Looking at the Optical Middle Ground

By Pete Dunne, CMBO Director

It just happened again. A new birder walked into the store, armed with new, but otherwise pretty worthless over the discount-counter binoculars. Happily, they had figured out that the problem they were having finding and identifying birds was related to the performance shortfalls of the glass. They did this before they stopped birding.  I hope never to find out how many incipient birders become stillborn birders before coming to this realization.

Anyway, they examined several instruments in the $150 to $350 range – all serviceable to good in quality. For comparison, they looked through a pair of high-end instruments. Said WOW!  And walked out the door with a binocular that many a veteran birder on a budget will envy.

But did they have to? While I believe – “buy the best binocular you can afford and buy it as soon as you can afford it” (in fact, I believe I coined this line), I wonder if maybe, there isn’t something of merit in the world of optics whose price tag falls between a restaurant dinner for two and a eight day cruise to the Caribbean?

If you are curious, too, read on.

THE GLASS BEHIND THE GLASS

I went over to the optics display here at the Center in Goshen and cast an appraising eye over the product in the middle – instruments that fall in the $400 to $800 price range. There was a time (and not long ago) when precious little was in this price category.  There were $300 binoculars called mid-range and stuff marketing for around $1,000 to $1,200 and that was called high-end. 

It’s a different world, now. Chinas entry into the market has turned inexpensive, mid-range optics into cheap optics. That is a pronouncement upon price, not quality. And the waxing strength of the Euro has driven the cost of fine European instruments through the glass ceiling. Suddenly, binoculars selling for around $500 and $600 didn’t sound like such a bad idea to buyers. In the last several years, a lot of manufacturers have started introducing stuff to fill the vacuum.

I’m not immune to partiality. There are companies and instruments that have won my favor and some that haven’t.  I will not pretend that the three instruments I chose to test are representative or unbiased.  They may not even be the best instruments at the price point.  That wasn’t my question or my objective.

I just wanted to see whether a $600 (or so) glass was that much better than a decent entry-level binocular to justify the outlay of cash or, conversely, whether a mid-priced instrument was so good that it made the purchase of a binocular costing three times as much seem questionable.

My reference standard at the low end was a Nikon 8x42 Monarch – a good, popular, well conceived and nicely constructed birding binocular that retails for just under $300. My high-end standard was the 8x42 Leica Ultravid, which retails, now, for about $1,800.

Yes, I could have used the new Ultravid HD – which is a superlative glass. But I know how the older Ultravid compares to other alpha makes and models and have not had the opportunity to test the new HD model against the competition. I was looking for a high-end instrument to represent the alpha pack, not vie for supremacy.

The mid-range instruments I chose to test were the Kowa 8x42 DFC ($530 member price) – a handsome glass from a company known for the high, optical quality of its instruments. The Zeiss 8x30 BT Conquest ($550 member price) – a light, nimble quality impregnated instrument designed by the esteemed German optics company and manufactured in Hungary. And the Vortex 8x42 Stokes Series DLS selling for $780 to members and standing at the top of the Vortex line.

THE TEST

All five instruments were subjected to our standard evaluation which tested and measured the following qualities: Ergonomics (balance/fit); weight, focusing, resolution, field of view, close focus, field quality, brightness, and color bias. Depth of field was not tested. All qualities were given equal value – meaning the instruments weight, field of view, and ability to resolve details were all considered to be of equal importance in determining the glass’ merit. Other qualitative, cosmetic, or subjective attributes that affected the final score (the adjusted score) of the instrument are discussed. 

I was the only person testing and only a single instrument of each make and model was tested.  This means these results are indicative and not definitive. 

THE RESULTS

All in all the instruments tested performed well and exhibited qualities and standards that make them birder-worthy instruments. But you knew this. Instruments that don’t meet birding specs don’t find their way into our stores.

Score Codes: 1 = poor, 2 = marginal, 3 = satisfactory, 4 = good, 5 = excellent

*Glossary Terms

DISCUSSION

Spin-doctors could have a field day with this. In the one sense, you could argue that the results were just what you would hope for and expect.  The unadjusted scores, and merit, of all three mid-priced instruments fell between the less expensive Nikon Monarch and higher priced Leica Ultravid instruments. 

However, there was also a range in those performance differences with the Zeiss Conquest being best in show – a near alpha performer at a close to entry-level price. The thing that gave the Zeiss both an objective and subjective edge was the consistency of its performance and quality – scoring good to excellent in most categories – only falling short in terms of field of view. The Vortex Stokes Series DLS was also a consistent performer. The Kowa DCF had a more patchy overall performance but note its strength in the optical categories.

The adjustments to the basic score are discussed under the individual instrument accounts.

