Brief review of Meopta Meostar B1+ 8x42. (in comparison with Zeiss Victory SFL 8x40 (2 Viewers)

[jackjack]

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.

that's what I want to know. thanks for telling. still don't know the official price is about the sam me between 10x42 hd and 8x42 non hd....
I also heard about 12x50 and 15x56 meostar hd are very good.
maybe I can get my hand on these and figure out for my self

 

[jackjack]

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!

have viewed through some high grade 7x42 model.

zeiss dialyt 7x42
zeiss tfl 7x42
leica ultravid hd 7x42
leica trinovid bn 7x42
leica trinovid ba 7x42

best optically is tfl (dialyt has much more ca) but I don't like it's mint coloring.
but I don't prefer dialyt's focus and eyecups.
UVHD 7x42 is much brighter and sharper, much compact then BN 7x42 but eyepoint can color satuation is better in BN. true leica film color...
BA seems little bit washed out than BN

contrast is best in dialyt but eye comfort is best in trinovid bn.
dialyt's high 3D rendering and vibrant + shiny color somtimes feel uncomfortable than trinovid's

overall I prefer dialyt optics most but I have trinovid bn. cheapest and still in warranty


didn't see edg 7x42 and meostar 7x42.

 

[Gray C]

Conclusion.

unless I go birding on a rocky mountain tumbling against my own feets, I will me much happier carring SFL because it is much lighter, compact and optically better.

Me and my friend both agreed Meoptar Meostar b1+ 8x42 has no significant advantage over Zeiss victory SFL 8x40.
It's quite a surprise for me because Meostar has more lens diameter and I think Meostar has equal optics quality because SFL is not the level of the big3 flagship.

but meostar was inferior in many parts.

it seems it's bulk and wight only has adventage of it's ruggedness.

I know I have to be careful but I have to say.

the meostar b1+ central sharpness was lot disappointing than I thought.

I thought It will be same Swaro SLC as some reviews in youtube says, but it seems not as close.
the centeral sharpness of Meostar b1+ is not only clealy inferior than SFL but also falls below cheaper ones such as zeiss conquest, nikon e2, swaro companion. even seems less than nikon monarch hg.

It has good 3D rendering and comfort of the view at 8x42 range but still, it quite don't shines as I heard about it.

Since victory sfl and swaro slc is known to be step below the Alphas (Swaro EL, NL / Zeiss HT , SF / Leica Noctivid)

Meostar series only have HD lenses on 10, over mags. but since price doesn differ much, I had doubts that the 'HD' meostars will preform much better...

Sorry for fanboys of Meoptar, but In my opinion, Meostar is not an Alpha.

I disagree with you in respect of the SLC. This binocular is very much in the "Alphas" class that you mentioned. Not flat field view, which many people prefer, but the image quality, central sharpness and brightness of image is very much up there with the others.

I've not looked through a SFL, so I cannot comment on them

 

[jackjack]

I disagree with you in respect of the SLC. This binocular is very much in the "Alphas" class that you mentioned. Not flat field view, which many people prefer, but the image quality, central sharpness and brightness of image is very much up there with the others.

I've not looked through a SFL, so I cannot comment on them

yes in terms of overall feel. it can be considered to Alpha to some. very nice build quality with nice deep yellow green coloring. nice 3d rendering for roof bino.
I'm not saying meostar b1+ 8x42 is not an alpha because of it's lack of flatness, tfl and ht has same or even worse distortion.

but if I look at the terms of Alpha sharpness, (I think the centeral sharpness at least level or higer then Zeiss conquest, which is one of the sharpest bino under 1000$.)
meostar B1+ 8x42 has hands down duller sharpness Zeiss sfl 8x40 and Nikon e2 8x30 (e2 and conquset 8x32 has very similar sharpness)
not only by me but also by the owner of the meostar I used at review.
I don't only check bino's centeral sharpness in one circumstances.

