Hello from Serbia! Sir, i admire your knowledge about binoculars, i am interested in yor opinion about Svbony Sv202 and Sa205!? I was reading some very nice reviews and some not soo good. In meentime i vas buy Sv202 8x32, its beter than Hawke Avid but not beter than BPC 8x40 Porro. Thank you sir for great content you share 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
@davidlytle397422 сағат бұрын
First of all, thank you for your kind words. They are very encouraging. And, thank you for bringing these Svbony offerings to my attention. While I have bought some of their eyepieces for telescope use, I have not evaluated their binoculars since my one bad experience with them. I purchased a 7x50 Porro (sv27?) that should never have left the factory. It came adequately packaged but was utterly out of collimation. I had a difficult time convincing Svbony that the problem was in their product and not my inexperience with binoculars. Eventually, they did replace it with one that performed adequately. As a 7x50 it was good but not impressive in any way. Because of this poor first impression I have not considered Svbony as a source for binos. However, you have changed this. I have not tested either of the models you are interested in. I have checked out what Neil English has to say about them and I recommend that you do the same. Neil does a marvelous job reviewing glass and I tend to agree with his assessments. I have bought quality glass solely on his recommendation. If you have read enough of my reviews you could guess which model that I would go with. The sa205 is smaller, lighter and has a field flattening system. 100% sharpness across the field beats 70%. Also, according to Neil, it has better control of glare. I can tell you now that I would risk my money on the sa205. If you absolutely have to have eight power then get the 202. The 205 evidently runs closer to 7x. But, I like 7x so, for me, that doesn't detract from the better features of the 205. Your inquiry and Neil's opinions have now conspired to cost me money. I will now have to evaluate the sa205 and sv202 for myself. You have done me a good service and I thank you.
@utilitac22 сағат бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 thank you sir 🙏🏻
@YouSydneyTube5 күн бұрын
I can confirm that these 6x30 are outstanding. I immediately ordered the 8x30 as well. However, there is another 6x30 under a different brand name that looks darn near identical and is literally 1/3 the price. I am waiting for it to arrive. I am hopping that it’s exactly the same bino rebranded… Can’t wait to get them and compare…
@davidlytle39744 күн бұрын
Please, keep us informed on your findings. Thanks for dropping us a note.
@alien35kit3 күн бұрын
Is that Kenko binoculars ultraVIEW 6x30WP?
@YouSydneyTube2 күн бұрын
Yes! 😁 The Kenko’s should arrive in a couple of days, although I think the coatings might make a difference. The KOWA seem to have wrapped these in the green rubber armour. If the Kenko are any good it might be great to do a thorough review. Also an updated on the KOWA. I am noticing that it exhibits some barrel distortion, which seems to be responsible for the drop off in sharpness towards the 1/3 of views parameter. There is a trace of CA in general (but very small - I noticed it in high contrast scenes at dusk - looking at trees and birds against sunset backdrop). RE barrel distortion - a slight refocus puts the edges in sharp focus - (and the middle goes out of focus) hence it seems that the field flatness seems to be a major cause of the droppoff towards the edges. The bunks are nice and bright in the evening!
@alien35kit2 күн бұрын
@@YouSydneyTube looking forward to seeing your comparison between the Kenko and Kowa. What I read from Amazon JP is that its prism is bk7, not sure if a square exit-pupil can be seen in low light.
@wrighty3388 күн бұрын
another 70% sweetspot? this is mid range territory at this point why not try a fujinon FMTR-SX or its chinese clone the APM MS ED 10x50
@davidlytle39747 күн бұрын
Hi wrighty, thanks for checking in. I do have the FMT-SX. It is better in every way, optically. But, it's heavy and with independent focus that doesn't snap. That's what I'm trying to get away from. Give me some central focus designs that can do better, that aren't from the big three, if you know of any. I'm up for trying them. Otherwise, I think that I'm going to have to lay down some real money and go Swaro or Leica.
@wrighty3387 күн бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Rave reviews on the Sky Rover Banner Clouds, but i think you've already said they wont work for you? and without spending 2 grand what about Razor UHD 10x50 from Japan? Kamakura ED optics, Abbe Koenig prisms and edge sharpness likened to the Fujinon's. I dont know what an ultravid HD retails for stateside, but id guess its a damn sight cheaper than in rip off Britain. best of luck, looking forward to the next installment
@davidlytle39747 күн бұрын
Thank you for the well wishes. Short of having a flat field, the Vortex may be a good choice. I certainly enjoyed the feel of it and the view was pleasant. I'll have to check out its sweet spot. Somehow I doubt that it will equal the BPOs 90 percent. That's why I may break down, get the EL and end my search. 100 percent focus is hard to beat. I can pick one up for around $1900 vs $1700 for the Vortex. Maybe it's worth it?
@wrighty3387 күн бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Since the EL's were discontinued in light of the new 52mm NL's they've been on deals, so yeah you could be onto something there. Im super glad astronomy is a totally different ball game, you're into binocular telescope territory at that point, 70mm, 80mm, and beyond
@davidlytle39746 күн бұрын
My old 16x80 ED turned out to be a good servant under dark skies. What's your go-to astro bin, if I'm permitted to ask?
@BENSHILA18 күн бұрын
Dear sir im about to buy zeiss 10 x 56 but they are rather expensive are these fuji 10 x 70 better? thanks
@davidlytle397418 күн бұрын
I am sorry to tell you that I have had no experience with the Zeiss 10x56 but I would certainly like the opportunity. As for absolute sharpness, I wouldn't hesitate to invest in a top of the line Fujinon. Since I discovered the problem with the eyepiece of my 10x50 FMT-SX and resolved it, it has become the absolute sharpest binocular in my possession. No roof prism binocular that I have put to my eyes has noticeably surpassed it. If you do decide to go with the Zeiss then I invite you to tell us all what you think of it. I would be most interested and thankful.
@tonyalvarez581521 күн бұрын
I just got last week the 10x42 Passion HD, OMG,, same sharpness and resolution and brightness as my Leica Ultravid 10x42. It really is something else with the quality of workmanship and the optics for sure. Please do a video on an HD please, would love to see what you think my friend. Love your videos!!
@tonyalvarez581521 күн бұрын
Darn it David, is there any Bino that has more than 50% sweet spot? LOL.
@davidlytle397421 күн бұрын
That seems to be the norm, doesn't it? 😢
@user-ry4rn7hp8p29 күн бұрын
Hi Dave. I've seen something similar to what you describe about the sharpness of this Maven B2 before, several times with Russian, Japanese and Chinese binoculars. I single this out as a separate type of defect... The last time I observed such a defect effect was with my new BOSMA APO 10x42, this is binoculars from Kunming United Optics (KUO), the same as the one that made a lot of noise on English-language forums - Sky Rover Banner Cloud APO 10x42. Even when the first reviews about Sky Rover appeared, BOSMA was already announced, it is the same model under two brands. By the fact that both of these brands apparently sell KUO products. So about the Maven B2 defect that you describe, or rather about its "ghostly sharpness", which I met earlier. As it was with my BOSMA APO, when looking at small details through binoculars, they become visible (unambiguously distinguishable) somehow gradually, at first I observe some blurring of the smallest details (for example, small letters in the inscription) - not clarity, then small details gradually appear and the inscription differs entirely, each letter. But if you take the binoculars away from your eyes for a while, and then look at the same objects again, then everything will repeat from the beginning, small details do not differ unambiguously (only some of them are the largest), it seems that small details float slightly and it remains so for a while, then it becomes clearer and more distinguishable. But the feeling that something is wrong remains all the time observing these details. Having watched so many times, I realized that my vision compensates for the lack of information from one eye with information from the other, and the brain puts it into a general image in which there is enough information, but gives a signal "something is wrong". At the same time, there is no pain in the eyes and head, this feeling is different. I checked my guess, looked with my left eye alternately through each half of the binoculars. All right. I asked my wife to look at it, she confirmed my observations. I mean, this is an optical flaw in one half of the binoculars, which causes the eye looking through it to see less detail, and the eye looking through the other half of the binoculars to see more. The brain gradually compensates for this disadvantage, gradually pulling up vision to normal, small details of objects are being drawn. I also noticed that in addition to the lack of sharpness in the right half, there is also less brightness, there is no explanation. The binoculars were sent back, and I am now in correspondence with the manufacturer. As I understand it, they have a different opinion, but I'm thinking of fighting. Regarding the model of the binoculars itself, I liked the very wide field (7.8°), excellent brightness and color reproduction. Excellent immersion in the image and the unexpected presence of a 3d effect, better than other Roof binoculars that I had. The sharpness that this model is capable of could not be estimated, for obvious reasons. Of the disadvantages, binoculars are heavy for 10*42 - 930 grams and Eye relief is not as big as we would like to see the whole field in sunglasses, the whole field is visible in corrective glasses. In general, provided that these defects are eliminated, I liked the binoculars, and so did my wife.
@davidlytle397428 күн бұрын
Thank you Alex for coming through with this evaluation. I now have a working theory to explain the ghostly resolution found in my two Mavens. Also, people have been asking for a review of the new Kunming offering and you have given us one. I found it most interesting and helpful. At least, your Bosma didn't cost you $1500.00. Would you be able to live with the anomaly in the Bosma/Sky Rover, considering how inexpensive it is? Anyway, thanks again for coming through with your review. I really do appreciate it.
@user-ry4rn7hp8p27 күн бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Such a defect as "ghost sharpness" will remind me of itself every time I look through binoculars, and annoy me, I have already suffered enough of this, so I am no longer ready to tolerate it. The presence of such a defect in binoculars means to me that I do not need it (binoculars). In addition, unlike a violation of collimation, this defect cannot be corrected.
@tonyalvarez5815Ай бұрын
BPO or GPO?
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
If you're asking me which is better, the BPOc or the GPO Passion HD, I can't answer you with absolute knowledge. I haven't checked out the HD yet. However, in order for the HD to compete it would have to be as sharp as the Fujinon FMT-SX, with flat field and near 90 percent Sweet spot to match.
@deanherde805Ай бұрын
Well I tell you one thing. I ain’t cravin a Maven.
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
That's a cute slogan that unfortunately now applies to me.
@winnon992Ай бұрын
The Maven’s Sweet Spot must be small.
@deanherde805Ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 I’m sure I’m not the only one who greatly appreciates your unbiased and concise reviews.
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
I thank you Dean for the kind words.
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
Winnon992, The sweet spot isn't small, just not super generous. The degree of focus fall off isn't horrible but it's noticeable after 60 percent out from center.
@redsky1433Ай бұрын
The porro optical design is simple and elegant. The prism surfaces don't have to be coated because the design utilizes total internal reflection. The popular roof prism design is more compact and can be lighter but it requires a lot more engineering to achieve a similar optical performance. Roof prisms are therefore usually more expensive. Also I believe roof prisms are more easily waterproofed but I'm not absolutely sure about that. Thanks for your video!
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
Red sky, I appreciate your comments. Porros can definitely step out ahead of roofs of the same objective diameters. As for waterproofing, it should be a practical matter regardless of type. I recently tested my Habicht for watertightness. As old as it is it remains tight and gas purged. Nice.
