the link of b1+ of the meopta official. all of the 8 powers are missing HD words.
I heard of meostar b1+ 12x50 and 15x56 is pretty good, but I can't say myself because I have not seen it.
-
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.
Brief review of Meopta Meostar B1+ 8x42. (in comparison with Zeiss Victory SFL 8x40 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jackjack
- Start date
the link of b1+ of the meopta official. all of the 8 powers are missing HD words.
I heard of meostar b1+ 12x50 and 15x56 is pretty good, but I can't say myself because I have not seen it.
why would you compare meostar b1+ with zeiss slc when the meostar sells for the same price as conquest HD? and although I keep searching to decide to buy one of this binoculars, still I incline towards conquest HD based on general oppinions.
so is it actually better that the conquest ?
so is it actually better that the conquest ?
john highridge
Member
Thank you for taking the time and making the effort to share your thoughts.
That is pretty thorough. It's always interesting to see how other folks evaluate binoculars. Because my birding is mainly at long distance, I mainly test for sharpness and detail at distance. From what I've seen, most binoculars (and probably the human eye too) perform well, indeed very well, at shorter range - maybe because in most birding you are probably looking at targets at 20 to 200 yards, and birding binoculars may be optimised for best performance at these distances. The further away the target is, the more difficult I've found it becomes to discern detail: colour is leached away by distance and atmospheric conditions, targets are often small and need good sharpness/resolution (and often brightness) to be seen clearly. I think modern coatings do cut through (unscientific term I know!) difficult conditions better. I also prize a binocular that lets me view small distant targets well and easily (little/no strain): I might have to keep my eye on a bird only a little larger than a pigeon, perching on one of the arms projecting from that red and white metal tower (the last photo in your post #3), too far to see with the unaided eye, for nearly an hour.
At shorter ranges I think checking plumage details on birds you're familiar with is a pretty good test, in part because it also tests how quickly the binocular's handling and focusing setup lets you "get on" to the target. Admittedly, most binoculars (that I've tried anyway) do perform well at this.
If I have to choose between meostar 8x42 to conquest 8x42 I'll go for meostar. comquset 8x42's small fov and dreading eye placement is much challenging for me than meostar's little bit lower center sharpness.
inferior center sharpness DON'T mean the whole bino is inferior. meostar 8x42 excels at CA correction, FOV, build quality, eyepoint, accessories, overall contrast than 8x42 conquest.
I really like conquest hd's center sharpness but It have many flaws to.
10x42 and 10x32 has too much CA for the price and sizes, too finicky focus depth. and I will not want to see through 8x42 with my naked eye again.
only conquest I like overall is conquest 8x32. may not the best optics, but manages the weaknesses of conquests far better than it's brothers.
Meostar has it own 1000s line challenging with conquest 'meopro airs' so I think it is reasonable to compare with upper - conquest line. the SFL
every people have their own bino compare standerd.
I think long range sharpness has more percentage of lens diameter influencing the real sharpness. especially when the light conditions are not so good because of more light gathering + more 3D rendering, more eye comfort due to bigger exit pupils ect.
in contrast, I think short range comparing can be more challenging to bigger lens than long range comparison.
because If the real mags are same, bigger lens with wider distance between center of the lenses tends to show smaller magnification them shoter lens distance.
you can find out by comparing same magnification roof and porro prisms. porro's magnification will seems more smaller then roof at the short distanse (about under 15 ~20m?)
when I compare binos with lens diameter or prism differ, at the short distanse, I only use one tubes each.
I had Conquest HD 10x42 and I don't remember it well. I consider the Meopte 10x42 the best so far both for observing nature and the night sky. I am very comfortable watching myself.
For me, the Conquest had an unacceptable CA and a focus wheel so weak that a stronger wind would move it.
Photos From Meopta.
For me, the Conquest had an unacceptable CA and a focus wheel so weak that a stronger wind would move it.
Photos From Meopta.
