Maven C1 10x42 review (1 Viewer)

Will be posting a full review (with photos) as I have time, but here are my initial impressions:

First the "bad" (if you want to call it that):

Diopter adjustment ring: Some slop in the movement. Never seen that before in any binocular. It still works fine, but there is a bit of squishy play there that should be fixed. Not sure if every unit has that or just mine. I plan to contact Maven about that and ask.

Then the "average":

Looks: Pretty plain - If they were going for plain and simple packaging, they nailed it. The orange highlighted diopter adjustment is about the only way you know these are not generic off-brand binos. Don't expect to be setting any trends with the C1. If that's important to you, pay the premium for the B series.

Eyecup extension: Several clear "stops" along the way from full in to full out, but I wish they locked in the full out position (really all the intermediate positions) a little better. As good as most binoculars but I was hoping for better than most in this area since I often leave my eyecups extended when I carry my binoculars in rough environments.

Eye relief: Pretty good, but I got spoiled by my Nikon HG-L's that had something like 19mm of eye relief. These are 16 or 17mm, which is what you'd expect. Nothing more.

Size: I'd say these are about what we should expect these days for 10x42's. Slightly smaller than the Vortex Vipers, but slightly larger than the Nikon Monarch 7's (still not sure how they got those 10x42's to be so small). Overall, about average or slightly better size-wise.

Weight: Again, about average. Feel good and solid in the hand. Not heavy but not particularly lightweight either. Again, somewhere between the Viper and the Monarch 7 is the impression I get.

Now the "good" (this is the really good part...)

Thankfully for Maven, we buy binoculars because we want them to produce an image, not because they are works of art or (for most of us) status symbols. And produce an image these do!

Wow! is not an inappropriate way to describe the C1's image. It pops for sure. For any binocular, it's very, very good. But for a $300 binocular it's nearly impossible to believe. Edge to edge sharpness on par with my old Nikon HG-L's (which is saying something). Color is very neutral to my eyes (to me Swaro's are too blue and my old Nikons were a touch warm - but in a good way). I am not one to ever notice CA, so I probably won't be the best person to evaluate how well these control it.

More later, but so far I'm darn impressed.

Well, I can't say I'm surprised at your description of the C 1 image. Yes it is very impressive for the price of the binocular.

The average descriptions as you describe them are something I can't fault too much either. However for a sub $400 glass they are actually better than I thought they might be, but no they are not premium binoculars in outward appearance. They are not outwardly cheap either. I'd call them a pretty solid binocular for the price, but it seems that is what you were saying.

The C1 I have has a diopter ring that is nearly too hard to turn, something I prefer as a diopter should need very infrequent adjustment. As to the eye cup on mine, there is a bit of side by side play past the last extension, but the micrometer says there is no further upward movement. I might also second your notion of a call to Maven about the diopter ring. EDIT: I just rechecked mine while the movement is indeed quite stiff, there is maybe a millimeter of total play before the ring actually affects movement of the mechanism.

For what you get, they are their own kind of a wow experience.

I think like many people, I'm always searching for the "holy grail" of mid-priced binoculars. Not that I can't afford or appreciate them, but I'm personally not comfortable owning a pair of optics that cost more than my first car. So I have searched and searched for something in that financial "comfort zone" (for me) of about $175-400 for years now.

That's the price range within which I think I can expect pretty decent optical performance, but if the binoculars were lost or stolen, I could replace them fairly quickly with a minimum of heartache.

Within that "zone" I've tried everything from Bushnell Trophy and Vortex Diamondbacks and Sightron Blue Sky on the low end, to Vortex Vipers, Nikon Monarch's, Zen-Rays and Leupold Mojaves and Bushnell Elites on the mid to upper end. The most expensive pair of binoculars (to me) that I kept for a while were a very beat up pair of Nikon HG-L's that had an exceptional image, but were larger and heavier than I wanted and lacked a feature I needed (tripod adaptable).

I owned a pair of Swaro SLC's, but sold them pretty quickly as I was afraid to take them anywhere, and my HG-L's gave me what to my eyes was just as good detail at a price I could afford to lose.

