Kite Bonelli 2.0 8x42. Something very nice!! (1 Viewer)

[Steve C]

I suppose I use what might be considered a variation of the pebble test. This is the talus slope test. Some of the rocks are bigger than a car. The slopes abound around here and I can get them from 1.5 to 4.5 miles away. I can get closer, but the Klamath Hills are from 1-2 miles straight south and can be viewed from a tripod on the back porch. Stukel Mountain is further away to the east and is less handy because I have to move everything.

I use this as a simple, basic test. I am not looking for arc seconds or arc rocks, just a comparative view. The question is a basic one. If circumstances demanded an accurate count of rocks in the fov, could I do it from the image I'm looking at or not. The pebble test it seems is likely very much the same thing, just smaller rocks and closer distances. Can the same rock or pebble be viewed with the same or less apparent sharpness at the same distance, or not.

At any rate, it works pretty well. Image differences can be sorted out pretty quickly. All three Maven binoculars do very well here, at least as well as the Swarovski's I have or have had, as one example.

If I feel the need for more technical accuracy, I break out a resolution chart. However I have some doubts about those as well. For example, I once was at the Kruger Optics facility not far from my home exchanging a faulty Caldera binocular. The engineer was a friendly fellow and offered to let me participate in some tests to see what was done and how they did it. The resolution test was illuminating. He set up a binocular (the one I have now because of the superior resolution and collimation precision) and pronounced it to have x arc seconds resolution. He said it was because the bars in a particular section of the USAF chart were visible. I looked and thought if I was doing the test, I would have used the next size larger set of bars.

 

[typo]

Steve,

Sounds like your rock slope does much the same job.

Although I've tried a few things I haven't come up with a permenant test targe for sharpness at home. I usually resort to a patch of bark or a foliage pattern that is reasonably lit at the time. All too transient for my liking. The large area and relative uniformity of the pebbles were a great target. I wish I had something like that closer to home. I've read you can get 'spilled coins' or 'fallen leaf' printed targets for such testing but I've never seen them. Perhaps I can get Paddy to photograph those pebbles for me and get them printed up.

The resolution chart serves a different purpose for me in defining the real or apparent limit to resolution. I don't think it necessarily followes that a high resolution binocular is always a perceptually sharp one but in the case of the Bonelli it is. Unfortunately I didn't try out the Swaro on the pebbles but from other views I tried I'd still bet on the Bonelli.

Hows that Maven report coming along?

David

 

[paddy7]

I can back up David's conclusions above - even though my bins lost!
Unless you're producing hard data, most resolution tests are going to be comparative; one optic against another. In the same light conditions, with the same distance and target, this seems a more than adequate organic way of assessing performance.
An arc-pebble is of course 1/60th of an arc-rock. Bear that in mind in any subsequent report.

 

[CliveP]

Yeah must check out some arc-sandgrains with my new Sapphire next time I'm at the beach8-P

Or maybe use the Papilio:t:

Or the rock walls in the Mourne Moutains 30-40 miles away if it's a clear day! This one I do actually do but I just like to look at the view really and can be nice with my 15x70 on the tripod.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=mourne+mountains&FORM=HDRSC2

 

[typo]

Just an observation on using distant natural targets.

As is often the case on the east coast, the atmospheric conditions last weekend meant I couldn't use distant targets for some comparisons in the way I would have liked to do. There was a haze over the coast which meant Aldeburgh ten miles away or even the radio masts a mile or two away were getting obscured from time to time. As I've noted before this tends to favour binoculars with poorer blue transmissions. The FL did a shade better through the haze, as it did through the heat shimmer over the pebbles at long range as well. So not every comparison went the Bonelli way. I suppose each design is intentionally (or accidentally) tuned to suite different applications. I still preferred the Bonelli to the FL for birdwatching in the conditions that weekend overall. The balance could have gone the other way in different priorities or conditions I suppose. I guess it just shows you need variety in your testing.

David

 

[CliveP]

I took the Sapphire 8x43 out this morning as the fog we've had for two days seemed about to lift.

Cycling along by the river was amazing with the mist rising off it and the sun breaking through. I got a morning like this a few weeks ago and it was like cycling through a dream.

I was looking forward to great autumn colours with the Sapphire but it didn't really happen. First the fog took a lot longer to lift and even then the Sapphire didn't start to perk up until the sun broke through so while I thought the Sapphire would be amazing in autumn I can't say it was this morning. A fare bit of glare with the low sun and fog haze also and also very noticeable the soft area out of focus in the outer 3rd of the view. Tough conditions though.

It definitely works in summer that's for sure but I was a bit disappointed today but not sure if any of my other bins would have fared any better or even as well. I still got those ultra sharp and clear closer in views when viewing not towards the sun.

You certainly can't say a particular bin is going to be like this or that every single time which can drive you nuts and make reviewing a very inexact effort but I suppose it is part of the fascination also.

Today I probably would have gotten on as well with just my Viking Vistron 8x25 and been happier with the smaller more portable bin or even just to forget using bins as the eye viewing was the most spectacular. Probably more a morning for taking a lot of landscape photos instead. Wish I had brought the camera but maybe will get another chance.

 

[paddy7]

I took the Sapphire 8x43 out this morning as the fog we've had for two days seemed about to lift.

Cycling along by the river was amazing with the mist rising off it and the sun breaking through. I got a morning like this a few weeks ago and it was like cycling through a dream.

