Question to Steiner owners (1 Viewer)

[Swedpat]

I am surprised Steiner has not its own group but is placed under "others". Is it not such a big selling brand so it deserve to have its own group?

Anyway: I have looked through a number of models and have had a 8x30 Rally 20 years ago.
My impression is that I really like the feeling of holding it and the rugged appearance. Silicon eyecups are much better than rubber. And I think the optics is high quality.
But a problem I have noticed is the extreme inner reflections or glares caused by glossy innertube.
My 8x30 had severe light circles in the field when observed against light sources.
I have seen it in a 7x50 and 9x40 as well many years ago. But I read this is still with a new 8x30 model.
I don't understand how this is ever accepteable with a high quality binocular.
I want to hear from Steiner owners about their experience and opinion.

 

[Rg548]

I had the 8x30 military version.... the genuine Military one...
The optics were superb. Better than my Leica BN.
I prefer the Leica as an overall binocular, and the Steiner had the reticle which annoyed me after time.
But the optics were amazing.
I sold it in the end.

 

[Elkhornsun]

I briefly owned the Steiner 15x56 and the optics were outstanding as were the built-in eye cups. I found them awkward to hand hold with the high ridges along the barrels of the binoculars. Had the barrels been smooth as with most binoculars I would have kept them.

 

[yarrellii]

I have had 3 Steiner, and the only one that I was really fond of was the 8x56 Extreme, what a great binocular (in every sense of the word): great view and great build quality. I also tried the hybrid-focus (for lack of a better term) 8x30 Wildlife, that had both IF and central focus. I found the FOV a bit limiting and overall it didn't convince me the way I expected it to do. And then I tried the 7x30 Navigator; I don't know if it was just my unit, but it had the worst inner reflections I've ever experienced in a piece of "quality optics". It was honestly unbearable. I'm not sure if it was the same kind of reflection @Swedpat is talking about, or more like ghost images, but I was very surprised (and terribly underwhelmed). I found the form factor and handling superb (I really like the way the classic Steiner Porro feels in the hands), but the view was just too compromised, even if 7x30 is a favourite format.

 

[ArchStanton]

I have the following AF Steiners: 8x30 (Amazon Black Friday Special)., 12x40 Predator Pro, and 7x50 Rally. Before the Steiners, we used the MIJ Bushnell poro prisms and when we purchased the Rallys, we really thought we had moved up
in the optics world. I’ve been using the 8x30’s exclusively for the last several years. Having recently compared the Steiner 8x30’s to Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32’s, I immediately noticed how the Conquests handled glare much better than the Steiners. I’m making the transition to roof prisms and now starting to see what I’ve been missing. Today, I tested a pair of Opticron Oregon 8x42’s and was pleasantly surprised by the clarity and brightness when viewing an Eastern Bluebird and Acorn Woodpecker. Next time I’m going to compare the Steiner 8x30’s to the Oregons.

 

[Swedpat]

Thank you all for replies! You confirm the impression I have got. Steiner is optically and mechanically very high quality while some of the models suffer from severe reflections in the field caused by glossy innertube.
It's very hard to understand that knowledgeable manufacturers of high quality instruments have not bothered about solving such an issue.
My Rally 8x30 had very good sharpness but bad contrast and brightness due to almost lack of antireflectic coating. When I compared it to the Nikon 7x20 I had since earlier I was surprised I could not see any difference in brightness in low light. In a direct comparison a 8x30 shall be significantly brighter than a 7x20 with the RBI of 14 compared to 8.

 

[john highridge]

Thank you all for replies! You confirm the impression I have got. Steiner is optically and mechanically very high quality while some of the models suffer from severe reflections in the field caused by glossy innertube.
It's very hard to understand that knowledgeable manufacturers of high quality instruments have not bothered about solving such an issue.
My Rally 8x30 had very good sharpness but bad contrast and brightness due to almost lack of antireflectic coating. When I compared it to the Nikon 7x20 I had since earlier I was surprised I could not see any difference in brightness in low light. In a direct comparison a 8x30 shall be significantly brighter than a 7x20 with the RBI of 14 compared to 8.

