• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Meopta Meostar B1 Plus 12x50HD (1 Viewer)

HenRun

Well-known member
Sweden
Meopta B1 Plus series continue to impress. I have found that despite having the option/funds for any brand available on the market - and trying most of them out - I have been circling back to Meopta for primarily; the performance, and secondary: superb value for money.

Despite having the 10X42HD and the 15x56HD I was curious to see what the 12x50HD is all about. In the German Catalogue it is separated from the other B1 Plus binoculars on a double page spread with the text: "2020 The best binocular from Meopta" in a circle badge above the image.

With the pending 8x32 returns I figured I might as well give it a test run since my fellow BinoManiac friend was very keen on either the 10x42HD or a 12X bino.

I would have loved to include the Meopta 8x32 in the image, unfortunately it was already boxed up and sent back:



The 10x42HD on the left, the 12x50HD in the middle and the 15x56HD on the right. The 10x42 is not that small, it is a hefty, dense package but it is not that tall for a 10x42.

Imaging in all three is superb. I have some intermittent problems with the 15x56 with glasses when I am panning down the hill we are located at but the ability to "focus through" branches and objects in the foreground is excellent with the higher magnification, something the 10X cannot do as well.

The 10x42 is easy to bring up to my eyes and hold steady despite/thanks to the weight and seeing the whole image with glasses is no problem.
If I could only have ONE binocular, I am pretty sure this one would be it.

The 12x50 sits inbetween the two in the magnification range while not giving anything away in the optical department.
It too gives me, easily, the full image with glasses. As far as resolution/sharpness/contrast the three are all up there with the best. Even against the sun and in harsh overcast light they perform great with no ocular reflections and they handle glare with excellence - it is very hard to provoke. None of them are plagued with CA, in fact it is a Meopta trait to have exemplary CA control in the HD range.

I expected I might like 12X but in a way I was thinking it would find a place with my friend since it sits inbetween the 10X and 15X.
However, I found that the 12X would easily replace the 15X for me. Despite all three having similar eye relief on paper the 10X and 12X are easier for me to work with my glasses. The 15x56 has very litte wiggle room - it gives me a great stationary viewing but any time I pan around I have to reconfigure my head placement. Without glasses it is much easier.
In terms of looking at details at far I find the 12X gives me pretty much the same ability to really spot small details as the 15X, though in some cases power always wins.

The 12X has almost the same ability to focus through foreground objects than the 15X and after watching a family of deer grazing at dusk and at dawn with both binoculars it was clear to me that the 12X is a keeper. It is probably the highest resolving of the three - but I can't see that with my eyes, I don't know if anyone can. The 15X is already fantastic with a CA free high resolution image in the center.

The 10X vs the 12X is easier to judge: the 10X is a better allrounder and handholding the 12X is more difficult. The 12X I find to be the best of the three following birds in flight as well as for short stints at medium distances looking at the birds in the birdfeeders. On a monopod or a tripod the 12X really is about the best I have seen so far, all things considered.

The price you pay is the field curvature, which is greater than on the 10X and looking down at the field the 12X drops off more towards the field stops and does it earlier than the 10X which does it more gracefully.

Is this a problem? If you would compare the Meopta 12x50HD with the Swarovski NL Pure 12x42 (which I have had at home, looking at the same field) I would say the Swarovski flat field and much wider imaging would impress most people more than the Meopta imaging would. It would, for me too. The Swarovski is stunning. I don't think the Swaro would give up that much in twilight viewing either. Is the Swaro sharper than the Meopta 12X? No, I don't think so.

I would say that I do think the Meopta is perhaps a little sharper in the center - judging by a coiled wire across the field where the coils are visible like "dots" on the Swarovski while the coils are more distinctly visible as lines in the Meopta 12X.

Edge performance on the Swaro is a slam dunk win though. But, given that the Swarovski costs a little more than twice as much as the Meopta I would rather have both the 10X and 12X Meoptas and some significant change in the pocket. So that was my decision, keep both. :)

Also, I did find that in light conditions that are common from my vantage point, the Swaro Pure NL does give me ocular reflections and it is more prone to glare than any of the Meopta HD offerings. Some will disagree with this but I can only tell it as I see it.

