Can you tell us more about this ?
-
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.
Perhaps another game changer (16 Viewers)
- Thread starter exup
- Start date
Ignatius
Naturwissenschaftliches Nudelaug
Just because we have apparently consumed PFAS by the thousands does not mean we need to continue doing so. And just because someone was unaware of having consumed it before does not mean they have to knowingly consume more of it once they do become aware.
Especially when one looks at this graphic, courtesy of Wikipedia
Sorry for the digression.
Last edited:
Chris Pringle
Active member
The optical weaknesses that I have been able to collect from reviewers on the SRBC:
- Not as bright in very low light conditions compared to the alphas
- Not among the best-in-class in eye relief
Last edited:
Conndomat
United States of Europe
I think you have the wrong idea about people who use Alpha binoculars, very few people proudly put them in a glass case and instead use them.
IMO, binoculars are also not suitable as a status symbol, most people are not interested in long-distance optics, it is a minimal part of the total population, most people cannot tell a Swarovski from a pair of chewing gum binoculars and you get little attention if you walk around with such optics wander.
Many astronomers have a tendency to look down on people who use expensive hand-held binoculars, it's simply not necessary, at the same time they invest thousands of euros in small full apos and pat each other on the back, it's a little bizarre, would these Takahashis, AP's, TMB etc. also be status symbols?
You should also pay attention to the frequency of use; binoculars can be used much more often than a telescope, which is very dependent on the weather and is only of limited use during the day.
In terms of price, an Alpha binocular is roughly equivalent to a small, fully equipped Takahashi FC-76 DS, and that doesn't include the star diagonal, the eyepieces, the viewfinder and the mount. Considering the much more common uses, I simply cannot understand this bashing over users of Alpha binoculars.
Andreas
My sentiments exactly . That quote should never be in a review , it's offensive . I quoted the same thing over on CN in the BC thread yesterday .
well mate - if you fancy sending it south of the border for some further critical review, I could, just about, be convinced to oblige
...It's a tough job this binocular reviewing lark, but someone's got to do it... 😇
Why wait?
What could possibly go wrong? New(at least to us on BF) optics manufacturer, new binocular models, MIC, optic service center? .... What could possibly go wrong?
Chris Pringle
Active member
Andreas,
Bashing? Just because I also post in CloudyNights? No one wants to turn this into a pissing contest between birders and astronomers and about who owns more expensive optical equipment. Some of us enjoy both hobbies.
Going back to binoculars, we have an interesting case scenario here with a brand new optical product that appeared out of nowhere. It was dismissed early on but it is now getting legitimate interest as more experienced reviewers get one in their hands. If it succeeds, it could potentially level the field in terms of optical performance in the world of binoculars - yes, we don’t know that yet, but the product does exist so it’s not vaporware or altogether hypothetical. So, this new SRBC appears to offer excellent optical performance (even better in a few optical parameters as per the reviews), but it sits on the opposite side of the price spectrum at about 1/5 the price of top-shelf binoculars. One could indeed argue in favor of paying a premium for an alpha brand due to local warranty service - if you happen to live in Europe or in the U.S. But the reality is that to quite a few of us, this may not be enough to close the price differential between the alphas and a product like the SRBC. So if it’s not for the things that usually motivate people to own such special top-tier products like brand status, exclusivity, heirloom quality or the pleasure of owning a beautifully crafted product, please enlighten us as to why someone should now spring for an alpha model?
tenex
reality-based
How has Sky Rover designed the Banner Clouds: have they found a new way to copy details of Swarovski optical design, or just run computer simulations equivalent to those Swarovski was able to X years ago?
What would make them "not as bright in very low light conditions": presumably a transmission curve weak on the blue end, which would also agree with the impression of warmer colors?
Who will be selling (and servicing?) these in Western countries, with what resulting markup?
What would make them "not as bright in very low light conditions": presumably a transmission curve weak on the blue end, which would also agree with the impression of warmer colors?
Who will be selling (and servicing?) these in Western countries, with what resulting markup?
Conndomat
United States of Europe
How would you describe that?
So alpha binoculars are made for the snobs and people who need a status symbol?
Basically you're jumping on the bandwagon that Neil suggested.
"All in all, this is very encouraging news for consumers who want new levels of sophistication for their hard-earned cash, and will surely help to break the ugly, pretentious, elitist “pay to play” cycle all too often seen on our vulgar forums."
"Why do we buy a refractor? Great optics, right?"
Maybe that's ugly, pretentious, elitist “pay to play”, every 10 inch Newton off the shelf will drive this expensive refractor into the ground in terms of resolution, visibility and detail recognition, so...
I cannot judge the performance of the Banner Cloud, I cannot provide any information about binoculars that I have not tested myself, and I have never made any negative comments about these binoculars.
But the fact is that I have compared many middle class and Alpha glasses with each other and ultimately the Alphas still have small advantages, be it in handling, in workmanship and especially optically, these differences are perhaps 5-10%, you can do the same Compare a good Chinese ED telescope with a full apo, the latter will always be slightly better.
In my opinion, the vast majority of Alpha binocular buyers are not the type of people who decadently brag or flaunt their optics, I find these statements presumptuous!
Conclusion:
IMO we optics lovers are a very small community, even if we take all birders, astronomers and nature watchers together, hardly anyone "out there" cares whether you have a Zeiss hanging around your neck or looking through a Takahashi, rather than here bashing against one side we should rather share our passion and complement each other.