1 have to check close distance(under 50m),
2 longer distance (up to 500m)
3. each tube comparison
4 checked with bino fixed,
5 compare digiscoped result taken at almost same time (about 1min differ, usually take 6 ~ 8 each and compare the finest. as you can see from my digiscoped birds photoes I posted, digiscoping at a fixed object is easy as pie to me. 8photo will look almost the same unless seen cafefully with magnification extended)
6 double checked with other manias if could

1~5 is done every time.
and did up to 6 at meostar b1+ comparison with sfl.
and meostar b1+ clearly fall in every parts then sfl.
so, I came out a result that sfl 8x42 is significantly sharper then meostar b1+ 8x42

if the result came from these amount of comparison doesn't match your opinion, I have nothing more to say.

 

[Nethero]

yes in terms of overall feel. it can be considered to Alpha to some. very nice build quality with nice deep yellow green coloring. nice 3d rendering for roof bino.
I'm not saying meostar b1+ 8x42 is not an alpha because of it's lack of flatness, tfl and ht has same or even worse distortion.

but if I look at the terms of Alpha sharpness, (I think the centeral sharpness at least level or higer then Zeiss conquest, which is one of the sharpest bino under 1000$.)
meostar B1+ 8x42 has hands down duller sharpness Zeiss sfl 8x40 and Nikon e2 8x30 (e2 and conquset 8x32 has very similar sharpness)
not only by me but also by the owner of the meostar I used at review.
I don't only check bino's centeral sharpness in one circumstances.

1 have to check close distance(under 50m),
2 longer distance (up to 500m)
3. each tube comparison
4 checked with bino fixed,
5 compare digiscoped result taken at almost same time (about 1min differ, usually take 6 ~ 8 each and compare the finest. as you can see from my digiscoped birds photoes I posted, digiscoping at a fixed object is easy as pie to me. 8photo will look almost the same unless seen cafefully with magnification extended)
6 double checked with other manias if could

1~5 is done every time.
and did up to 6 at meostar b1+ comparison with sfl.
and meostar b1+ clearly fall in every parts then sfl.
so, I came out a result that sfl 8x42 is significantly sharper then meostar b1+ 8x42

if the result came from these amount of comparison doesn't match your opinion, I have nothing more to say.

A thought on the sharpness- you might have gotten a bad sample. I had a MeoStar B1+ 10x42 that was equal to Zeiss SF and HT 10x42’s that I had and compared them to. And this was also comparing them under magnification and on tripods. Absolutely alpha sharpness and clarity.

They only lagged in overall brightness in comparison, especially to the HT’s.

 

[jackjack]

A thought on the sharpness- you might have gotten a bad sample. I had a MeoStar B1+ 10x42 that was equal to Zeiss SF and HT 10x42’s that I had and compared them to. And this was also comparing them under magnification and on tripods. Absolutely alpha sharpness and clarity.

They only lagged in overall brightness in comparison, especially to the HT’s.

according to HenRun's thread above, there is a possibility of 8, 7 power meostar have lower competitiveness at the price point then 10, 12, 15 power meostars.
(meostar don't deploy HD lens on 8 or less power.)
I didn't see 10+ magnification meostar. If I manage to get my hands of meostar 10x42, I can compare it with Zeiss HT 10x42 I have.

 

[adhoc]

Nethero, other than those two aspects, i.e., sharpness and clarity, and brightness, could you please briefly list the definite--to you--pros and cons of the MeoStar vs the SF and vs the HT, thanks. Also, if B1+ then it had to be HD?

 

[Nethero]

Nethero, other than those two aspects, i.e., sharpness and clarity, and brightness, could you please briefly list the definite--to you--pros and cons of the MeoStar vs the SF and vs the HT, thanks. Also, if B1+ then it had to be HD?

I’ll try 😅.

Meopta MeoStar (yes HD)

Pros- built like a tank and solid in hand. Absolutely stunning image with a warm, vibrant color tone. Absolutely 0 CA (I am very sensitive to this).

Cons- slow focuser and heavy (that whole built like a tank thing). The warm image looks distinctly yellow when compared side by side to something as “cool” as the HT. Under overcast lighting they were too dim for my preferences.

