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.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stephen Prower" data-source="post: 3507096" data-attributes="member: 115634">Binastro1. Many thanks for the further measurements! So we get closer to a possible source for the claimed <7* figure of resolution of the Comet AX24 6x24: the paperwork that came with the 1976 Komz 6x24 that the Comet is styled upon.2. Whatever the true figure of resolution, I continue to be pleased with the binocular. The specification means subjectively that I require fewer milliseconds to get on the small garden bird, and the optics--helped by the compressing effect of the lower magnification?--are up in my eyes with the optics of a more expensive Opticron 8x binocular.3. Time will of course tell whether I continue to enthuse in the same way in a month's time!4. But since you say that you distrust Chinese products in themselves, not just by virtue of the way in which they are sold, I must in fairness to Comet provisionally, as above, report first impressions of performance, and not just details of specification, in reply to you.5. You are right that the appearance, new condition and low price of the Comet AX24 6x24 will attract the attention of persons who know of the high reputation of the Komz 6x24. They certainly attracted my attention. But even if I had thought that it was a Komz, it was sold by my seller as a Comet.In some eyes it would make a binocular a fake if it was sold as a Comet, but passed off by a seller as having the performance of a Komz. That is the issue with the documentation that we have been discussing. And it's a respectable opinion. But the offence smacks more to my eyes of a deception, utilising the Comet as a tool, not passing it off as a fake.Finally we are at one that a binocular becomes a fake in ordinary language if it is passed off to a buyer as the real thing instead of a look-alike. Yet the difficulties continue. Even the 'Zeiss 8x30 Jenoptems' with six figure serial numbers that persons offer for sale on Ebay were, as I believe, manufactured in Japan as look-alikes, not fakes, hence the failure to give them seven-figure serial numbers.So we come to Comet's practice of manufacturing look-alikes of so 'authentic' appearance that they bear the Komz logo and a 1976 Komz serial number, but nowhere at all the Comet logo.I can't say that you're wrongly aggrieved.Not all sellers will accurately describe them in their literature as 'Comet' binoculars.6. Otherwise I share your experience of absent or indifferent Chinese quality control.Quite apart from other goods, I've already mentioned, apropos, my disintegrating Comet AX11 7x30. And then, even more apropos, there's 8x30mark's faulty actual Comet AX24 6x24.7. I have also found Chinese documentation often to be more than inaccurate: figures and details are plucked out of thin air. Sometimes they relate to a different product entirely: I had documentation with a monocular that related to a binocular.We haven't pinned down the source of the inaccuracies as to Field of View and Close Focus Distance that we've found in the Comet AX24 6x24 documentation on the web, but we've certainly found the inaccuracies.8. But the Comet AX11 7x30 performed quite well in my hands. It seemed to be manufactured to a reasonable standard, even if one of my three had been faultily assembled, and quite likely all three subject to little or no quality control.And so far I've never had any problem returning a defective item that I have bought on Ebay.So at a low price for the Comet AX24 6x24, I was prepared to punt.Others quite reasonably wouldn't have been!Stephen</blockquote>

Verification