Review BX-4 McKinley HD (1 Viewer)

I really hope to get a chance to test the BX4 in hand... given their very good edge-edge performance and such wide FoV, they may be perfect since a majority of my work is done on forest birds... if I don't get a chance to try the McKinley I may go with the 7x43 ED3 since from all the reviews I've read here and elsewhere, they seem to be of similar optical quality to the Viper HD but with a wider Field of View.

Thanks!

jremmons said:

I really hope to get a chance to test the BX4 in hand... given their very good edge-edge performance and such wide FoV, they may be perfect since a majority of my work is done on forest birds...

Click to expand...

I agree! The McKinley (and the Conquest HD) are the two I want to see/handle/play with as soon as I can get my hands on them.

jremmons said:

I really hope to get a chance to test the BX4 in hand... given their very good edge-edge performance and such wide FoV, they may be perfect since a majority of my work is done on forest birds... if I don't get a chance to try the McKinley I may go with the 7x43 ED3 since from all the reviews I've read here and elsewhere, they seem to be of similar optical quality to the Viper HD but with a wider Field of View.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

Hi .... I have owned the 6x32,8x32 HD's & handled the 8x42HD & used the 7x43 ED3 for a couple of days. With my eyes the 8x42 McKinley HD's were so close optically to all the above, unless compared side by side it would be a toss up to decide which one optically performed better. Having said this, the McKinley I now own(8x42) I think is better built than the Vortex & the Zen-Ray. Both the Vortex & Zen-ray models mentioned are also well built & nice to handle, but since I pefer a really huge ocular lens to view thru combined with their long eyerelief gave the Leupold's the edge over the others for me. As I have mentioned before one would never think they were sourced out of China with the Quality look & feel they have that Leupold is known for. ...... gwen

Just want to share my short reviews. I currently own Leupold Hawthorn 7x42, ZRS 8x32, Bushnell Elite 8x42 and 7x26, Alpen Wings 10x42. None is above $500 because that is the limit I set for my little collections. I mainly compare to Bushnell Elite 8x42 because they are the closest.

Build and Mechanics: the Mckinley 8x42 is slightly larger but much heavier than Bushnell elite. The build quality is really worse than Elite for 1) It is much tighter to twist up the left eye cup than the right; 2) The center hinge is way too tight (my wife can`t adjust it); 3) there is even rubber debris in the eye cup which obviously got in during production. So I will say the QC is poorer (typically made in China I suppose?). The rubber is thick but feel a little soft. However, the focus knob is very smooth and the tension is just right, it has more tension than Bushnell Elite but not too tight. Just perfect.

Optically the large FOV is very impressive, it beats the Elite 8x42 completely. It is slightly brighter than Elite too. The edge sharpness is also slightly better and the view is very flat. The view is absolutely very sharp, which is the best among all the bins I have now. I tried a SW EL a few days ago and can`t tell the difference since they are not side by side. Also it feels more comfortable to watch maybe due to the large ocular.

Conclusion: Opically I think Mckinley 8x42 is very nice. It will be a 9 if Bushnell Elite is a 7.5. However even the build quality is good but the QC is not consistent. See if you can live with that or at least find a place to try out or have easy return.

P.s. the case from Leopuld is really nice, I like that over all the case I have owned so far.

So here is my quick review of the Leopold BX-4 McKinley and why I selected this binocular over several others after testing.

Started out at big box store and was able to test Nikon Monarch 7, Bushnell Legend HD, Zeiss Terra, and Conquest.

Terra was out almost immediately due to some blackouts on the edges of the field of view, no eye cup adjustment could solve it and even the MOLCET method achieved marginal results.

Legend in the store had some issues - not certain if that is typical of the line, but the focus was loose and sloppy so it made it hard to compare to the others.

I really liked the Monarch 7 - was almost set to buy it, but the price was higher than I had seen on internet and none of the 30 day free return etc. I could tell the Conquest was better, mostly in the clarity or sharpness, but the Monarch looked like a winner to me.

Still decided to call an internet store that has 30 day money back guarantee. Ordered a Viper HD, EO Ranger ED, and Leupold McKinley. The Leupold was a price match from another online store so the price was $450.