@mauriciolacruzАй бұрын
The summary that I came up with after reading and seeing a multitude of reviews for a long time, is that the only "negative" points of the Kowa Genesis Prominar XD 44 (8.5x and 10.5x) compared to the so-called "Alphas", are: 1. Greater weight (which I see as positive since it means greater constructive robustness.) 2. A lower FOV (which I don't find particularly negative either, since the FOV of these Genesis is not small either, it is more than enough and, in addition, we must take into account that either the 8.5x or the 10.5x version, in any case, it is always a magnification 0.5x greater than its competitors; in addition, I also particularly prefer to see the edge of the image, or circle, rather than not seeing it and being out of my field of vision because it is excessive, as happens with the NL Pure.) In some cases the edge-to-edge sharpness is also mentioned, somewhat less than the best of them all (again the Swarovski NL Pure), but on the other hand it is average to the rest. (Which does not bother me nor do I notice much of it since my eyes always look at the center of the image and not at the edges.) And with regards to the rest of the mechanical (focus wheel) and optical (sharpness in the center of the image, sweet spot, color, contrast, brightness, CA control, flare / glare / stray light control, geometric distortions, close focus distance...) characteristics, the general opinion / consensus is that the Kowa Genesis Prominar XD 44 are at the same level (or similar) as the "Alphas" in some of these characteristics and even above them in others (which also happen to be the most relevant optical characteristics for me and what I value most in binoculars.) So well, as each person has a different point of view from their neighbor, what for you "does not arrive / it doesn't make", for others "does arrive / it does make and even surpasses." I finally bought these Kowa (both: the 8.5x44 and the 10.5x44) and I couldn't be happier. And I don't look back since. Cheers!
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
Fair enough brother. Nothing beats, "couldn't be happier". Thanks for chiming in.
@mauriciolacruzАй бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 You're welcome. 👍🏻 Do you know which other two I love too in my little collection?: 1. The Blaser Primus 8x56 (which I bought brand new for around €1,000 shipping included), and what for me happened to be the biggest surprise of them all... 2. The Bushnell Forge 8x42 for €400-ish (shipping included). Yes, made in China and certainly with some drawbacks (smaller sweet spot, lesser edge-to-edge sharpness, etc) compared to the other ones, BUT with an IMPRESSIVE overall image quality, especially considering their price point!: good glare / stray light control, very good CA control, very good FOV, very good build quality, excellent sharpness in the center, excellent color reproduction, excellent color saturation, excellent contrast, excellent brightness... I'm amazed with the Forge for just a bit more than €400! Should anyone want a second / backup pair, they should certainly consider these Bushnell. Best bang for buck! 👍🏻
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
It's interesting to me to hear you mention the Forge. It's been on my to-do list for a while. I think that a lot of lower mid-level units hold remarkable value. The Chinese are really cranking out some good stuff recently. I definitely invite suggestions and recommendations for future reviews. Any other ideas?
@mauriciolacruzАй бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 I have heard and read good things about the Sig Sauer Zulu 9 as well. And others. But honestly, I think the Bushnell Forge are hard, if not impossible, to beat for the price. Best "budget" binos in the market. Why? Simply because their pros are much more important than their cons. I love my Kowas, but I think this model from Bushnell does have far better quality / price ratio, even though the Kowas are superior.
@blaberus1Ай бұрын
I have the 10x42 B1.2 and have tested them (mainly for resolving power/sharpness) against Leica, Zeiss and Swaros, and they are as good or better. Even though they don't have field flatteners, the sharpness looks fine to my eyes edge to edge. This edge to edge sharpness isn't anyway very important to me, as I tend to concentrate in the middle of the FoV.
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
Your experience with Maven is exactly why I am trying them out. I haven't given up. I have a B2 (my original interest) on its way right now. If that doesn't work I can always try the B6, without flatteners. I'll still be looking for around an 80 percent sweet spot. Yeah, the center is most important but let's have a bit of clear field. What percent of field do you get with your B1.2?
@BlackForestReconАй бұрын
Interesting features. Looks like it was made in the early 90s (still made in Japan). Perhaps it was an attempt by Tasco to gain a foothold in the higher-priced sector. And then it didn't work out and they stopped trying - but that´s just pure speculation on my part. Happy collecting! 😄
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
You're probably right. It is marked "Japan" yet the Tasco representative suggested that it may have been assembled in Florida. Really??? Anyway, stuff like this makes collecting truly interesting. Thanks for checking in. Happy collecting and hiking to you. Keep up the beautiful work.
@peterbowler6524Ай бұрын
Join Birdforum some very clued up binocular people.
@winnon992Ай бұрын
About a few hours ago I just got my Tameron RangeMasters delivered in the mail. They’re looking good and yes they are heavy ! I really like the view. I really believe I’m going to like them. Great Video !
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
Good to hear and thank you.
@joesalaman3503Ай бұрын
Interesting thing about coatings versus no coatings I've found is that they don't improve sharpness only light transmission and the more modern multi coatings often seem to produce chromatic aberrations in bright light, which is why I don't own many modern bins. My favorite pair are the oldest and sharpest of my collection, well over 100 years old and made forty odd years before coatings were invented, these pre WW1 made Busch prisma binocule's are 9x20 with tiny exit pupils and narrow FOV and pretty useless in low light but in good light they are pin sharp 100% all the way to the edge and have such an amazing depth of field for 9x magnification at least as good as any 7x pair I own so you don't have to fiddle with the focus much. With their compact size and light weight I find myself taking them everywhere and they have gotten me more interested in miniature and compact binoculars, which I find far more useful than their bulkier more respected counterparts. There are so many situations when you don't want to look like a nerd or peeping tom with a big pair round your neck that my full size pairs stay in my vehicle or at home these days. These little old Busch's are actually sharper at the edge than my Leitz's I mentioned in my last post but of course cant compare in low light. Another great compact vintage binocular I own are Bausch & Lomb 10x28 discoverer reverse porro's, the older 1960's all metal version. These are amazing birding binoculars, the purple coatings make for rich colors and outstanding contrast though they do get a tad fuzzy round the edges and you have minimal depth of focus but the barrel wheel is super smooth and precise and can focus down to 8 feet, which is amazing for a 10x porro. They are heavy for their size but it makes for a steady view. I would love to watch you review this binocular that also comes in a 7x24 version which I have not tried.
@joesalaman3503Ай бұрын
"Das Boot", has to be the best war movie if not THE best movie of all time, every nail biting minute of it. Thanks for reminding me of that great movie I first saw in a old abandoned movie theater with no heating in a 1980's British winter that had been brought back to life by local film buffs with a reel to reel projector and the first CD player I ever saw that cost its proud owner as much as a car at the time. It was the full 6 hour version and we had several intermissions while the young guy changed the reels, one of which had failed to engage the take up spool and was piled up on the floor when the lights came on, which made us all laugh otherwise we all huddled in our winter coats and drank hot chocolate and nobody said a word or complained the whole time. at the end we all filed out in total silence totally dumbstruck by what we'd seen. Totally unforgettable experience! I have some Leitz Marseptits that are great binoculars BTW.
@davidlytle3974Ай бұрын
I've never seen the full series as a movie, only the edited version for theatrical release. That was impactful enough. I can hardly imagine how fully invested in the crew you must become in a six hour viewing.😮😮. The event, that you so beautifully described, makes me envision an indoor star party. Now, I have to marathon watch the full series. Thank you.
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Man, I wish I had the money for Oz. Thank you very much for the kind comment, by the way. I think that the next video will be less of a review and more of a plea for assistance. I have a 7x50 that no one seems to know about, even the manufacturer.
@Khaliq081019332 ай бұрын
I also bought the ED version, thanks for the nice Video!
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Thank you Khaliq for the friendly communication. Now, what is your assessment of the ED?
@robinj.93292 ай бұрын
A "good or better" Quality pair of 7x50 porro prisms binoculars are THE STANDARD to own and use! I try to keep a pair handy for most every need. Now, at night, for Astronomy purposes? The 8x56 are just a tad heavier and I must use them on some sort of brace. For me, next up is my 14x70mm pair. These are normally used only for the Night Sky and on a special mount. But, great optics are a joy to use!
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
We have nearly the same set up. 7x50 is bright and stable. My 8x56 is fabulous for brightness and a wide field of 8.4 degrees -and it's lighter than my Resolux by a pound. Finally, there is my 16x80 ED. A nice trio to cover the bases late at night. Thanks for sharing.
@citizenwolf87202 ай бұрын
I've watched a lot of your videos. Thanks for doing them. They're appreciated. But I'm now curious as to what's behind the curtain. Kansas or Oz? :)
@johnnydee74802 ай бұрын
Great review. I have some advice: Take it or leave it. Your audio level (stats for nerds) is reading at -10.3. I recommend turning it up to near -3. You should aim to get your audio at -16 Lufs.
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Thank you johnnydee. I won't leave it. Is there any review that we have offered that has a proper volume?
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Wrighty, please don't let this one incident put you off from the Maven B series. For all I know the entire B series is worth exploring. And why not, when you can just send them back till you get one that fits the bill. I may yet give the B2 a go. Nine power for sure.
@user-kf9vz8fz9l2 ай бұрын
Hello David, I'm disheartened to hear your report, I had high hopes for this model from reading the sheer amount of praise for it. Do you feel the 15X model would fare any better?
@Paracellum2 ай бұрын
Hello David, You should try a new SkyRover (Banner Cloud) APO binocular - either in 8x42 or 10x42. (10x50 &12x50 are going to be available soon). I had a chance to try them against the Swarovski NL Pures - 8x42 and 10x42 - and I must admit - I was impressed. Optically - the are very impressive, bright, sharp, CA are very well corrected. I could barely see any difference in their perfomance against an Austrian Alpha Glass. A huge 70° AFOV , which is sharp right to the edge makes them a joy to use. Built quality and ergonomic however are not on par with the Swarovskis, but they are more than acceptable for $450, i've paid for them. Please be advised - the eye relief on the SkyRover is a little bit "restricted", some independent measurements say it it about 12-13 mm, which may be challenging for an eyeglass wearer. I don't wear glasses - and can only see the whole field of view only with the eyecups fully down.
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Thanks for the hands-on dope on the Sky Rover. I have a friend in Russia who is getting one and will be letting me know just how bad the eye relief is for glass wearers. I don't think that any of us would mind hearing from you concerning how much the AFOV is restricted if you put on sunglasses. I can tell you that I would be quite happy to hear that the field is reduced by a mere five or six degrees. Thanks again for your suggestion and personal experience with this new offering from the CCP.