Post in thread 'Brief review of Meopta Meostar B1+ 8x42. (in comparison with Zeiss Victory SFL 8x40' Brief review of Meopta Meostar B1+ 8x42. (in comparison with Zeiss Victory SFL 8x40
yes that is the main downside of the conquest 10x42. 10x32 manage to get abit better but still have some disappointment.
as the thread I worte above, I only said that conquest has better ceter sharpness than meostar. not the conquest is better binocular than meostar
if I have comparison result between conquest hd 8x42 not sfl 8x40.
conquest only excels at center sharpness, distortion, close focus, handling while meostar excels other parts.
Main reason I posted this review ahead of other bino reviews is because of your request.
hope this threads are helpful to you
meostar may be the better 'binocular' than conquest due to it's better CA control, eye confortness and build quality. and I like meostar's colors better personally.
what I was disappointed is that I heard and see may reviews of placing meostar as the same level of swaro slc, zeiss tfl which is a step better than conquest.
to me Meostar is not the step - up overall bino than conquest.
I can't assume that bino over 1000$ that made after 2010 has sever quality control that even influences Central sharpness.
have seen over 10 of the 250$ model Chinese bino at the same times.
there are some collimation issues, dioptor setting issues, dust inside, mechanical disorders and even little bit of uneven edge sharpness between individual tubes.
but the central sharpness are all very similar in every tubes.
maybe there are small differ I can't found but at least not much to infuance the level of the sharpness of the bino
if Meoptar has quality control of their most recent flagship model bad enough to influence the central sharpness THAT much,
I think it will be much much more critical issue to them then just only central sharpness falling little behind their price point.
I think many of us have found binoculars that are praised by others to be not so impressive ourselves. In my case it's the Nikon EII 8x30, which has an awkward combo of not focusing enough beyond infinity for me to use without glasses, and not enough eye relief for me to use it with (and even when I focused it on closer targets I wasn't as impressed as I expected to be).
@jackjack the link here includes a couple further links to my thoughts on the Meostars I tried at the 2019 birdfair here in the UK, not as detailed as yours, but hopefully still interesting. In short I felt they were very strong in the sub-alpha category (Conquest HD/Monarch HG/Canon 10x42 unstabilized) and indeed seemed extremely close to Ultravids, although a little behind the now discontinued SLC. (Re-reading my remarks reminds me of the somewhat finicky eye placement I noted in the 10x42 Meostar HD, which reminded me of how my 8x32 FL can sometimes be.)
The ones I looked through were demos and may have been picked for optical quality: that's always something to consider when trying binoculars at optics events. Sample variation does exist and in many respects testing customer bought models, as you did, (ideally 3-4 rather than one) gives you a better picture of what you are likely to get when you open the box than looking at demo models.
@NoVik - thanks for the photos, the deer in the field is great. You guys are so much better at binoscoping than I am! I'm sure when you look through the binoculars the image is still better than any binoscope, but if you looked through the binoscopes I have attempted, you would think that eg. the Nikon 10x42 SE was no better than an Action 10x50...
@jackjack the link here includes a couple further links to my thoughts on the Meostars I tried at the 2019 birdfair here in the UK, not as detailed as yours, but hopefully still interesting. In short I felt they were very strong in the sub-alpha category (Conquest HD/Monarch HG/Canon 10x42 unstabilized) and indeed seemed extremely close to Ultravids, although a little behind the now discontinued SLC. (Re-reading my remarks reminds me of the somewhat finicky eye placement I noted in the 10x42 Meostar HD, which reminded me of how my 8x32 FL can sometimes be.)
The ones I looked through were demos and may have been picked for optical quality: that's always something to consider when trying binoculars at optics events. Sample variation does exist and in many respects testing customer bought models, as you did, (ideally 3-4 rather than one) gives you a better picture of what you are likely to get when you open the box than looking at demo models.
@NoVik - thanks for the photos, the deer in the field is great. You guys are so much better at binoscoping than I am! I'm sure when you look through the binoculars the image is still better than any binoscope, but if you looked through the binoscopes I have attempted, you would think that eg. the Nikon 10x42 SE was no better than an Action 10x50...
