Review BX-4 McKinley HD (1 Viewer)

Thanks Steve. It seems odd that Leupold does not list that as one of the features on the web page.

Speaking of color bias, is the color the same between the 10x and the 8x? The reason I ask is I recently compared the same model 8X42 and 10X42 units from two different companies and in both cases, the 10x units had a noticeably more amber color bias than the 8x units. I was expecting them to be exactly the same but that was not the case.

If the Mckinley has the same ever so slight color bias of the Nikon EDG, then that would be excellent. However, if it is along the lines of the noticeable amber bias of the Theron Wapiti LT 8X32 that I had, that would be a problem for me.

I will keep an eye out for the new McKinley the next time I am at Bass Pro or Cabela's so I can check it out.

Bruce

I'll check the color bias against my Theron 8x32 and get back.

The color balance on both the 8x and 10 x McKinley is the same. I would call it very slightly red. Now for the kicker, the Theron Wapiti LT 8x32 that I have I would say has the same ever so slight red balance, perhaps a bit more , but very little more red than the McKinley.

What this says about our different sets of eyes, or how your Theron may differ from mine I am afraid I can offer no insight into.

When I tried the Theron Wapiti 8x42 it had a very obvious yellow/amber color cast.

To me this is very different from the "slightly warm/red" effect you get from, say, most Nikon binoculars, the Sightron SII, Vortex Viper, etc. They appear to be neutral but have a little "enhancement" of reds that improves contrast, but the warm bias is really only obvious in comparison to a more neutral/cool binocular.

Other binoculars that I've tried that were obviously yellow/amber are the Alpen Rainier 8x32 and an older Swarovski SLC 7x42. With these (and the Theron) no comparison was necessary to see the yellow/amber color bias, it was obvious when staring at clouds, the sky, white signs, etc. just in comparison to naked eye viewing.

eitanaltman said:

When I tried the Theron Wapiti 8x42 it had a very obvious yellow/amber color cast.

To me this is very different from the "slightly warm/red" effect you get from, say, most Nikon binoculars, the Sightron SII, Vortex Viper, etc. They appear to be neutral but have a little "enhancement" of reds that improves contrast, but the warm bias is really only obvious in comparison to a more neutral/cool binocular.

Other binoculars that I've tried that were obviously yellow/amber are the Alpen Rainier 8x32 and an older Swarovski SLC 7x42. With these (and the Theron) no comparison was necessary to see the yellow/amber color bias, it was obvious when staring at clouds, the sky, white signs, etc. just in comparison to naked eye viewing.

Click to expand...

Well, my Theron is not at all like that. Remember I had Franks's Sightron SII 8x32 at the same time. The color cast on this Theron and Frank's Sightron was for all intents and purposes the same. This one is not at all like the cast of the older Swarovski and the 8x42 Meopta Meostar I have seen. I would say my Theron has about an identical color cast as the Vortex Viper too. Don't know how else to say it.

Perhaps the 8x42 is different than the 8x32....

I thought the Theron LT 8x 32 was better than the 8x42. I'll have to chase some notes, but I do seem to remember the 8 x 42 having a bit of a yellow cast.

They were...going by memory. I do remember the 8x42 having more yellow in the image than the 8x32 but, I definitely thought the Sightron was more red to the Theron 8x32s yellow.

Steve .... Thanks for comparing the color bias between the 8x and 10x McKinley models. It's good to know they are the same.

I doubt our eyes are different. I suspect it was a sample difference between the two Theron Wapiti LT 8X32 units. The immediate thought that came to mind on my first view with the LT was beer bottle amber (but not anywhere near that extreme). While corresponding on their return, I ordered and received a Sightron II Blue Sky 8X32 and like you, was able to compare side by side. In my case there was a noticeable difference in the color cast. The Sightron was much more neutral and matched my understanding obtained from all the Sightron II 8X32 reviews I had read. Sounds like you got the LT I wanted!

Considering the LT sells for $155, I suspect the manufacturing tolerances amount to "close enough" when it comes to color tone. I doubt that they can afford to discard a batch if the color is not exact and still sell for $155. I did ask the distributor to let me know if he agreed with my assessment when he got it back, but he said he probably would not have time to take a look before he donated them to a charitable cause. I thought that was a strange response. Unfortunately I never heard back, too bad.

It sounds like the color bias of the McKinley is similar to the Sightron II 8X32 that I had. If that is the case, the McKinley color bias would work for me.

FrankD said:

They were...going by memory. I do remember the 8x42 having more yellow in the image than the 8x32 but, I definitely thought the Sightron was more red to the Theron 8x32s yellow.

Click to expand...