I was looking forward to great autumn colours with the Sapphire but it didn't really happen. First the fog took a lot longer to lift and even then the Sapphire didn't start to perk up until the sun broke through so while I thought the Sapphire would be amazing in autumn I can't say it was this morning. A fare bit of glare with the low sun and fog haze also and also very noticeable the soft area out of focus in the outer 3rd of the view. Tough conditions though.

It definitely works in summer that's for sure but I was a bit disappointed today but not sure if any of my other bins would have fared any better or even as well. I still got those ultra sharp and clear closer in views when viewing not towards the sun.

You certainly can't say a particular bin is going to be like this or that every single time which can drive you nuts and make reviewing a very inexact effort but I suppose it is part of the fascination also.

Today I probably would have gotten on as well with just my Viking Vistron 8x25 and been happier with the smaller more portable bin or even just to forget using bins as the eye viewing was the most spectacular. Probably more a morning for taking a lot of landscape photos instead. Wish I had brought the camera but maybe will get another chance.

Hi Clive - While not having any scientific background at all, this is precisely the point i've been trying to understand myself over the last few months; how certain bins seem to leap into life in certain environments, light conditions, seasons etc. Also, how some of the tech stuff (for instance, the Allbinos transmission curves for colour representation) actually apply to real birding. For most of the places i go (marshes, reedbeds, beaches and shingle) the Zeiss FL 8x32 performs beautifully; when there's haze or what we used to call 'dirty air' it can cut better than others with better transmission in the blue (short wavelength) end of the spectrum.
Not all 'high performance' statistics are necessarily to the end-user's advantage, it seems! I would think autumn colours favour binoculars which may peak towards the red/yellow end of the spectrum. I took my Vanguard Endeavor EDII out yesterday and it was stunning!
Paddy

 

[CliveP]

You might be right Paddy. I use my Kowa SV from here and especially in the evening the autumn colours (green/red) are great and then on wet days it reminds me of my old Swaro El that used to be so good cutting through the dull light but if I take the Kowa out midday then green seems to predominate over everything (hints of a yellow bias) whereas in the same midday light the Sapphire would show much more variety of colour although sometimes I find it almost to bright and contrasty for my eyes compared with the relaxing more subdued Kowa SV. I actually got another headache after using the Sapphire the other day and it's definitely not collimation this time, I think it was the difficult light. Never had any problem with the Sapphire though on summer days when the brightness and colours where really terrific and no distortion in the view. So it's good to have lots of options. My bins are all (except the Frontier 8x25) new so I'm still trying to get the hang of them all but I thought the Sapphire was just going to be tops at everything and so the other day was a surprise. My Kowa and Vistron both handle glare really well so they may have been the better bins for those conditions.

I should take the M7 out next to see how it goes but I'm sort of in the Kowa mood for my next outing as I also like how it does the wide angle when it then reminds me some of the 8x32 FL I once had. Not as pronounced as either the EL or the FL but that it has those aspects at all makes me a fan. I still enjoy using it every day and on a budget I think it's an especially good all-rounder. It even seems to have similar resolution to my M7 10x or not far behind. I believe the other Kowas up the range are better but with this SV I have no desire at all to seek something else to replace it even with one of the "better" Kowas. Bad news for Kowa perhaps?

 

[paddy7]

I think if there is an art to all this, then perhaps this is it; knowing enough about a set's performance to know how well it will perform in certain conditions. The science underlying design certainly comes into this, and i think the 'arc-grain, arc-pebble, arc-rock' thing has a lot of merit for resolution testing at least.
There probably aren't that many forum contributors who only own one binocular (including myself) and some of the pleasure is selecting the right optics for the right job. Perhaps the 'best for everything' notion is ridiculous.
You may be right with the Kowa. I tried the 8x42 high end model (forgotten the name, but BD or X something rings a bell, and can't be bothered to look it up at this time of night) and while i liked the view, the focus and dioptre were so tight i thought i'd break them adjusting it.
Although i probably use the FL 8x32 most of the time, there are days i know the Vanguard will be preferable, while the M7 8x30(after 10 minutes or so of gettting the technique back with regard to exact eye positioning) is a delightful compact companion and a great mate in a range of conditions. I really like Nikon's approach to colour reproduction (but also Zeiss' - and Vanguards! - just maybe on different days!)

 

[CliveP]

My old Sapphire was very consistent over any condition so not necessarily unrealistic or ridiculous I would say but this newer one I have now is bit more of an extremes performer. When it's good it's sort of unbeatable but I guess the consistency is the price to pay in this case. I think they have pushed the optics to the limits or something so it seems a little querky now on occasion such as I encountered. I still love it for the times when it's extremely good as nothing else I have can match it then or I imagine even bins I don't have.

I wish Albinos would do a wavelength test on it as I bet it's easily in the 90's for much of the range.

Maybe I should keep my sunglasses on when using it sometimes!

 

[typo]

At the moment there is an introductory trade-in promotion on the Bonelli 2.0.

There is a minimum £100 extra against the regular part exchange value.
http://www.birders-store.co.uk/kite-bonelli-20-8x42-binoculars.html

Sounds like CleySpy and One Stop Nature on the north Norfolk coast will be the next to Stock the Bonelli 2.0 and others to follow.

The outgoing model which was previously £959 is now discounted to £599 wich strikes me as a bit of a bargain.
http://www.birders-store.co.uk/kite-bonelli-8x42-binoculars.html

David