@cameraprepper79382 ай бұрын
When I saw the title, I thought it was the Carl Zeiss Dialyt 8x30 B/GA T* Classic which I think is one of the best Zeiss binoculars ever made together with the Carl Zeiss Dialyt 7x42 B/GA T* Classic and the Carl Zeiss Dialyt 8x56 B/GA T* Classic. I do not remember my first binocular brand name, but it was a 16x50 in 1970. Later I got a 7x50 which I only had a short time, nex up was a Kenlock 7x35 wich was prety good and very compact. Then I got my first really good binocular, a Prominar 9x35 wich I guess was a re-branded Kowa 9x35, the coating was excellent and the handling very good, unfortunately like most binoculars with oculars on a "bridge" it did not last for hard work in the field, so I got my first high end binocular, the Leitz 10x40 BA/N, the N stands for a better close focus distance of 4.5 meters, the normal Leitz 10x40 BA had a close focus of 9 meters !!! If you compare the 10x40 BA/N to the 10x40 BA you can see that at very long distance, that the 10x40 BA is sharper. The Leitz 10x40 BA/N could have been fully working if it wasn´t for an accident out in the field. So I got the Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD, it is very sharp and easy to handle as my old Leitz was, but I was disappointed with the lack depth of field in the Leica 8x32 compared to my old Leitz 10x40 BA/N. So I bought a (not much used) Leitz 10x40 BA in mint condition, later a Leitz 8x40 B and Leitz 8x32 B and Leitz 8x32 BA (green armor), latest I got a Leica Ultravid 12x50 HD which now is my most used binocular and sometimes my Kowa TSN-99A Prominar telescope. Do you know this site for binoculars !? www.allbinos.com/binoculars_reviews.html
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Wow! Somehow I'm left feeling a little jealous. I've noticed that a lot of people think very highly of the Zeiss Dialyts. Yes I do know Allbinos. I have made a few decisions based on their reviews. So far, I haven't been led wrong. Tell us more cameraprepper. You've got my attention.
@cameraprepper79382 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 I do not know what else to tell, but I can tell why I love Leitz and Leica binocular, it is not every thing about specs, it is much more about personal experience, the Leitz and Leica binoculars is very easy for me to use and the overall performance is excellent.
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
I lean the same way. Leica just works for me.
@wrighty3382 ай бұрын
David, It sounds like you got a demo dud which is not unheard of. My C series sweet spot is huge and thats their mid tier glass. Every review on B5's iv read have equalled or exceeded swaro SLC's for about half the price.
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Hi Wrighty. I considered that as a possible answer. But the fact that some other Maven enthusiast described the same phenomenon, specifically from the 10x B5, would tend to suggest the possibility of a design weakness in this model. It still might have been an anomaly with my specific B5. However, to me, the clincher is that when I spoke to the Maven associate I specified that the unit would be used for an online video review and that they should send me one that accurately represented that Model. Ouch!!! Regardless, I did say that I would consider keeping it if it was at least as sharp as my Russian BPOc at $300. But it wasn't. I'm not about to say that its performance in this regard was poor. What I'm saying is that my Porros can't be replaced with this "Very good" Maven with central focus. I held out hope that it could be the economy version of a Swaro but I just didn't luck out this time. I fully believe what you're saying about the C series. I also believe that I may have won out if I had gone with the B2 as I originally intended. But, I was too frickin curious about another 10x with field flatteners AND CF. Oh well.
@wrighty3382 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Its certainly something il bear in mind before picking up a B5 as i really dont wanna be spending Swaro bucks on smaller instruments if i can help it. Since getting my C2 iv fallen for their glass and had thought their entire B series range would have me covered for small roof prism instruments with alpha like performance. Il do more serious homework closer to the time as Im looking at their B.3 8x30 next.
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
I recently returned my Genesis 44 8.5x44 to Kowa for them to evaluate and re-collimate if necessary. I did this because I didn't believe that the Secozoom should have been outperforming the Kowa. They returned it after it went to their repair shop and wrote to me to assure me that it was being returned fully conforming to their standards of performance for that model. As soon as it arrived I tested it against the Secozoom at 50 yards, using the 1951 resolution test target. The eight power Secozoom outperformed the Kowa by a full element. I believe that I would be doing the community a disservice by not passing this information on.
@androna19192 ай бұрын
Tinc la versió GA amb coverta de goma i no puc estar més content amb la construcció. Com els teus, són impermeables. Òpticament, són òptims per observació i caça big game i grans aus. Poc recomanable per aus petites a curta distància. Si no portes ulleres i pots viure sense un gran FOV, són per tu. Ho he pogut comparar amb Zeiss i Leica 10x de primera classe i en condicions de llum escassa aquests Habicht estan per sobre sense dubtes. Gran canal, tens un seguidor més.
@davidlytle39742 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for the encouraging words. I needed it today. And welcome to the channel and group. Your evaluation of the modern builds of the Habicht is certainly valued by other viewers and contributors.
@mgray6122 ай бұрын
jeezus dude ditch the slow talk and get to the damn point.
@WD-sr8qz2 ай бұрын
Don't like it change the channel
@johnpoulter3 ай бұрын
David, the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 is worthy of a look 👍 Some high end bins have awful focus action. I had some Swaro 8x56SL that were inexcusably bad and notchy, and a couple of pairs of Ultravids with unimpressive focus action. At that level, you really expect such a simple thing to be sorted properly. If a pair of $40 Swifts can have a focus like butter, the big boys have no excuses.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Thank you for sharing your experience with less than stellar focusers on premium binos. Anytime I dare to point out something similar, like the Celestron Nature DX focuser being better than the Noctivid's, I wince from the expectation of naysayers writing to tell me that I 'm misleading folks. That you can't get performance from a $150 unit that can rival or surpass that of a $2000 one. It's nice to have some Amen Charlies out there to back me up. I don't believe that outfits like Swarovski generally send out products with crappy focusers (focusers not equal to expectations). I did allow that the Noctivid's focuser had seen better days before being handled by unknown numbers of customers. Anyway, I'm with you on this one. I did have an Audubon once that I rescued from a pawn shop. Lovely view and mechanics.
@johnpoulter3 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 I think that line was known for it, the focuser was a plastic affair. They probably won't go down that route again. My only other Swaro was a 10x25 and that was fine. It's a deal-breaker for me now, regardless how nice the glass. If the focusing's not right, I won't have it. I am down to my GPO HD 10x42 & a Victory FL 8x42. Both lovely, smooth focus, and the Zeiss is as near to a perfect bino as I've come.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
I have been blessed with the opportunity to look through a fair number of premium binos but I have never even seen an FL yet. I admit that I'm envious, a bit.😊
@johnpoulter3 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 I hadn't come across it until recently, working on the theory if something was top dog just a dozen years ago, it can't be too shabby now. Very glad I found one at reasonable cost 👍😊
@stevedickson58533 ай бұрын
I've just tested my Kowa 6x30 and my close focus is around 2.6 meters , I actually measured with the tape measure, iI can't understand where Kowa got the 5 meters from
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Thank you for being thorough and cluing us in. Now I'll be checking for myself rather than quoting Kowa. How do you rate your YF?
@stevedickson58533 ай бұрын
@davidlytle3974 love em, slight blackouts as i dont wear glasses when I try to bury my eyes into the cups but not much an issue I hold them slightly away, decent optics and high quality padded strap for the price, faults- probably just the joined eye piece caps fit loose, whereas the objective lense caps are nice and tight
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Well, I measured off the short focus on mine, twice. It came to 3.65 meters. I suppose that there is some variation between builds and Kowa offers 4 meters as an average. What do you think?
@stevedickson58533 ай бұрын
@davidlytle3974 I've just remeasured mine to be sure against your pair and still the same around 2.16-17 meters , some variations going on here between our pairs, ,but no complaints about my close focus lol , but I think kowa has underestimated its own close focus figures with 5 meters by a lot which could dent some of its sales if people looking for a shorter close focus that kowa has printed , their loss
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
I agree. They're being too conservative.
@user-sd6pm9ew7n3 ай бұрын
they both have too much eye relief for many non glass users. Eye point is user dependent but there are some tendency of the bino. amount of ER mm stated is not all. smaller AFOV are more easier to make long ER but also easier to have more blackout to non glass wearers. and also, If eyesup is not long enough for it's eyerelif, also can lead to blackouts. vantam and yf is both have all that issue. small afov, eyecup bit short to fit it's long ER. vantam is worse. and of course, 8x30 yf is much easier to see with naked eyes. because of less ER and much larger AFOV 6x30 has bit longer eyecup then 8x30 but not enough. they both have enough ER to use with glasses. 6x30 is much longer that even can be seen with I leave one eyecup click behind. so. ease of view to glass wearers will be better in 6x30 but in overall, more variety of people will found 8x30 much comfortable. Longer ER doesn't always mean better ease of view many people didn't even heard about it. The blackout issue is not only with cheap binoculars. Zeiss conquest 8x42 is notorious for it that Zeiss even sell extending eyecup for conquest. 8x42 conq is known to have worst eyepoint between 32~42 conq mainly because it have significantly smaller afov. Even Leica noctivid 8x42 has blackout issue to some. not as much as vantam, yf 6x30, conquest 8x42 but significantly more then Swaro NL 8x42. because it have more ER and smaller AFOV. so, therea are some binocular that eye glass weares like but non glass wearers dislike and can also have opposite situation. rubber flip eyecup such as nikon E2, Steiner nighthunter, ior valdada and some bino with less - average eyerelif such as kowa genesis, fujinon hc, leica ultravid tends / said to be more comfortable to non eyeglass wearers.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
I find your point an interesting one. Being dependent on glasses, I am biased towards longish eye relief. I suppose that I could start exploring the blackout tendencies of the binoculars I review by removing my glasses, extending the eyecups and seeing if I have trouble with blackouts. I will start tomorrow with both the yf and the Bantam. It would be a travesty if either binocular, designed with kids in mind, fails by design to accommodate young eyes without glasses. Thank you for your contribution.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Well, thank goodness. Neither binocular gave me any blackouts at any stage. If I tried to climb into the eyecups, cramming my cheeks into them, only then would I get any beginnings of darkening along the edge of the field. Nothing approaching normal use could force a blackout issue with these binoculars. Of course, this is what little old me got with my adult facial features. But, kids' eye sockets are probably shallower yet so I think the kiddies are likely safe from this particular problem. I do promise to be less self centered in the future and consider the possible weakness of narrow field binoculars for those who don't need greater eye relief as I do. Thank you again for your contribution.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Actually, shallower wouldn't be better. Maybe the kids aren't so safe.
@neilenglish74333 ай бұрын
Hello David:Enjoyable video. I love testing out all kinds of binos in all genres. It’s a labour of love for me and, I suspect, for you also! Keep up the good work! Best wishes, Neil
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Thank you so much Neil for your words of encouragement. You suspect correctly - I'm having a blast learning and sharing. Discovery is fun, isn't it?
@Adventure-MTB3 ай бұрын
Hey i like your reviews , i did get this bino for my little guy because its not bad for the money but also because when he uses it as a bat or train , warranty will get me a new one. i did the same for my daughter she is older , viper in the end i dont think any of the vortex line are that great .
