500. My glass is half full. ;)

Sancho,

I should have the Swaro EL 32s back in my possession shortly. I will compare the two directly and report more of my observations. I never compared the 32 mm EL with the Frontier ED but rather the Promaster ED model. My choice to sell both of the ELs was due to the fact that the optical performance of the Promaster was on par with the ELs (the sweet spot wasn't as large but the centerfield apparent sharpness was better). Brightness favored the Promaster EDs as did the lower level of color fringing. When comparing the 32 mm EL to the 42 mm EL I noted a higher level of color fringing and a slightly dimmer image. With that thought in mind I expect the Frontier ED to be noticeably brighter and sharper with less color fringing and a more neutral color tone in comparison to the 32 mm EL. The only characteristic I expect the EL to beat the Frontier ED in is the size of the sweet spot.

Also keep in mind that the full sized 42 mm Frontier ED actually has a 6 foot wider field of view in comparison to the 32 mm EL. Not significant in and of itself but when you consider we are comparing a 32 versue a 42 mm then I consider it significant as you then couple it with the larger exit pupil and brighter image for a very high comfort level.
 
Last edited:
Frank, sincerest thanks for that. You´ve spent a lot of time both testing the bins and explaining these issues to less-technical folk like me, and I really do appreciate your time, skill and patience. Have a great weekend!:t:
 
Sancho, you got one? To join the others on the shelf? I thought you were a faithful one binocular man. Plus image stabilized toys. ;)
 
Sancho, you got one? To join the others on the shelf? I thought you were a faithful one binocular man. Plus image stabilized toys. ;)
No, not yet. I'm just intrigued by them. If Santa brings them, and I like them, I'll get rid of my EL's. And I'm trying to clear that shelf....;).
 
Huang - congratulations on producing what are clearly superb binoculars at a very competitive price; had I not recently purchased a pair of Zeiss 8x42s, I would be taking a very close look at your products for my 'primary' binoculars. Congratulations too on the excellence of your English and thanks for taking the time to post your comments here.

Since I am thinking getting binoculars for my wife which would also serve as a 'back-up' pair for myself, please allow me to comment on the preferred options for smaller binoculars. Although they may be popular in the USA I doubt whether 7x32 would be popular amongst British/European birdwatchers. Personally, I'd love to see a good quality 9x36 but only if it was closer to 32 models, rather than 42mm ones, in weight. I feel this unusual specification would make it 'stand out from the crowd'. In addition for many of us birdwatchers who dither between x8 or x10 maginification and 32mm or 40+mm objectives, it would be an ideal compromise. However, it might be debateable whether it would fit comfortably within your current line up so a 8x32 model might be a safer option for you. In conclusion, I add that it'd be good to see a good quality ED 50mm telescope to rival the Nikon 50ED in quality and better it on a similar margin on price. With more birdwatchers travelling and airlines getting ever more fussy about hand baggage this may be a growth area for a go ahead optics company,

John
 
John,

Though not a 50 mm Promaster does make a Elite ELX ED 65 mm scope. It was only reviewed once so far over on 24 hour campfire. I believe I am on the list of reviewers at some point.
 
John,

Though not a 50 mm Promaster does make a Elite ELX ED 65 mm scope. It was only reviewed once so far over on 24 hour campfire. I believe I am on the list of reviewers at some point.

Thanks for the tip, Frank - good review of the Hawke binoculars incidentally. As it happens I was already aware of this scope you mention, it's just that the Nikon scope seems to have the quality small (i.e. under 60mm) scope market sew up,

John
 
Thank you John.

I seem to remember Bushnell coming out with a new ED scope recently but I honestly don't remember what the objective diameter was. I do know it was very compact because of the folded light path design. Something to consider.