I enjoyed reading your report!
Everyone has their own opinion and way of doing things. We don't have to all agree and it's always difficult to determine how a binoculars is going to perform for a particular individual. In fact if someone bought only one from the group of "better" binoculars(including these two) they would be satisfied with said binoculars for their entire life.
Quite honestly as much as I like Meopta binoculars, I'd probably stick with the SFL 8X40 when given the choice between these two. Difference in weight/size would be the main factors.
Everyone has their own opinion and way of doing things. We don't have to all agree and it's always difficult to determine how a binoculars is going to perform for a particular individual. In fact if someone bought only one from the group of "better" binoculars(including these two) they would be satisfied with said binoculars for their entire life.
Quite honestly as much as I like Meopta binoculars, I'd probably stick with the SFL 8X40 when given the choice between these two. Difference in weight/size would be the main factors.
My experience with Meopta is that there is a significant difference between the HD and non HD models in the Meostar line-up. The 10x42 HD and the 12x50 HD especially have superb center resolution, high contrast and very low to zero CA in the center of the image. In this regard I think they are hard to beat. Equal, perhaps, but not beat.
I have the 12x50HD. Bought one, traded up to a Swarovski Pure NL 12x42 - but ended up trading back since I prefer the Meopta 12x50HD for my use. I think it is the best 12X for my purposes as it is very resilient to bad lighting conditions. Better than the Pure NL. The Swarovski EL 12x50 is very, very nice but I find that the Meopta performs slightly better in the very center. Nobody has to agree, it is just my opinion. Had the cost been the same I would maybe have chosen the EL, but I am not sure. Still have that great feeling when I use the Meopta 12x50 HD, every single time!
With regards to the Meopta 10x42HD I think it is a great binocular. However in the 10x class there are so many excellent options which makes it hard to single out ONE binocular and considering how many there are out there the Meopta 10x42 HD is no particular stand out, except for class leading CA control in the center of the image.
For the non HD models I find the 8x32 Meostar a little gem. It is not as well resolving at far distances to my eyes as many of the other 8x models I have tried. It lacks that little last bit of crispness at far distances. Especially in dull weather. Compared to the 10x and 12x HD models this is obvious.
But, I have very fond memories of it and it is one of the binoculars I have dearly missed for several reasons.
It just feels so right in hand and the eye box is very comfortable. Also, it is a very cool looking binocular. By strange luck I did find a new old stock B1.1 8x32 on sale just last week - so it is on the way over to me as I write.
I could not resist.
I have had a few superb binoculars over the years that I have no "connection" with other than that they are great binoculars. There are others that I for one reason or another enjoy using more, even if they are in fact lesser performers.
The Meopta 8x32 together with the Leica 7x42 UVHD+ are my favorite binos. The SFL 8x40 outperforms then in pretty much every optical aspect but it does not resonate the same to me as the other two.
The SFL is the best bang for the buck 8x binocular in my book and I don't ever need "better" but it is more clinical in the view it presents. Does not set a foot wrong and comes easy to recommend for sure.
The best eye box I have ever looked through is the Meopta Meostar 7x42 which is truly a "wow" moment for me. It is a heavy but comfortable brick of a binocular. It too lacks that "crispness" at the longest distances but has a very nice view at mid to near distances. Lovely bino!
The thing, the only thing, that put me off is the amber tint. It made cloudy days look fantastic but late summer days and evening light became very orange, too much for me. Compared to the clean colored look of the SFL 8x40 it was too much. At the time I compared it to the 8x32 Victory FL and that was when it really stood out to me that the 8x32 FL is quite green in color cast, the SFL very neutral/clean and the Meopta Meostar 7x42 the polar opposite of the 8x32 FL. Subjectively speaking of course.
All of them great binoculars in their own regard.
Recently I have not used many binoculars and I find it is easy to "forgive" some, if not most, shortcomings of a binocular once you get past a certain performance level. I simply get used to it and comparing becomes less interesting as long as I don't find anything I really don't like. I sometimes look through my old Swarovski Pure NL and really enjoy the view, but I don't miss the binocular.