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Thank you for writing and sharing your family with us. Trains indeed. When I was young enough to "play" with my dad's Bell & Howell 8x40, I used it as a space ship. Now, for Vortex, .....since I became familiar with the line I have developed the view that Vortex is the Taurus of binoculars. I don't mean that as an insult. It's just that I have generally been able to find other makes at the same price points that are superior. Actually, my two favorite Vortex binos lay at opposite ends of the spectrum. I respect the Razor UHD and this little Bantam. Your thoughts?
@Adventure-MTB3 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 i do think the bantam for the price is great , but as for the razor uhd for the money they are heavy and optically there is better , even the vipers my daughter has i would like to have gotten her some thing better , but that warranty for now is best for her until she gets a job and learns abut money , i have been using bino's all most every day now for 15 years and started at the 400$ price point and thought they were good but as i learned more i moved up and have been lucky to have used Swarovski EL line for the last 10 years and now use the NL and when i look at others i can now see the difference and cant go back lol there maybe others at a lower price point that are just as good but i did not want to spend time finding them , your reviews are help people with that and is great hope more find your channel .
@robertkirk43873 ай бұрын
I just got a brand-new pair of these, serial number 6975308 and they do not have the yellow tint to them, maybe they have later coatings?
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Maybe. Lucky you. Mine actually had a slightly brownish hue. Clear is better for sure.
@robertkirk43873 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 cheers mate.
@anirudhmoudgal3 ай бұрын
Kudos on the review! Really helpful in deciding which piece one should get. And thank you for taking suggestions from the community
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Hi Wrighty, good to hear from you. I just ordered a Kowa 8x30 but received a second 6x30 instead. I'm trying. Anyway, I think that it would be cool if you made a video review of your Maven and sent me a link. I'd watch.
@wrighty3383 ай бұрын
Not sure you can go wrong for $48. I should pick up a Kowa YF 8x30, they're almost twice as expensive in the UK compared to Japan so they will have to wait to be added on a JP order i think. I just got myself the Maven C.2 7x28 and its been going everywhere with me.
@Paultricounty3 ай бұрын
It’s obvious you don’t know what to look for in binoculars to see the difference between an entry level $200 Diamondback binocular to an upper mid grade $1000 optic. The resolution, light transmission, edge correction, distortion characteristics, color reproduction, etc. etc., the list goes on are completely on a different level in the Leica, assuming again you didn’t have an old beat up Leica. Either you need to get your eyes checked or your doing a mis service to your viewers. Unfortunately this a perfect example of how anybody can post a KZread video and get viewers.
@Paultricounty3 ай бұрын
Another issue that the Tamron version of the Bushnell Rangmeaster suffer from, is the top heavy design. It is well known by collectors of these fine instruments that there are a lot of them that have cracked prisms. The issue is that if you have a small IPD (inter- pupillary distance) setting, they don’t balance well and tip over when placed down thus damaging the prisms. The problem here with this review is that the reviewer doesn’t want to do his due diligence to review a proper example, because he doesn’t want to spend a few dollars. I’m sure we’d all agree if we reviewed a beat to crap Swarovski NL it wouldn’t perform well.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Absolutely no disrespect is intended in this attempt to clarify matters. I fully understand the natural tendency for enthusiasts to circle the wagons and defend their loved ones when they perceive that they aren't being given their due honors. I just want to clarify a few points so that readers won't go away with any misunderstandings. First, having determined that the Range master is the sharpest 7x35 I have ever looked through and having expressed the opinion that an Alpha probably couldn't surpass its performance, I have to wonder where I lacked "due diligence". Would a more expensive copy of the Tamron change my mind? Second, as for the Habicht, I did not offer a review of current builds of this model, nor did I suggest that a new version would perform poorly. This review was merely intended to give a heads up on what could be expected from older used units that can be picked up on eBay at affordable prices. Even with imperfections and degraded performance due to age, I offered my opinion that they were well worth picking up. Since affordability was key to the purpose of the review, spending "a few dollars" ($1300) wasn't in the cards. And the most important reason is this, It's purely a matter of personal preference that I don't wish to pay such money to be the owner of a binocular with such a restricted field, even if it were the sharpest binocular on Earth. If anyone wishes to listen attentively to the review they will recognize that this was what I was relating to the listener. There was absolutely no attempt on my part to suggest that a brand new Habicht would have less than stellar performance. Relax. Your lady's honor is undefiled. In fact, her thrice divorced sister is a nice piece.
@Paultricounty2 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 As with all KZread videos there are experts, then there are people who don’t know anything about the topic being discussed and everything in between. I think your misunderstanding, it’s not about not giving them their due honors, it’s about not acknowledging the fact that you don’t have a representative example of the vintage optic. A lot of people will go away with a misleading opinion of the performance of the Tamron rangemasters. It’s a little like doing a review on a 1960s Corvette , that needs a motor rebuild and a new front end then saying it’s not fast and doesn’t handle well. Yes they are very sharp, but then how many 7 x 35’s have you tried? No, these are not as sharp as the modern so-called alpha options ( NL, EL, SF, Ultravids etc., etc.). As far as changing your mind about a more expensive copy of a Tamron, it’s not about expense, it’s about condition. Lots of times these Tamron‘s can be had for about $200 in relatively nice shape, but most of them don’t reach their potential until they have been serviced, which usually costs from $100-$200. Then you have something. As far as the Habicht’s, the classic/vintage examples are completely different binoculars than the newest version. The newest habicht offering optically is closer to the alpha level albeit with a the traditional smaller FOV. But of course there are pros and cons to a smaller FOV.
@Paultricounty3 ай бұрын
A couple of things here that are misleading about his subjective observations. I may need two parts. First the eye relief is 10mm and anybody who does not wear glasses can easily see the whole 11° FOV, and the edge field stop is clear , black and sharp. But because of the huge field of view it is on the periphery, unlike binoculars that have a more conventional (smaller) FOV. As far as clarity and sharpness, it is outstanding even by todays standards. The issue here is that 90% of these are beat up and require service , and the main service is cleaning the haze buildup on the prism as well as a good collimation. Assuming of course we’re starting with a specimen with good condition coatings. I’ve had a half a dozen of these and every one needed the prism cleaned to perform at its best. It’s clear the reviewers Bushnell needed service. This is very unfortunate when your giving opinions on the quality of optics.
@BlackForestRecon3 ай бұрын
The Tamron Rangemaster is an excellent wide-angle binocular and I am continually impressed with its performance. I hope that the location where I want to make a video about these binoculars will work out this year. The Rangemaster binoculars were apparently not officially sold here in Europe. That's why both versions are extremely difficult to obtain here. On the other hand, many european binocular collectors don't have these binoculars on their radar, which is why they aren't that expensive when you do find them. I would recommend the Swift Audubon to you as the next milestone. Happy collecting! 😀
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Hey! It's always an honor for me to receive a good word from you Doctor. I will definitely be looking forward to seeing your Tamron video while hearing the breeze and the tinkle of goat bells. And yes, your suggestion is a good one. I rescued an Audubon from a pawn shop two years ago. I bought it for $20 in parts and reassembled it after removing a light film of fungus on the prisms. What a lovely, sharp binocular that turned out to be. Sadly, I sold it for $70 before I ever had a thought to review it. Oh well. I will be watching to see what you show us next to get my next zen fix. Keep em coming.
@wrighty3383 ай бұрын
7x35's such a rare size nowadays, or just 7x in general. There's nothing between a Nikon action ex at the budget end and a Leica trinovid at the top end if you want this size. The latest UO 6.5 or 8x32 APO's might be close though.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
There is always the 7x50. I just wish we could get one with an 8.5 degree field or better, with plenty of eye relief. And, let's keep the price around $300 . What would you say to that?
@wrighty3383 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Yep Id take it in a porro design. Hold onto that shadowquest 8x56 of your's it looks like steiner just gave it the chop - hopefully they've got a newer version in the works.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
If only it had central focus and ED triplet objectives. 😮
@sundin56463 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 7X50mm, but it only has 7.8 degree fov
@sundin56463 ай бұрын
you owe it to yourself to get a nikon wx
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Ha! I owe it to myself to borrow yours.
@sundin56463 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 i would if i had one...
@Thestripper13 ай бұрын
Sell all of those and get the Habicht 8x30 and be satisfied for the rest of your life (if the eye relief is sufficient for you that is).
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
You're the second person to recommend the Swaro 8x30. You guys are gonna cost me money. Really, thanks for the tip.
@Thestripper13 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Yeah i know they will set you back a bit, but so will having a heap of medium performing binoculars. I used to have a bunch but now I only have the little Habicht. Another top performer is the Kite Optics Lynx 8x30 HD+. Not sure if it's available in the States yet but if it is go and try it. The ones I've looked through will rival the performance of any binocular out there, in all regards. The field of view is only rivalled by Swarovskis newest NL. The Kite is around €650 so it's really a no brainer. It's not as pretty as the Habicht though.
@Paultricounty3 ай бұрын
No, this $500 bino is not on the level of a $1000 bino. The ED is a mid level bino in about the same grouping as a Nikon M7, a Zeiss Terra, a vortex Viper and so on. The Passion HD is in the upper mid level , just below the top of the line binoculars. It compares well with the Zeiss Conquest, Nikon MHG, Leica Trinovids, etc. etc. When it comes to optics , you pay for what you get. There’s no free ride.
@vesselalytle75253 ай бұрын
I appreciate your position - in principle. You've given me an idea for a generally beneficial video on just the topic that You've touched upon. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
@Paultricounty3 ай бұрын
I’ve seen so many of these videos and because of many , I went down a deep rabbit hole of buying and testing just about everything on the market, as well as some that have been discontinued for years. I’ve even bought and tested vintage high end bins from the 1950’s and 1960’s. One thing that I’ve clearly learned is that most of these reviewers know very little about what their talking about, and seem to have even less knowledge of optics. There are key giveaways when to stop watching , one is when someone says that $500 binoculars are as good as $1000 binoculars . Something to consider is that one $500 binocular really is not better in any profound way than another $500 binocular. The only real thing different are some characteristics of the image.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Alrighty then. You settled that issue. Super thanks for the review John. Please, keep us informed concerning any other gems you run into.
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
John, a side by side comparison is exactly what matters. Your report is just what I needed. It comports well with other reports I've heard and I intend to eventually act on it. So, the incremental adjustments provided by the diopter are small enough that you don't end up with a compromised focus between the two barrels? And the focus knob - do you find it performing for you as I described the focuser on the ED model? If yes then you definitely got a winner and I want one.
@johnpoulter3 ай бұрын
Oh that's good, glad it was of some help. I find the dioptre adjustment just fine and had concerns when discovering it was a click-step, too, for the very reason you mention. Maybe I got lucky, but it's spot on. The focus knob..I have to almost sacrilegiously say it's smoother than my Ultravids and I'm able to find perfect focus more easily. One thing I forgot, the eyecups: these are rock-solid and the twist-up is firm, clicks twice with total certainty and could be left anywhere in between with confidence. Apparently, they're solid aluminium covered with rubber; whatever, they are superbly built. The more I think about these components, the more I appreciate how thoroughly decent the bins are.