Zeiss SF

Pros- best handling of any binocular, including NL’s. Perfect weight distribution and excellent flat, wide field of view. Low amounts of CA. The best focuser (better than my memory of EDG’s and better than NL’s).

Cons- large (not heavy mind you) and they have a slight yellow cast. Again really noticeable against the HT’s. CA is detectable (less than Leica Noctivids and Swaro NL’s, though).

Zeiss HT

Pros- bright. Really noticeably brighter than any binocular side by side, even in strong bright daylight. In daylight this might be “enhanced” by their very “cool” color cast (blueish-green). Focuser is better than NL’s.

Cons- larger and not as well distributed in weight as the SF’s. Noticeable amounts of CA (similar to my memory of Swaro SLC HD’s).

Summary of it all: the SF’s were my birding bino for three years. I loved them. But their slight yellow cast bugged me, especially in overcast lighting. When I tried the MeoStars I was shocked. They equaled the SF’s in clarity and sharpness and BEAT them in CA control. But they were too dim for my likes in overcast lighting and the focuser was too slow and the yellow cast was noticeable. The weight I could live with. Then I got my hands on some HT’s and at first I was unsure. They are relatively bulky and almost seemed overly bright in bright natural light. But I was sold with their performance in overcast lighting. I knew I could live with the CA and bulky size because of how well they perform in respects to image brightness.

 

[jackjack]

I’ll try 😅.

Meopta MeoStar (yes HD)

Pros- built like a tank and solid in hand. Absolutely stunning image with a warm, vibrant color tone. Absolutely 0 CA (I am very sensitive to this).

Cons- slow focuser and heavy (that whole built like a tank thing). The warm image looks distinctly yellow when compared side by side to something as “cool” as the HT. Under overcast lighting they were too dim for my preferences.

Zeiss SF

Pros- best handling of any binocular, including NL’s. Perfect weight distribution and excellent flat, wide field of view. Low amounts of CA. The best focuser (better than my memory of EDG’s and better than NL’s).

Cons- large (not heavy mind you) and they have a slight yellow cast. Again really noticeable against the HT’s. CA is detectable (less than Leica Noctivids and Swaro NL’s, though).

Zeiss HT

Pros- bright. Really noticeably brighter than any binocular side by side, even in strong bright daylight. In daylight this might be “enhanced” by their very “cool” color cast (blueish-green). Focuser is better than NL’s.

Cons- larger and not as well distributed in weight as the SF’s. Noticeable amounts of CA (similar to my memory of Swaro SLC HD’s).

Summary of it all: the SF’s were my birding bino for three years. I loved them. But their slight yellow cast bugged me, especially in overcast lighting. When I tried the MeoStars I was shocked. They equaled the SF’s in clarity and sharpness and BEAT them in CA control. But they were too dim for my likes in overcast lighting and the focuser was too slow and the yellow cast was noticeable. The weight I could live with. Then I got my hands on some HT’s and at first I was unsure. They are relatively bulky and almost seemed overly bright in bright natural light. But I was sold with their performance in overcast lighting. I knew I could live with the CA and bulky size because of how well they perform in respects to image brightness.

are those all 10x42?

my 10x42 ht also show some washed out color in bright light.
it feel even overbright in daytime
but it is the brightest 10x42 I've seen. so I'll going to keep on with it

hope to get my hands on 10x42 meostar.
I also heard in korean forum meostar 15x56 is almost good as slc 15x56 but their 8x42 not as good as 8x42 slc.

meostar 8x42 show significantly more CA then same power SF and NL

haven't seen slc 8x42 so can't say about it.

 

[Nethero]

are those all 10x42?

my 10x42 ht also show some washed out color in bright light.
it feel even overbright in daytime
but it is the brightest 10x42 I've seen. so I'll going to keep on with it

hope to get my hands on 10x42 meostar.
I also heard in korean forum meostar 15x56 is almost good as slc 15x56 but their 8x42 not as good as 8x42 slc.

meostar 8x42 show significantly more CA then same power SF and NL

haven't seen slc 8x42 so can't say about it.