In the case of the Meopta 7x42 it was the amber/orange cast, and weight, nothing else. But it is enough to put me off looking for one.
In case of the SFL 8x40 I honestly don't like the panning at mid distances, but that's it.
Everything else is as good as it "needs to be" or better. The panning behaviour is a bit of an issue, especially compared to some other binos that pan better - though they are not optically better.
In case of the Leica 7x42UVHD+ the smaller AFOV is very apparent coming from the SFL as well as a little worse ergonomics/balance. But, fifteen minutes into using the Leica you get used to it and the view is very rewarding and "relaxed" and as long as I did not switch back and forth I would prefer the Leica view.
Even if it meant a little compromise in actual performance.
With the Meopta 8x32 B1.1/B1+ I find the combined performance in all aspects makes for a great pair of binoculars.
Since there does not seem to be a B2 series coming out any time soon I will happily reunite with the older little pocket rocket. I know the strength and weakness of it. It will replace my Zeiss VP 8x25 - which is arguably a technically/optically better binocular, but I find I miss using the Meopta for more than one reason. It is not a substitute for an Alpha class 8x bino for me, but a very good extra bino, and as such just needs to be really good and comfortable to use.
The ultimate dream bino does not exist for me in the 7/8X range.
A Noctivid 7x32/35? A Meostar B2 HD 8x32? I don't know. A 600g 7x40 Meostar HD perhaps, with 1.8m close focus. Yes please!
In the mean time I will have to make do with what I have... (sighs internally).
Joking, of course, SO many fine binos out there, enjoy and use!
I have the 12x50HD. Bought one, traded up to a Swarovski Pure NL 12x42 - but ended up trading back since I prefer the Meopta 12x50HD for my use. I think it is the best 12X for my purposes as it is very resilient to bad lighting conditions. Better than the Pure NL. The Swarovski EL 12x50 is very, very nice but I find that the Meopta performs slightly better in the very center. Nobody has to agree, it is just my opinion. Had the cost been the same I would maybe have chosen the EL, but I am not sure. Still have that great feeling when I use the Meopta 12x50 HD, every single time!
With regards to the Meopta 10x42HD I think it is a great binocular. However in the 10x class there are so many excellent options which makes it hard to single out ONE binocular and considering how many there are out there the Meopta 10x42 HD is no particular stand out, except for class leading CA control in the center of the image.
For the non HD models I find the 8x32 Meostar a little gem. It is not as well resolving at far distances to my eyes as many of the other 8x models I have tried. It lacks that little last bit of crispness at far distances. Especially in dull weather. Compared to the 10x and 12x HD models this is obvious.
But, I have very fond memories of it and it is one of the binoculars I have dearly missed for several reasons.
It just feels so right in hand and the eye box is very comfortable. Also, it is a very cool looking binocular. By strange luck I did find a new old stock B1.1 8x32 on sale just last week - so it is on the way over to me as I write.
I could not resist.
I have had a few superb binoculars over the years that I have no "connection" with other than that they are great binoculars. There are others that I for one reason or another enjoy using more, even if they are in fact lesser performers.
The Meopta 8x32 together with the Leica 7x42 UVHD+ are my favorite binos. The SFL 8x40 outperforms then in pretty much every optical aspect but it does not resonate the same to me as the other two.
The SFL is the best bang for the buck 8x binocular in my book and I don't ever need "better" but it is more clinical in the view it presents. Does not set a foot wrong and comes easy to recommend for sure.
The best eye box I have ever looked through is the Meopta Meostar 7x42 which is truly a "wow" moment for me. It is a heavy but comfortable brick of a binocular. It too lacks that "crispness" at the longest distances but has a very nice view at mid to near distances. Lovely bino!
The thing, the only thing, that put me off is the amber tint. It made cloudy days look fantastic but late summer days and evening light became very orange, too much for me. Compared to the clean colored look of the SFL 8x40 it was too much. At the time I compared it to the 8x32 Victory FL and that was when it really stood out to me that the 8x32 FL is quite green in color cast, the SFL very neutral/clean and the Meopta Meostar 7x42 the polar opposite of the 8x32 FL. Subjectively speaking of course.
