chill6x6
Well-known member
I have the 8X42 and you know....I can't help but wonder if the 10X42SF doesn't make more sense and that I would like it better!
-
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!
Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Death Of The Alpha? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
I have the 8X42 and you know....I can't help but wonder if the 10X42SF doesn't make more sense and that I would like it better!
Kind of similar to that, I now use my £28 ex display Viking Vistron 8x25 on most outings even though I have many "better" bins and have owned a few alphas previously.
This is actually quite a new experience for myself but I have found these Vistron to be the best combination of usability and toughness with the viewing capability delivered for their small size and if anyone was standing beside me with whatever whopping alpha bin or even something like my excellent Hawke Sapphire 8x43 would I be jealous or feel that I'm missing something?
I think the answer is no because I'm benefiting from having something which is unnoticeable wearing it and easily packed yet I can get I would say something around 80% of what the very best could deliver and I'm very happy with that situation although I wouldn't say no to an updated glass/coating etc Vistron 8x25 or similar and currently I have about 7 different compacts (all good) from which to have arrived at this situation/conclusion. If I really need a bit more performance then I have several other bins that can provide that but what I have found I need most is convenience and to be uncluttered and unburdened and when that makes me happy as with this Vistron then my venture outdoors I find is more satisfactory.
I took the little Vistron to a large lake a week or two ago thinking this will be to small to be satisfactorily useful. Well I was wrong as yet again it was plenty useful and enjoyable.
But I can see that alphas will not die. There will always be folks to whom the cost is an insignificant small change amount so no need (or time) to think about it so just go for the luxury brand but the "elites" are the 1%.
If the alpahs want sales then they will have to purchase Maven or Tract or the like or perhaps they are already the investors behind the scenes.
I'm not selling my Vistron any time soon but I will in future keep an eye on this type of bin. Even my M7 10x30 (which I found to be easier to use than the Leica 10x32 HD I had previously although the HD stuffs the M7 for colour) gets left behind most days as the Vistron is just that little bit more handy.
Something off topic but perhaps worth mentioning as I found it stood out to me and that is that I found a neck strap that I had, a light aftermarket bungy type for medium size bins that I put on the Vistron and which makes it the most comfortable bin I have to wear. With different straps on the Vistron it seems like I'm wearing a different bin and although they came with a good quality bungy strap there really is such a difference with this other one I now use. Just something that surprised me how good it works in suiting that particular bin and that makes such a difference to the usability enjoyment.
Last edited:
Troub. You really should get your hands on a Maven or Tract. They feel great in the hand. Just as quality as an SF or SV. You have to get over that voice in your head that keeps telling you you need to have an alpha.
I look forward to having a look at those. But Dennis you are winding yourself up so tight with your new enthusiasm that you aren't taking notice of what folks are telling you. So I will remind you again that I enjoy Conquests and Terras from Zeiss just as much as HTs and SFs not to mention Meoptas and Kowas. I haven't got a little voice telling me I need alphas even if it would fit neatly into your perception if I had.
Lee
dalat
...
You have to get over that voice in your head that keeps telling you you need to have an alpha.
:-O
We all know that the nagging voice in your head long ago told you that you no longer own the best binocular that money can buy.
That's why you've quietly dumped your Swaro, you're promoting the bins that you're about to dump and you will soon boast about how the Noctivid or SF is the best birding binocular in the world.
I think we should allow Dennis a 'burning bush' moment, followed by a couple of blocks of 'mea culpas' accompanied by a birch twig, seeing as one brief year ago, the first response nay-saying the thread topic would be from him, and perhaps this mellowing of position may extend into the future?
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Hi Chuck
I'm really enjoying the SF 10X, but you own so much top glass it's hard to say, I believe you would. If you go for the $1699 closeout on the Gray model, I would make sure they send you one with a latter SN, mine were made in October and I believe the view is much better than the view of the pair I tried last December. To get the new eyecups just call Zeiss, in three-four days you'll have them. Deals like this on new high end items don't happen very often.
Merry Christmas Chuck
Your posts on this forum are the model everyone else should strive to emulate, I wish I could be half as civil. :-O
I'm really enjoying the SF 10X, but you own so much top glass it's hard to say, I believe you would. If you go for the $1699 closeout on the Gray model, I would make sure they send you one with a latter SN, mine were made in October and I believe the view is much better than the view of the pair I tried last December. To get the new eyecups just call Zeiss, in three-four days you'll have them. Deals like this on new high end items don't happen very often.
Merry Christmas Chuck
Your posts on this forum are the model everyone else should strive to emulate, I wish I could be half as civil. :-O
chill6x6
Well-known member
Hey Robert!