@johnpoulter3 ай бұрын
Hi David. I haven't tried the ED but I did buy the HD 10 x42 and I have to say they're pretty stunning. It will be interesting to hear your take on them. I wouldn't fight shy of buying an ED anytime because the reviews in general are so darn good and it seems they're not too far off from the HD in performance anyway. Cheers for your video 👍
@davidlytle39743 ай бұрын
Thank you John for your kind response and input. Have you actually heard anything pertaining to the difference between the ED and HD versions of this binocular? I ask because I don't feel any compulsion to buy the HD if the difference is unimpressively slight. How is the CA on yours? How do you appreciate the diopter on your HD? Your opinions may actually affect my wallet.😊
@johnpoulter3 ай бұрын
@@davidlytle3974 Hi David, nothing specific, just heard that they were better. I am thinking of getting an 8x30 ED but waiting for a bargain and they sound good enough for me by all accounts and will make an interesting comparison. I wasn't in the market for a 10x42, or didn't think I was until these came long at a price too good to miss; so my reasoning was that if I'm not happy I can always get my money back easily. I can say the HD are on a par with my Leica Ultravid 8x42 in terms of image quality. That's just through taking both out and using them alongside, one after the other, nothing scientific. I like the dioptre though some may prefer a smooth turn. I thought it might be inaccurate but I had no trouble finding the sweet spot for my imperfect eye. As far as chromatic aberration - haven't noticed any. Sorry can't be more helpful but I would say if you see a good deal on one, I don't think you'll be disappointed 😊
Пікірлер
Hello from Serbia! Sir, i admire your knowledge about binoculars, i am interested in yor opinion about Svbony Sv202 and Sa205!? I was reading some very nice reviews and some not soo good. In meentime i vas buy Sv202 8x32, its beter than Hawke Avid but not beter than BPC 8x40 Porro. Thank you sir for great content you share 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
First of all, thank you for your kind words. They are very encouraging. And, thank you for bringing these Svbony offerings to my attention. While I have bought some of their eyepieces for telescope use, I have not evaluated their binoculars since my one bad experience with them. I purchased a 7x50 Porro (sv27?) that should never have left the factory. It came adequately packaged but was utterly out of collimation. I had a difficult time convincing Svbony that the problem was in their product and not my inexperience with binoculars. Eventually, they did replace it with one that performed adequately. As a 7x50 it was good but not impressive in any way. Because of this poor first impression I have not considered Svbony as a source for binos. However, you have changed this. I have not tested either of the models you are interested in. I have checked out what Neil English has to say about them and I recommend that you do the same. Neil does a marvelous job reviewing glass and I tend to agree with his assessments. I have bought quality glass solely on his recommendation. If you have read enough of my reviews you could guess which model that I would go with. The sa205 is smaller, lighter and has a field flattening system. 100% sharpness across the field beats 70%. Also, according to Neil, it has better control of glare. I can tell you now that I would risk my money on the sa205. If you absolutely have to have eight power then get the 202. The 205 evidently runs closer to 7x. But, I like 7x so, for me, that doesn't detract from the better features of the 205. Your inquiry and Neil's opinions have now conspired to cost me money. I will now have to evaluate the sa205 and sv202 for myself. You have done me a good service and I thank you.
@@davidlytle3974 thank you sir 🙏🏻
I can confirm that these 6x30 are outstanding. I immediately ordered the 8x30 as well. However, there is another 6x30 under a different brand name that looks darn near identical and is literally 1/3 the price. I am waiting for it to arrive. I am hopping that it’s exactly the same bino rebranded… Can’t wait to get them and compare…
Please, keep us informed on your findings. Thanks for dropping us a note.
Is that Kenko binoculars ultraVIEW 6x30WP?
Yes! 😁 The Kenko’s should arrive in a couple of days, although I think the coatings might make a difference. The KOWA seem to have wrapped these in the green rubber armour. If the Kenko are any good it might be great to do a thorough review. Also an updated on the KOWA. I am noticing that it exhibits some barrel distortion, which seems to be responsible for the drop off in sharpness towards the 1/3 of views parameter. There is a trace of CA in general (but very small - I noticed it in high contrast scenes at dusk - looking at trees and birds against sunset backdrop). RE barrel distortion - a slight refocus puts the edges in sharp focus - (and the middle goes out of focus) hence it seems that the field flatness seems to be a major cause of the droppoff towards the edges. The bunks are nice and bright in the evening!
@@YouSydneyTube looking forward to seeing your comparison between the Kenko and Kowa. What I read from Amazon JP is that its prism is bk7, not sure if a square exit-pupil can be seen in low light.
another 70% sweetspot? this is mid range territory at this point why not try a fujinon FMTR-SX or its chinese clone the APM MS ED 10x50
Hi wrighty, thanks for checking in. I do have the FMT-SX. It is better in every way, optically. But, it's heavy and with independent focus that doesn't snap. That's what I'm trying to get away from. Give me some central focus designs that can do better, that aren't from the big three, if you know of any. I'm up for trying them. Otherwise, I think that I'm going to have to lay down some real money and go Swaro or Leica.
@@davidlytle3974 Rave reviews on the Sky Rover Banner Clouds, but i think you've already said they wont work for you? and without spending 2 grand what about Razor UHD 10x50 from Japan? Kamakura ED optics, Abbe Koenig prisms and edge sharpness likened to the Fujinon's. I dont know what an ultravid HD retails for stateside, but id guess its a damn sight cheaper than in rip off Britain. best of luck, looking forward to the next installment
Thank you for the well wishes. Short of having a flat field, the Vortex may be a good choice. I certainly enjoyed the feel of it and the view was pleasant. I'll have to check out its sweet spot. Somehow I doubt that it will equal the BPOs 90 percent. That's why I may break down, get the EL and end my search. 100 percent focus is hard to beat. I can pick one up for around $1900 vs $1700 for the Vortex. Maybe it's worth it?
@@davidlytle3974 Since the EL's were discontinued in light of the new 52mm NL's they've been on deals, so yeah you could be onto something there. Im super glad astronomy is a totally different ball game, you're into binocular telescope territory at that point, 70mm, 80mm, and beyond
My old 16x80 ED turned out to be a good servant under dark skies. What's your go-to astro bin, if I'm permitted to ask?
Dear sir im about to buy zeiss 10 x 56 but they are rather expensive are these fuji 10 x 70 better? thanks
I am sorry to tell you that I have had no experience with the Zeiss 10x56 but I would certainly like the opportunity. As for absolute sharpness, I wouldn't hesitate to invest in a top of the line Fujinon. Since I discovered the problem with the eyepiece of my 10x50 FMT-SX and resolved it, it has become the absolute sharpest binocular in my possession. No roof prism binocular that I have put to my eyes has noticeably surpassed it. If you do decide to go with the Zeiss then I invite you to tell us all what you think of it. I would be most interested and thankful.
I just got last week the 10x42 Passion HD, OMG,, same sharpness and resolution and brightness as my Leica Ultravid 10x42. It really is something else with the quality of workmanship and the optics for sure. Please do a video on an HD please, would love to see what you think my friend. Love your videos!!
Darn it David, is there any Bino that has more than 50% sweet spot? LOL.
That seems to be the norm, doesn't it? 😢
Hi Dave. I've seen something similar to what you describe about the sharpness of this Maven B2 before, several times with Russian, Japanese and Chinese binoculars. I single this out as a separate type of defect... The last time I observed such a defect effect was with my new BOSMA APO 10x42, this is binoculars from Kunming United Optics (KUO), the same as the one that made a lot of noise on English-language forums - Sky Rover Banner Cloud APO 10x42. Even when the first reviews about Sky Rover appeared, BOSMA was already announced, it is the same model under two brands. By the fact that both of these brands apparently sell KUO products. So about the Maven B2 defect that you describe, or rather about its "ghostly sharpness", which I met earlier. As it was with my BOSMA APO, when looking at small details through binoculars, they become visible (unambiguously distinguishable) somehow gradually, at first I observe some blurring of the smallest details (for example, small letters in the inscription) - not clarity, then small details gradually appear and the inscription differs entirely, each letter. But if you take the binoculars away from your eyes for a while, and then look at the same objects again, then everything will repeat from the beginning, small details do not differ unambiguously (only some of them are the largest), it seems that small details float slightly and it remains so for a while, then it becomes clearer and more distinguishable. But the feeling that something is wrong remains all the time observing these details. Having watched so many times, I realized that my vision compensates for the lack of information from one eye with information from the other, and the brain puts it into a general image in which there is enough information, but gives a signal "something is wrong". At the same time, there is no pain in the eyes and head, this feeling is different. I checked my guess, looked with my left eye alternately through each half of the binoculars. All right. I asked my wife to look at it, she confirmed my observations. I mean, this is an optical flaw in one half of the binoculars, which causes the eye looking through it to see less detail, and the eye looking through the other half of the binoculars to see more. The brain gradually compensates for this disadvantage, gradually pulling up vision to normal, small details of objects are being drawn. I also noticed that in addition to the lack of sharpness in the right half, there is also less brightness, there is no explanation. The binoculars were sent back, and I am now in correspondence with the manufacturer. As I understand it, they have a different opinion, but I'm thinking of fighting. Regarding the model of the binoculars itself, I liked the very wide field (7.8°), excellent brightness and color reproduction. Excellent immersion in the image and the unexpected presence of a 3d effect, better than other Roof binoculars that I had. The sharpness that this model is capable of could not be estimated, for obvious reasons. Of the disadvantages, binoculars are heavy for 10*42 - 930 grams and Eye relief is not as big as we would like to see the whole field in sunglasses, the whole field is visible in corrective glasses. In general, provided that these defects are eliminated, I liked the binoculars, and so did my wife.
Thank you Alex for coming through with this evaluation. I now have a working theory to explain the ghostly resolution found in my two Mavens. Also, people have been asking for a review of the new Kunming offering and you have given us one. I found it most interesting and helpful. At least, your Bosma didn't cost you $1500.00. Would you be able to live with the anomaly in the Bosma/Sky Rover, considering how inexpensive it is? Anyway, thanks again for coming through with your review. I really do appreciate it.
@@davidlytle3974 Such a defect as "ghost sharpness" will remind me of itself every time I look through binoculars, and annoy me, I have already suffered enough of this, so I am no longer ready to tolerate it. The presence of such a defect in binoculars means to me that I do not need it (binoculars). In addition, unlike a violation of collimation, this defect cannot be corrected.
BPO or GPO?
If you're asking me which is better, the BPOc or the GPO Passion HD, I can't answer you with absolute knowledge. I haven't checked out the HD yet. However, in order for the HD to compete it would have to be as sharp as the Fujinon FMT-SX, with flat field and near 90 percent Sweet spot to match.
Well I tell you one thing. I ain’t cravin a Maven.
That's a cute slogan that unfortunately now applies to me.
The Maven’s Sweet Spot must be small.
@@davidlytle3974 I’m sure I’m not the only one who greatly appreciates your unbiased and concise reviews.
I thank you Dean for the kind words.
Winnon992, The sweet spot isn't small, just not super generous. The degree of focus fall off isn't horrible but it's noticeable after 60 percent out from center.