Kind of interesting how things change course in threads. Check me for accuracy Frank, but as I remember we both had a Theron LT 8x32 at the same time. We then did a trade, I don't remember what exactly we shuffled, but I got from you the Theron I now have and sent you the Theron I got. In the deal I had use of your Sightron for a couple of weeks. I think you sent me the better Theron unit as we agreed on some sort of deficiency in the one I got and it wound up going back to Theron...I think . Anyway I liked the Theron I have now and had a very difficult time in deciding between it and ordering a Sightron. Decided on the Theron because I knew I had a good one in hand and did not really ever warm up to the peculiar armor design of the Sightron.

So your recall of the Theron may be from the one I sent you, I seem to recall it having a bit of a yellow cast, more like the 8x42 Theron LT.

So I'm currently in the market to upgrade my BX-3 Mojaves, as I plan to give them away as a gift, and The McKinley is one of the few I've currently pinpointed as a good option based on my price point and the reviews I've read; the other two would be the ZR Prime HD and Vortex Viper HD.
Of these options, would it be fair to state that the Leupold BX-4 is likely the superior choice? From some of the posts in this thread, it seems as if they are ever so slightly superior in most aspects as compared to the other options I listed; however, the ZR Prime and Vortex Viper both also tend to have outstanding reviews, so I'd like to make the most informed decision possible - if I can, I'll likely be heading to some nearby stores to try out at least the VV and BX-4, but my time to make such trips at my current field station is currently a bit limited.

Thanks for your help!

I will caveat this by noting that I haven't tried the Prime/McKinley, but I trust the reviews of those who have posted in this thread. I have plenty of experience with Vipers.

I would imagine that all three are *excellent* optically. Largely this is going to be a question of taste and priorities. I think it's safe to assume that all three are close enough in terms of brightness/contrast/sharpness on axis that you are mostly deciding on the "other stuff".

To me, the big differentiators are that the Prime/McKinley are larger, heavier, have wider FOV's, and have field flattener lenses that result in not only a flat field that is sharp to the edge, but also large oculars and eyecups that may not "fit" everyone's face. Some people are fine, but others have complained about the huge ocular/eyecups and how they make it difficult for eye placement. It seems from what folks have said in this thread that the McKinley is "easier" than the Prime in this respect because the eyecups are a bit more tapered.

The Vipers in contrast are significantly smaller and lighter (24oz vs. 29oz for the 42mm versions), but have a narrower FOV and won't have a flat field with sharp edges. In my experience Vipers are always razor sharp on axis, with a clean bright view, neutral well-saturated colors, and the HD versions have almost no CA. You will see some mild curvature and pincushion and fall-off at the edges. Vortex knows how to make comfy eyecups, and the Vipers have a smaller diameter, tapered soft rubber eyecup.

So I think broadly the question you have to ask yourself is where your priorities are... are you willing to put up with a larger, heavier binocular to gain a wider FOV with a flat field, or would you prefer a more compact and possibly more ergonomic package that gives up some FOV and edge performance? I think a lot of questions will be answered if you can handle the Viper and McKinley in person, as the ergonomic aspects will be pretty quick to assess.

The other option to consider in that general price point (leaving aside used/demo models) is the Nikon Monarch 7, which is also extremely light and compact for a 42mm and has a wider FOV than the Vipers. But because it doesn't have the more complex eyepieces, it will have more distortion and fall-off as you get to the edges.

Hmm, I'm not sure how big of an issue weight would create as although I currently use fairly light binos, I often use a harness as opposed to a simple strap. Overall ergonomics is the main reason I wish I could find the McKinley somewhere; I wear large, flat-rimmed glasses when I bird so I don't thin the large occulars will be too much of an issue, though.

In regards to FoV, I would like to upgrade - my current BX-3 are around a 375 FoV or so, so dropping to a 350 FoV would seem like something of a downgrade, although I imagine the sweet spot of the Vipers to be nicer. I'm not entirely sure what field-flatteners do in terms of image quality; I've not had the opportunity to loo through any binos utilizing such equipment.

One thing that I think could help would be a comparison of the BX3 to Viper HD to BX4, but I'm not sure if that's possible, particularly as the BX-4 does not seem to be reviewed too often.

jremmons said:

Hmm, I'm not sure how big of an issue weight would create as although I currently use fairly light binos, I often use a harness as opposed to a simple strap. Overall ergonomics is the main reason I wish I could find the McKinley somewhere; I wear large, flat-rimmed glasses when I bird so I don't thin the large occulars will be too much of an issue, though.

In regards to FoV, I would like to upgrade - my current BX-3 are around a 375 FoV or so, so dropping to a 350 FoV would seem like something of a downgrade, although I imagine the sweet spot of the Vipers to be nicer. I'm not entirely sure what field-flatteners do in terms of image quality; I've not had the opportunity to loo through any binos utilizing such equipment.