Yes, all 10x42.

 

[adhoc]

Nethero, I just wanted to know about the MeoStar compared with each of SF and HT--sorry if I was not clear--but thank you very much for your post all of which is really useful to me, personally at this time!

BTW, I found Leica "too red" and Zeiss "too blue-green" for me and hoped, from a lot I had read in BF, that Meopta's color rendition was right for me and went for one (the 15x56). I do like it but switching between that and Zeiss (in 8x and 10x) is a bit discordant. I try to look on the positive side philosophically that this reminds me all is relative!

Jackjack, MeoStar 15x56, also 10x42 and 12x50, are "HD", but 8x42 and others are not.

 

[HenRun]

adhoc: I went from the Meostar HD 15x56 (which I think is great) to the Meostar HD 12x50 which I think is "the best" since it combines 12x reach with a very crisp, zero CA image in virtually any condition.

I do regard the Meostar 10x42HD (which I also have owned, and have friends who still do) as a great binocular and in terms of "sharpness" and CA correction to be top notch. There are other aspects with the 10x42HD that make other competitor models more attractive for some. I think most could settle for less in a bino.

Since the 12x50HD is absolutely on par with the 10x42HD for image quality with no significant drawbacks for me since I use it on a monopod with a quick release I found no reason to keep the 10x42HD. Neither model are among the highest transmission optics on the market but in reality I have never found them lacking. On the contrary I find that almost all other top end binos in the 12X range have drawbacks that rule them out for me, like the 12x42 Pure NL I had, wonderful bino but the Meopta works better in tricky light and despite the wonderful wide, immersive view of the Pure NL I find the Meopta "purity" of a smaller view with incredible crisp detail extraction and resilience to glare more rewarding. There are a handful of binoculars that still wow me to this day whenever I use them, the Meopta 12x50HD is one of them, the Swarovski BTX is another. But there are many fine binoculars out there.

It makes for a better spread for me with my 7/8X binos and then a "significant" jump to 12X, and with very little to "give up" compared to the 15x56. I find tracking birds in flight with the 12x50HD much easier than with the 15x56HD and for summer thermals the 12X does a little better with the "shimmer".

Also what I like with (starting from 10X) 12X and 15X binos are their ability to "focus through" branches and other obstacles and blurring them out better than lower magnification binos. This has been very useful out in the forest where I would normally consider 12X a bit too much.

The Meopta 8x32 Meostar does not "wow" me like the SFL 8x40 in use, but I love pretty much everything about it. Size, ergonomics, optical quality and eye box. Almost everyone who has looked through it thinks "huh, this is great".
Every time I pick it up (almost every day) I feel the same.

My 7x42 Leica UVHD+ is a little more hit and miss for ergonomics and my viewing experience varies depending on the day. It is always very pleasant to look through but there are times when the viewing experience is behind that of the Meopta, the SFL and a bunch of others that I like and/or have used in the past.

Comparing the Meostar 8x32 and the Leica 7x42 I can sometimes not say which I prefer. Looking at smaller birds perched at mid distance the Leica contrast and saturation is phenomenal but the added magnification and much better eye box in the Meopta for most of the time makes up for the difference and gives an easier viewing experience.
But, those days walking around with the Leica in the morning mist spotting deer are an experience I cherish. The Leica feels special to me. But there have been times I think the viewing with glasses could have been better. Going between the SFL/Meostar and the Leica both the SFL and Meostar are incredibly eye friendly and even if not comparing I can sometimes find the Leica a little awkward in use, even after a break in period. The wiggle room for adjustments is incredibly small for me. When I get it right the image is very pleasant, and sometimes just "almost great".

 

[HenRun]

I also think the Meostar focusers are generally on the slow side.
The one on the 12x50 is very even and smooth and I don't find it as slow in practical use as on the 8x32.

Maybe it is because I seldom go from near to far range but more often from far range to mid range on the 12X.