So the testing commenced.

Clear day hanging at the lake - compared birds at the feeder from about 100 feet. Looked across a cove at some colorful water toys, boat houses, and a radio tower.

Viper HD was disappointing. Had high hopes based on reviews, but had kidney beaning pretty bad especially on right eye. Tried every eye cup position and even different positions on different eyes - no luck, back in the box they go.

Spent about two weeks with the others. Looked at full moon several nights in a row, check for CA with some wires and tree branches. Took some time to look at some water fowl on a sludge lagoon at a water treatment plant nearby. Went on a weekend bird walk with local Audubon club carrying both EO Ranger ED and McKinley.

After all that I can say the EO and McKInley were pretty close for me in terms of color, sharpness, and most of the typical optical parameters I could identify.

The McKinley had a couple of advantages that put it over the top.

1. Almost zero distortion in the view. The EO Ranger had pretty noticeable pincushioning on the edges. Probably could live with it for most cases, but once I noticed it seemed to get more pronounced every time I looked through the binoculars

2. For some reason the McKinley seemed brighter (maybe the large oculars) and also gave the appearance of having more magnification even though I know that is not the case

3. Both binoculars had thumb indents on the body. If I put my thumbs in the indents and held the binoculars the way they intended the focus wheel was right on the index and middle finger. The EO required me to strain my index figure back towards my thumb to reach the focus wheel. It just seemed to fit my hand better and the ergonomics worked better.

Sure there is the issue of weight, but I notice it more when just handing it around or picking up than I did using it. The only other QC issue I noticed it the left eye cup does not click solid in place at fully twisted up position. Both clicked solid at the other detents and the right one clicks at full up, but the left is a little soft even though is does not move when there.

I had wanted to go get the Monarch 7 and a ZR ED3 for comparison, but the local store did not have the Monarch 7 in 8x42 anymore and I figured after all that time and only 7 days left to return for money back I would just accept not testing the ZR ED3.

There was another price drop while I had them and called and was able to get cost adjustment down to $418 so I decided these would be the choice.

I'm pleased overall - felt I gave them a good test and spent quite a bit of time with others to compare and made the best choice.

Saw the other threads about them coming out with a new version. If the existing units go on sale or closeout pricing I would highly recommend the BX-4 McKinley to anyone looking for a good quality pair of 8x42 binoculars.

Legal Disclaimer: I am not a professional binocular tester and results could vary. No animals were harmed in testing this equipment.

Yankeeflipper,

Your review is very much the way I felt when I was using these binoculars. I pitted them against a plethora of optics, including my own Swarovski WB EL and Vortex Viper HD, Swarovski SV, Leica Trinovid (the new model), Vortex Razor HD (current generation), and Zeiss Conquest HD, and Zeiss HT.

Of the ones I tried, I only preferred the HT. The SV had of course a nice, distortion free image when held still but produced horrific amounts of "rolling-ball" distortion when panning, to the point of inducing nausea - I did notice an almost miniscule amount of "r-b" in the BX4, but it was enough for me to disregard, and I am incredibly sensitive to this particular effect.

The Zeiss Conquest was nice, but I couldn't really find anything I liked better than what I saw from the BX4 - I think it may have been a bit "brighter," but the 40'+ increase in the FoV and increased eye relief of the BX4 was much preferable to me, as was the distortion free image. The Razor HD and Trinovid also produced nice images, but I found the Trinovid unusable with glasses, and didn't think the Razor HD warranted the increase in cost from the BX4, which also had ergonomics preferable to my hands. The Viper HD is a solid binocular with great center-field clarity, but the FoV of the 8x42 model is far too limiting in comparison; the edges were also not nearly as crisp. Another appealing aspect of the BX4 is the Leupold warranty which I have used twice before (for my BX3 and Wind River binoculars) and have never found fault.

At their sell-out price of ~$450, I too think the McKinley HD is a bargain. Even at their original $600 price point, I would take them over some that cost ~$400-600 more, although I have heard issues with QC that likely should not be an issue in this price-range. If these binoculars fit your facial geometry (there seems to be issues for some people in this regard), I'd recommend testing out a pair.

Happy birding,
Justin