WHich Chinese Look -a-Likes (1 Viewer)

Hi I'm hoping for some advice from actually users of any of these clones. I'm looking 8 X OR 8.5 , 42mm TO 45mm and am surprised at the number of near identical models available ..For example the more popular ones include Zen Ray ED 3, Eagle Ranger ED, Vortex talon HD etc etc. Personally I am drawn to the Vanguard Endeavour ED 8x42 which have an excellent review

http://www.bestbinocularsreviews.com/Vanguard8.5x45EndeavorED-42.htm

http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2011midpricebins/review_vanguard_ed.html

The only difference I can see in most other clones is the lockable dioptre setting.

Does anyone have any views on this choice and are the 8.5 x worth getting over the 8x

I am curious. What drew you to the Vanguard as opposed to the other models?

Price? Professional reviews? Something else entirely?

For what it is worth many of the models you referenced do use the same basic platform but have subtle differences in terms of construction, design or performance. Short of the expensive Vortex Razors I have used/owned all of them at one time or another....the Endeavor ED being the other exception. The only reason I haven't tried it is because of the poor track record I have had with other Vanguard products. Every single Vanguard bin or scope I have bought suffered from some notabler quality control issues.

Maybe that has changed. The last one I bought was a Spirit Plus model last summer.

Hi Frank,

Essentially from the two reviews I have linked. Im from the electronics manufacturing industry and am well aware of the "branding" that goes on with companies... selecting a product and adding slight tweaks and differences so as to make it "their own" . Following these reviews, the Eagle Ranger ED was voted best buy 2011 , and on contacting their distributor over here I was informed its identical to the Vortex Talon model.
Other things that drew me were the attention to details such as the locking dioptre ( Im not sure how important this feature is , if the control is stiff enough to prevent movement) I also like the idea of "open" design for handling.

It does seem a minefield so I am hoping for a little enlightenment , especially on the QC issues.

Howard

On paper, my only objection to the Vanguards, which otherwise sound like a "best buy" from the reviews, is the moderate FOV (6.5*), which is typically found at lower price points. The one example that binoculars reviews used at the same price point was the 828 Audubon, which is the exception rather than the rule.

The Eagle Ranger ED and Vortex Talon HD have 8* FOV. That's a big difference. The Vanguard's edges will probably be better, but you pay for that with a narrowish 52* apparent field of view.

But some people are fine with that. For birding, my motto, borrowed from the French TV tight rope walker, is "Wider is Bedder". YMMV.

Anyway, if you do buy one, please post your opinions about it. These may turn out to be a "sleeper" that has remained undiscovered because of the "Brand X" nameplate, and because some people have been "burned" by some of their other products.

Perhaps Vanguard has improved its quality and QC. You could be on the "vanguard" of a new trend.

Brock

brocknroller said:

Anyway, if you do buy one, please post your opinions about it. These may turn out to be a "sleeper" that has remained undiscovered because of the "Brand X" nameplate, and because some people have been "burned" by some of their other products.

Brock

Click to expand...

Yep, your proclaimed "budget/low price guinea" is not taking a shot at this one.

Brocken roller.... I think only the Eagle Ranger and its clones Zen Ray etc have a 426 FOV , The Endeavor 8x 42 are 376ft, obviously less on the 8.5 x model.

Frank.....I have been looking at the Hawke Frontier ED Mk2 and am very impressed 8x43 may be a better compromise ? I also quite like the aesthetics ...any comments to add to your excellent review of the earlier model ( which appears to be the Zen clone etc)?

Caslad66 said:

Brocken roller.... I think only the Eagle Ranger and its clones Zen Ray etc have a 426 FOV

Click to expand...

The Bushnell 8x42 and 8x36 Legend Ultra HD models both have 426 ft FOV and they only cost ~$200. They are Chinese EDs but they are not similar in body design to the others.