The porro optical design is simple and elegant. The prism surfaces don't have to be coated because the design utilizes total internal reflection. The popular roof prism design is more compact and can be lighter but it requires a lot more engineering to achieve a similar optical performance. Roof prisms are therefore usually more expensive. Also I believe roof prisms are more easily waterproofed but I'm not absolutely sure about that. Thanks for your video!
Red sky, I appreciate your comments. Porros can definitely step out ahead of roofs of the same objective diameters. As for waterproofing, it should be a practical matter regardless of type. I recently tested my Habicht for watertightness. As old as it is it remains tight and gas purged. Nice.
The summary that I came up with after reading and seeing a multitude of reviews for a long time, is that the only "negative" points of the Kowa Genesis Prominar XD 44 (8.5x and 10.5x) compared to the so-called "Alphas", are: 1. Greater weight (which I see as positive since it means greater constructive robustness.) 2. A lower FOV (which I don't find particularly negative either, since the FOV of these Genesis is not small either, it is more than enough and, in addition, we must take into account that either the 8.5x or the 10.5x version, in any case, it is always a magnification 0.5x greater than its competitors; in addition, I also particularly prefer to see the edge of the image, or circle, rather than not seeing it and being out of my field of vision because it is excessive, as happens with the NL Pure.) In some cases the edge-to-edge sharpness is also mentioned, somewhat less than the best of them all (again the Swarovski NL Pure), but on the other hand it is average to the rest. (Which does not bother me nor do I notice much of it since my eyes always look at the center of the image and not at the edges.) And with regards to the rest of the mechanical (focus wheel) and optical (sharpness in the center of the image, sweet spot, color, contrast, brightness, CA control, flare / glare / stray light control, geometric distortions, close focus distance...) characteristics, the general opinion / consensus is that the Kowa Genesis Prominar XD 44 are at the same level (or similar) as the "Alphas" in some of these characteristics and even above them in others (which also happen to be the most relevant optical characteristics for me and what I value most in binoculars.) So well, as each person has a different point of view from their neighbor, what for you "does not arrive / it doesn't make", for others "does arrive / it does make and even surpasses." I finally bought these Kowa (both: the 8.5x44 and the 10.5x44) and I couldn't be happier. And I don't look back since. Cheers!
Fair enough brother. Nothing beats, "couldn't be happier". Thanks for chiming in.
@@davidlytle3974 You're welcome. 👍🏻 Do you know which other two I love too in my little collection?: 1. The Blaser Primus 8x56 (which I bought brand new for around €1,000 shipping included), and what for me happened to be the biggest surprise of them all... 2. The Bushnell Forge 8x42 for €400-ish (shipping included). Yes, made in China and certainly with some drawbacks (smaller sweet spot, lesser edge-to-edge sharpness, etc) compared to the other ones, BUT with an IMPRESSIVE overall image quality, especially considering their price point!: good glare / stray light control, very good CA control, very good FOV, very good build quality, excellent sharpness in the center, excellent color reproduction, excellent color saturation, excellent contrast, excellent brightness... I'm amazed with the Forge for just a bit more than €400! Should anyone want a second / backup pair, they should certainly consider these Bushnell. Best bang for buck! 👍🏻
It's interesting to me to hear you mention the Forge. It's been on my to-do list for a while. I think that a lot of lower mid-level units hold remarkable value. The Chinese are really cranking out some good stuff recently. I definitely invite suggestions and recommendations for future reviews. Any other ideas?
@@davidlytle3974 I have heard and read good things about the Sig Sauer Zulu 9 as well. And others. But honestly, I think the Bushnell Forge are hard, if not impossible, to beat for the price. Best "budget" binos in the market. Why? Simply because their pros are much more important than their cons. I love my Kowas, but I think this model from Bushnell does have far better quality / price ratio, even though the Kowas are superior.
I have the 10x42 B1.2 and have tested them (mainly for resolving power/sharpness) against Leica, Zeiss and Swaros, and they are as good or better. Even though they don't have field flatteners, the sharpness looks fine to my eyes edge to edge. This edge to edge sharpness isn't anyway very important to me, as I tend to concentrate in the middle of the FoV.
Your experience with Maven is exactly why I am trying them out. I haven't given up. I have a B2 (my original interest) on its way right now. If that doesn't work I can always try the B6, without flatteners. I'll still be looking for around an 80 percent sweet spot. Yeah, the center is most important but let's have a bit of clear field. What percent of field do you get with your B1.2?
Interesting features. Looks like it was made in the early 90s (still made in Japan). Perhaps it was an attempt by Tasco to gain a foothold in the higher-priced sector. And then it didn't work out and they stopped trying - but that´s just pure speculation on my part. Happy collecting! 😄
You're probably right. It is marked "Japan" yet the Tasco representative suggested that it may have been assembled in Florida. Really??? Anyway, stuff like this makes collecting truly interesting. Thanks for checking in. Happy collecting and hiking to you. Keep up the beautiful work.
Join Birdforum some very clued up binocular people.
About a few hours ago I just got my Tameron RangeMasters delivered in the mail. They’re looking good and yes they are heavy ! I really like the view. I really believe I’m going to like them. Great Video !
Good to hear and thank you.
Interesting thing about coatings versus no coatings I've found is that they don't improve sharpness only light transmission and the more modern multi coatings often seem to produce chromatic aberrations in bright light, which is why I don't own many modern bins. My favorite pair are the oldest and sharpest of my collection, well over 100 years old and made forty odd years before coatings were invented, these pre WW1 made Busch prisma binocule's are 9x20 with tiny exit pupils and narrow FOV and pretty useless in low light but in good light they are pin sharp 100% all the way to the edge and have such an amazing depth of field for 9x magnification at least as good as any 7x pair I own so you don't have to fiddle with the focus much. With their compact size and light weight I find myself taking them everywhere and they have gotten me more interested in miniature and compact binoculars, which I find far more useful than their bulkier more respected counterparts. There are so many situations when you don't want to look like a nerd or peeping tom with a big pair round your neck that my full size pairs stay in my vehicle or at home these days. These little old Busch's are actually sharper at the edge than my Leitz's I mentioned in my last post but of course cant compare in low light. Another great compact vintage binocular I own are Bausch & Lomb 10x28 discoverer reverse porro's, the older 1960's all metal version. These are amazing birding binoculars, the purple coatings make for rich colors and outstanding contrast though they do get a tad fuzzy round the edges and you have minimal depth of focus but the barrel wheel is super smooth and precise and can focus down to 8 feet, which is amazing for a 10x porro. They are heavy for their size but it makes for a steady view. I would love to watch you review this binocular that also comes in a 7x24 version which I have not tried.
"Das Boot", has to be the best war movie if not THE best movie of all time, every nail biting minute of it. Thanks for reminding me of that great movie I first saw in a old abandoned movie theater with no heating in a 1980's British winter that had been brought back to life by local film buffs with a reel to reel projector and the first CD player I ever saw that cost its proud owner as much as a car at the time. It was the full 6 hour version and we had several intermissions while the young guy changed the reels, one of which had failed to engage the take up spool and was piled up on the floor when the lights came on, which made us all laugh otherwise we all huddled in our winter coats and drank hot chocolate and nobody said a word or complained the whole time. at the end we all filed out in total silence totally dumbstruck by what we'd seen. Totally unforgettable experience! I have some Leitz Marseptits that are great binoculars BTW.
I've never seen the full series as a movie, only the edited version for theatrical release. That was impactful enough. I can hardly imagine how fully invested in the crew you must become in a six hour viewing.😮😮. The event, that you so beautifully described, makes me envision an indoor star party. Now, I have to marathon watch the full series. Thank you.
Man, I wish I had the money for Oz. Thank you very much for the kind comment, by the way. I think that the next video will be less of a review and more of a plea for assistance. I have a 7x50 that no one seems to know about, even the manufacturer.
I also bought the ED version, thanks for the nice Video!
Thank you Khaliq for the friendly communication. Now, what is your assessment of the ED?
A "good or better" Quality pair of 7x50 porro prisms binoculars are THE STANDARD to own and use! I try to keep a pair handy for most every need. Now, at night, for Astronomy purposes? The 8x56 are just a tad heavier and I must use them on some sort of brace. For me, next up is my 14x70mm pair. These are normally used only for the Night Sky and on a special mount. But, great optics are a joy to use!
We have nearly the same set up. 7x50 is bright and stable. My 8x56 is fabulous for brightness and a wide field of 8.4 degrees -and it's lighter than my Resolux by a pound. Finally, there is my 16x80 ED. A nice trio to cover the bases late at night. Thanks for sharing.
I've watched a lot of your videos. Thanks for doing them. They're appreciated. But I'm now curious as to what's behind the curtain. Kansas or Oz? :)
Great review. I have some advice: Take it or leave it. Your audio level (stats for nerds) is reading at -10.3. I recommend turning it up to near -3. You should aim to get your audio at -16 Lufs.
Thank you johnnydee. I won't leave it. Is there any review that we have offered that has a proper volume?
Wrighty, please don't let this one incident put you off from the Maven B series. For all I know the entire B series is worth exploring. And why not, when you can just send them back till you get one that fits the bill. I may yet give the B2 a go. Nine power for sure.
Hello David, I'm disheartened to hear your report, I had high hopes for this model from reading the sheer amount of praise for it. Do you feel the 15X model would fare any better?
Hello David, You should try a new SkyRover (Banner Cloud) APO binocular - either in 8x42 or 10x42. (10x50 &12x50 are going to be available soon). I had a chance to try them against the Swarovski NL Pures - 8x42 and 10x42 - and I must admit - I was impressed. Optically - the are very impressive, bright, sharp, CA are very well corrected. I could barely see any difference in their perfomance against an Austrian Alpha Glass. A huge 70° AFOV , which is sharp right to the edge makes them a joy to use. Built quality and ergonomic however are not on par with the Swarovskis, but they are more than acceptable for $450, i've paid for them. Please be advised - the eye relief on the SkyRover is a little bit "restricted", some independent measurements say it it about 12-13 mm, which may be challenging for an eyeglass wearer. I don't wear glasses - and can only see the whole field of view only with the eyecups fully down.
Thanks for the hands-on dope on the Sky Rover. I have a friend in Russia who is getting one and will be letting me know just how bad the eye relief is for glass wearers. I don't think that any of us would mind hearing from you concerning how much the AFOV is restricted if you put on sunglasses. I can tell you that I would be quite happy to hear that the field is reduced by a mere five or six degrees. Thanks again for your suggestion and personal experience with this new offering from the CCP.
