What binoculars do you think have the most WOW factor! (2 Viewers)

[[email protected]]

I have no doubt they may be better optically with the combination of the latest coatings and ED glass but that really doesn't address the problem with Chinese binoculars.....their lack of build quality. Great optics are nice but if the quality of the mechanical components or the assembly and fitting of components are substandard the total package will be found wanting.....regardless of how good the optics are.

I usually keep all of my "pricey optics" in a large safe when not in use and my vintage binoculars are kept in a large cabinet. The vintage binoculars dating from the 40's-70's were manufactured in the US, Germany, Japan and of course they fall short of modern binoculars in respect to glass coatings and such but they are built and assembled to a quality level that far surpasses anything coming out of China today. To me a Chinese binocular that offers 95% of the optical performance at 25% of the cost of an alpha probably isn't such a great value when you consider the longevity/reliability factor.

Of course judging from the sales of Chinese binoculars I don't think many people are as concerned about the overall quality of a binocular as I am. I still find it troubling that a manufacturer would consider one defective unit in x amount of units produced to be acceptable. I know I'm in the minority but I don't think a defective unit should ever be allowed to leave factory under any circumstances.

Steve

I agree with you Steve. Without the total package what good are excellent optics? The Chinese have got the optics down but they still come up short mechanically and build quality wise. I am still tempted by their price/performance ratio but I think these Zen Ray Primes will be my last venture into the Chinese world of lack of QC. If these prove troublesome I will give up on Chinese binoculars. I just received the Stokes DSL's which are made in Japan and let me tell you they are WAY higher quality than the Bresser's and going by memory the optics are at least equal to the Bresser's in my opinion. I did compare the Stokes 8x42 to the Hawthorne's 7x42 and even though they were different magnifications I feel the Stokes view is superior. It has a bigger sweetspot, it is sharper on-axis and it has better contrast. This Stokes is a quality Japanese binocular. It is made very well. I am sure the Zen Ray Prime will beat it in optics but I am not so sure about quality.

 

[Steve C]

I understand your dislike of Chinese stuff. But you really do need to get your hands on a Prime or a McKinley.

just been looking at the Mckinley looks like a contender for the prime thanks to steve C for making me aware:t: which would you say is the better off the 2..thanks in advance:hi:

Not enough difference to talk about really. The main difference is that the 8x McKinley has better contoured eye cups than the Prime and may be more comfortable for some. I would also say that the McKinley has a bit of a warmer bias in its color scheme that the more neutral Prime. I'd be hard pressed to pick one. Good thing I have both I guess.

There are reviews from both Frank and I here on both the Prime and the McKinley.

 

[Steve C]

I agree with you Steve. Without the total package what good are excellent optics? The Chinese have got the optics down but they still come up short mechanically and build quality wise. I am still tempted by their price/performance ratio but I think these Zen Ray Primes will be my last venture into the Chinese world of lack of QC. If these prove troublesome I will give up on Chinese binoculars. I just received the Stokes DSL's which are made in Japan and let me tell you they are WAY higher quality than the Bresser's and going by memory the optics are at least equal to the Bresser's in my opinion. I did compare the Stokes 8x42 to the Hawthorne's 7x42 and even though they were different magnifications I feel the Stokes view is superior. It has a bigger sweetspot, it is sharper on-axis and it has better contrast. This Stokes is a quality Japanese binocular. It is made very well. I am sure the Zen Ray will beat it in optics but I am not so sure about quality.

dennis

You have the market cornered for going into an "evaluation" with some sort of objectivity.

Carry On

 

[[email protected]]

Zen Ray, in their website: It's mandatory for our trained staff to inspect every pair [of bins] through our 16-point inspection procedure before we pack them into the shipping box.

I don't know if I believe that. I wonder how TRAINED their staff is.

 

[[email protected]]

What a person likes/dislikes about a particular binocular is a very subjective matter and if you're happy with your binocular that is what is important. I do think comments on the build quality of current production binoculars (regardless of where manufactured) should be prefaced with "appears" or "seems" when talking about build quality/durability as only time will tell how a product lasts over the years.

If the Primes are still working great in forty or fifty years than I would agree with you that build quality isn't an issue. I will give the Chinese credit for build quality/durability where they deserve it......for instance they did a really great job on their wall.

Steve

Yes, but it took them 2000 years to build the wall. They had enough time for QC.

 

[[email protected]]

I have returned two and waiting for my third prime. I hope Charles promise will keep this time :smoke:

The prime is so close to be a very good performer, if only the QC issues could be fixed I would recommend it to everyone...

Well, I will get back with a final review on the ZR section here, when i get the bin. Will it be a keeper or a refunder ?

Anders

Oh no! So that means I have a slim chance of getting a quality Zen Ray Prime?

 

[[email protected]]

Not enough difference to talk about really. The main difference is that the 8x McKinley has better contoured eye cups than the Prime and may be more comfortable for some. I would also say that the McKinley has a bit of a warmer bias in its color scheme that the more neutral Prime. I'd be hard pressed to pick one. Good thing I have both I guess.

