I don't think so. I have no problem seeing full fov with my glasses on, and have to retract one step with naked eyes.The Eye relief will be the deal killer for those who wear glasses, get the popcorn sit back and watch.
I don't think so. I have no problem seeing full fov with my glasses on, and have to retract one step with naked eyes.The Eye relief will be the deal killer for those who wear glasses, get the popcorn sit back and watch.
Because so far every single overhyped China bino proved to be a storm in a waterglass.Why is it so hard to believe that a China sourced ? …. could produce a China Alpha binocular so close in Quality to a European brand ?
I'm guessing that was a rhetorical question ?First of all, a lot of Ballihoo and what does APO means on handheld binoculars?
Andreas
Of course when someone wants to spend 6k, Nikon will be preferred instead a Chinese product. But if a chinese manufacturer could make the same and sell it for 3k, some people may come interested. The WX is with IF and its weight limited in its use but a roof with CF and 8x42 half the price as the premium brand would of course see some sales.Depends on the market, you could “do a WX” and charge $6k, but then you’d not sell a lot of units. Pricing is always a balance.
Peter
First reports coming in of an 'NL' clone .....
Looks like Sky Rover have produced a new range of roofs, to go with their extensive range of excellent astro gear and bins.
Definitely one to watch.
Excellent points. I personally won't buy a roof prism binocular from a Chinese manufacturer until it's clear they stand up to prolonged and rough use in the field. Porros are another matter. They are much easier to "get right", and from what I've seen so far (I've got two APM 6x30s and will get a 6x32 in the near future) these are very well built. And there's not much that can go wrong with a "simple" porro.As to its objective qualities... we really shouldn't be surprised that Kunming is capable of making excellent binoculars. The questions are going to be quality control/consistency and mechanical quality/longer term durability. But those factors also depend on the price point they are aimed at. No one is going to expect a £500 class binocular to be built as tough as a Conquest or have the mechanical finesse of (say) a Noctivid.
It's interesting that you think the APMs are well built (they do look pretty decent in photos - glad to see that impression being confirmed by a knowledgeable user) - yet models like the Oberwerk "SE", if some user comments are accurate, has good optics but not so good mechanicals. I wonder how much it'd cost to get the "SE" up to the level of the APMs mechanically?I personally won't buy a roof prism binocular from a Chinese manufacturer until it's clear they stand up to prolonged and rough use in the field. Porros are another matter.
I don't know the Oberwerk. I find it too heavy to get my interested - and I've got the Nikon SE. The APM isn't on the same level of, for instance, the old Zeiss West Porros. However, it's pretty well made, very clean, and the focuser is smooth without any play. I've seen alphas that were worse. I used my APMs quite a lot, including on two trips to the Alps. Worked just fine, in all sorts of weather.It's interesting that you think the APMs are well built (they do look pretty decent in photos - glad to see that impression being confirmed by a knowledgeable user) - yet models like the Oberwerk "SE", if some user comments are accurate, has good optics but not so good mechanicals. I wonder how much it'd cost to get the "SE" up to the level of the APMs mechanically?
By "prolonged use" I mean extensive use in the field, over a period of at least a year. Say something like 20 hours a week for a year. Quite a few people I know use their bins a lot more. Some of them daily. I find many modern roofs have got quite complex, perhaps too complex. Just think of the focuser. There are plenty of things that can go wrong, and even the so-called "alpha manufacturers" had their fair share of problems over the past decade. With a Chinese roof in particular I'd want to see how reliable it is before I buy it. Because, let's face it: You probably won't have very good service if something goes wrong after a couple of years.Out of pure curiosity, what would you consider "prolonged and rough use in the field" to be - what level of mishandling, and over what sort of time period? I have to admit I am very easy on my binoculars, I often don't even focus very much during a typical stint. I can live with less than ultimate ruggedness if the binocular is outstanding optically (not saying the SRBC is - not till I get to look through it anyway).
The Canon is quite clearly a fair weather binocular. I use it as such, for instance on walks. No problems at all so far, and I use it quite a lot. But it's of course in a different category than, say, the Canon 10x42 IS.Agree that a binocular intended for the birding market needs to (at minimum) meet those criteria (which should be emailed to Sky Rover!). I use my binoculars more lightly than most birders (though perhaps require more in certain areas of optical performance), but poor weather and bumps against trees etc should certainly be expected as part of normal birding duties. (NB. how's your Canon 8x20 IS holding up?)
The Eye relief will be the deal killer for those who wear glasses, get the popcorn sit back and watch.