I've also spent time looking through Meopta Meostar/Cabelas Euros, Zeiss Terras and Conquest HD's, Celestron Granites, Howas and others, as fellow bird watchers and hunters would humor me when I asked to see what they were carrying.

The closest comparison I can make to these C1's would be the Zeiss Conquest HD. I am not sure my eyes can tell the difference really. The Zeiss have a little bit (slightly) better ergonomics and eyecups (probably the most comfortable and well built eyecups I've ever used) but not by enough to really matter to me, and certainly not 3 times better. I would expect the Conquest to be more durable over time, but time will tell with these C1's as I put them through daily use.

I am very much looking forward to using them.

Enjoyed reading your review/comments....

Looks to be a nice binocular in the $300 range...

Still haven't had time to take good photos, but I have been taking them hunting the past weekend and this week I had a chance to do some hawk watching.

I suppose the slop in the diopter ring isn't really that big a deal. I mean, once it's set, it's set. So I have no reason to even notice the diopter ring after that. It's certainly firm enough that I don't think there is much chance it will be accidentally moved.

Image is still, to my eyes, as clear and sharp and bright as I can imagine. It really leaves me wanting for nothing at all, aside from the "average" field of view. I could pay 3x as much to gain 0.5 degree FOV, but I am not sure why I would.

Eyecups have fallen down a few times like I expected they would. I just pop them back into place, but tighter eyecups and especially ones with deeper detentes or stops would be appreciated. It should be more difficult to move these eyecups through their range from full-in to full-out IMO.

The looks have grown on me. Simple but classic, if not somewhat plain. The orange accents are taking some getting used to. I see a flash of orange every time I bring the binoculars to my eyes, and I have to admit that has proven to be a tiny bit distracting. Certainly it's not something I'm used to with mostly brown or black or dark gray or green binoculars that I've owned in the past. But complaining about that would be nit-picking.

Light gathering is very good. I was observing some whitetail does at 250 yards VERY late into the evening on Sunday, and with the naked eye I could not see them at all. Once again, the optical quality of these binoculars is exceptional.

Have heard good things about Maven. Thanks for the helpful information!

Still loving the view. Been taking them hunting and birding for the past week or so and I just cannot find any flaws in the optics whatsoever. Easily the most "normal" view I've ever had in a binoc. Nothing funny going on anywhere in the image. Colors are true in bright and dim light. Light gathering is very good.

Trouble with the eyecups is what I expected. They move too easily from one position to the next so I'm usually fiddling with them. Nothing more than other pairs of binocs I've had, but not as good as bins with good friction or more definite stops in the positions. This is an area where the Maven C1's could use improvement.

So far, that's just about my only complaint. If the eyecups were harder to move, I'd say these were just about the perfect sub-$800K binocular.

Ergonomically speaking, the Monarch 7's are the best I've used under $800. But the view from the Monarch 7's cannot keep up with these Maven C1's. They are not nearly as bright or as good edge to edge.

I think you'd have to get into a Zeiss Conquest or Meopta/Cabelas Meostar to get as good an image as these. I'd put the C1's ahead of the Vortex Razor for image, but not build quality.

So for another $300-500 you would gain a tiny bit of FOV and better eyecups and not much else IMO.

Update -

The easy-to-move eyecups have finally gotten on my nerves. Plus the Right one unscrews rather easily. An email to Maven's customer service resulted in an almost immediate reply with an offer to look at the problem, fix it if they can and refund my money if they cannot. Today is our CBC so tomorrow they go in the mail back to Maven. I hope they have a solution. The unscrewing is likely just a loc-tite-and-done solution. The ease of movement of the eyecups may not be so simple. I think in their zeal to provide eyecups that were easy to move, they might have overdone it. But these double as birding/hunting binocs, and I can't have those eyecups moving around on me in the field. It will cost me sightings and possibly animals if I'm constantly having to readjust them.

