• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

new Papilio II (1 Viewer)

ephemere

Member
I briefly owned the 6.5x before returning it. The close-up capabilities were interesting, but I did not find it as appealing for general use as the Bushnell 7x26 Elite of similar specs (size, weight, AFOV) that I ended up keeping. The Bushnell was more expensive, but some promotions at the time narrowed that gap.

One thing that prospective purchasers of the Pentax should keep in mind is that the depth-of-field at close focus is quite narrow, as is typical with macro views, so your subject will go out of focus easily. The way I tended to use them was to fix the focus at minimum and to focus by moving myself closer to/further from the subject.
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
A fast look at Amazon brought up 47 reviews (5 stars) on the 6.5x and 57 reviews on the 8.5X..and That just on Amazon USA..Of course You will find two people that agree with your opinion among those reviews .In any case I am just expressing a view based in my experience with the only unit of this model(6.5X)that i have .My unit is a very Sharp binocular at all distances ,THAT NEEDS TO BE USED PROPERLY in the super short distance because is not that easy to use,but with practice is a great tool for macro views..My Kid ,after months of use,has naturally learnt how to use this binocular well and is getting the best out of the macro views.
Dennis,I forgot which model you had,the 6.5X or the 8.5X ,maybe we are not talking about the same binocular
I had both the 6.5x and 8.5x Papillio's. I compared to them to both the Swarovski 8x25 CL-P and the the Zeiss Victory 8x25 under varying conditions. Sorry, but they are not as sharp as either especially at long range. Not even close. At the cost difference it is logical they wouldn't be. The people that give the Papillio 5 stars have probably never looked through a Zeiss Victory or Swarovski CL-P. $50 Bushnell's get 5 star ratings on Amazon.com. The people don't know any better or may have never seen an alpha level binocular. A Papillio is good little binocular for close observation but it is not in the same class as the alpha compacts for all around birding.
 
Last edited:

mayoayo

Well-known member
I dont need to look through a zeiss or swaro last generation compact ,because I dont need one,..You get fueled on the Alpha comparison when i say that the papilio is as good as any compact..Ok Dennis,there are better binoculars for those that can afford it. but no alpha class binocular can compare with the papilio on specifications either,..its unique focussing system,with the convergent lenses is a really good idea ,even though DOF is really thin at close range ,there is no strain on the eyes and this is remarcable,and it is a 6.5X!..At this magnification apparent sharpness and contrast is definitely as good as any of the 8x compacts you pointed,but lets leave it there.I didnt say it is a birding binocular either.I said it is the perfect family or travel little binoculars,and You can see that my examples of suggesting use were from gardens to architecture and museums ,while still totally usable for birding .
I think is definitely a five stars product on its own merit ,because I am of the opinion that its uniqueness makes it incomparable ,even with your alpha class references
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
It is a pointless and futile argument to say a Papillio has comparable optics to an alpha level compact like a Zeiss Victory or Swarovski CL-P for all around birding. Apparent sharpness or contrast are just not quite as good IMO. If you are happy with the Papillio and feel it is as good as the alpha compacts optically you are lucky. You saved hundreds of dollars but for most people including me there is a significant difference between the view of the Papillio and a Swarovski CL-P. It is not even worth arguing over. It is just when somebody says a Papillio is as good optically as a Swarovski CL-P I have to disagree. Enough said.
 
Last edited:

mayoayo

Well-known member
There we go again Dennis..a simple thread about a simple inexpensive binocular turned into a negative comparison with the most expensive binoculars in the market ..I didnt save any money buying an inferior model,,I spent 100 dollars in a binocular for my 11 years old ,that he loves and that surprised me in a very positive way,from the view,to the strap lugs design!!!!..Dont you like the strap lugs design Dennis? I am sure you noticed how well designed the system is..or didnt you?...The binocular Is very very sharp with incredible contrast ,specially at infinity,..You said that the binocular lacks image quality at infinity,well, it doesnt.Of course there are all around better birding binoculars,but as an all around binocular period,the Papilio is amazing ,i mean ALL AROUND,down to 50cm..Today we were in the Pyrennes,and were walking around watching metallic green beetles and bumble bees and weird flies sucking on the thistle flowers..pretty cool at that level of magnification,You cannot dream that level of detail with the swaros..never!.Your eyes would cross so bad focussing so close with other bino other than the papilio!!!!...we were lucky enough to see two Lagermeier,an adult and a juv,and I agree ,the Swaro would have been much better(probably better even than my inexpensive 8x32)than the papilio 6.5x,but not because of lack of sharpness of contrast,but mostly because 6.5X in a distant flying bird is not a lot ,and the FOV is not huge either,But what really is cool is to have a binocular that can give you such different views of different worlds ,close and far.You said the binocular is good for close range but poor for infinity,I say no ,I say close range is interesting and amazing but finicky due to very narrow DOF,but at infinity the image is crisp and shows excellent contrast.The Alpha comparison is your thing,you started it and I agree is not worht to argue over it
 
Last edited:

Nixterdemus

Well-known member
I compared to them to both the Swarovski 8x25 CL-P and the the Zeiss Victory 8x25 ...

Imagine that ...
---
I would like to take a peek through the new & improved II as I only have the old 6.5.

ETA: The 8.5 only has a 2.47 ep. Conventional wisdom frowns on a 10x30 for its paltry 3mm ep/favours 10x32. The 6.5x comes in at 3.23. I have no problem w/detail through mine bearing in mind I'm giving up latest coatings along w/1.5X compared to the standard 8X.

The M5 20x56 that everyone decries, for difficult eye placement, comes in w/2.8/one third more mm than the 8.5x21.
Gimmie a break. For slightly over a C-note the Papilio 6.5/8.5x21 packs a lot of punch for its price.
I cannot believe the argument is over its virtue compared to alpha class bins.

As always YMMV ...
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top