When I saw the title, I thought it was the Carl Zeiss Dialyt 8x30 B/GA T* Classic which I think is one of the best Zeiss binoculars ever made together with the Carl Zeiss Dialyt 7x42 B/GA T* Classic and the Carl Zeiss Dialyt 8x56 B/GA T* Classic. I do not remember my first binocular brand name, but it was a 16x50 in 1970. Later I got a 7x50 which I only had a short time, nex up was a Kenlock 7x35 wich was prety good and very compact. Then I got my first really good binocular, a Prominar 9x35 wich I guess was a re-branded Kowa 9x35, the coating was excellent and the handling very good, unfortunately like most binoculars with oculars on a "bridge" it did not last for hard work in the field, so I got my first high end binocular, the Leitz 10x40 BA/N, the N stands for a better close focus distance of 4.5 meters, the normal Leitz 10x40 BA had a close focus of 9 meters !!! If you compare the 10x40 BA/N to the 10x40 BA you can see that at very long distance, that the 10x40 BA is sharper. The Leitz 10x40 BA/N could have been fully working if it wasn´t for an accident out in the field. So I got the Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD, it is very sharp and easy to handle as my old Leitz was, but I was disappointed with the lack depth of field in the Leica 8x32 compared to my old Leitz 10x40 BA/N. So I bought a (not much used) Leitz 10x40 BA in mint condition, later a Leitz 8x40 B and Leitz 8x32 B and Leitz 8x32 BA (green armor), latest I got a Leica Ultravid 12x50 HD which now is my most used binocular and sometimes my Kowa TSN-99A Prominar telescope. Do you know this site for binoculars !? www.allbinos.com/binoculars_reviews.html
Wow! Somehow I'm left feeling a little jealous. I've noticed that a lot of people think very highly of the Zeiss Dialyts. Yes I do know Allbinos. I have made a few decisions based on their reviews. So far, I haven't been led wrong. Tell us more cameraprepper. You've got my attention.
@@davidlytle3974 I do not know what else to tell, but I can tell why I love Leitz and Leica binocular, it is not every thing about specs, it is much more about personal experience, the Leitz and Leica binoculars is very easy for me to use and the overall performance is excellent.
I lean the same way. Leica just works for me.
David, It sounds like you got a demo dud which is not unheard of. My C series sweet spot is huge and thats their mid tier glass. Every review on B5's iv read have equalled or exceeded swaro SLC's for about half the price.
Hi Wrighty. I considered that as a possible answer. But the fact that some other Maven enthusiast described the same phenomenon, specifically from the 10x B5, would tend to suggest the possibility of a design weakness in this model. It still might have been an anomaly with my specific B5. However, to me, the clincher is that when I spoke to the Maven associate I specified that the unit would be used for an online video review and that they should send me one that accurately represented that Model. Ouch!!! Regardless, I did say that I would consider keeping it if it was at least as sharp as my Russian BPOc at $300. But it wasn't. I'm not about to say that its performance in this regard was poor. What I'm saying is that my Porros can't be replaced with this "Very good" Maven with central focus. I held out hope that it could be the economy version of a Swaro but I just didn't luck out this time. I fully believe what you're saying about the C series. I also believe that I may have won out if I had gone with the B2 as I originally intended. But, I was too frickin curious about another 10x with field flatteners AND CF. Oh well.
@@davidlytle3974 Its certainly something il bear in mind before picking up a B5 as i really dont wanna be spending Swaro bucks on smaller instruments if i can help it. Since getting my C2 iv fallen for their glass and had thought their entire B series range would have me covered for small roof prism instruments with alpha like performance. Il do more serious homework closer to the time as Im looking at their B.3 8x30 next.
I recently returned my Genesis 44 8.5x44 to Kowa for them to evaluate and re-collimate if necessary. I did this because I didn't believe that the Secozoom should have been outperforming the Kowa. They returned it after it went to their repair shop and wrote to me to assure me that it was being returned fully conforming to their standards of performance for that model. As soon as it arrived I tested it against the Secozoom at 50 yards, using the 1951 resolution test target. The eight power Secozoom outperformed the Kowa by a full element. I believe that I would be doing the community a disservice by not passing this information on.
Tinc la versió GA amb coverta de goma i no puc estar més content amb la construcció. Com els teus, són impermeables. Òpticament, són òptims per observació i caça big game i grans aus. Poc recomanable per aus petites a curta distància. Si no portes ulleres i pots viure sense un gran FOV, són per tu. Ho he pogut comparar amb Zeiss i Leica 10x de primera classe i en condicions de llum escassa aquests Habicht estan per sobre sense dubtes. Gran canal, tens un seguidor més.
Thank you so much for the encouraging words. I needed it today. And welcome to the channel and group. Your evaluation of the modern builds of the Habicht is certainly valued by other viewers and contributors.
jeezus dude ditch the slow talk and get to the damn point.
Don't like it change the channel
David, the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 is worthy of a look 👍 Some high end bins have awful focus action. I had some Swaro 8x56SL that were inexcusably bad and notchy, and a couple of pairs of Ultravids with unimpressive focus action. At that level, you really expect such a simple thing to be sorted properly. If a pair of $40 Swifts can have a focus like butter, the big boys have no excuses.
Thank you for sharing your experience with less than stellar focusers on premium binos. Anytime I dare to point out something similar, like the Celestron Nature DX focuser being better than the Noctivid's, I wince from the expectation of naysayers writing to tell me that I 'm misleading folks. That you can't get performance from a $150 unit that can rival or surpass that of a $2000 one. It's nice to have some Amen Charlies out there to back me up. I don't believe that outfits like Swarovski generally send out products with crappy focusers (focusers not equal to expectations). I did allow that the Noctivid's focuser had seen better days before being handled by unknown numbers of customers. Anyway, I'm with you on this one. I did have an Audubon once that I rescued from a pawn shop. Lovely view and mechanics.
@@davidlytle3974 I think that line was known for it, the focuser was a plastic affair. They probably won't go down that route again. My only other Swaro was a 10x25 and that was fine. It's a deal-breaker for me now, regardless how nice the glass. If the focusing's not right, I won't have it. I am down to my GPO HD 10x42 & a Victory FL 8x42. Both lovely, smooth focus, and the Zeiss is as near to a perfect bino as I've come.
I have been blessed with the opportunity to look through a fair number of premium binos but I have never even seen an FL yet. I admit that I'm envious, a bit.😊
@@davidlytle3974 I hadn't come across it until recently, working on the theory if something was top dog just a dozen years ago, it can't be too shabby now. Very glad I found one at reasonable cost 👍😊
I've just tested my Kowa 6x30 and my close focus is around 2.6 meters , I actually measured with the tape measure, iI can't understand where Kowa got the 5 meters from
Thank you for being thorough and cluing us in. Now I'll be checking for myself rather than quoting Kowa. How do you rate your YF?
@davidlytle3974 love em, slight blackouts as i dont wear glasses when I try to bury my eyes into the cups but not much an issue I hold them slightly away, decent optics and high quality padded strap for the price, faults- probably just the joined eye piece caps fit loose, whereas the objective lense caps are nice and tight
Well, I measured off the short focus on mine, twice. It came to 3.65 meters. I suppose that there is some variation between builds and Kowa offers 4 meters as an average. What do you think?
@davidlytle3974 I've just remeasured mine to be sure against your pair and still the same around 2.16-17 meters , some variations going on here between our pairs, ,but no complaints about my close focus lol , but I think kowa has underestimated its own close focus figures with 5 meters by a lot which could dent some of its sales if people looking for a shorter close focus that kowa has printed , their loss
I agree. They're being too conservative.
they both have too much eye relief for many non glass users. Eye point is user dependent but there are some tendency of the bino. amount of ER mm stated is not all. smaller AFOV are more easier to make long ER but also easier to have more blackout to non glass wearers. and also, If eyesup is not long enough for it's eyerelif, also can lead to blackouts. vantam and yf is both have all that issue. small afov, eyecup bit short to fit it's long ER. vantam is worse. and of course, 8x30 yf is much easier to see with naked eyes. because of less ER and much larger AFOV 6x30 has bit longer eyecup then 8x30 but not enough. they both have enough ER to use with glasses. 6x30 is much longer that even can be seen with I leave one eyecup click behind. so. ease of view to glass wearers will be better in 6x30 but in overall, more variety of people will found 8x30 much comfortable. Longer ER doesn't always mean better ease of view many people didn't even heard about it. The blackout issue is not only with cheap binoculars. Zeiss conquest 8x42 is notorious for it that Zeiss even sell extending eyecup for conquest. 8x42 conq is known to have worst eyepoint between 32~42 conq mainly because it have significantly smaller afov. Even Leica noctivid 8x42 has blackout issue to some. not as much as vantam, yf 6x30, conquest 8x42 but significantly more then Swaro NL 8x42. because it have more ER and smaller AFOV. so, therea are some binocular that eye glass weares like but non glass wearers dislike and can also have opposite situation. rubber flip eyecup such as nikon E2, Steiner nighthunter, ior valdada and some bino with less - average eyerelif such as kowa genesis, fujinon hc, leica ultravid tends / said to be more comfortable to non eyeglass wearers.
I find your point an interesting one. Being dependent on glasses, I am biased towards longish eye relief. I suppose that I could start exploring the blackout tendencies of the binoculars I review by removing my glasses, extending the eyecups and seeing if I have trouble with blackouts. I will start tomorrow with both the yf and the Bantam. It would be a travesty if either binocular, designed with kids in mind, fails by design to accommodate young eyes without glasses. Thank you for your contribution.
Well, thank goodness. Neither binocular gave me any blackouts at any stage. If I tried to climb into the eyecups, cramming my cheeks into them, only then would I get any beginnings of darkening along the edge of the field. Nothing approaching normal use could force a blackout issue with these binoculars. Of course, this is what little old me got with my adult facial features. But, kids' eye sockets are probably shallower yet so I think the kiddies are likely safe from this particular problem. I do promise to be less self centered in the future and consider the possible weakness of narrow field binoculars for those who don't need greater eye relief as I do. Thank you again for your contribution.
Actually, shallower wouldn't be better. Maybe the kids aren't so safe.
Hello David:Enjoyable video. I love testing out all kinds of binos in all genres. It’s a labour of love for me and, I suspect, for you also! Keep up the good work! Best wishes, Neil
Thank you so much Neil for your words of encouragement. You suspect correctly - I'm having a blast learning and sharing. Discovery is fun, isn't it?
Hey i like your reviews , i did get this bino for my little guy because its not bad for the money but also because when he uses it as a bat or train , warranty will get me a new one. i did the same for my daughter she is older , viper in the end i dont think any of the vortex line are that great .
Thank you for writing and sharing your family with us. Trains indeed. When I was young enough to "play" with my dad's Bell & Howell 8x40, I used it as a space ship. Now, for Vortex, .....since I became familiar with the line I have developed the view that Vortex is the Taurus of binoculars. I don't mean that as an insult. It's just that I have generally been able to find other makes at the same price points that are superior. Actually, my two favorite Vortex binos lay at opposite ends of the spectrum. I respect the Razor UHD and this little Bantam. Your thoughts?
@@davidlytle3974 i do think the bantam for the price is great , but as for the razor uhd for the money they are heavy and optically there is better , even the vipers my daughter has i would like to have gotten her some thing better , but that warranty for now is best for her until she gets a job and learns abut money , i have been using bino's all most every day now for 15 years and started at the 400$ price point and thought they were good but as i learned more i moved up and have been lucky to have used Swarovski EL line for the last 10 years and now use the NL and when i look at others i can now see the difference and cant go back lol there maybe others at a lower price point that are just as good but i did not want to spend time finding them , your reviews are help people with that and is great hope more find your channel .
