Have you compared the best Kowa (Genesis Prominar XD) side by side against the best Nikon (Monarch HG)? (2 Viewers)

[[email protected]]

The 8x42 and 10x42 and 8x30 MHG's are lighter than most of the expensive binoculars too, they're a great value. Light weight could make them more attractive to some than the expensive ones, if you carry them on long birding sessions the weight difference is huge between something like 24 ounces and 30.

I agree. The 42 mm NL weighs close to 33 oz, and you are still getting a 42 mm aperture with the MHG for less than 1/3 the price. 33 oz. gets heavy around my neck very fast!

 

[[email protected]]

Of course we can id more detail on an object with the IS, it’s just the overall image is not the most pleasing. I believe there is individual physical attributes and limitations of the person that make the difference between the low optical level of the IS 20 and a 42mm NL become less apparent. I think that difference is more about you than these two binoculars. There is no way in million years I’d choose a cheap low level plastic Chinese optic over one of the finest optical tools ever made, regardless if I can see one more piece of feather structure at 100 yards. The overall image quality and feel of the NL is just so much more enjoyable.

I think (I’m quite sure) that there are other reasons you sell your binoculars after having them for a short time, and I know it’s not because your Canon IS 20mm is better. A matter of fact I’d be willing to wager that the canon will be up foe sale soon. Let us all hope we don’t go through another Meopta sale fiasco 🤪✌🏼🙏🏼.

Paul

Part of the reason I sold my NL was because of the weight. I have a little arthritis in my shoulder, and it has made me prefer lighter binoculars. But the big reason is I realized I could ID the bird quicker and farther away when I use an IS binocular because of the much greater resolution, and I really started to enjoy the steady, more relaxed view. It is amazing how much more detail you can see on the bird when you use an IS binocular! I just bought a Sig Sauer Zulu 6 16x42 IS binocular. I think I will be able to ID at 3x the distance of a normal 8x binocular with these, and they only weigh 20 oz. I have my Swarovski Habicht 7x42 for low light and my Nikon SE 8x32 for when I want that porro view. There is something special about the view through the leaded glass SE. The SE surprised me in that the FOV does not feel that restrictive. I think it is because the edges are so sharp. Any more weight is huge with me. I don't want to carry a brick around my neck anymore. I wouldn't buy another Meopta. They are laying hundreds of employees off at their optics division due to low demand. I question how long they will be in business.

Meopta Optika Cuts 200 More Jobs - Prague Business Journal

Meopta Optika plans to make two hundred more employees redundant due to a decline in orders. The company initially laid off two hundred staff in early May. The latest round of layoffs brings total job losses to four hundred or twenty percent of its two thousand employees. Meopta Optika is a...

praguebusinessjournal.com

 

[Upland]

Must be my lucky week, i’m disagreeing with you again.
EL and MHG not even close, swaros are one of the top 3-4 best money can buy. As far worth is, that is subjective and is in the pocket of the beholder.

I owned the ELs and hardily disagree. The ELs are not much better optically and are Heavy, have severe rolling ball and and are not anymore sharp to the edges. Classic case of paying for the name.

 

[Paultricounty]

Part of the reason I sold my NL was because of the weight. I have a little arthritis in my shoulder, and it has made me prefer lighter binoculars. But the big reason is I realized I could ID the bird quicker and farther away when I use an IS binocular because of the much greater resolution, and I really started to enjoy the steady, more relaxed view. It is amazing how much more detail you can see on the bird when you use an IS binocular! I just bought a Sig Sauer Zulu 6 16x42 IS binocular. I think I will be able to ID at 3x the distance of a normal 8x binocular with these, and they only weigh 20 oz. I have my Swarovski Habicht 7x42 for low light and my Nikon SE 8x32 for when I want that porro view. There is something special about the view through the leaded glass SE. The SE surprised me in that the FOV does not feel that restrictive. I think it is because the edges are so sharp. Any more weight is huge with me. I don't want to carry a brick around my neck anymore. I wouldn't buy another Meopta. They are laying hundreds of employees off at their optics division due to low demand. I question how long they will be in business.

Meopta Optika Cuts 200 More Jobs - Prague Business Journal

Meopta Optika plans to make two hundred more employees redundant due to a decline in orders. The company initially laid off two hundred staff in early May. The latest round of layoffs brings total job losses to four hundred or twenty percent of its two thousand employees. Meopta Optika is a...

praguebusinessjournal.com

“Of course we can id more detail on an object with the IS, it’s just the overall image is not the most pleasing. I believe there is individual physical attributes and limitations of the person that make the difference between the low optical level of the IS 20 and a 42mm NL become less apparent”

Thats exactly what I said above, your physical attributes are limiting you to see and appreciate the difference. The arthritis, the eye issues with glare etc. etc. this is a perfect example of why these things are subjective, why would anybody spend $2500 on an NL when they can’t see the difference from a $500 Chinese IS bins.