Andreas
Last edited:
lol, and I suppose everyone interested in the WX/NL/SF had to go get one too?
re: SRBC design - no idea as to what extent it is a Swaro NL copy, I'm sure we will find out in time. But in general, computer aided design must make it possible to design complex optical trains more easily than in the past.
re: SRBC design - no idea as to what extent it is a Swaro NL copy, I'm sure we will find out in time. But in general, computer aided design must make it possible to design complex optical trains more easily than in the past.
tenex
reality-based
For any reason they please, of course. There is nothing more boring than talking about who has more money than whom and how they choose to spend it. There is no generally valid conclusion to be drawn as to when "the gap has been closed" or where "diminishing returns" end etc, just individual preferences and circumstances of no intrinsic interest to anyone else. Not to mention ugly sentiments like resentment or contempt (as seen in Neil's snarky review comment) which it would be especially nice to do without.
Reading Andreas‘ post made me re-read Neil‘s review (post # 78 above) more carefully than before and have to admit I am somewhat perplexed about certain statements that I found there. Consider these (emphasis by me):
„I now have the opportunity of presenting an instrument that, I believe, completes that evolutionary journey: enter the SkyRover Banner Cloud series of high-performance roof prism binoculars which are every bit as good as the current crop of so-called ‘alpha’ binoculars made by Zeiss, Swarovski and Leica, but without their enormous price tags.“
„To keep costs down, SkyRover avoided the design of a lockable dioptre mechanism: an eminently sensible move as these really are a solution waiting for a problem. Then slap on another $500 for the “convenience.”Totally unnecessary and not conducive to sharing!“
„One often hears that it takes many weeks to garner an accurate assessment of an instrument’s optical and mechanical quality. While there is some truth in this, the reality is that once you’re used to looking through first-rate optical instruments one can easily come to firm conclusions after just a few minutes of use.“
„The instrument excels in all terrains, whether it be wide open hills, valleys, observing out at sea and forest exploration. “
So after just a few minutes of use, one can firmly say that an instrument is every bit as good as the alphas and excels in all terrains?
I find the boldness of these statements admirable.
many astronomers have expensive hand-held binos! I wouldn't judge the whole astro community by CN forums, it's got its own weird problems and is generally dysfunctional IMO - not representative of the whole.
These types of arguments come up all the time, I can still remember one of my college roomates ranting against spending money on good beer, insisting that beer is an "indistinguishable product" or some nonsense like that! Actually, it's similar to optics - some people can't tell the difference between the expensive stuff and cheap swill or they just don't care
I'm having trouble seeing what's different between the latest "Banner Cloud" or whatever versus things like Nikon Monarch 5's and 7's, Zeiss Terra, Swaro's new kid binocular, etc. Vortex, Maven. There are dozens of binos made in China of varying quality and more made in Japan, Germany, Portugal, etc, I don't see much to get excited about.
These types of arguments come up all the time, I can still remember one of my college roomates ranting against spending money on good beer, insisting that beer is an "indistinguishable product" or some nonsense like that! Actually, it's similar to optics - some people can't tell the difference between the expensive stuff and cheap swill or they just don't care
I'm having trouble seeing what's different between the latest "Banner Cloud" or whatever versus things like Nikon Monarch 5's and 7's, Zeiss Terra, Swaro's new kid binocular, etc. Vortex, Maven. There are dozens of binos made in China of varying quality and more made in Japan, Germany, Portugal, etc, I don't see much to get excited about.
An unknown factor is always the eyesight of the person posting, especially when they claim there is no difference between instruments in widely different price brackets.some people can't tell the difference between the expensive stuff and cheap swill or they just don't care
If it costs more, it’s probably better, especially if it costs a lot more.
tenex
reality-based
The wide FOV and flat field, which beg comparison with NL not Monarch... and raise the question why Nikon or Kamakura haven't attempted something similar yet.
To which I could add:
"The Banner Cloud 8 x 42 Apo also impressed me with its very decent stereopsis when viewing complex targets in the middle distance."
Compared to what, a Papilio?
"While the West is busy going woke and de-industrialising, China is powering ahead, offering ever more sophisticated technologies for the consumer market."
Technologies that originated where? And have already been available for how many years now?
But obviously, nitpicking from vulgar forums can be ignored.
I have to say that I disagree with that statement. It took me quite a while to really appreciate just how good my Curio 7x21 is. It was not love at first sight. (Of course, one might not view the Curio as a first rate optical instrument in which case my argument falls away. However i think it is.).
Бинокль Sky Rover Banner Cloud 8x42 APO обзор
I found the above review that compares SRBC to the other models in the same price category (I am sorry if someone posted it earlier). It seems the reviewer did not rate SRBC in the same category of binoculars more than 1000.
"The Banner Cloud performs better than the comparably priced Nikon M7 8x42" "The Nikon M7 8x42 has slightly better materials than the Banner Cloud"
" in Banner Cloud, the colors seem a little muted to me and there is a lack of “transparency” in the picture"
"If we expand the price range for choosing binoculars to buy, then the Kyte Lynx HD+ 8x42 shows nicer, more transparent and sharper than the Banner Cloud"
I found the above review that compares SRBC to the other models in the same price category (I am sorry if someone posted it earlier). It seems the reviewer did not rate SRBC in the same category of binoculars more than 1000.
"The Banner Cloud performs better than the comparably priced Nikon M7 8x42" "The Nikon M7 8x42 has slightly better materials than the Banner Cloud"
" in Banner Cloud, the colors seem a little muted to me and there is a lack of “transparency” in the picture"
"If we expand the price range for choosing binoculars to buy, then the Kyte Lynx HD+ 8x42 shows nicer, more transparent and sharper than the Banner Cloud"
