looksharp65
Well-known member
I think most people would like this binocular if the 6.5x plate was hidden because low power binoculars are more competent and versatile than many buyers think.
//L
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Meopta 6.5x32 MeoPro (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Pinewood
- Start date
I think most people would like this binocular if the 6.5x plate was hidden because low power binoculars are more competent and versatile than many buyers think.
//L
A2GG
Beth
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello all,
For those who are still subscribed to this thread, I might add a little update. Here in New York City, we are in the grips of the coldest January for decades. I was out in -7ºC weather and in -10ºC weather. The focussing wheel was definitely sluggish, but not stiff, in the colder temperature. Although, I had Zeiss 10x32 FL with me, I missed the chance to compare the focussing. My excuses are I did not need the Zeiss because the MeoPro was doing, nicely; and at that temperature, I was not thinking of reporting to my readers.
As some may know, I was busy looking for those over wintering orioles.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
For those who are still subscribed to this thread, I might add a little update. Here in New York City, we are in the grips of the coldest January for decades. I was out in -7ºC weather and in -10ºC weather. The focussing wheel was definitely sluggish, but not stiff, in the colder temperature. Although, I had Zeiss 10x32 FL with me, I missed the chance to compare the focussing. My excuses are I did not need the Zeiss because the MeoPro was doing, nicely; and at that temperature, I was not thinking of reporting to my readers.
As some may know, I was busy looking for those over wintering orioles.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
Last edited:
OpticsNerd1
Member
I'm happy with mine as well. Lately I've been trying to find a deal on a set of 10x binos and unless I spend near a grand I can't get anything with a noticeably better image than these meopros. These things are a steal.
chartwell99
Well-known member
Arthur's recommendations and evaluations are always spot on, and the Meopta 6.5 x 32 is no exception. My $240 Cameraland demo purchased based on that recommendation truly is a steal - bright, sharp and very nice in the hand. I like the low power and size of the configuration, but had to sell my 6 x 32 Vortex Viper HD last year due to persistent blackouts which made the otherwise excellent optics of this much higher priced binocular a real pain. Thankfully, no such problem here. Thanks to all who contributed to this thread as I am the ultimate beneficiary.
Pinewood
New York correspondent
chartwell99
Well-known member
A very brief update: the Meopros went from birds to the opera (Sondheim - A Little Night Music) this past weekend and the view from Orchestra Row M was truly stunning. Brilliant true color images, wonderfully wide field of view and perfect magnification. Theater use may be their best use yet.
Yes, you got that right :t:
I'm still considering this one for cold weather use (next winter ... )
OK:
I got my hands more permanently on these little dragon-slayers today (thanks, bluespider-pal!),
and they are indeed awesome. Rather than repeat all the superlatives again, and maybe say
I don't notice a lack of power, I thought it would be worth noting what I saw but did not know yet:
---These are hefty....heh, crikey, are they burly for their size!
---When I first noticed the oddly large depth of field (and yes, I do mean distance range from
infinity-focus to closest-pretty-sharp distance), I did a double take. I did check and confirm though.
They out-range the large-range-for-power Yosemites, the Bushnell-custom/Fuji 7x35s, and even the
Wuest 6x30s. A pleasant surprise.
---There is a blackout spot with cups down, but put the glasses
to the middle eyecup position, and no trouble at all. No-glasses? It's fine all the way out.
The designers knew the issue and devised rendezvous points to fix it.
A bit like the Yosemite 'forced relief', but more generous.
---There is a curvature to the field. It's slight and smooth edge to edge,
but the image is sharp to the last percent or so to the edge. I have no problem with this trade.
I've seen it so often on the best stuff. It's much like the Customs, but sharper across the field.
--The looking is easy and comfortable. Extremely comfortable. As expected, but worth noting.
Because of that and the depth of field, I can grab-n-go and bring them to bear without even
focusing most of the time.
Which brings up the one thing I would add: A focus-lock.
I'm happy.
I got my hands more permanently on these little dragon-slayers today (thanks, bluespider-pal!),
and they are indeed awesome. Rather than repeat all the superlatives again, and maybe say
I don't notice a lack of power, I thought it would be worth noting what I saw but did not know yet:
---These are hefty....heh, crikey, are they burly for their size!
---When I first noticed the oddly large depth of field (and yes, I do mean distance range from
infinity-focus to closest-pretty-sharp distance), I did a double take. I did check and confirm though.
They out-range the large-range-for-power Yosemites, the Bushnell-custom/Fuji 7x35s, and even the
Wuest 6x30s. A pleasant surprise.
---There is a blackout spot with cups down, but put the glasses
to the middle eyecup position, and no trouble at all. No-glasses? It's fine all the way out.
The designers knew the issue and devised rendezvous points to fix it.