For viewing details I find the 12X close to perfect - it can squeeze out as much detail in the sweetspot as I can resolve with my eyes, probably more! The field curvature is not a problem either - looking at the farm houses across the fields they all stand out in a highly detailed, ca free, image. From 12X and up the limiting factor for is more due to the thermals in the air - but I rather look through some sharp thermals than some smeared ones. In the cool afternoons when the air is reasonably still the imaging of both the 15X and the 12X is a joy to see. I prefer juggling the 12X on the monopod over the 15X so it will be my field kit for excursions around the area.

This leaves the 15x56HD in Limbo so I put it on the market, at a fair price. Given that Meopta is virtually unknown over here I expected it to stay in the stable. It isn't easy to find a buyer which is a pity - since it is a great piece of glass! Lucky for me it did sell after a week and a half and the buyer will use it as a viewing bino out at a lake at their summer house. The buyer was not an optics expert but I hope with time he will realize what a bargain he made with that purchase.



Side with the 15x56 the 12x50 almost looks small!



At the moment the 12X is the only bino I have at home: the 10x42 is at my friends house and I also let him buy the Zeiss 8x32 FL from me.
House feels kind of empty! Hopefully the 8X quest is about to be resolved within a week, fingers crossed!

Ergonomics: I find the 10X42 superb for my hands. Comparing to a lot of other binoculars in the 10x42 range it would not have been my first choice going by ergonomics and first impressions - but after some use I find I don't even think about the ergonomics - which means I have no problems with it = perfect. I think I would probably choose the Meostar 10x42HD of the Zeiss SF 10x42 or Swarovski NL 10x42 - but that is primarily going on price/performance and factoring in having two other binos in the near magnification range. If prices were equal I don't know. I really don't.

The 12x50 is not as nice to handle as the Geko/GPO 12,5 bino, being fatter and heavier, but again, when actually using it, I have no complaints.
It isn't as nice in handling as the 10x42 but the ergonomics are very similar. It is very good for the class, but not great.

I don't think anyone with normal to medium or small sized hands would choose the Meopta over the Swarovski 12X or the GPO/Geko 12,5X based on ergonomics alone. For viewing I think most would choose the Swarovski or GeKo - the latter being fantastic with glasses. I found the CA in the GeKo too much for me so in the end it would be a no brainer for me: Meopta for under half the price of the Swaro with imaging "on par" with some trade off when it comes to the whole package.

On a monopod or tripod there is nothing to complain about with the Meopta. Everything is placed where it "should" be and works as intended.
 
Last edited:
I was REALLY hoping you would say the 15x56 is by far the pick of the litter as I recently bought (at a pretty good price) a Cabela's version of the 15x56 HD that was serviced by Meopta earlier this year.

I am really enjoying them.

I very much appreciate your impressions and opinions of the various binoculars you have used and reading about how you feel they compare.
-Charlie-
 
Hey Charlie, thanks for the feedback. I am glad you have enjoyed them. :)
I am not that technical in writing my impressions and I would say they are for the most part highly subjective. Some findings I think will hold true for many others too though.

I am not sure which one would be the pick of the litter.
The 15x56 B1 Plus is one of a few high magnification binoculars that outperforms many others with smaller magnification and has almost no peers. Considering the price point it is definitely a superb binocular. A little picky with eye placement for me in the long run - but for those who don't have that problem there is almost only the Swarovski 15x56 SLC HD that rivals it on the market for sheer performance.

Others report the 12x50 having too little effective eye relief - but it works for me. As with the 15x56 and with glasses there isn't much room to spare but it works for me. The 12x50 is perhaps the optically best of the lot but as with the 15x it is a struggle to handhold unsupported. If you enjoy the 15x56 on a tripod I would say that power is king and you have made the right choice. For me, I wish I had the 12x handling with the 15x magnification - and I guess some will find them equal.