One thing that I think could help would be a comparison of the BX3 to Viper HD to BX4, but I'm not sure if that's possible, particularly as the BX-4 does not seem to be reviewed too often.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the Birdforum. I agree with you that it is good to try before
you buy. I am not sure where you reside, but many of the large sporting
goods stores, such as Cabelas, Bass Pro, Scheels, and others may have
the Leupold and Vortex models you have mentioned.
I would not think weight would be an issue here, as the BX-4 is in the range of
most in this size.
Good luck in your optics search, and tell us what you have found.

Jerry

jremmons said:

Hmm, I'm not sure how big of an issue weight would create as although I currently use fairly light binos, I often use a harness as opposed to a simple strap. Overall ergonomics is the main reason I wish I could find the McKinley somewhere; I wear large, flat-rimmed glasses when I bird so I don't thin the large occulars will be too much of an issue, though.

In regards to FoV, I would like to upgrade - my current BX-3 are around a 375 FoV or so, so dropping to a 350 FoV would seem like something of a downgrade, although I imagine the sweet spot of the Vipers to be nicer. I'm not entirely sure what field-flatteners do in terms of image quality; I've not had the opportunity to loo through any binos utilizing such equipment.

One thing that I think could help would be a comparison of the BX3 to Viper HD to BX4, but I'm not sure if that's possible, particularly as the BX-4 does not seem to be reviewed too often.

Click to expand...

I would say I need just about as much ER as anyone here, and I could see about the full Fov in the Prime HD. You won't have any problems with using either the Prime HD, or the McKinley with glasses.

As for the weight of those two twins, they are about as heavy as current 'alphas' (Zeiss HT, Swaro SLC-HD), but are quite compact dimensionally. Due to the inclusion of field flattening elements, there's a lot of glass in there - it kinda feels like holding a rubber covered glass rock! They're quite steady in the hand because of this though, and if you already use a harness, weight shouldn't be an issue.

The field flatteners mean that the view is clear nearly to the edge of the Field of View, whereas, other bins without them show some blurriness or softening towards the edges. The 8x seems to be the pick in these models.

Try them, and go for the one that suits. Keep us posted .....



Chosun :gh:

Cabelas new Fall Limited Edition Catalog lists the BX-4 McKinleys. There is a Cabelas in Louisville, Ky which you may be able to visit from your location. You could call them and see if they have any in stock and try one one out there.

Alternatively, Eagle Optics has an excellent 30 day return policy on the binoculars it sells. You could compare both of the binoculars you are interested in and send one back. You can check it out on their website: www.eagleoptics.com.

There are a couple of reviews of the 8 x 42 McKinley there and 31 on the 8 x 42 ViperHD.

Bob

Thanks for everyone's help and advice!
I went to a nearby Wild Birds Unlimited on today, one of my rare days off, and got to look through some 8x42 Viper HD and was very impressed by the overall clarity of the image - although my BX-3 aren't bad by any means, I could very distinctly see the advantages of these binos.
I'm going to attempt to make a trip to either Louisville one weekend or during my conference next week in MN, try and find a nearby Leupold dealer to look through some BX-4.
Another option I've been considering is the ZR ED3 7x43; I tried one of my colleagues 7x42 Leica Trinovid BN and just really liked the way the 7x worked, especially considering the shakiness my hands present. However, I'm not sure if these binos are on par with the optical quality of the BX4/Viper HD.

Sorry for all the questions, but I'm really trying to make the most informed decision since I) I don't make a lot (poor wildlife professionals!) and II) I don't have the option to test many binos, given my relatively isolated location.

Thanks again!

Justin

The ZR 7x43 ED3 is certainly on par with the other two you mentioned depending on what your priorities are. It is a little lighter than the Mckinley and a little more ergonomic. Centerfield performance is identical. The only area where the McKinley betters the ZR 7x43 is in edge performance. Trust me, I have both.

Yeah, I haven't tried the Prime/McKinley but the ED3 is definitely on par with the Viper HD optically.

FrankD said:

The ZR 7x43 ED3 is certainly on par with the other two you mentioned depending on what your priorities are. It is a little lighter than the Mckinley and a little more ergonomic. Centerfield performance is identical. The only area where the McKinley betters the ZR 7x43 is in edge performance. Trust me, I have both.

Click to expand...

IME Also, colours appear just slightly more saturated in the Prime HD (McKinely twin) than in the ED3.

The colour rendition 'appears' (to me, since that's not what the transmission curve says) to peak in the green part of the spectrum, whilst the Prime HD has a slightly 'warmer' rendition to me. Please note this is about the time that I confirmed I had two different coloured eyes (to look out of - not at!). Such fancy, superior genetic evolution though, in no way makes up for my Mr. Magoo like resolution ! |8.| :-C

Both bins will show a pretty neutral (life-like) colour rendition, and similar colour 'pop', with maybe better saturated and vibrant blues evident in the Prime HD. It really will be a personal preference, and other things such as the handling, and magnification, may carry more weight in deciding on your final choice, for you.



Chosun :gh: