Kite APC 16x42 … gimmick, replacement or addition? (my report) (1 Viewer)

[kabsetz]

The "problem" with the Nikon 85 VR was not that it didn't work but that it was a solution without a real problem. All non-VR scopes are used with a tripod/head combo which does the job of controlling vibrations mostly well enough, and a tripod is still needed to support a VR-scope. A VR-scope is better only if you have a crappy tripod or when it is windy. For seawtaching on windy shores the Nikon would probably work better than conventional scopes.

I have tried one of the Nikons, but only briefly and not in particularly windy conditions. Also, the scope is just as big and heavy as a Swaro 95, with smaller optics and not quite as good optical quality.

With binoculars, IS makes much more sense as binoculars in birding are almost always hand-held, and thereby always shaking unless you have stabilisation.

 

[FVG]

The "problem" with the Nikon 85 VR was not that it didn't work but that it was a solution without a real problem. All non-VR scopes are used with a tripod/head combo which does the job of controlling vibrations mostly well enough, and a tripod is still needed to support a VR-scope. A VR-scope is better only if you have a crappy tripod or when it is windy. For seawtaching on windy shores the Nikon would probably work better than conventional scopes.

I have tried one of the Nikons, but only briefly and not in particularly windy conditions. Also, the scope is just as big and heavy as a Swaro 95, with smaller optics and not quite as good optical quality.

With binoculars, IS makes much more sense as binoculars in birding are almost always hand-held, and thereby always shaking unless you have stabilisation.

Just stand with a telescope on the windy coast or on an open windy plain. Then you need a very heavy tripod to avoid fine vibrations. It is precisely those fine vibrations that take away a lot of detail. And if there is no wind, you can of course simply turn off the VR. The big question is whether those fine vibrations that are often caused by wind along the tripod legs (even with carbon) are damped well enough by the VR. The advantage of binoculars with VR or IS is that those very fine vibrations are partly dampened by your body and the remaining movements by the IS.

 

[Hermann]

The advantage of binoculars with VR or IS is that those very fine vibrations are partly dampened by your body and the remaining movements by the IS.

The main advantage of the IS in binoculars is that it dampens the physiologic tremor, the entirely natural tremor that affects every human being, with a frequency in the range of 8-12Hz.

Hermann

 

[mbb]

Could stabilization be effective for some kind of hand-held 'draw tube' scope?
(Not referring to the fact of the scope being collapsible, but to the way they can be held with 2 hands, though requiring some stabilising support as some have described. E.g. the Meopta TGA, Swarovski CT(S/C)75/80, Zeiss Dialyt 65mm ...)
I don't know if it would be effective considering the frequency of the movement.
But íf that would work, it would be great!
Not just about moving from e.g. 20x in the SigSauer to e.g. 30x in the scope, but also having a larger objective and thus exit pupil and brightness at dusk-&-dawn etc. (I wouldn't want to hand-hold 60 or 75 mm binoculars .)

(I haven't had the opportunity to try out a draw tube scope yet, but should have the opportunity in a few days. I am looking forward to it, but realize I shouldn't expect long perfectly stable views without additional support/stabilisation of some kind.)

 

[padlnjones]

Major differences in performance between Kite APC 16x42 and Sig Sauer Zulu 6 HDX 16x42

on paper:
a) ED and HT glass elements: Kite doesn't have ED glass vs. Zulu has ED glass
b) IS correction angle: Kite has 2° vs. Zulu has 3° plus new "Target mode"
c) Weight with batteries (AA alkaline 23g or 0.8 oz, Kite needs two, Zulu needs one): Kite 781g or 27.1oz vs. Zulu 621g or 21.9 oz
d) Durability: Kite has optional silicon jacket (retails 60USD plus adds extra weight) vs. Zulu comes with rubberized body and abrasion-resistant lens coatings
e) Kite has strange IS auto-off function when aimed downwards which significantly limits its use during hikes in the mountains, glassing from the roof of building, etc.
f) Warranty: Kite has 2 years warranty on electronic components vs. Zulu has 5 years warranty on electronic components

in real life:
I am planning to bring my Zulu 6 HDX to our local bino store next week and compare it to Kite APC that they sell.
I will keep you posted.

Hi, did you ever post that comparison? I am deciding between these two. thx!

 

[Eya]

I'm not sure I can add that much to the other reviews on BF. Is there anything specific you had in mind?

I just used a crappy £5 digiscoping adapter to try and show the stabilization effect. Disregard the poor quality of the framing, vignetting and the iPhone 12 camera, and keep in mind our eyes have a built-in stabilization effect so the videos look worse than when you look directly in them. I was focusing on the light yellow house.

The Kite is OK, it does have a tendency to "float" more than I'd like. It's much lighter than my Canon 10x42L IS and the high magnification is very useful.

The Sig-Sauer is simply amazing, and will completely replace my Kite. I don't like the battery bulge at the bottom of the main barrel (not shown in any of the product photos, go figure) as it gets in the way. The supplied accessories are crap, so I am using an OP/Tech USA bino strap with quick-release connectors, and until I find a properly fitting pouch, the Swazi binocular beret.

Thanks for this information.
Is there any difference between the 2 pairs in in optical quality (brightness, contrast, color reproduction, color fringing) and overall build quality ?
If those are at least on par withh thee APC42 on the Zulu6, I may well indulge myself with a pair of 20x42 Zulu6 HDX for my next birthday

 

[fazalmajid]

Thanks for this information.
Is there any difference between the 2 pairs in in optical quality (brightness, contrast, color reproduction, color fringing) and overall build quality ?
If those are at least on par withh thee APC42 on the Zulu6, I may well indulge myself with a pair of 20x42 Zulu6 HDX for my next birthday

Optically the Zulu6 is better, it lacks the visible CA of the Kite.

The build quality is roughly the same (the Zulu6 is lighter, and thus feels less substantial).

 

[GrumpyBuzzard]

Just reading through this thread and agree it's frustrating using a scope or large binoculars on a good tripod when it's windy. This is where image stabilised binoculars truly shines, I would love to own the Zeiss 20 x 60s but my doctor advises living the rest of my life with one kidney comes with risks.