I own the Wildlife XP 8x44 and 10x44 (bought cheap) and love the huge ocular lenses and rugged build. But the crescent glare monster appears in way too many situations for a model with such a high MSRP. I can mitigate it somewhat by repositioning my eyes against the oculars, but from reading reviews on BF and elsewhere have learned that internal reflections are a long running issue with this model and its predecessors. And like you I wonder why Steiner would allow it to continue.

 

[Binocollector]

Same here, I have the small 8x25 "Safari Ultrasharp" and the ghosting it shows is atrocious. I tried it on the moon -- unusable. Apart from that the optics are really good but how they could mess it up so badly with the ghosting and glare is unexplainable to me. I'd really like to try the Safari porro with center focus though but the glare/ghosting issue is a dealbreaker.

 

[jring]

I had the 8x30 military version.... the genuine Military one...
The optics were superb. Better than my Leica BN.
I prefer the Leica as an overall binocular, and the Steiner had the reticle which annoyed me after time.
But the optics were amazing.
I sold it in the end.

Hi,

I dunno - when I was in the german army in 1990, I had plenty of opportunity to try military bins as two of my roommates were the ones who repaired them. There were two 8x30 standard issue IF porro models, the then current Fero D12, made by Steiner and the Hensoldt DF dating back to the 50s.

The Fero D12 had a plastic body and there was not a lot to repair on them as they could not be opened. The optical quality left sth to be desired even when in good order. Narrow 6.5 deg field, small sweet spot to make things worse, plus interesting reflections and stray light problems... Also easy to knock out of collimation, which usually lead to a case of "lost during an exercise".

The all metal DF with rubber armour on the other hand was build like a tank, has an 8 deg field and larger sweet spot - no problems with reflections and stray light. These were meant to be returned to an arsenal to either be sold off as surplus or stored for a mobilisation in case of war. But it didn't happen - who had one, kept it. When there was a problem, they were brought to my roommates along with a case of beer to ensure they didn't go back to the arsenal as per regulation but were repaired with parts scrounged from those examples too badly damaged...

Joachim, who has a pair of DF with the recticle removed in his glovebox...

 

[Tringa45]

along with a case of beer

In view of the differences perhaps more than a crate of beer changed hands when the military contract was granted.

John

 

[jring]

In view of the differences perhaps more than a crate of beer changed hands when the military contract was granted.

John

Most certainly - but unlike the beer, I did not profit from whatever changed hands before that contract with Steiner was signed ;-)
One reason might have been that it was before I was born...

Joachim

 

[Rg548]

Hi,

I dunno - when I was in the german army in 1990, I had plenty of opportunity to try military bins as two of my roommates were the ones who repaired them. There were two 8x30 standard issue IF porro models, the then current Fero D12, made by Steiner and the Hensoldt DF dating back to the 50s.

The Fero D12 had a plastic body and there was not a lot to repair on them as they could not be opened. The optical quality left sth to be desired even when in good order. Narrow 6.5 deg field, small sweet spot to make things worse, plus interesting reflections and stray light problems... Also easy to knock out of collimation, which usually lead to a case of "lost during an exercise".

The all metal DF with rubber armour on the other hand was build like a tank, has an 8 deg field and larger sweet spot - no problems with reflections and stray light. These were meant to be returned to an arsenal to either be sold off as surplus or stored for a mobilisation in case of war. But it didn't happen - who had one, kept it. When there was a problem, they were brought to my roommates along with a case of beer to ensure they didn't go back to the arsenal as per regulation but were repaired with parts scrounged from those examples too badly damaged...

Joachim, who has a pair of DF with the recticle removed in his glovebox...

There is a 32 year gap between your 1990 experience, and my 'new' Steiners.