Master Kan was unable to keep the pebbles from being grasped from his hands. His physical skills had deteriorated. 🙏🏼

I’ll keep my 10x42L IS & the 10x32 for fun , but for Beautiful gorgeous images and the feel of quality, I have the NL‘s , SF‘s , Noctivids etc. etc.

Paul

 

[Paultricounty]

I owned the ELs and hardily disagree. The ELs are not much better optically and are Heavy, have severe rolling ball and and are not anymore sharp to the edges. Classic case of paying for the name.

I have both of these glasses, except for my wife there is not one person out of close to a dozen people I’ve let compare the two , all feel then EL is noticeably superior to the MHG. Edge correction is also superior to that of nikon , and rolling ball is an individual thing, most don’t even notice it.

 

[[email protected]]

“Of course we can id more detail on an object with the IS, it’s just the overall image is not the most pleasing. I believe there is individual physical attributes and limitations of the person that make the difference between the low optical level of the IS 20 and a 42mm NL become less apparent”

Thats exactly what I said above, your physical attributes are limiting you to see and appreciate the difference. The arthritis, the eye issues with glare etc. etc. this is a perfect example of why these things are subjective, why would anybody spend $2500 on an NL when they can’t see the difference from a $500 Chinese IS bins.

Master Kan was unable to keep the pebbles from being grasped from his hands. His physical skills had deteriorated. 🙏🏼

I’ll keep my 10x42L IS & the 10x32 for fun , but for Beautiful gorgeous images and the feel of quality, I have the NL‘s , SF‘s , Noctivids etc. etc.

Paul

I really feel in the near future the optical binoculars are going to be replaced by digital electronics, and then they will all have IS as a standard feature. Then there won't be any reason for a binocular to weigh two pounds. They will all weigh under a pound, have a zoom and photographic capabilities built in, be tack sharp to the edge with an adjustable FOV and color biases and probably be made of a lightweight polymer or carbon fiber. The future is digital electronics.

 

[Paultricounty]

I really feel in the near future the optical binoculars are going to be replaced by digital electronics, and then they will all have IS as a standard feature. Then there won't be any reason for a binocular to weigh two pounds. They will all weigh under a pound, have a zoom and photographic capabilities built in, be tack sharp to the edge with an adjustable FOV and color biases and probably be made of a lightweight polymer or carbon fiber. The future is digital electronics.

That’s silly Dennis🙃. That sounds like the talk in the early 2000’s when people were predicting that our portable cellular telephones would have built-in email, texting, HD video/photo recording , video calling, internet connectivity, global mapping , and a flashlight. And you see how that worked out 🤭🙏🏼.

Paul

 

[[email protected]]

That’s silly Dennis🙃. That sounds like the talk in the early 2000’s when people were predicting that our portable cellular telephones would have built-in email, texting, HD video/photo recording , video calling, internet connectivity, global mapping , and a flashlight. And you see how that worked out 🤭🙏🏼.

Paul

Look how much further the technology has advanced in cell phones, computers and cameras. I feel this technology will eventually come to binoculars. It is already happening in astronomy, with the market flooded with all the new automatic telescopes. You can get this robotic telescope right now that could replace your spotting telescope. This technology can be applied to binoculars.

DWARF II Smart Telescope

DWARF II smart telescope, best for astrophotography and nature photography. Learn more and shop now!

dwarflab.com

"AI Powered Object Recognition and Tracking​

Whether it's a bird or a ball player, DWARF II's neural network processing unit (NPU) automatically recognizes and tracks the movement of your chosen subject. If the action slows down, you're one click away from zooming-in for a closer look. Our panoramic and telephoto lenses are always kept in sync and our app enables one-click switching between them."

 

[Paultricounty]

Have you compared the best Kowa (Genesis Prominar XD) side by side against the best Nikon (Monarch HG)?

How do they stand each other?

Thanks.

I’ve compared side by side Genesis 8x & 10x33 to MGH, Conquest, Trinovid, & Razor. All are optically in the same category , upper mid grade binoculars. I’d say One is slightly better than the other in one area or another. CA best in Kowa, build probably Leica, warm image MHG, conquest and razor the brightest.

The EDG , EL, NL, SF, UVHD, Noctivids are all optically superior in ALMOST every way, if one can recognize the difference.

Paul

 

[[email protected]]

I’ve compared side by side Genesis 8x & 10x33 to MGH, Conquest, Trinovid, & Razor. All are optically in the same category , upper mid grade binoculars. I’d say One is slightly better than the other in one area or another. CA best in Kowa, build probably Leica, warm image MHG, conquest and razor the brightest.