After looking through Leica, Swarovski, Zeiss 12x45 Conquest, Geko/GPO and Vortex in the 12x range I would say that only the Swarovski NL 12x42 (and perhaps the EL12x50 which I haven't seen) would optically match the Meopta - at twice the price. Maybe the Vortex Razor UHD would be a dark horse in this segment too - I have yet to see through one - but it is about 50% more expensive too.

The 10x42HD I would say is perhaps the best buy in the line up. Except for weight it has no real weaknesses and matches the 12x and 15x for performance and is easier to hand hold.

In the 10x range there are so many other great binoculars out there, but for me the Meopta was a balance of optical performance as well as price.
I could have gone Swaro EL/NL or Zeiss SF but for the price difference I could get two Meoptas and the trade off in weight is a sacrifice I can do. Had the Meopta been significantly more expensive or the others way cheaper the decision would have been harder than comparing 15x and 12x binos.

The 8x Meopta Meostars don't have the HD moniker and start to show a little more CA and drops slightly in performance which is the opposite of many other brands, they are still great binoculars but the competition in the 8x magnification is fierce. I have too little experience with the Meostar 8x to give any valuable input. In the 8x32 range I find it difficult to find myself a keeper bino, mostly due to my glasses.

There will be, hopefully, yet one more Meopta review/assessment coming up shortly, it might be of interest - stay tuned!
One Meopta will be pitted against two well known and far more expensive competitors. :)

EDIT: shouldn't write before breakfast. Brain is not warm yet.
 
Last edited:
The 12x50 is still going strong. This is a cropped handheld (!) shot of a Woodpecker (Dryobates Minor) through my kitchen window glass using an iPhone 12 mini and a cheap adapter. I did not have time to set the 12x50 on the tripod so I snapped five six images and two were usable.
The Woodpecker is a regular around the house and a beautiful bird.
 

Attachments

  • Hackspett_1.jpg
    Hackspett_1.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 69
I would imagine the Meopta Meostar B1 Plus 12x50 is a good binocular as it has an splendid 63.6 AFOV, but it is heavy for a 50 mm as a lot of Meoptas are at 38 oz. I know the Meopta Meostar B1 Plus 15x56 is an excellent binocular. I had one once at the same time as the Swarovski SLC 15x56, and really they are just as good for less money. Many of the Meostars are exceptional binoculars, including the 8x42. I find the Meopta Meostar B1 Plus 8x32 one of the weakest performers in the line, though.
 
Last edited:
As you replied I was literally using the 12x50. Optically it is superb, even slightly better than the 15x56 I think, to the point the extra magnification was not worth having in my view as the 12x I can use handheld for some time and on tripod it is superb. EDIT: not to mention slightly better eye relief in practical use for my glasses and face structure.

Despite being heavy the 12x works great for tracking birds in flight. Handheld it is more straining and most of the time I have it supported or on tripod with the Swaro quick release. On a monopod it is great for use in the field and the magnification is great for penetrating branches and foliage, something I find 8x does not do as well, for obvious reasons. And the lack of CA in the 12x50 makes for crisp, detailed long range viewing.

After getting the Swaro 8x32 NL I sold the Meopta Meostar 10x42 to a friend, despite how good the 10x is I find the mag difference is too small for handheld use and the Swaro ticks all the every day use boxes. The Swaro is not ”sharper” than the Meostar 10x but handholding I find the NL bridges the mag gap more than any other 8x I have had. The 10X42 Meostar is a great piece of glass and would still be my go to 10X if I would want one again.

The 12x Meostar however does extract that extra level of detail, alowing me yesterday to try to ID a bird across the field as it was perched in the branches, even with the Swaro I was not quite sure on the bird species. With the 12x I had a first look handheld and then snapped it onto the tripod and got me a pretty good look before the bird took off. I am still trying to find out what species it was and that 12x look gave me cues I could not get with lesser manification.

The 12x gets even more use now.

I agree that the 8x32 in the Meopta line up is the weakest of the bunch. If you don't have any of the better alpha glass to compare it to side by side it is still a great bino and very easy on the eyes for me. Out of all the binos I sold off I do regret not holding on to it.