--AP

Caslad,

I have not tried the Hawke Frontier Mark II but did follow the threads that popped up on it a few months ago. It appears to be a bit of a hybrid in comparison to the Zen Ray models that I prefer. The body style was a cross between the ZR ED2 and ED3 from what I remember and the focusing speed was faster. I do believe they added dielectric coating to the prisms as well. I would expect it to perform at a level similar to the ED2 based on what I read. Wish I could offer more.

It doesn't get any easier Frank I have now come across another model the Delta SL3 an own brand made for In Focus , its made in Japan , for what its worth.


http://www.at-infocus.co.uk/delta.html

It looks similar to the Opticron Verano Oasis and HD

Having spoken to the guy locally he said he preferred it to the Verano and certainly to the Hawke Frontier ED which he said were heavy and looked plasticky in comparison. He also seemed to be of the opinion good glass and compatibility in optical components was more important than ED or HD hype . They are local so I guess a trip to try oput is needed ...the proof it does seem ...is in the actual eating of the pudding !

On the original Vaguard post....I asked Eagle Optics their opion of the Endeavour and was told it was a new brand to them but she was unaware of any QC issues She said they were " nice binoculars for their price point but no better than the Eagle Ranger ED"

I checked out the Delta SL3. Without being able to enlarge the image and lacking further specific details it is difficult to determine which open bridge bin style we are looking at. It is Japanase made according to the description so it may well be of a different lot than the others.

One thing that did turn me off was the "benchmark 7 degree field of view". If 7 degrees is a benchmark for an 8x bins then there are quite a few models that are well above the benchmark.

Still, until you get one in your hands you won't know how good it is. The person you spoke to is correct though. ED glass does not make a binocular. If a binocular is designed to take full advantage of the ED glass then it can be truly sensational. If it isn't then it can certainly be worse than many non-ED glass bins out there.

The Delta SL3 is quite different from the Verano HD. It seemed quite pleasant to use, but the sun was setting in my face when I tried them together so couldn't really comment on how they compare optically. I've tried the Verano HD on other occasions and it's view and build is very good for the price point.

David

I came cross this on here from back in July 2011 ....

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=204633&page=4

Interestingly enough the Vanguard Endeavour finished 22 on the list , however, almost all the ones higher were Alpha models ...maybe we are missing something with these binoculars ???

Not sure why you think something is "missing"? I think the consensus is that the Endeavor ED's are (1) excellent optically, (2) not a "clone" of the Zen ED open bridge China-bins (different size, weight, and FOV spec) and (3) have a narrower FOV than Zen ED, Vortex Talon, etc. models.

there are multiple web reviews out there as well as folks on this forum, including at least one who compared them directly to Zen ED3's and kept the ED3's because of the wider FOV. He stated that they were otherwise comparable in optical quality.

I think you are torturing yourself a bit by overthinking this, they will all be very similar optically and the best thing you can do is got some in YOUR hands and test with YOUR eyes to see if you like it

Caslad66 said:

I came cross this on here from back in July 2011 ....

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=204633&page=4

Interestingly enough the Vanguard Endeavour finished 22 on the list , however, almost all the ones higher were Alpha models ...maybe we are missing something with these binoculars ???

Click to expand...

I don't know what the testers did drink that day but it must be some hard stuff.
They prefered the Zeiss conquest 10x30 to the Nikon edg 10x42 by 9 ranks.
Plus i wonder how they can prefer the old el to the swarovision.
I wish i could contact them to know who their alcool dealer is.

Well, I finally made the trip to my sort of "local" In Focus store to try some binoculars.
The store is on the 3rd floor of an old building , with a nice view over the rooftops and into the countryside beyond. I was interested in 3 models at my price point
The Hawke Frontier ED Mk 2
The Opticron Verano BPG HD
Delta SL3 ( In Focus,,Japanese own brand)

In terms of binoculars, although I am accquainted with the terminology and optics behind them I am a simple layman, a Joe Average compared to you guys. However, here is my take on the three models.