Sancho,

I received the Swaro EL 32 mm yesterday afternoon and took it outside today to compare it directly to the Frontier ED. My previous comments were pretty much confirmed. The Swaro 32 definitely has the edge on the Frontier ED in terms of the size of the sweet spot and, therefore, the overall comfort level of the image. Comparing the two really highighted the one area where the Frontier ED is a bit weak optically.
However, the Frontier ED is noticeably brighter, sharper and has better contrast. The colors in the Frontier ED might even be a bit more vivid. Even during daylight hours the difference was noticeable.

My advice would then be, unless you are someone that is sensitive to the size of a bin's sweet spot (ie, you prefer a large one over most other optical characteristics), then the Frontier ED bests the Swaro EL 32 mm in terms of image quality.

As for physical comfort...this is a no-brainer. The 32 mm Swaro EL is easily the most ergonomic bin on the planet...at least for my hands. The Frontier ED is very good in this area in that it combines a well balanced design with a very reasonable weight (26 ounces) for a full-sized, high image quality binocular. So my suggestion would be that if you are considering a high quality full-sized addition to the 32 mm EL already in your stable then the 42 mm Frontier ED should be at the head of your list...especially if you value high end image quality.
 
Thanks for that, Frank...I was out this morning with my EL 8x32 and was thinking just how much I love the size and feel of them in the hand, and how that will never be "bested". In any case, the rumour here is that Santa is from Iceland, and will be on the Dole by Christmas.....;)
 
I spent a great deal of time with the Frontier ED yesterday and today. After extended use in slightly different conditions than what I was previously testing them in I have found that they do indeed display field curvature through a good percentage of the outer portion of the image. Why this was not immediately apparent to me in my previous applications took a bit of thought. In my previous usage of this bin I had been pretty much limiting myself to observing specific objects. Doesn't sound too unusual right? Well when you pick out an object to view and then point the bin at the object you leave out an important part of binocular usage...panning.

Even comparing the 32 mm EL to the 42 mm Frontier ED earlier today and yesterday I seldom really did much more with them other than picking out various objects at different locations to focus each binocular on. I rolled the focus in and out to see how sharply each one popped into focus. I tried to induce flare and other lighting issues with each binocular. I even tried some tricky situations which would really highlight color fringing. But, in no circumstance did I really try to pan with the Frontier ED until today. What I noticed was fairly moderate levels of field curvature. This forced my eye to the center of the image on just about every occasion. I am guessing I noticed it more this time also because I was using the Meopta Meostar yesterday quite a bit too. One very good thing about that bin, at least from my perspective, is that the sweet spot is very large and the image is very flat (field flattener element if I remember correctly). Panning large areas is a breeze with that binocular. Switching from it to the Frontier ED really made me notice the field curvature level that the Frontier ED displays.

I do not remember seeing it much in the Promaster ED though the Promaster's field of view is narrower. I now wonder whether the increased field of view on the Frontier ED is what is showing more field curvature or if the optical designs in each model are actually quite different. Maybe Huan can comment on this if he happens to pop into the thread again.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the tip, Frank - good review of the Hawke binoculars incidentally. As it happens I was already aware of this scope you mention, it's just that the Nikon scope seems to have the quality small (i.e. under 60mm) scope market sew up,

John

John,

What about the Opticron MM2 ED?

Paul
 
2. This ring effect is different from veiling glare. I tried to make this clear in the post above. This "ring" effect is precisely that a ring in the FOV centered on the center of the FOV. Inside and outside the (relatively thin) ring the view is unaffected (as far as I can see). This is different from veiling glare where the section of the view affected a "circular chord" across the FOV i.e. a circle intersecting the FOV circle but not concentric with it though in the workst case it might consume the whole fo the FOV. That is it is not a ring around the center of the FOV but a portion of the FOV.

After some more experimentation during the weekend I'm now sure this "ring in the FOV" or "lumpiness in the field" is due to reflection between my eye and my birding eyeglasses (that don't have AR coating).

I got into two situations where I could reproduce the effect with two different bins. And in both cases the effect disapeared when I took off my eyeglasses.
 