The attached photo is made with a simple iPhone adapter on the Meopta 12x. To enable focusing via the left ocular of the adapter is mounted at an angle so the adapter does not interfere and I usually end up rotating/cropping down the image afterwards.

The Swaro works well with the adapter too but I find the Meopta is the best I have for attaching the iPhone to, the extra reach and stellar optics makes for some decent snapshots.
 

Attachments

  • 63E12855-4A96-4A6B-8345-208F1D47594D.jpeg
    63E12855-4A96-4A6B-8345-208F1D47594D.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 44
Last edited:
As I am writing this the Woodpecker is back at the bird feeder, it is a daily visitor at the moment. I am not sure if there are two of them as I think one (if there are in fact two) has a slightly different tone on the chest feathers. I am trying to gather a few shots now and then to try and find that out.

The Meopta is optically very capable and most of the phone shots don't do it justice. The one I posted is through glass and the tripod was not locked down and quite wobbly as I scrambled to get a few shots off before the Woodpecker took off. Any digital crop takes a resolution toll too but overall I think it does the job well enough with no extra gear.
 
As you replied I was literally using the 12x50. Optically it is superb, even slightly better than the 15x56 I think, to the point the extra magnification was not worth having in my view as the 12x I can use handheld for some time and on tripod it is superb. EDIT: not to mention slightly better eye relief in practical use for my glasses and face structure.

Despite being heavy the 12x works great for tracking birds in flight. Handheld it is more straining and most of the time I have it supported or on tripod with the Swaro quick release. On a monopod it is great for use in the field and the magnification is great for penetrating branches and foliage, something I find 8x does not do as well, for obvious reasons. And the lack of CA in the 12x50 makes for crisp, detailed long range viewing.

After getting the Swaro 8x32 NL I sold the Meopta Meostar 10x42 to a friend, despite how good the 10x is I find the mag difference is too small for handheld use and the Swaro ticks all the every day use boxes. The Swaro is not ”sharper” than the Meostar 10x but handholding I find the NL bridges the mag gap more than any other 8x I have had. The 10X42 Meostar is a great piece of glass and would still be my go to 10X if I would want one again.

The 12x Meostar however does extract that extra level of detail, alowing me yesterday to try to ID a bird across the field as it was perched in the branches, even with the Swaro I was not quite sure on the bird species. With the 12x I had a first look handheld and then snapped it onto the tripod and got me a pretty good look before the bird took off. I am still trying to find out what species it was and that 12x look gave me cues I could not get with lesser manification.

The 12x gets even more use now.

I agree that the 8x32 in the Meopta line up is the weakest of the bunch. If you don't have any of the better alpha glass to compare it to side by side it is still a great bino and very easy on the eyes for me. Out of all the binos I sold off I do regret not holding on to it.

The attached photo is made with a simple iPhone adapter on the Meopta 12x. To enable focusing via the left ocular of the adapter is mounted at an angle so the adapter does not interfere and I usually end up rotating/cropping down the image afterwards.

The Swaro works well with the adapter too but I find the Meopta is the best I have for attaching the iPhone to, the extra reach and stellar optics makes for some decent snapshots.
"I agree that the 8x32 in the Meopta line up is the weakest of the bunch. If you don't have any of the better alpha glass to compare it to side by side, it is still a great bino and very easy on the eyes for me. Out of all the binos I sold off, I do regret not holding on to it."

Isn't that funny how you get to thinking a binocular is the greatest thing since sliced cheese, like the Meopta Meostar B1 Plus, and then you side by side it with an alpha, and you are jerked back to reality! I once had a Kowa Prominar Genesis 8x33 and I thought it was wonderful until one day I side by sided with an NL, and it shocked me how much better the NL was. I sold the Kowa the next day on eBay! Have you ever side by sided the Swarovski EL 12x50 with your Meopta Meostar B1 Plus 12x50? I would be curious how it stacks up to an alpha. The Meopta Meostar B1 10x50's aren't really ranked that high in Albino's testing, but the 12x50 could be different. According to Meopta there were no optical changes in the B1 to the B1 plus. How is the CA in your Meopta Meostar B1 Plus 12x50? Just curious because I might try a pair.