I KNOW that's a great deal... Problem is I can't afford EVERY great deal even tho I'm the biggest sucker for them! What was kinda my thinking...sell the 8X and pick up the 10X. I've got the HT 10X and SV 10X in the time being so I think I'll be okay! Quite honestly the gray SF is one of the best looking binoculars you'll ever see. I'd have no problem with the gray color whatsoever. BTW...I all REALLY have a "great deal" OTW thanks to Ted and Bruce!
Merry Christmas yourself!
Not really Clive, Zeiss and Leica already have relationships with far-eastern manufacturers hence new Trinovid, Conquest HD and Terra.
What Zeiss and Leica don't do is sell direct to the public but if they ever decided to go down this route (which I don't believe they would) they wouldn't need to buy Maven or Tract to do it.
Lee
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Caution to Trevor and Jon of Tract Optics - Stay away from the bus routes! :king:
Dennis - Swaro did have focus issues in the past but it appears to me that they have addressed the issue in recent years. Is it your more recent Swaro EL SV 8X32 and the Swaro EL SV 10X50 that had the focus issues?
jan van daalen
Well-known member
And did you tell the buyer why you were selling themB
Nehhh, these are the best of the best the optical industry can produce.......
Jan
Last edited:
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
The 10X SF makes more sense if it is the 10X that is more appealing to you rather than an 8 power.
I have noticed that some models but different powers in the same model line can be like fraternal twins or they can be like identical twins. Owning one of each now in the Zeiss SF line (thanks to the sale), I find that the two Zeiss SF models are more like identical twins.
The weight, handling and ergonomics are the same. I have different color straps to reduce the chance of me grabbing the wrong one. Optical differences are primarily those that relate to the differences in power. I suspect if you were to do close side by examinations of charts and such you would pick up differences in distortion, etc. I really do not pick up differences out in the field looking at the birds, other than those brought about by the differences in magnification. Things like color balance and perceived brightness are close enough. The biggest difference is I start to see the beginnings of rolling ball in the 8X but not in the 10X.
If any issues you may have with the 8X SF is due to just the power, then going to a 10X SF may work for you. If any of your short comings in the 8X is something unique to the SF model, then you may well notice the same in the 10X.
I think both are excellent and to me, neither is "better" than the other. However they are different because of the differences in magnification. I think the 8X gives a move impressive first view due to the 8X power. The 8X power gives a more natural view because of the greater depth of field, the wider FOV and less magnified shake. On the other hand, looking at the detail of a Mallard feather less than 20 yards away with the 10X is quite spectacular.
Both are top tier and far from being dead and buried.
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
As a bino fanatic, I own a number of "alpha" bins and many non-alphas. I've used them all quite a bit. None of my alphas satisfies my need for (what would be for me) the perfect bin (optics, ergonomics, design, build), though the Leica 8x20 Ultravid BL and Swarovski 8.5x42 ELSV nonFP come close. None of my non-alphas comes as close as do the alphas, so I'm not convinced that the alphas will be displaced any time soon. But I'll admit, I've not tried Tract or Maven. Given that the alphas are only now starting to get things right, and are finally making roofs (which I prefer ergonomically and for their physical integrity) with optics as good (or better?) than what have been available in porros, I think it is premature to suggest they have nothing more to offer or nowhere to go for design improvements. I'd like to see more use of variable-ratio focus in bins.
One bit of design spec/engineering that most (if not all?) non-alpha roofs get wrong (and very stupidly wrong, as it shouldn't be that tricky), is in designing a focus that doesn't stiffen appreciably in the cold. [How do the Tract and Maven bins do in that regard?] I participated in a couple of winter bird counts (CBCs) over the weekend. Temps were subzero degrees F for a good portion of both days, and the first day had wind and blowing snow to make things extra awkward. I was happy that my bins worked like an extension of my own body all day. Water from melted snow on oculars beaded up and shook off easily, focus remained finger tip smooth, superb optics helped in seeing under difficult conditions and kept eyes relaxed after 12 hours of viewing flitting sparrows in brush. Got 67 species in my part of the count circle on the first count, and found 74 species in my part of the Sunday count. Most of my success is based on knowing the birds and how to find them, but I'm sure that I'd have missed several species with lesser bins, mostly for reasons of superior handling to get the bird in view quickly or because I might have fatigued and not kept at it so intensely all day. Very satisfying to end days like these feeling that my bins never let me down (i.e. never limited reaping success from my efforts), which is something I couldn't say in the past.
