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="denco@comcast.n" data-source="post: 3181139" data-attributes="member: 25300">1)What percentage of the Maven FOV was sharp, would you estimate? What percentage of the CL's?  Maven 70%      Swarovski CL  85% (The Swaro's were sharper RIGHT at the edge also but not like say a Swarovision)2)Sorry to hear about the eyecups. The B1 eyecups are very nice, and removeable. The B1 also left me with an impression of excellent build quality, overall. The Maven's eyecups twist out sloppily as is typical of many Chinese binoculars. The tolerances are simply not tight enough.  The Swarovski's CL are manufactured with much closer tolerances making for a nice quality feel when you twist them out. The Maven's feel like they could come off. I really HATE the big fat rubbers at the end of the eyecups on the Mavens. Your eye sockets are not squared off like that the eyecups should not be either. Swarovski has it right on the eyecup rubbers. A small thin rounded rubber that fits in your eye socket. The build quality of the Maven is not bad. I would say it is typical of Chinese binoculars also. Nowhere near the quality of the Swarovski. The body rubber has a cheaper sticky feel to it ,whereas, the Swarovski feels smoother and higher quality and it is thicker. The Swarovski looks like it was designed as one piece ,whereas, the Maven looks like parts of it were afterthoughts.3)Interesting to hear you found the low light performance lacking, as the B1's was pretty impressive.I am sure the B.1's low-light performance was better than the B.3 because of the larger aperture but comparing the two 30mm binoculars side by side at dusk I could definitely see more detail through the Swaro. Surprised me actually. Swarovski's are known for their coatings and the high quality glass they use. That was probably the difference. The Swarovski even though it doesn't use HD glass as such showed less CA than the Maven also. I asked Swarovski about that once and they said even though it isn't technically HD glass it is high quality glass so it controls CA quite well. There is quite a price difference in these two binoculars so in a way it wasn't fair but I report it as I see it. Perhaps, a better comparison for the Maven B.3 8x30 would be the Nikon Monarch 7 8x30 HD or the Kite equivalent. The Swaro CL is almost twice the price of the Maven and is really not in the same class.</blockquote>

Verification