I just got a brand-new pair of these, serial number 6975308 and they do not have the yellow tint to them, maybe they have later coatings?
Maybe. Lucky you. Mine actually had a slightly brownish hue. Clear is better for sure.
@@davidlytle3974 cheers mate.
Kudos on the review! Really helpful in deciding which piece one should get. And thank you for taking suggestions from the community
Hi Wrighty, good to hear from you. I just ordered a Kowa 8x30 but received a second 6x30 instead. I'm trying. Anyway, I think that it would be cool if you made a video review of your Maven and sent me a link. I'd watch.
Not sure you can go wrong for $48. I should pick up a Kowa YF 8x30, they're almost twice as expensive in the UK compared to Japan so they will have to wait to be added on a JP order i think. I just got myself the Maven C.2 7x28 and its been going everywhere with me.
It’s obvious you don’t know what to look for in binoculars to see the difference between an entry level $200 Diamondback binocular to an upper mid grade $1000 optic. The resolution, light transmission, edge correction, distortion characteristics, color reproduction, etc. etc., the list goes on are completely on a different level in the Leica, assuming again you didn’t have an old beat up Leica. Either you need to get your eyes checked or your doing a mis service to your viewers. Unfortunately this a perfect example of how anybody can post a KZread video and get viewers.
Another issue that the Tamron version of the Bushnell Rangmeaster suffer from, is the top heavy design. It is well known by collectors of these fine instruments that there are a lot of them that have cracked prisms. The issue is that if you have a small IPD (inter- pupillary distance) setting, they don’t balance well and tip over when placed down thus damaging the prisms. The problem here with this review is that the reviewer doesn’t want to do his due diligence to review a proper example, because he doesn’t want to spend a few dollars. I’m sure we’d all agree if we reviewed a beat to crap Swarovski NL it wouldn’t perform well.
Absolutely no disrespect is intended in this attempt to clarify matters. I fully understand the natural tendency for enthusiasts to circle the wagons and defend their loved ones when they perceive that they aren't being given their due honors. I just want to clarify a few points so that readers won't go away with any misunderstandings. First, having determined that the Range master is the sharpest 7x35 I have ever looked through and having expressed the opinion that an Alpha probably couldn't surpass its performance, I have to wonder where I lacked "due diligence". Would a more expensive copy of the Tamron change my mind? Second, as for the Habicht, I did not offer a review of current builds of this model, nor did I suggest that a new version would perform poorly. This review was merely intended to give a heads up on what could be expected from older used units that can be picked up on eBay at affordable prices. Even with imperfections and degraded performance due to age, I offered my opinion that they were well worth picking up. Since affordability was key to the purpose of the review, spending "a few dollars" ($1300) wasn't in the cards. And the most important reason is this, It's purely a matter of personal preference that I don't wish to pay such money to be the owner of a binocular with such a restricted field, even if it were the sharpest binocular on Earth. If anyone wishes to listen attentively to the review they will recognize that this was what I was relating to the listener. There was absolutely no attempt on my part to suggest that a brand new Habicht would have less than stellar performance. Relax. Your lady's honor is undefiled. In fact, her thrice divorced sister is a nice piece.
@@davidlytle3974 As with all KZread videos there are experts, then there are people who don’t know anything about the topic being discussed and everything in between. I think your misunderstanding, it’s not about not giving them their due honors, it’s about not acknowledging the fact that you don’t have a representative example of the vintage optic. A lot of people will go away with a misleading opinion of the performance of the Tamron rangemasters. It’s a little like doing a review on a 1960s Corvette , that needs a motor rebuild and a new front end then saying it’s not fast and doesn’t handle well. Yes they are very sharp, but then how many 7 x 35’s have you tried? No, these are not as sharp as the modern so-called alpha options ( NL, EL, SF, Ultravids etc., etc.). As far as changing your mind about a more expensive copy of a Tamron, it’s not about expense, it’s about condition. Lots of times these Tamron‘s can be had for about $200 in relatively nice shape, but most of them don’t reach their potential until they have been serviced, which usually costs from $100-$200. Then you have something. As far as the Habicht’s, the classic/vintage examples are completely different binoculars than the newest version. The newest habicht offering optically is closer to the alpha level albeit with a the traditional smaller FOV. But of course there are pros and cons to a smaller FOV.
A couple of things here that are misleading about his subjective observations. I may need two parts. First the eye relief is 10mm and anybody who does not wear glasses can easily see the whole 11° FOV, and the edge field stop is clear , black and sharp. But because of the huge field of view it is on the periphery, unlike binoculars that have a more conventional (smaller) FOV. As far as clarity and sharpness, it is outstanding even by todays standards. The issue here is that 90% of these are beat up and require service , and the main service is cleaning the haze buildup on the prism as well as a good collimation. Assuming of course we’re starting with a specimen with good condition coatings. I’ve had a half a dozen of these and every one needed the prism cleaned to perform at its best. It’s clear the reviewers Bushnell needed service. This is very unfortunate when your giving opinions on the quality of optics.
The Tamron Rangemaster is an excellent wide-angle binocular and I am continually impressed with its performance. I hope that the location where I want to make a video about these binoculars will work out this year. The Rangemaster binoculars were apparently not officially sold here in Europe. That's why both versions are extremely difficult to obtain here. On the other hand, many european binocular collectors don't have these binoculars on their radar, which is why they aren't that expensive when you do find them. I would recommend the Swift Audubon to you as the next milestone. Happy collecting! 😀
Hey! It's always an honor for me to receive a good word from you Doctor. I will definitely be looking forward to seeing your Tamron video while hearing the breeze and the tinkle of goat bells. And yes, your suggestion is a good one. I rescued an Audubon from a pawn shop two years ago. I bought it for $20 in parts and reassembled it after removing a light film of fungus on the prisms. What a lovely, sharp binocular that turned out to be. Sadly, I sold it for $70 before I ever had a thought to review it. Oh well. I will be watching to see what you show us next to get my next zen fix. Keep em coming.
7x35's such a rare size nowadays, or just 7x in general. There's nothing between a Nikon action ex at the budget end and a Leica trinovid at the top end if you want this size. The latest UO 6.5 or 8x32 APO's might be close though.
There is always the 7x50. I just wish we could get one with an 8.5 degree field or better, with plenty of eye relief. And, let's keep the price around $300 . What would you say to that?
@@davidlytle3974 Yep Id take it in a porro design. Hold onto that shadowquest 8x56 of your's it looks like steiner just gave it the chop - hopefully they've got a newer version in the works.
If only it had central focus and ED triplet objectives. 😮
@@davidlytle3974 Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 7X50mm, but it only has 7.8 degree fov
you owe it to yourself to get a nikon wx
Ha! I owe it to myself to borrow yours.
@@davidlytle3974 i would if i had one...
Sell all of those and get the Habicht 8x30 and be satisfied for the rest of your life (if the eye relief is sufficient for you that is).
You're the second person to recommend the Swaro 8x30. You guys are gonna cost me money. Really, thanks for the tip.
@@davidlytle3974 Yeah i know they will set you back a bit, but so will having a heap of medium performing binoculars. I used to have a bunch but now I only have the little Habicht. Another top performer is the Kite Optics Lynx 8x30 HD+. Not sure if it's available in the States yet but if it is go and try it. The ones I've looked through will rival the performance of any binocular out there, in all regards. The field of view is only rivalled by Swarovskis newest NL. The Kite is around €650 so it's really a no brainer. It's not as pretty as the Habicht though.
No, this $500 bino is not on the level of a $1000 bino. The ED is a mid level bino in about the same grouping as a Nikon M7, a Zeiss Terra, a vortex Viper and so on. The Passion HD is in the upper mid level , just below the top of the line binoculars. It compares well with the Zeiss Conquest, Nikon MHG, Leica Trinovids, etc. etc. When it comes to optics , you pay for what you get. There’s no free ride.
I appreciate your position - in principle. You've given me an idea for a generally beneficial video on just the topic that You've touched upon. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
I’ve seen so many of these videos and because of many , I went down a deep rabbit hole of buying and testing just about everything on the market, as well as some that have been discontinued for years. I’ve even bought and tested vintage high end bins from the 1950’s and 1960’s. One thing that I’ve clearly learned is that most of these reviewers know very little about what their talking about, and seem to have even less knowledge of optics. There are key giveaways when to stop watching , one is when someone says that $500 binoculars are as good as $1000 binoculars . Something to consider is that one $500 binocular really is not better in any profound way than another $500 binocular. The only real thing different are some characteristics of the image.
Alrighty then. You settled that issue. Super thanks for the review John. Please, keep us informed concerning any other gems you run into.
John, a side by side comparison is exactly what matters. Your report is just what I needed. It comports well with other reports I've heard and I intend to eventually act on it. So, the incremental adjustments provided by the diopter are small enough that you don't end up with a compromised focus between the two barrels? And the focus knob - do you find it performing for you as I described the focuser on the ED model? If yes then you definitely got a winner and I want one.
Oh that's good, glad it was of some help. I find the dioptre adjustment just fine and had concerns when discovering it was a click-step, too, for the very reason you mention. Maybe I got lucky, but it's spot on. The focus knob..I have to almost sacrilegiously say it's smoother than my Ultravids and I'm able to find perfect focus more easily. One thing I forgot, the eyecups: these are rock-solid and the twist-up is firm, clicks twice with total certainty and could be left anywhere in between with confidence. Apparently, they're solid aluminium covered with rubber; whatever, they are superbly built. The more I think about these components, the more I appreciate how thoroughly decent the bins are.
Hi David. I haven't tried the ED but I did buy the HD 10 x42 and I have to say they're pretty stunning. It will be interesting to hear your take on them. I wouldn't fight shy of buying an ED anytime because the reviews in general are so darn good and it seems they're not too far off from the HD in performance anyway. Cheers for your video 👍
Thank you John for your kind response and input. Have you actually heard anything pertaining to the difference between the ED and HD versions of this binocular? I ask because I don't feel any compulsion to buy the HD if the difference is unimpressively slight. How is the CA on yours? How do you appreciate the diopter on your HD? Your opinions may actually affect my wallet.😊
@@davidlytle3974 Hi David, nothing specific, just heard that they were better. I am thinking of getting an 8x30 ED but waiting for a bargain and they sound good enough for me by all accounts and will make an interesting comparison. I wasn't in the market for a 10x42, or didn't think I was until these came long at a price too good to miss; so my reasoning was that if I'm not happy I can always get my money back easily. I can say the HD are on a par with my Leica Ultravid 8x42 in terms of image quality. That's just through taking both out and using them alongside, one after the other, nothing scientific. I like the dioptre though some may prefer a smooth turn. I thought it might be inaccurate but I had no trouble finding the sweet spot for my imperfect eye. As far as chromatic aberration - haven't noticed any. Sorry can't be more helpful but I would say if you see a good deal on one, I don't think you'll be disappointed 😊