--AP
One bit of design spec/engineering that most (if not all?) non-alpha roofs get wrong (and very stupidly wrong, as it shouldn't be that tricky), is in designing a focus that doesn't stiffen appreciably in the cold. [How do the Tract and Maven bins do in that regard?] I participated in a couple of winter bird counts (CBCs) over the weekend. Temps were subzero degrees F for a good portion of both days, and the first day had wind and blowing snow to make things extra awkward. I was happy that my bins worked like an extension of my own body all day. Water from melted snow on oculars beaded up and shook off easily, focus remained finger tip smooth, superb optics helped in seeing under difficult conditions and kept eyes relaxed after 12 hours of viewing flitting sparrows in brush. Got 67 species in my part of the count circle on the first count, and found 74 species in my part of the Sunday count. Most of my success is based on knowing the birds and how to find them, but I'm sure that I'd have missed several species with lesser bins, mostly for reasons of superior handling to get the bird in view quickly or because I might have fatigued and not kept at it so intensely all day. Very satisfying to end days like these feeling that my bins never let me down (i.e. never limited reaping success from my efforts), which is something I couldn't say in the past.
--AP
Last edited:
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
No Virginia, the Tract Toric 8X42 is not an Alpha
"Say it ain't so, Joe!" (A small boy to Shoeless Joe Jackson, November, 1920)
The Tract Toric 8X42, in my opinion, is not in the top tier of 8X42 binoculars. There, I said it!
As is obvious in this thread and the other Alpha thread currently in progress, there is no universal definition as to what is an Alpha or a top tier binocular (especially a general purpose birding binocular). We each have are own criteria. Part of mine is an 8X42 roof binocular must have a FOV of over 400 ft at a 1,000 yards ( 133m at 1,000m) to be considered in the top tier. The Tract Toric 8X42 fails my criteria on specifications since it only has a 377 ft FOV.
Here are what I consider to be top tier 8X42 binoculars and how they compare in FOV:
- 444 ft Zeiss SF 8X42
- 410 ft Swaro 8X42 SLC WB HD
- 408 ft Zeiss HT 8X42
- 405 ft Leica Noctivid 8X42
- 403 ft Nikon EDG-II 8X42
- 399 ft Swaro 8.5X42 SV EL - (Would be approx. 423 ft if an 8X power)
The Toric 8X42 appears to be an excellent binocular from what I have read, but it is not in the top tier class as the above shows. The 8X42 Toric might be a great choice for some specific purpose, such as game spotting where FOV is not as important, but it fails to have all of the attributes of a top tier binocular. There are other highly regarded binoculars such and the 8X42 Trinovid and the 8X42 Conquest HD that also fail to meet the criteria. They are all excellent binoculars but are not up to the level of a top tier models.
I do own a Vanguard Endeavor 8X42 which has a 367 FOV, but I only paid around $200 for it. It would be highly unlikely that I would ever buy an 8X42 with a FOV of under 400 ft that is $500 or more. I do notice that I am reluctant to use the Endeavor because of the somewhat tunnel like view.
If you were to make the case that the Tract Toric 10X42 should be considered with the top tier, then that would be a stronger case since it has a FOV of 341 ft, which is right in there with what is considered by many as the top models.
As nice as the Toric 8X42 may be, in my opinion, it is lacking in specifications and I just can not buy the claim that it is equivalent to those top tier models listed above. It may be a much better value then the above, but top tier it ain't. Sorry Joe! |=(|
"Say it ain't so, Joe!" (A small boy to Shoeless Joe Jackson, November, 1920)
The Tract Toric 8X42, in my opinion, is not in the top tier of 8X42 binoculars. There, I said it!
As is obvious in this thread and the other Alpha thread currently in progress, there is no universal definition as to what is an Alpha or a top tier binocular (especially a general purpose birding binocular). We each have are own criteria. Part of mine is an 8X42 roof binocular must have a FOV of over 400 ft at a 1,000 yards ( 133m at 1,000m) to be considered in the top tier. The Tract Toric 8X42 fails my criteria on specifications since it only has a 377 ft FOV.
Here are what I consider to be top tier 8X42 binoculars and how they compare in FOV:
- 444 ft Zeiss SF 8X42
- 410 ft Swaro 8X42 SLC WB HD
- 408 ft Zeiss HT 8X42
- 405 ft Leica Noctivid 8X42
- 403 ft Nikon EDG-II 8X42
- 399 ft Swaro 8.5X42 SV EL - (Would be approx. 423 ft if an 8X power)
The Toric 8X42 appears to be an excellent binocular from what I have read, but it is not in the top tier class as the above shows. The 8X42 Toric might be a great choice for some specific purpose, such as game spotting where FOV is not as important, but it fails to have all of the attributes of a top tier binocular. There are other highly regarded binoculars such and the 8X42 Trinovid and the 8X42 Conquest HD that also fail to meet the criteria. They are all excellent binoculars but are not up to the level of a top tier models.