Noticeably the largest and heaviest was the Hawke followed by the slightly smaller Opticron and the smallest, looking almost "compact" like in comparison was the Delta even the 10x42 was smallest of the bunch.
Aesthetically the Hawke looked the most rugged, with its smooth outer coating and the dimpled gripping areas either sde of the barrels.The other two had a softer, slightly grained covering all over. The Delta looked the best engineered( well it is Japanese!) and although all felt comfortble to me when handled, the SL3 had that "je ne sais quoi" about it.
All three were easy to set up and adjust, the Delta being the only one with a dioptre adjustment concentric with the focus control, this moved with nice clicks between the increments.
I was able to view comfortably on all three with or without my spectacles on.
Optically I found it hard to discern the obvious nuances that must exist between the three but was of the impression that the Hawke had a brighter and crisper image.Is this due to the 1 mm increase in object lens size alone ?
As I said earlier all three handled nicely and focussing appeared nice and smooth. Apparently it is classed as "slow" on all models. If this is the case then it is what suits me, I like to be able to fine tune things.
The Hawke has easily the widest FOV on paper 426ft compared to some 36oft or so with the other two, In practice I wasn't overly aware of this difference
After an hour of playing with other maginfications, and models without ED glass etc, I can say that I would have be pleased with any of them ! However I was drawn strangely enough to the Hawke Frontier .
I still am intrigued by the Vanguard Endeavour specs and feel that a 8.5 x 45 would be the best of all Worlds as it were for me, and I cant beleive the optical quality and build would be any differeent to these three and am deciding between the Hawke and whether or not to bite the bullit and buy a Vanguard model to prove once and for all if it lives up to the Reviews it has been given.
To conclude..I did ask to have a peek through some Swarovskis..Why one wants to compare a Ford with a Roll Royce beats me ..the differences are all too glaringly obvious, more to compare a Ford with a Cheverolet like I just did. Pleasantly enough, fine though they are , they didn't "blow my socks off" and the differences weren't glaringly obvious. Suffice it to say, I am sure that any purchaser of binoculars, who visits a reputable dealer, will I am sure be pleased with what ever model he or she buys at what ever price point , so good are the optics and build these days.

Optically I found it hard to discern the obvious nuances that must exist between the three but was of the impression that the Hawke had a brighter and crisper image.Is this due to the 1 mm increase in object lens size alone ?

Click to expand...

almost certainly nothing to do with the objective size. It could be sample variations or it could be that the Frontier ED mkII, which is obviously the same bin as the Zen ED3, is just a wee bit better because it uses better dielectric coatings or has a slightly different optical design.

I am willing to bet that the Vanguard Endeavor will be very similar to the other two you tried. Pretty darn close optically to the others but with the narrower FOV.

That clear, bright, wide "easy" view with the massive FOV is what drives many of us on this side of the pond to the Zen-Rays and their clones. If you assume optical quality among all these "china bin" ED open bridge clones is essentially the same, might as well get the model with the biggest FOV right? Other than that you are mostly choosing based on non-optical factors like size, weight, ergonomics, aesthetics, warranty policy, etc.

eitanaltman said:

almost certainly nothing to do with the objective size. It could be sample variations or it could be that the Frontier ED mkII, which is obviously the same bin as the Zen ED3, is just a wee bit better because it uses better dielectric coatings or has a slightly different optical design.

I am willing to bet that the Vanguard Endeavor will be very similar to the other two you tried. Pretty darn close optically to the others but with the narrower FOV.

That clear, bright, wide "easy" view with the massive FOV is what drives many of us on this side of the pond to the Zen-Rays and their clones. If you assume optical quality among all these "china bin" ED open bridge clones is essentially the same, might as well get the model with the biggest FOV right? Other than that you are mostly choosing based on non-optical factors like size, weight, ergonomics, aesthetics, warranty policy, etc.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't the 8.5x and 45mm be of much benefit ?

maybe not over the 43mm and 8 x Hawke

Caslad66 said:

Wouldn't the 8.5x and 45mm be of much benefit ?

maybe not over the 43mm and 8 x Hawke

Click to expand...