The EDG , EL, NL, SF, UVHD, Noctivids are all optically superior in ALMOST every way, if one can recognize the difference.

Paul

Grasshopper. Master Kan would like to seek knowledge from you. I know I am supposed to be all knowing, but sometimes I seek enlightenment from grasshoppers such as yourself. Why are the 42 mm alphas like the NL and Noctivid so much heavier than the Nikon MHG 42 mm. I know they are built better, but do they really have to be that heavy? I think Swarovski and Leica should make an 8x40 like the Zeiss SFL and bring it in at about 22 oz. for about $2000.

 

[Canip]

there is not one person out of close to a dozen people

Actually out of 13 (including me) 😊

 

[Scott98]

Grasshopper. Master Kan would like to seek knowledge from you. I know I am supposed to be all knowing, but sometimes I seek enlightenment from grasshoppers such as yourself. Why are the 42 mm alphas like the NL and Noctivid so much heavier than the Nikon MHG 42 mm. I know they are built better, but do they really have to be that heavy? I think Swarovski and Leica should make an 8x40 like the Zeiss SFL and bring it in at about 22 oz. for about $2000.

or look at the 27 ounce EDG vs. the 24 oz. Monarch....I suspect the extra weight is in the focuser of the EDG and probably more eyepiece lenses and/or wider eyepiece lenses - the EDG ep's, like the NL's, are very wide. The NLs are probably packed with more lens elements to provide the huge flat field. Noctivid? who knows

I like the idea for Swaro - the same thing just occurred to me in a different thread - how about slimming the EL down and rebranding it as something to compete with SFL? The EL optics are really nice IMO, if they redesign the body for light weight they might have a winner

 

[Paultricounty]

Grasshopper. Master Kan would like to seek knowledge from you. I know I am supposed to be all knowing, but sometimes I seek enlightenment from grasshoppers such as yourself. Why are the 42 mm alphas like the NL and Noctivid so much heavier than the Nikon MHG 42 mm. I know they are built better, but do they really have to be that heavy? I think Swarovski and Leica should make an 8x40 like the Zeiss SFL and bring it in at about 22 oz. for about $2000.

I think what Scott said sums it up. I’d like to ad possibly there’s a thicker magnesium shell on NL’s and EL’s. I believe (I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong) that the SFL has thinner lighter glass and thinner magnesium body. Another thing to consider , it’s not that the others are heavy for 42mm binoculars, it’s that the MHG’s are lighter 😜.

It would be nice if Swaro came out with an ELL, and with intelligent focus (smarter than smart) 🤭.

 

[Upland]

Thats exactly what I said above, your physical attributes are limiting you to see and appreciate the difference.

My eyes are fine thanks. See plenty of differences in lots of glasses. My eye doc says they’re great too. I think he knows better than a presumptuous internet expert.

 

[Paultricounty]

My eyes are fine thanks. See plenty of differences in lots of glasses. My eye doc says they’re great too. I think he knows better than a presumptuous internet expert.

Your very welcome. Goody on you that your eye doctor says your eyes are great, is that doctor Vinny boom bots😝. I think this is a classic case of , sees the difference but doesn’t want to admit it.

I prefer overconfident Internet expert, thank you.

 

[Conndomat]

And at the next step, an increase of an extra 10% in quality, comes with an increase of 100% in price (twice as much).

10% increase in quality can account for 90% of viewing pleasure.

Andreas

 

[mauriciolacruz]

10% increase in quality can account for 90% of viewing pleasure.

Andreas

If with binoculars that offer me 80% image quality I only feel 10% viewing pleasure and with others that offer me only 10% more image quality I feel 90% viewing pleasure, I think that I would have a problem, but not in my eyes.

 

[Conndomat]

If with binoculars that offer me 80% image quality I only feel 10% viewing pleasure and with others that offer me only 10% more image quality I feel 90% viewing pleasure, I think that I would have a problem, but not in my eyes.

The last 10% can be the fine tuning, like the spices in good food, you can fill up without them but what does the palate say?

Andreas

 

[mauriciolacruz]

The last 10% can be the fine tuning, like the spices in good food, you can fill up without them but what does the palate say?

Andreas

Anyways, like I say, in the end "everything" is subjective, because even if you can numerically quantify this or that, it comes down to personal tastes / preferences to choose this or that binocular over others.

 

[Conndomat]

Anyways, like I say, in the end "everything" is subjective, because even if you can numerically quantify this or that, it comes down to personal tastes / preferences to choose this or that binocular over others.

That's why value for money and 20% here and 10% there is nonsense.

Andreas