On the bright side, the view is still spectacular to me. A biologist friend and I were comparing them to his Eagle Optics Rangers and they blew his Rangers away. He is now considering a pair of C1's pending the outcome of the eyecup situation.

justabirdwatcher said:

Update -

The easy-to-move eyecups have finally gotten on my nerves. Plus the Right one unscrews rather easily. An email to Maven's customer service resulted in an almost immediate reply with an offer to look at the problem, fix it if they can and refund my money if they cannot. Today is our CBC so tomorrow they go in the mail back to Maven. I hope they have a solution. The unscrewing is likely just a loc-tite-and-done solution. The ease of movement of the eyecups may not be so simple. I think in their zeal to provide eyecups that were easy to move, they might have overdone it. But these double as birding/hunting binocs, and I can't have those eyecups moving around on me in the field. It will cost me sightings and possibly animals if I'm constantly having to readjust them.

On the bright side, the view is still spectacular to me. A biologist friend and I were comparing them to his Eagle Optics Rangers and they blew his Rangers away. He is now considering a pair of C1's pending the outcome of the eyecup situation.

Click to expand...

I never had that problem with my Tract Toric HD 8x42 but I know what you mean about loose eye cups. I don't like overly loose eye cups either. That is one thing I really like about the new Swarovski CL 8x30. It has no click stops on the eye cups but they are nice and tight in any position so you really have an infinite amount of adjustment on the eye cups. For me they work perfect fully extended.

Same is true with the Zeiss Conquest HD's, which may be what I end up with anyway. Even the Nikon Monarch 7's have really good eyecups. Eyecups should have good friction to keep them from moving in or out. Why you'd want eyecups to move that easily is beyond me.

If you need the best eye cups you can get, look at the GPO Passion line, none have better eye cups. The Passion HD is every bit the equal of the Conquest HD, or for that matter the SLC.

I suppose you tried screwing the eye cups all the way in, hard. That set the threaded part of the eye cup hard enough on the C1 that it was not an issue. It was only an issue with mine because I took the eye cup off to look at the way the mechanism screwed on and off.

A little wrap of teflon tape will work as well.

I did try screwing the eyecup (Right one) in all the way, and then it began unscrewing in the opposite direction. Took me a while to figure out what was going on, but the metal part of the eyepiece is threaded in two directions. So if you tighten it too much in one direction, the other set of threads come loose. LOL

That actually doesn't bother me that much. I can fix that easy with a drop of loc-tite. The ease with which the eyecups extend and "contract" for lack of a better term, is what annoys me most.

justabirdwatcher said:

I did try screwing the eyecup (Right one) in all the way, and then it began unscrewing in the opposite direction. Took me a while to figure out what was going on, but the metal part of the eyepiece is threaded in two directions. So if you tighten it too much in one direction, the other set of threads come loose. LOL

That actually doesn't bother me that much. I can fix that easy with a drop of loc-tite. The ease with which the eyecups extend and "contract" for lack of a better term, is what annoys me most.

Click to expand...

That's interesting about the eye cup. I had not noticed that. I figured you had tried that, but I decided to ask. Sometimes the overlooked obvious really trips me up.

The eye cups stay in the detent position pretty well on my C 1.

I'm sending them back so they can see why they are so easy to move. Maybe it's just me and I'm used to eyecups that are harder to move on my old Nikon HG-L's and my Sightrons. Regardless, that's what I'm used to and what I require, because my binocs get bumped around quite a bit and I don't want to have to reset the eyecup position all the time.

Other folks who are much more careful with their binoculars might actually like how easy these are to move in and out.

Couldn't bear to part with my primary bin's during hunting season, so I took the advice of the Maven rep and put blue loc-tite on the threads of the Right eyepiece. That fixed the unscrewing issue. So the only issue now is the ease with which they move from one position to the next. I kept count during yesterday's hunt how often I needed to reset the position. Three times in an afternoon of hunting I pulled them up and one of the eyecups was in the wrong position from rubbing against my clothing or otherwise being bumped.

It's simple enough to move them back where they belong, but I feel I shouldn't have to.

Having said that, the view is still just remarkably clear and detailed. I observed a 10-point Whitetail buck chasing a group of four does for about 5 minutes at a distance of over 300 yards (according to my rangefinder). It was very simple for me to make out all the points on his antlers at that distance. Afterwards, an Eastern Phoebe entertained me by catching insects from it's perch on a fence. The feather detail was remarkable and it's colors were true. The view through these C1's has me very willing to work through the eyecup issue in order to keep them for my future birding and hunting exploits. I just haven't seen anything else anywhere close in sharpness and light gathering ability for even 2x the price.

justabirdwatcher said:

Same is true with the Zeiss Conquest HD's, which may be what I end up with anyway. Even the Nikon Monarch 7's have really good eyecups. Eyecups should have good friction to keep them from moving in or out. Why you'd want eyecups to move that easily is beyond me.

Click to expand...

I have a few year old pair of Monarch 7 8x42, the eye cups tend to fall down for folks who try to use them in any position other than fully down. As a glasses wearer who leaves them down, this doesn't bother me.

They are nice bins with a lovely field of view but are optically outclassed by a lot of competitors any more.

Agreed on the optically outclassed (but only slightly) regarding the M7's. Still a good value for the money and one of the most compact, best handling pairs of 10x42 I've ever seen. Sorry to hear that about their eyecups however. Seems there is no connection between who can make eyecups that stay put, and how much the product costs. For instance, the eyecups on my "cheap" Sightron 8x32 Blue Sky's are ideal. Perfect position at full extension and hold their position no matter how rough I treat them. If all my bins had those eyecups and that focus wheel, I would not complain at all.

It's so unfortunate that they eyecups keep moving on these Mavens. I pulled them out for a quick view of some sparrows yesterday, and by the time I reset the position of the left eyecup, all the sparrows had flown out of the bush they were in and were off to the distant treeline. For such great glass (and I mean great glass) it is an annoyance for sure. I'd bet an eyeglass wearer would never notice this issue though.

Seems to me that if a lower cost Binocular can have good optics, why can't they have better eye-cups and focus mechanisms. They have accomplished 75 % of the hard part, then throw together the remaining 25%. Perhaps they are not spending enough time on QA/QC on these specifics, some are dis-functional right out of the box, and secondly they start to break down after two weeks of use, (design problem or poor quality materials).
I see some of these manufacturers going by the roadside as road kill. Folks will not want to buy a sample 200-300 bucks and then send it back often, to get the right one.

It took me three times to get a good legend M from the net, I Like the optics very much, but come on, the eyecups and the focus wheel?

Andy W.

dries1 said:

Seems to me that if a lower cost Binocular can have good optics, why can't they have better eye-cups and focus mechanisms. They have accomplished 75 % of the hard part, then throw together the remaining 25%. Perhaps they are not spending enough time on QA/QC on these specifics, some are dis-functional right out of the box, and secondly they start to break down after two weeks of use, (design problem or poor quality materials).
I see some of these manufacturers going by the roadside as road kill. Folks will not want to buy a sample 200-300 bucks and then send it back often, to get the right one.

It took me three times to get a good legend M from the net, I Like the optics very much, but come on, the eyecups and the focus wheel?

Andy W.

Click to expand...

Andy, I wondered the same thing until I contacted Maven. Ironically, I think they did TOO good of a job on the eycups, having metal barrels that roll on ball bearings. I think that's why it's too easy to move them. I could probably fix the problem by removing the rubber cover and taking a small round rat tail file and just making the detents deeper. I did that on a pair of Alpens a few years ago and it worked perfectly. But I would rather Maven, being a new company, learn from this so I intend to send them back. If it's just my pair, they can replace them with a pair that has better friction on the eyecups. If not, they can reevaluate their design (or not).

I'm not ready to put Maven in the same category as the "have to buy 3 to get a good one" group just yet. I don't think they roll that way. And as I've said, the optics are 2nd to none IMO. If there were not, I would have sent these back weeks ago. I just can't give up that view so easily!

Ball bearings, that is a first for me. I would like these companies to succeed, the sample I was talking about was a large company, not a small one, and I am sure the Maven is a better quality optic. I just wonder if the time that is spent on the optics is that much more than is spent on R&D of eye cups, and focus wheels (materials, design, compatibility since no one complains of the optics just some of the hardware, I am speaking of many midrange cost binos, not specifically Maven.

I have got to get a second view of those.

Andy W.