A bit like the Yosemite 'forced relief', but more generous.
---There is a curvature to the field. It's slight and smooth edge to edge,
but the image is sharp to the last percent or so to the edge. I have no problem with this trade.
I've seen it so often on the best stuff. It's much like the Customs, but sharper across the field.
--The looking is easy and comfortable. Extremely comfortable. As expected, but worth noting.
Because of that and the depth of field, I can grab-n-go and bring them to bear without even
focusing most of the time.
Which brings up the one thing I would add: A focus-lock.
I'm happy.
bluespiderweb
Great Grey Looking Out
You're happy-I'm happy!
Glad to hear they arrived safe and sound, and that you are as impressed with them as I was. Just can't keep them all! Yes, a very nice bit of kit, and a sweet package Meopta puts together. What do you think of that neck strap?!! And I loved the diopter on the Meo's-best I've seen and used yet.
Enjoy them in good health!
Barry
Glad to hear they arrived safe and sound, and that you are as impressed with them as I was. Just can't keep them all! Yes, a very nice bit of kit, and a sweet package Meopta puts together. What do you think of that neck strap?!! And I loved the diopter on the Meo's-best I've seen and used yet.
Enjoy them in good health!
Barry
Yup, the diopter is sweet and discrete.
As for the neck strap..heh, that was a bit over the top...closed-cell float bubbles, wide belts,
guard collars...sheesh! The sort of thing you would hook a Coast Guard helicopter winch, lol.
Definitely doesn't fit in the bag.
So...I swapped in a nice neoprene-belt thing from some Barskas, which are on a 1-point lanyard
scheme now (bounces less: the composite-tube Yosemite clones are quite light).
I went to the woods, the pond, and the hill, ans checked these against the Carson 8x32 VPs
and some (early 70s 50s-reprise design) Consort 7x30s that are particularly nice. Against the Carsons the
edge resolution and contrast are improved just a tad, and the edge-flash is gone. Against the Consorts,
the resolution and contrast are the same (those Consorts are special), but the brightness is more
and the color is more natural.
Contrast and glare suppression is a big topic now, so it's worth looking at how the Meopro did that.
The short front ribbed tunnel is about identical to the one one the old 7x35 wides and the 7x30 consort.
Then things get interesting. Next is a flat black baffle can (two ring irises with an expanded diameter
chaber between them), another baffle can formed with the focuser lens, that has a clever beveled lead-in,
then an odd theatre-curtain iris to the inside to make a baffle with the prism entrance. The fact that they
are obsessed with supression is a pleasant surprise. They didn't miss the bus of re-discovery.
The finish isn't flat black inside, but it's a glass-shot blasted finish with satin blacking. Very effective with
the rings-of-doom irises. A lot like the pebbled-bitumen interior in the Yashica/Thorobreds of 1948-1958.
So there's a lot of back-to-the-future mixed in there. I have no amibitions to fit on hoods. .the cans
are built in. It's kind of a museum of binocular design going on in there, 70 years of history combined.
All those tweaks add up.
As for the neck strap..heh, that was a bit over the top...closed-cell float bubbles, wide belts,
guard collars...sheesh! The sort of thing you would hook a Coast Guard helicopter winch, lol.
Definitely doesn't fit in the bag.
So...I swapped in a nice neoprene-belt thing from some Barskas, which are on a 1-point lanyard
scheme now (bounces less: the composite-tube Yosemite clones are quite light).
I went to the woods, the pond, and the hill, ans checked these against the Carson 8x32 VPs
and some (early 70s 50s-reprise design) Consort 7x30s that are particularly nice. Against the Carsons the
edge resolution and contrast are improved just a tad, and the edge-flash is gone. Against the Consorts,
the resolution and contrast are the same (those Consorts are special), but the brightness is more
and the color is more natural.
Contrast and glare suppression is a big topic now, so it's worth looking at how the Meopro did that.
The short front ribbed tunnel is about identical to the one one the old 7x35 wides and the 7x30 consort.
Then things get interesting. Next is a flat black baffle can (two ring irises with an expanded diameter
chaber between them), another baffle can formed with the focuser lens, that has a clever beveled lead-in,
then an odd theatre-curtain iris to the inside to make a baffle with the prism entrance. The fact that they
are obsessed with supression is a pleasant surprise. They didn't miss the bus of re-discovery.
The finish isn't flat black inside, but it's a glass-shot blasted finish with satin blacking. Very effective with
the rings-of-doom irises. A lot like the pebbled-bitumen interior in the Yashica/Thorobreds of 1948-1958.
So there's a lot of back-to-the-future mixed in there. I have no amibitions to fit on hoods. .the cans
are built in. It's kind of a museum of binocular design going on in there, 70 years of history combined.
All those tweaks add up.