“The major differences are the rubber armor which was improved for better grip and a slightly slimmer profile, the addition of a hydrophobic coating on exterior lens surfaces for improved water repellence, and some of the mechanical tolerances inside the binocular were tightened up to increase durability. Weight and glass composition are the same otherwise. The Air is supposed to drop in January, but with all the delays we have experienced with covid, I am cautious to guarantee that timeframe.”

 
Last edited:
I had both 12x50, the EL SV and B1+ and can very frankly tell you that Meopta is wel ahead in terms of CA correction and EL SV is well ahead in field correction. Generally Meostar is better for peoples without glasses who are sensitive on CA, otherwise EL SV is better for peoples who wear glasses and are not sensitive to CA. In terms of centerfield resolution B1+ wins, in terms of brightness EL SV wins. B1+ is better for terrestrial observation while EL SV is better for astronomy.
 
I had both 12x50, the EL SV and B1+ and can very frankly tell you that Meopta is wel ahead in terms of CA correction and EL SV is well ahead in field correction. Generally Meostar is better for peoples without glasses who are sensitive on CA, otherwise EL SV is better for peoples who wear glasses and are not sensitive to CA. In terms of centerfield resolution B1+ wins, in terms of brightness EL SV wins. B1+ is better for terrestrial observation while EL SV is better for astronomy.
Interesting that the B1+ 10x50 is ahead of the EL SV 10x50 in center field resolution and CA. I would imagine that the EL SV is better corrected because most Swarovski's are very corrected and flat field. Have you ever compared the B1 to the B1+ in the 10x50? I wonder if there is any difference.
 
I had both 12x50, the EL SV and B1+ and can very frankly tell you that Meopta is wel ahead in terms of CA correction and EL SV is well ahead in field correction. Generally Meostar is better for peoples without glasses who are sensitive on CA, otherwise EL SV is better for peoples who wear glasses and are not sensitive to CA. In terms of centerfield resolution B1+ wins, in terms of brightness EL SV wins. B1+ is better for terrestrial observation while EL SV is better for astronomy.

My take is that the 12x50 Meopta B1+ is extremely well corrected for CA and that the center field resolution is very hard to match, let alone surpass.

I did compare it to the NL Pure 12x42 side by side and though I would prefer the NL Pure in everyday use for more than one reason I still choose the Meopta 12x50 as it does exactly what I want out of that type/magnification. Considering the price difference I am more than happy sticking to the Meopta. It all boils down to it being a magnification I rarely hand hold and if small detail extraction is the goal (which is why I have them in the first place) I do think the Meoptas leave me with nothing more to ask for. With the NL Pure 12x42 I would be tempted to handhold them more often which still is a far cry from using lesser magnification except for very brief use. With the Meopta 12x50 I know I need the monopod on a walk and the few times I bring that kit it is very rewarding.

I do use progresssive glasses and though I can't explain how they do it but the Meopta 12x50 meshes with my glasses superbly. I did try with my other pair of glasses which are not progressive and it is just not as good, the shape of the glasses are different and of course a factor as well but this alone makes the 12x50 a solid keeper for me even though it is my least used bino. Like with all of the "best" Alphas out there it puts a smile on my face everytime I use it. Solid optical quality never gets old.

I don't have the same issues at all with the Pure NL 8x32, they work with everything but in the 12x and 15x range I prefer Meopta over Swarovski, all things considered.

There are quite a few praise-worthy binoculars out there and some of them have passed through my hands the last couple of years. Once I straightened out my personal priorities and needs I can still look back and appreciate some of them and even miss them in use - but I also remember the reason I chose to slim down the outfit and get more use out of the remaining binos. Do miss the Meopta 10x42 but I get to look through my old pair every now and then so all is good. I might even buy it back in the years to come - I don't rule that out as I know what it is capable of, it just does not fit my particular needs right now.
 