On the 8x32 I use it for near to far range and the focuser feels slow. It is rarely a "problem" with the Meostar 8x32 but going from the SFL 8x40 to the Meostar (and Leica) the difference is obvious, the SFL "smart" focuser worked very well for me.

 

[hopster]

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!

Also a big fan of the Meopta 12x50 HD which is difficult to fault and my limited experience is that the HD Meoptas are a class above the non-HD ones as HenRun says.

 

[jackjack]

Also a big fan of the Meopta 12x50 HD which is difficult to fault and my limited experience is that the HD Meoptas are a class above the non-HD ones as HenRun says.

you mean the non HD in same series? (like 8x42 B1+ vs 12x50 B1+ HD)
interesting...

 

[HenRun]

Jackjack: I assume he means the same series of Meostar non HD vs HD.
I think there is some agreement on the difference by many who have seriously looked through them.

My conclusion is that non HD Meostars are very fine binoculars and have traits that make them very attractive for the price, especially on the second hand market. The HD Meostars have stiffer competition since they compete with the very best and may fall short depending on preference. For me the 12x50HD is the stand out in the line up. I think the "shortcoming" of the 12x50HD is actually a strength: it has quite narrow FOV but for me that really helps with subject isolation and it is still wide enough so that you can easily track birds in flight.

 

[hopster]

you mean the non HD in same series? (like 8x42 B1+ vs 12x50 B1+ HD)
interesting...

I don't think they make models where you can directly compare the same magnification and objective lens with and without HD, unless someone here knows different. That would of course be best.

 

[tenex]

I don't think they make models where you can directly compare the same magnification and objective lens with and without HD, unless someone here knows different. That would of course be best.

It would make an interesting comparison. When the HD versions first appeared, the 10x42 and 12x50 remained available for a while in either form, but the non-HD were subsequently discontinued, although one might still turn up for sale used. And of course the 8x are still not HD.

 

[adhoc]

HenRun, thank you very much. Very high praise for the MeoStar-HD 12x50 by others "before your time" in BF I had already indicated to you by post and/or PM, and items I missed can be found from the thread headings in the Meopta subforum.

Your ideas on the MeoStar-HD 10x42 too are useful to me. This "darkness" that some dislike seems to be a deliberate compromise by Meopta, Leica, Nikon in the EDG. The Swaro. BTX I have not used but very much like to try.

Going from 10x to MeoStar-HD 12x50 are you immediately struck by the increase in useful detail as with 10x to MeoStar-HD 15x56? Is this in fact better with the 12x because of greater steadiness of 12x vs higher mag. of 15x? Here I mean, entirely, handheld.

I'd expect raptors and other birds in flight to be easier with MeoStar-HD 12x vs MeoStar-HD 15x because the view is wider and steadier. I look fwd. to use the 12x50 for this!

"Focusing through" branches with higher mag. you have mentioned before. After reading your posts I had looked for this but was not so struck by it. Maybe it varies among users.

I wonder if you are aware MeoStar 8x32 was made in an HD version for the US retailer Cabelas. What you write of the Leica Ultravid-+ 7x42 too is very useful to me. Now I do not long for it! Zeiss SFL I am not considering. As my 8x and 10x I use Z. Victory Pocket and Conquest 10x32. Where I live it is impossible to try out any binoculars, and accounts in BF relevant to me are so valuable.

Adding in edit: I chose MeoStar-HD 15x56 over 12x50 because I don't use a scope--I dislike viewing with only one eye--and this, mounted, will have to do. Steadied 15x binocular vision gives as much detail as steadied 20x monocular. But I am tempted to add the 12x50 to my "mimimalist" set above then maybe omitting 10x.

 

[HenRun]

Adhoc: it is the same with me. I did many years of one eyed looking through cameras as a photographer and had no issues with it at the time. But for the last fifteen years, trying to look through scopes I realized it is no longer for me. Which was a bit sad, as I like optics. However the BTX is the remedy for me, it gives me that high magnification joy.