All of them great binoculars in their own regard.
Recently I have not used many binoculars and I find it is easy to "forgive" some, if not most, shortcomings of a binocular once you get past a certain performance level. I simply get used to it and comparing becomes less interesting as long as I don't find anything I really don't like. I sometimes look through my old Swarovski Pure NL and really enjoy the view, but I don't miss the binocular.
In the case of the Meopta 7x42 it was the amber/orange cast, and weight, nothing else. But it is enough to put me off looking for one.
In case of the SFL 8x40 I honestly don't like the panning at mid distances, but that's it.
Everything else is as good as it "needs to be" or better. The panning behaviour is a bit of an issue, especially compared to some other binos that pan better - though they are not optically better.
In case of the Leica 7x42UVHD+ the smaller AFOV is very apparent coming from the SFL as well as a little worse ergonomics/balance. But, fifteen minutes into using the Leica you get used to it and the view is very rewarding and "relaxed" and as long as I did not switch back and forth I would prefer the Leica view.
Even if it meant a little compromise in actual performance.
With the Meopta 8x32 B1.1/B1+ I find the combined performance in all aspects makes for a great pair of binoculars.
Since there does not seem to be a B2 series coming out any time soon I will happily reunite with the older little pocket rocket. I know the strength and weakness of it. It will replace my Zeiss VP 8x25 - which is arguably a technically/optically better binocular, but I find I miss using the Meopta for more than one reason. It is not a substitute for an Alpha class 8x bino for me, but a very good extra bino, and as such just needs to be really good and comfortable to use.
The ultimate dream bino does not exist for me in the 7/8X range.
A Noctivid 7x32/35? A Meostar B2 HD 8x32? I don't know. A 600g 7x40 Meostar HD perhaps, with 1.8m close focus. Yes please!
In the mean time I will have to make do with what I have... (sighs internally).
Joking, of course, SO many fine binos out there, enjoy and use!
Last edited:
iseegeorgesstar
Well-known member
Thank you for your review and pictures -- love the tireless work you're sharing!
iseegeorgesstar
Well-known member
Perhaps it's a sample variation? Have others units shown similar findings?
Meostar non HD models seem to lack that last bit of crispness at far range. They are still very nice binoculars. I have tried most of them and owned three/four of them, two HD models and one non HD.
The 8x42 was sent to me by mistake (I ordered the 8x32 at the time) so I had only one day with it and it was a very nice binocular. We compared it to a Swarovski Pure NL 8x32 and the Swaro had better performance at far distances but in general use and at mid distances the Meostar was really nice to look through. A bit meaty in the grip.
The 8x32 is one of my all time favourites - even if it is not optically in the top five or six that I have looked through. It does not do as well at far range as the best 8x I have looked through, that is for sure. It would still make for a great "second bino" and for most people would serve very well as an only bino. Today, given the price, I would look for a second hand one if I was looking for one.
For the 10x42HD and the 12x50HD I think the performance is as good as any other Alpha range bino, perhaps not in ergonomics, field of view, weight etc but the performance is top notch.
The 8x42 was sent to me by mistake (I ordered the 8x32 at the time) so I had only one day with it and it was a very nice binocular. We compared it to a Swarovski Pure NL 8x32 and the Swaro had better performance at far distances but in general use and at mid distances the Meostar was really nice to look through. A bit meaty in the grip.
The 8x32 is one of my all time favourites - even if it is not optically in the top five or six that I have looked through. It does not do as well at far range as the best 8x I have looked through, that is for sure. It would still make for a great "second bino" and for most people would serve very well as an only bino. Today, given the price, I would look for a second hand one if I was looking for one.
For the 10x42HD and the 12x50HD I think the performance is as good as any other Alpha range bino, perhaps not in ergonomics, field of view, weight etc but the performance is top notch.