Last edited:
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello all,
About a month, ago, the focussing know fell off my MeoPro 6.5x32. Then I met two bird watchers, whose MeoPro 8x42 binoculars' were missing focussing knobs. I have been waiting for the proper adhesive, for weeks, otherwise I could have sent the whole binocular off to Meopta for repair. It seems that my nine months of use may be a contributor to this, but I think that Meopta may have chosen an adhesive that was not permanent to allow for service.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
About a month, ago, the focussing know fell off my MeoPro 6.5x32. Then I met two bird watchers, whose MeoPro 8x42 binoculars' were missing focussing knobs. I have been waiting for the proper adhesive, for weeks, otherwise I could have sent the whole binocular off to Meopta for repair. It seems that my nine months of use may be a contributor to this, but I think that Meopta may have chosen an adhesive that was not permanent to allow for service.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
Oh dear. What are the mating surfaces? Is it press-fit dowel-in-hole or something?
Well, I took a look at mine, and poked around a bit.
What can I say: after all the cleanings and restorations, I head to trouble like
a beaver heads to the sound of falling water. Another analogy is..
I am a fool rushing to where angels fear to tread...
So here's (my) deal:
---I pull out a bit on the rubber "knob"
---It's actually a sleeve, loosely covering a very well-attached metal knob.
---The knob/sleeve interface is mostly coated in a very high film strength grease!
---There are a few dots of very brittle plastic glue (like a "Duco" type stuff)
at the top ledge...this is eve more peculiar.
---So I make a fingernails-cage at the bottom...and the sleeve slips off!
...the high film strength has undermined the glue.
What to do?
--First, I use q-tips and acetone to do a very careful bit-by-bit degreasing, lightly damp.
--Then I repeat for the inside of the sleeve.
--I pop the sleeve on...it works like a champ with simple finger-pressure and friction.
The molded shape captivates the sleeve OK.
So...I'm fine for now. Glue is almost irrelevant: I can stretch-fit over electrician's tape,
make a new sleeve with adhesive-backed grit, whatever. The big metal knob is on
solid, and some bizarre greasing was done. Maybe I can practice on leatherette.
It's official: I've tweeked or fixed all my favorites, including the Meo.
I found a trivial and bizarre external problem. I've never seen anything like it.
Works great with nothing now. Eventually I'll probably slip a layer of electrician's tape
on and put the sleeve over that. I cannot fathom the logic behind the greasing.
Their adhesive is weirdly non-suited.
Well, I took a look at mine, and poked around a bit.
What can I say: after all the cleanings and restorations, I head to trouble like
a beaver heads to the sound of falling water. Another analogy is..
I am a fool rushing to where angels fear to tread...
So here's (my) deal:
---I pull out a bit on the rubber "knob"
---It's actually a sleeve, loosely covering a very well-attached metal knob.
---The knob/sleeve interface is mostly coated in a very high film strength grease!
---There are a few dots of very brittle plastic glue (like a "Duco" type stuff)
at the top ledge...this is eve more peculiar.
---So I make a fingernails-cage at the bottom...and the sleeve slips off!
...the high film strength has undermined the glue.
What to do?
--First, I use q-tips and acetone to do a very careful bit-by-bit degreasing, lightly damp.
--Then I repeat for the inside of the sleeve.
--I pop the sleeve on...it works like a champ with simple finger-pressure and friction.
The molded shape captivates the sleeve OK.
So...I'm fine for now. Glue is almost irrelevant: I can stretch-fit over electrician's tape,
make a new sleeve with adhesive-backed grit, whatever. The big metal knob is on
solid, and some bizarre greasing was done. Maybe I can practice on leatherette.
It's official: I've tweeked or fixed all my favorites, including the Meo.
I found a trivial and bizarre external problem. I've never seen anything like it.
Works great with nothing now. Eventually I'll probably slip a layer of electrician's tape
on and put the sleeve over that. I cannot fathom the logic behind the greasing.
Their adhesive is weirdly non-suited.
Last edited:
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello Optic Nut,
Underneath the focussing know is a pierced wheel, with six spokes, and with two lugs, at the edges, spaced 180º, apart. The notches match two depressions in the focussing knob, to match the lugs. The adhesive was applied to the spokes. Meopta recommended either Loctite™ 495 or Loctite™ 2K. Finding them has been difficult.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
Underneath the focussing know is a pierced wheel, with six spokes, and with two lugs, at the edges, spaced 180º, apart. The notches match two depressions in the focussing knob, to match the lugs. The adhesive was applied to the spokes. Meopta recommended either Loctite™ 495 or Loctite™ 2K. Finding them has been difficult.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
Ah...so you had a more serious fail.
I only see the permanent and the "removable" blue everywhere.
Good old #243.
Wait..