There are reviews from both Frank and I here on both the Prime and the McKinley.

How was the QC on your Prime? Any problems? Be honest. Charles isn't looking at my thread. He doesn't like me.

 

[[email protected]]

Not enough difference to talk about really. The main difference is that the 8x McKinley has better contoured eye cups than the Prime and may be more comfortable for some. I would also say that the McKinley has a bit of a warmer bias in its color scheme that the more neutral Prime. I'd be hard pressed to pick one. Good thing I have both I guess.

There are reviews from both Frank and I here on both the Prime and the McKinley.

So the 8x McKinley is a clone of the Zen Ray Prime? I didn't know about it. Maybe I should have bought it instead. Maybe I can still cancel the Zen Ray. I like the looks of it better.

 

[Steve C]

I don't know if I believe that. I wonder how TRAINED their staff is.

Sorry, but I can't resist this one.

dennis, they have to be better trained than you

 

[[email protected]]

So the 8x McKinley is a clone of the Zen Ray Prime? I didn't know about it. Maybe I should have bought it instead. Maybe I can still cancel the Zen Ray. I like the looks of it better.

I cancelled the Zen Ray Prime 8x42 and ordered the Leupold Mckinley 8x42. I like the looks of the Leupold better. It's still Chinese but it doesn't look as Chinese.

 

[Binoseeker]

Dennis,

Sorry you didn´t get the primes also...to compare with the McKinley :smoke:
I didn´t get it that the McKinley was so close to the prime when reading the review...

Since ZR seems to have made bins without QC issues before I hope they will get around with the prime also but since I need the bin for birding and it takes a lot of time sending them back and forth, I don´t have time to do this anymore....the birding season begins now :t: it is spring time !!

Anders

 

[tezz223]

I cancelled the Zen Ray Prime 8x42 and ordered the Leupold Mckinley 8x42. I like the looks of the Leupold better. It's still Chinese but it doesn't look as Chinese.

i would have thought..with all the nit picking you do you would have bought them both..and gave us all in depth review

 

[BruceH]

............ Charles isn't looking at my thread. He doesn't like me.

I cancelled the Zen Ray Prime 8x42 and ordered the Leupold Mckinley 8x42. ................

Dennis ..... I think you made Charle's day!

I am interested in reading your opinion on how sensitive the 8x McKinley is to eye placement. I was one of those that had a hard time with blackouts using the 10x Prime, but from other postings, the 10x was more sensitive to eye placement than the 8x Prime.

 

[eitanaltman]

I bought these Vortex Stokes 8x42 DLS binoculars on Astromart. Do you think they will be optically and mechanically better than my Leupold Hawthornes 7x42 or say Franks Bresser's 8x42 ED's? Here is a review of them saying they are better than the Leupold Gold Rings and here is the link on Astromart that I bought them from for $275.00. They retailed for $900.00 when new.

Has anyone else noticed the striking similarity between the Vortex Stokes DLS and the Alpen Teton?

Same shape, same focus and diopter knob designs (metal with a ring of knurled rubber), same body design with the way it flares out behind the thumbs to cover the strap lugs....

The 8x42 models seem to have the same specs, 383' FOV, weigh around 27oz, 17-18mm eye relief, etc. The Stokes seems to have a better close focus spec and there is a 0.5" difference in spec'd length which looks to be due to difference eyecups (same 4.9" spec for width). The Optics4Birding reviews both are similar, with notes such as 1.25 turns for focus rotation, good "flat field performance" with minimal edge distortion, etc. And the Tetons (like the Rainiers) are made in Japan.

My assumption is that Alpen licensed the basic Vortex Stokes design when they designed the Teton and customized it to their uses, much like they seem to have done with using the Leupold Golden Ring for the Alpen Rainiers.

http://www.optics4birding.com/RevVortexStokesDLS.aspx
http://www.optics4birding.com/alpen-teton-binoculars-review.aspx

 

[[email protected]]

Dennis,

Sorry you didn´t get the primes also...to compare with the McKinley :smoke:
I didn´t get it that the McKinley was so close to the prime when reading the review...

Since ZR seems to have made bins without QC issues before I hope they will get around with the prime also but since I need the bin for birding and it takes a lot of time sending them back and forth, I don´t have time to do this anymore....the birding season begins now :t: it is spring time !!

Anders

When I ordered the Primes from Zen Ray they didn't ship the first day so I e-mailed them and asked them why and they said they are now doing QC checks on every single binocular before they ship it.

 

[[email protected]]

Dennis ..... I think you made Charle's day!

I am interested in reading your opinion on how sensitive the 8x McKinley is to eye placement. I was one of those that had a hard time with blackouts using the 10x Prime, but from other postings, the 10x was more sensitive to eye placement than the 8x Prime.

The 8x would have easier eye placement because it has a 5 mm exit pupil versus 4 mm on the 10x. That 1 mm makes quite a difference. An 8x42mm is also less finicky than a n 8x32. I will let you know if they work for me. I don't tolerate to many blackouts so that would be a deal killer for me.

 

[[email protected]]

Has anyone else noticed the striking similarity between the Vortex Stokes DLS and the Alpen Teton?

Same shape, same focus and diopter knob designs (metal with a ring of knurled rubber), same body design with the way it flares out behind the thumbs to cover the strap lugs....

The 8x42 models seem to have the same specs, 383' FOV, weigh around 27oz, 17-18mm eye relief, etc. The Stokes seems to have a better close focus spec and there is a 0.5" difference in spec'd length which looks to be due to difference eyecups (same 4.9" spec for width). The Optics4Birding reviews both are similar, with notes such as 1.25 turns for focus rotation, good "flat field performance" with minimal edge distortion, etc. And the Tetons (like the Rainiers) are made in Japan.

My assumption is that Alpen licensed the basic Vortex Stokes design when they designed the Teton and customized it to their uses, much like they seem to have done with using the Leupold Golden Ring for the Alpen Rainiers.

http://www.optics4birding.com/RevVortexStokesDLS.aspx
http://www.optics4birding.com/alpen-teton-binoculars-review.aspx

Yes, those do look like clones but I think the Alpen has a composite body and the Stokes is aluminum but they still could be a copy of the basic design. Your description of the optical performance is right on though. The Stokes have a bigger sweetspot than the Bresser's I think but I am going by memory. The FOV doesn't seem as small as it is on the Stoke's either. The Stokes view to me looks real similar to the Swarovski 8x32 EL. The armor on the Stokes is appealing. It is comfortable and kind of smooth like but it feels nice to hold them.

 

[brownpelican1]

Yes, those do look like clones but I think the Alpen has a composite body and the Stokes is aluminum but they still could be a copy of the basic design. Your description of the optical performance is right on though. The Stokes have a bigger sweetspot than the Bresser's I think but I am going by memory. The FOV doesn't seem as small as it is on the Stoke's either. The Stokes view to me looks real similar to the Swarovski 8x32 EL. The armor on the Stokes is appealing. It is comfortable and kind of smooth like but it feels nice to hold them.

From post #54 over on the Bresser Everest ED thread: Dennis said this about the Bresser. "The optics on these are amazing at this price point. In fact I would put them on par with the Swarovski EL and I would even say that because of the ED glass they are sharper on-axis than the EL."

The ergonomics on these are great. To me the Swarovski EL is the best binocular ergonomically around and I would put this one on par with the EL. Great armouring with an open bridge and excellent balance because it is shorter than most roofs.


From post #80 on the Bresser Everest Ed thread Dennis said this about the Bresser: These things fit my hands like an EL. I am dumbfounded at the quality of these things.

Same song, different bin and on and on it goes. And now.........The McKinley's are coming...............The McKinley's are coming!

I need a B !

 

[[email protected]]

From post #54 over on the Bresser Everest ED thread: Dennis said this about the Bresser. "The optics on these are amazing at this price point. In fact I would put them on par with the Swarovski EL and I would even say that because of the ED glass they are sharper on-axis than the EL."

The ergonomics on these are great. To me the Swarovski EL is the best binocular ergonomically around and I would put this one on par with the EL. Great armouring with an open bridge and excellent balance because it is shorter than most roofs.


From post #80 on the Bresser Everest Ed thread Dennis said this about the Bresser: These things fit my hands like an EL. I am dumbfounded at the quality of these things.

Same song, different bin and on and on it goes. And now.........The McKinley's are coming...............The McKinley's are coming!

I need a B !

I still would say that about the Bresser. It has superb optics and great ergonomics. I question the quality though after the eye cup falling off after two weeks of little use and the other buyers that have had trouble with the diopter and focus.

 

[brownpelican1]

I still would say that about the Bresser. It has superb optics and great ergonomics. I question the quality though after the eye cup falling off after two weeks of little use and the other buyers that have had trouble with the diopter and focus.

The eye cup did not fall off. The rubber cover on the eye cup fell off.

You had a $200. binocular that had amazing optics, as good as an EL....no wait, even sharper than an EL. It had ergonomics that were as good as an EL. It had great armoring, excellent balance and fit your hand like an EL. And you wouldn't put a drop or two of glue on the piece of rubber in order to continue to enjoy $2000 performance for $200. Oh well, different strokes for different folks.

And now you've gone tilting at windmills again. I'm not sure what your point is in continuing to compare the Bresser to other bins. Not other $200. bins but bins that are more expensive. The Hawthorne @ $300. +, the McKinley @ $600., and the Stokes DLS which is no longer available but sold for $700. to $900. when new. If you set out to prove that more expensive bins have better QC then you have succeeded. Thank you! Who would have thought it??

By the way, your flip-flop on the Zen-Ray Prime was a doozey! Under the bus they went before Charles could get a pair in a box. Damn! Your good!3