Focusing "through" is very dependent of location and distance to the object of interest in relation to the surrounding "obscuring" objects. Sometimes the effect is not as noticeable but even so I think magnification always helps in cutting through and masking out the blurry branches.

In denser forest I find that at least 10X or above blurs out branches outside of the area of focus, say if a bird is perched in a tree partially obscured by branches from another tree. Same with bushes or other things that you can "see through" but that obscures the point of interest.

This is more apparent with more magnification, with the BTX at 30X I find this very useful.

The Meostar 15x56 HD is very nice, I used it on a monopod (and tripod) and optically it is very, very nice. I could not hand hold it at all. And chasing birds in flight almost made me dizzy when trying to pan, due to the magnification and narrow FOV. Well, that is handheld, I only used the 15x56 handheld for birds in flight and I was not very good at it.

What I found better with the 12x50 HD is: less disturbance from thermals (magnification and slightly better optics) and the ability to handhold briefly, and ability to track birds in flight. With the quick release for the monopod I have the option of removing it and reinstalling it when walking but in open areas I mostly have the 12x50 mounted, ready to use and rested on my shoulder. Even handheld I find the Meostar 12x50 superb for tracking birds in flight as the "snap to focus" is so great and the magnification is not a problem as long as I am moving along.

I have been tempted to try out the Cabelas HD version of the Meopta 8x32. I don't know much about it and I had a feeling it might be a bit "yellow" in the imaging. If it isn't it would be interesting. I think the design is kind of ugly but nice optics is very forgiving for that. I will not be looking at it, but through it. They do surface from time to time on ebay from reputable sellers.

As for the lesser transmission of the Meopta Meostar I have almost never found this to be a problem for my use. On the contrary I find it very helpful on bright sunny and bright but overcast days. With the 8x32 Pure NL some details would get washed out in the very high contrast/transmission but visible in the Meopta 10x42HD (which were out at the same time on that trip).

EDIT: this is also very useful in the winter. Meoptas are great winter binos and the lesser transmission and for the bright winter days they keep the "brightness wash out and snow glare" better under control than many of the other high end binos I have had the pleasure to use winter time. Unfortunately Swarovski Pure series was not working well for me under winter conditions whereas Meopta Meostar and the SFL 8x40 both work very well.

Of course that extra transmission will be useful for those that are out in the very early hours or at dawn.

Regarding the 7x42 UVHD+, don't let my experience discourage you too much. I used it just this morning before sitting down typing this, and it is wonderful. I love the image.

AFOV is smaller than I am used to and that it even more apparent when I take off my glasses. I hate taking off my glasses when using binoculars but I did try it out with the 7x42 UVHD+ and the bino works better without glasses for me. I love the imaging of the bino but it comes with more inconvenience for me than any other bino that I like.

It really varies from day to day and sometimes when I am out birding with it it simply does not agree with me as much as all my other/previous binoculars. I have to pay attention to everything; my glasses must sit perfectly and my posture must be adjusted and my grip on the bino must be very specific to enjoy looking through it. Since I am often out in dense forest and tricky terrain with it I can not always choose my stance and the Leica is the least forgiving when I have to stand a bit awkwardly. The Meopta and the SFL are always just up to the face and view through regardless of position.

I will see if this will be tolerable in the long run. I could always revert back to the SFL 8x40 for ease of mind and ease of use but on the good days the Leica is great in use and a good side kick to the 12x50 if I take them both out.

The few occasions I lug out the BTX I am often not sure what else to bring. The Meopta 8x32 is the best for quick spotting and the most handy. But bringing the 12x50 with the BTX gives me two steps of great reach and spotting details at far with the 12x50HD before bringing it closer with the BTX 30X / 51X (with converter) is also great fun.

I have at times gone up to a look out near the house with very good views of the surrounding and sometimes even 8X has not been enough to spot a few things but the 12X brings them to attention. I am still young enough to bring three binos but I would rather have company if I do which makes it easier to manage the whole circus it becomes...