After some more experimentation during the weekend I'm now sure this "ring in the FOV" or "lumpiness in the field" is due to reflection between my eye and my birding eyeglasses (that don't have AR coating).

I got into two situations where I could reproduce the effect with two different bins. And in both cases the effect disapeared when I took off my eyeglasses.


I feel better now (about having never seen such). Something tells me I will in not too many more years.

APS
 
I think even I can avoid it AP.

These glasses don't have AR coating due to a manufacturing mistake but they also have a low bifocal height and a very solid stainless stell frame so they make good birding glasses.

That missing AR is the biggest problem for stray light. Of course there is a certain irony in worrying about the quality of AR coatings in bins only to have an uncoated lens just in front of the eye ;)

Unless you develop astigmatism (which most people don't) you shouldn't need glasses to bird. To look at the birds in the field guide is another matter, though. I didn't used to use them with bins but I realized (with better bins) that correcting my astigmatism was a big help in improving the view.
 
Zeiss 10x42 vs Hawke Frontier ED 10x42

Dear All

Concerning the Hawke Frontier ED 10x42.
I have recently had the chance to test the above binocular in comparison to my Zeiss 10x42 FL which I bought in 2007 for 979 pounds.

I'm not new to useing premium binoculars having owned Leica, Swarovski etc over the years, and I must say the Hawke ED are a damn good pair of binoculars.
In comprison with the Zeiss they held their own very well.
This has annoyed me somewhat, as the price of the Hawke is only 299 pounds in the uk, That's a third less than the price of the Zeiss.

Am I the only one who has observed this and is a bit cheesed off ? Additionally how the hell can Hawke produce a binocular to challenge the Zeiss FL at such a low price ?
It also begs the question what exactly am I getting from the Zeiss for the extra 679 pounds.

Reply's please

Tim
 
Dear All

This has annoyed me somewhat, as the price of the Hawke is only 299 pounds in the uk, That's a third less than the price of the Zeiss.

Am I the only one who has observed this and is a bit cheesed off ? Additionally how the hell can Hawke produce a binocular to challenge the Zeiss FL at such a low price ?
It also begs the question what exactly am I getting from the Zeiss for the extra 679 pounds.

Reply's please

Tim


I think the question of what exactly do you get for the extra money you spend for the alpha glass vs the Hawke/Promaster is a valid one. It seems there should indeed be something. Whatever it is it is, it's not giving the buyer much optical difference as you noted. I guess that gets us down to durability. How well the less expensive binoculars hold up will likely be the difference. However the jury has some time to deliberate the question, since the new glass is just that, too new to see what the durability, service, and warranty levels will be. Also there needs to be a little wider dealer network developed to make these more readily available.

I do wonder what we get from the alpha glass. Prior to now we could always see that there was somewhat better optics and there was always the longevity of a superior brand name working in their behalf. Nowadays, who knows?
 
Yikes, this scares me in an Emperor has no clothes kind of way. Are my expensive Leica bins going to de-value tremendously when it becomes apparent there isn't that Wow factor anymore over bins costing 1/3 as much?
 
John,

I have no idea if expensive glass will de-value. Probably not. However all of the "WOW" for expensive binoculars went away for me when I first looked through a Pentax DCF WP in 1996. Since then, it has been, for me anyway, "wow, look how good these $500 binoculars are". I'm not saying I thought the initial phase coated Pentax were as good as the alpha. For me it was no longer is the alpha good enough for me to spend that kind of money for it. Prior to that I had lusted after a Leica Trinovid. Now I'm completely satisfied with the Promaster ELX ED, as I would likely be with the Hawke. Most of the newer optically terrific $500 glass will probably sell to folks with my attitude.
 
Has anyone passed a geiger counter over a pair of these?
How about any toxicological tests?
Are these built by political prisoners?
Is a living wage paid?

I wouldn't rush to equate these bins with something coming out of Japan or Europe, regardless of their optical performance.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top