Hi Howard

I went through this process a month or so back, initially fairly convinced from a number of recent published reviews of the Vanguard Endeavours (albeit in two different sizes) that they were the best buy at this price point. However there were some quality concerns raised in this forum about Vanguard generally which made me stop and think, this was going to be a long term purchase for me so I wanted to get it right. So I did a lot of reading and a bit of asking, to the point where I was going round in circles, much like I suspect you might be right now after reading this thread! So, I've now got the Vanguard Endeavour 8.5x45, after initially plumping for a pair of Opticron HR 8x42 (porro prism design). The Opticrons got a couple of very good reviews here on BF around the time I was posting and I was beginning to think if I don't buy something soon I'll go mad and these look OK. The £200 price tag via £300 for the Vanguards was also attractive I have to confess. First impressions out of the box were good but I didn't really take to them - my dumpy hands took up a natural position that left the focus knob a slight reach away, and for some reason I couldn't get them properly "set" when viewing with glasses, they always needed a bit of adjustment to the eye to eye distance which I found frustrating. I suppose I could have tightened up the hinge but in the back of my mind I thought they might be going back and I didn't want to fiddle. So I then got the Vanguards and spent some time on side by side comparison. For me the Vanguards were very significantly better - a much brighter and clearer view with a higher level of detail resolution, and what felt like a better build quality versus the Opticrons. No need for fiddling with adjustments, just "bang" - instant clear picture every time I brought them up to view. OK they're 8.5x45 versus 8x42 and £100 more expensive so maybe a slightly unfair comparison, but I decided to keep them and no regrets so far. Build quality seems very good. The diopter ring works well, stays happily locked in to its setting, the flip down, stay on lense covers are great, the focus is smooth with just the right level of resistence for my fingers at least, they're very comfortable to hold and the neck strap is good quality. The one slight criticism I have is that there is a noticeable level of colour fringing in high contrast situations (e.g bare branches against a grey backlit sky) but I can honestly say it doesn't impinge on my enjoyment, the bright, high res image trumps this for me. Also I'm not an experienced bino user so I'm not sure how they would compare with other 45 mm bins in this regard, I'm guessing at this price point it might not be an uncommon feature even with ED glass etc. I suppose I should try to compare them with similar bins to see whether there is a significant difference in this regard, but frankly I'd rather spend the time looking at birds right now, life's too short. Similarly I can't really comment on the FOV issue as the Opticrons were pretty much identical in this regard. I'm also not convinced this is something I'd loose much sleep over to be honest, and I certainly wouldn't spend significantly more just for a wider view.

Given the number of good reviews out there the Vanguards must surely be worth a trial although why not get at least one other pair mail order for a side by side comparison. I have to confess I was a bit reluctant to do this initially but it really does give a much better impression than shop trials and the no questions asked return policy worked well for me. OK it cost me a tenner in return postage but that was worth it to get to the point that I was happy with my decision. Nothing quite like buyers remorse to keep you agitated when the whole idea is to become absorbed in the surroundings (isn't it?) |;|

Good luck!
Bruce.

Can anyone comment on the colour fringing in high contrast situations ? is this common with similar spec binoculars ? ( Im thinking of the hawke Frontier ED in particular)

In my experience the CA in 8x42s vary quite a bit, but it is very dependent on the conditions and not easy to compare one day to the next. In the price category I would count the Hawke Frontier ED as one of the best, the Opticron Verano HD as quite good, maybe just above the Bushnell Legend Ultra HD and the Nikon Monarch as a bit below average but there are much worse out there. Seems that some forum members are much more sensitive to noticing it than others.

David