Those numbers seem odd: 2K is a Loctite Silicone sealant, and 495 is an acrylic superglue. I ran into a superglue
on the sleeve top. It was no match for the grease. So..these adhesives are 'made' by Loctite but they
are not the actual thread-locking product, maybe.
If the bonding broke free on those (looks like) permanent bonds, I would suspect that grease...it's the type
that crawls around. It might have lifted the bond. The adhesives would be ordinary, but
the main thing would be to degrease before replacement.
I only see the permanent and the "removable" blue everywhere.
Good old #243.
Wait..
Those numbers seem odd: 2K is a Loctite Silicone sealant, and 495 is an acrylic superglue. I ran into a superglue
on the sleeve top. It was no match for the grease. So..these adhesives are 'made' by Loctite but they
are not the actual thread-locking product, maybe.
If the bonding broke free on those (looks like) permanent bonds, I would suspect that grease...it's the type
that crawls around. It might have lifted the bond. The adhesives would be ordinary, but
the main thing would be to degrease before replacement.
Last edited:
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello Optic N,
I put the binocular on its side, and scraped the old adhesive off. Using a washable marker, I drew a line along the knob and through the dioptre scale, allowing me to quickly align the knob with the lugs. I removed the knob. Then I stood the binocular on its objectives; placed paper under the metal wheel, then I used the adhesive, in case I dripped. I replaced the knob, using the aligning mark, and compressed it with an elastic [rubber] band, for 48 hours.
I had the glass out, today, where it met its match, even with a working focussing knob. It was just about useless to find a humming bird's nest, 9 cm. tall and 3 m, away, when Tuesday, an 8x did the job. Fortunately, I had a 10x, today, so I was able to observe the female ruby throated hummingbird, minding the nest and flying off.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :scribe:
I put the binocular on its side, and scraped the old adhesive off. Using a washable marker, I drew a line along the knob and through the dioptre scale, allowing me to quickly align the knob with the lugs. I removed the knob. Then I stood the binocular on its objectives; placed paper under the metal wheel, then I used the adhesive, in case I dripped. I replaced the knob, using the aligning mark, and compressed it with an elastic [rubber] band, for 48 hours.
I had the glass out, today, where it met its match, even with a working focussing knob. It was just about useless to find a humming bird's nest, 9 cm. tall and 3 m, away, when Tuesday, an 8x did the job. Fortunately, I had a 10x, today, so I was able to observe the female ruby throated hummingbird, minding the nest and flying off.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :scribe:
Last edited:
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello Optic N,
I will revise the size of the nest, down to 6 cm. It is not a matter of sharpness, but higher power was need to make the nest apparent. Today, after getting my landmarks right, I could see the nest with the 6.5x32 MeoPro. There are folks using spotting scopes to look at it and photographers who use 500 mm. lenses.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
I will revise the size of the nest, down to 6 cm. It is not a matter of sharpness, but higher power was need to make the nest apparent. Today, after getting my landmarks right, I could see the nest with the 6.5x32 MeoPro. There are folks using spotting scopes to look at it and photographers who use 500 mm. lenses.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
Last edited:
If we assume both binoculars were operating to nominal levels,
the contrast and resolution were well past what's needed to actually see the nest.
It looks like the hummingbird nest is well-camouflaged:
http://www.rubythroat.org/questionsnesteggs01.html
It could be mistaken for a gall or a stub at a lost twig.
Maybe 'largeness in your optic cortex' is a key factor to finding things like nests,
to noticing the subtle mismatch against some other thing it could be.
I know in photos of camouflaged things, it takes a half a minute sometimes to find the animal or thing.
Camouflaged things "dawn on you" after a lot of staring and cognitive shuffling inside....that's the point
of those camouflage photos. I remember in science some other kids never found the octopus.
This sort of fits with some comparisons I did a while back, where I thought
"I can see the same details in a 6x view, but it takes a lot longer than at 10x".
It's not you need more resolution, but more like you need 'bigger shapes' for the Cognitive Psych.
the contrast and resolution were well past what's needed to actually see the nest.
It looks like the hummingbird nest is well-camouflaged:
http://www.rubythroat.org/questionsnesteggs01.html
It could be mistaken for a gall or a stub at a lost twig.
Maybe 'largeness in your optic cortex' is a key factor to finding things like nests,
to noticing the subtle mismatch against some other thing it could be.
I know in photos of camouflaged things, it takes a half a minute sometimes to find the animal or thing.
Camouflaged things "dawn on you" after a lot of staring and cognitive shuffling inside....that's the point
of those camouflage photos. I remember in science some other kids never found the octopus.
This sort of fits with some comparisons I did a while back, where I thought
"I can see the same details in a 6x view, but it takes a lot longer than at 10x".
It's not you need more resolution, but more like you need 'bigger shapes' for the Cognitive Psych.
Last edited:
