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

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kkokkolis" data-source="post: 3274441" data-attributes="member: 127913">The ca is narrower and paler and it starts further towards the edge. The Conquest also shows spikes on distant street lamps, but they are much shorter and less pronounced. Starfields are better and astigmatism is less. I also get a 3D phenomenon I didn't with Terra, don't know why. Glare control is quite similar in my samples. And yes, it is brighter. Moon looks better, could it be because of better resolution (more small craters visible?). The focuser is narrower, intented to be used with just the index finger. Terra can be used with two fingers. Both are nice, I was accustomed to Terra's (more stiff and positive as I feel it) but that is going to change soon. Although the Conquest is 100gr heavier, it doesn't feel bad. I find it well balanced and it feels more solid. I expect Conquest to be better, as Terra was better than anything I tried before. I would like to see in what ways it is better. The sum of +10% on 9/10 of their characteristics makes it feel like 100% better. But the truth remains that Terra does the job too and most people would be happy with it. It's differences from the 20-50€ binoculars many people are satisfied with (the Lidl 10x50 or Celestron Skymaster 15x70 which are very popular) are more than the Conquest/Terra differences. But then it costs 10-25 times as much.</blockquote>