Interesting that the B1+ 10x50 is ahead of the EL SV 10x50 in center field resolution and CA. I would imagine that the EL SV is better corrected because most Swarovski's are very corrected and flat field. Have you ever compared the B1 to the B1+ in the 10x50? I wonder if there is any difference.
Never had non HD Meostar, as I am that type of guy who can complain on CA in EL SV 12x, thus will double complain for non HD Meopta 12x50. Meopta made good job by implementing two HD lens per barrel. So if splitting hairs by watching stripes of white/black pattern, the point when CA starts to cause resolution loss starts earlier in ELSV than in Meostar HD within centerfield. Yet when looking for outer field the ELSV will win, cause monochromatic aberrations in Meostar HD simply blur the view way earlier than CA in fully corrected field of EL SV. Both have common only 12x50 format, otherwise designs are different and each has its own strenghts. Meostar HD is like SLC style with better CA but worse transmission.
 
Nice to see them get the stamp of approval from Allbinos! The only real weak point is transmission, which has always been a soft spot for the Meostars. I'm assuming the mirror surface is still silvered since I have never seen marketing for a dielectric coating in the Meostars.
 
There has been a long and interesting discussion here on the combination of silver and dielectric prism coating still favored by Meopta, but I don't think its impact on overall transmission has been documented. I'd suppose that other factors (like lens coatings) are involved also, and transmission isn't quite as high a priority as for the alpha brands.
 
There has been a long and interesting discussion here on the combination of silver and dielectric prism coating still favored by Meopta, but I don't think its impact on overall transmission has been documented. I'd suppose that other factors (like lens coatings) are involved also, and transmission isn't quite as high a priority as for the alpha brands.

I don't think there is any documentation, but we can speculate. I have never seen dielectric mentioned in Meostar sales literature or spec sheets, usually it's mentioned somewhere as a feature if it is used. I can't recall where I heard they used silver over aluminum, but it makes sense as silver is a more premium coating than aluminum with higher reflection.

Meopta is down a few percent in transmission from it's competitors. The only way that is possible is inferior coatings, more lens elements or silver mirror coatings. I seriously doubt Meopta has inferior coatings. Meostars have a fairly straightforward optical layout, so that just leaves the prism mirror coating. I don't think 88% vs. top notch Alphas being 90-92% (w/SP prisms at least) is a big deal. I certainly don't find my Meostars dim at all. Maybe the B2 versions will have dielectric mirror surfaces.
 
Even though I would like to have the highest transmission possible, I have yet to find the Meopta Meostar series "dim".

I don't know how to phrase it properly but I think that in very bright conditions, or all out sunny conditions, it can even be somewhat of an advantage. What I mean is that they are still bright enough in anything but very drab conditions and that transmission reduction does not deter the viewing experience for me and in harsh contrast lighting they seem to lessen the "impact" or eye strain compared to the highest transmission optics that to my eyes can seem a little washed out in comparison, even though they perform better at dusk or dawn.

Meopta has for me a fairly uniform imaging which to me sets them apart from "lesser" binoculars with the same "low" transmission figures.

I don't recall if it was posted on the Birdforum a few years back in a discussion with a Meopta representative who said that they don't use silver in their coatings. Or maybe I simply don't remember correctly.
 
I had both 12x50, the EL SV and B1+ and can very frankly tell you that Meopta is wel ahead in terms of CA correction and EL SV is well ahead in field correction. Generally Meostar is better for peoples without glasses who are sensitive on CA, otherwise EL SV is better for peoples who wear glasses and are not sensitive to CA. In terms of centerfield resolution B1+ wins, in terms of brightness EL SV wins. B1+ is better for terrestrial observation while EL SV is better for astronomy.

I wonder how you would describe the difference in colour balance? My expectation would be that the EL was bluer and the B1+ was more orange. But which is closer to the naked eye?
 
I had both 12x50, the EL SV and B1+ and can very frankly tell you that Meopta is wel ahead in terms of CA correction and EL SV is well ahead in field correction. Generally Meostar is better for peoples without glasses who are sensitive on CA, otherwise EL SV is better for peoples who wear glasses and are not sensitive to CA. In terms of centerfield resolution B1+ wins, in terms of brightness EL SV wins. B1+ is better for terrestrial observation while EL SV is better for astronomy.

A very nice summary of the differences with no words wasted!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top