I do own a Vanguard Endeavor 8X42 which has a 367 FOV, but I only paid around $200 for it. It would be highly unlikely that I would ever buy an 8X42 with a FOV of under 400 ft that is $500 or more. I do notice that I am reluctant to use the Endeavor because of the somewhat tunnel like view.
If you were to make the case that the Tract Toric 10X42 should be considered with the top tier, then that would be a stronger case since it has a FOV of 341 ft, which is right in there with what is considered by many as the top models.
As nice as the Toric 8X42 may be, in my opinion, it is lacking in specifications and I just can not buy the claim that it is equivalent to those top tier models listed above. It may be a much better value then the above, but top tier it ain't. Sorry Joe! |=(|
Chill4x4. Do you think If I took all your alpha's and disguised them by covering up the Zeiss labels and the Swarovski labels and then had a blind test with your Maven's do you think you could pick out the alpha's from the Maven's? I really think a lot of this alpha stuff is in people's heads. I wonder how many people could REALLY pick out their alpha's if they did not know what was what. You wouldn't be able to handle the binoculars either. JUST look through them.Hi Jerry...
You make great points for each group IMO. I buy "alpha" binoculars(not JUST those binoculars mind you!)because...well TWO reasons...reason ONE- Prior experience! I've been using Swarovski and Zeiss riflescopes for about twenty-five years, Swarovski binoculars about 20 years, and Leica Geovid about 15 years. ALL were SOLID choices. Reason two: I see no reason to NOT get the best available as long as I can afford it. Look...a small gain in performance regardless of product more times than not requires a pretty steep increase in price. So basically that at 2X the price I get a warranty that is pretty much written in stone, more FOV, flattest transmission curve in the business, high light transmission, made for binocular case, center diopter adjustment, and the flattest field in the business. Some of those features can be equaled by NO ONE! Does one NEED them? No, certainly not. But I LOVE 'em!
The rolling ball phenomena is the strangest thing to me. I've never seen it and can't IMAGE it! But sure enough there are several others besides yourself that DO see it.
Maven....I'll admit I think they are probably at the head of the "non-alpha" class. I love the EDG-like smooth/precise focus. I have a B1 and a B2....I probably like the 8X42 B1 a little more. I don't feel the reduction in size/weight cost me much if anything optically. I like and enjoy them BOTH a LOT! And I don't have ANY problem with them being your favorite binocular! But I like binoculars. I probably have about 10 non-alpha binoculars that are really great binoculars. No doubt I could have my best birding day EVER using any of them. BUT...I were to set out to DO that...and could only have one binocular(i'd rather have TWO)....well, you know that answer!
Folks....I'm no binocular snob. I think most of your realize that. I have seven brands of binoculars here. Thursday I'll be birding with the new Conquest HD 10X42 and a Opticron spotting scope!
The Tract Toric 8x42 does have a slightly smaller FOV but the view is so good it doesn't bother me. I thought it would but it doesn't seem that small or restrictive. I really enjoy the lack of RB on the Tract versus the SV 8x32. For me the Tract Toric 8x42 is just easier to use than the Swarovski. Smooth focus and no problems with the Tract. The SV is more finicky than the Tract. I know that sounds strange but it is true. Have you tried the Tract Toric 8x42, Bruce? I found out some times you just can't judge a binocular by the specifications.
Last edited:
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
An 8x42 _should_ be less finicky than an 8x32. I'm a big fan of full-sized bins because they are just so much easier to use and see through. Maybe you should give the 8.5x42 EL a try (again) some time. As others have said, Swarovski may finally have sorted its focusing issues. My 8.5x42 ELSV has super smooth focus, very similar in feel to the Zeiss FL.
--AP
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Chuck
Don't you have a 10X50 SV or FP, since you prefer the 8.5 FP, you might like the 10X50 you already have as much or more than a 10X SF. Just thinking out loud. |:d|
Don't you have a 10X50 SV or FP, since you prefer the 8.5 FP, you might like the 10X50 you already have as much or more than a 10X SF. Just thinking out loud. |:d|
Your lucky with your SV. I have never had a Swarovski with as smooth a focus as a Zeiss and I have had a LOT of them including current ones. I believe Swarovski uses greaseless focusers like Leica so they work in cold weather and as a result they are not generally as smooth as Zeiss or Nikon's. You are correct about the 8x42 being an easier binocular to use. I am totally happy with my Tract and Maven. I don't see myself ever buying another Swarovski.
Last edited:
I have no doubt that either a Maven or a Tract would have performed as well under those cold weather conditions. I have used both my Maven B.2 9x45 and my Tract Toric 8x42 in sub-zero conditions in Colorado and I have had zero problems and the focus did not even stiffen up that much on either. I believe Steve has tested Mavens by putting them in the freezer overnight and they performed fine when taken out.
Sums up the everything I find wrong about your posts.