REFERENCE INSTRUMENTS:

Low-End Nikon Monarch 8x42; $290 Member Price

For several years now, this is the entry-level standard-bearer. Perhaps half of the new or novice birders coming into our stores looking for a binocular to get started with walk out with this instrument. Sometimes two! (Birding couples, you know).

A good, basic, user-friendly binocular has an excellent track record. On the whole, the only thing you might mark it down for (and I did) is a relatively stingy field of view (factory rated at 330 ft./1000 yds.). I awarded it 1+ for eyecup assembly, overall design, and overall quality (total=3+). The twenty-five year limited warranty got it 2+.  All in all, a very good instrument at a very affordable price.

High-End Leica Ultravid 8x42; $1,745 Member Price

One of the markets stellar performers. You might personally like another instrument better but you cannot fail to be impressed by this rugged, intelligently designed, performance packed German binocular.

Scoring excellent in almost all categories (good only in terms of weight at 28 oz; and close focus 8 feet). I awarded it an additional 1+ for eyecup assembly; 2+ for design/curbside appeal and a top rated 3+ for overall quality. The warranty, once the envy of the market, has been considerably down-graded. The new HD models come with a tempered ten year warranty covering parts and labor for the first five years of ownership; parts only for the balance. 

MID-PRICE RANGE TESTED INSTRUMENTS:

Kowa DFC 8x42; $530 Member Price

A handsome, step-up instrument that performs well and outshines the Monarch most notably in optical performance. Like the Monarch it has a relatively small field of view (in fact an identical 330 ft./1000 yds.). But if you want to offer buyers a better optical package and still maintain a reasonable price point something has to give. Kowa chose to sacrifice field of view. 

It’s only physics boys and girls. You want to build a binocular that people without Swiss bank accounts can afford it isn’t a matter of whether to cut corners, its a matter of where to cut corners.

The Kowa score was adjusted down for several reasons. The four-click-stop adjustable eyecup assembly feels a bit chancy (meaning not particularly durable) and the preordained stops mean that for some individuals, eye-relief needs are not met. If your eyes fall between the clicks, you’re out of luck (-2). If not, it is not a problem.

The overall quality, while good, was diminished somewhat by the light plastic bridge cover (-1).  My biggest complaint was with the strap attachment points that lie right in the crotch of my hand (between my index finger and thumb). If my thumbs are positioned where the indented areas on the barrel lie, I do avoid the attachment points but I also can’t find the focus wheel with my finger. Cost the glass a -2 deduction.

Yes I could have just given the instrument a 3 in the ergonomic category and be done with it.  But expressed this way I get to explain my concerns with the glass.

I awarded the instrument +2 in overall design/curbside appeal (because it really is a very handsome glass).  Total adjustments (-5+2) = -3. Lifetime warranty covering mechanical performance +3.

So why might you choose this instrument over the Monarch?  Superior optical performance for one thing.  And that’s enough to sway a lot of people.

Zeiss Conquest 8x30; $550 Member Price   

I’ve got to admit I’ve been prejudiced against this glass. First, I never liked the idea of a low-end Zeiss. I’m a purist. I like my high-end instruments unsullied by things like market and price considerations. Second, the memory of the Zeiss Diafun 8x30 binocular is still fresh in my mind. Manufactured in the nineties, by a company (and a nation) caught in a period of tough transition, the Diafun offered the worst image I have ever seen in any binocular retailing for over $100. When the sales person showed me a pair, I honestly thought it was a joke.

I’m happy to say that this proud German company has recovered from those dark Diafun days.  But it’s pretty clear that the Conquest, made in Hungary, has a bit of Diafun lurking somewhere in its bloodline. Hence my underlying skepticism.

And hence my delight upon discovering that the Zeiss 8x30 Conquest is a great instrument at a bargain price! It scored good to excellent in all categories but one. It got extra points for overall quality and design. Combined with a lifetime warranty this glass easily outscored the Kowa and the Vortex. It has won a solid place in my heart and put the ghost of the Diafun to rest. 

If you were looking for a great birding binocular that will not break the bank, you would be very, very remiss in not looking seriously at this instrument.

Vortex Stokes Series DLS 8x42; $780 Member Price

The DLS is the flagship of the Vortex line – a commendable collection of low to mid-priced instruments that has been attracting buyers since about 2003. Taking intelligent advantage of the growing manufacturing might of China, Vortex owes it popularity to an understanding of the needs of its market and a refreshingly honest pricing formula for its vendors.

This means vendors like to promote these instrument and people like to buy them. Win/win.

The DLS distinguished itself as a solid performer right down the line. Scoring good in most categories it faltered only slightly in terms of color bias (registered red). Among all the instruments tested (including the Leica), the focus wheel on this glass is a pure, responsive, silky-smooth joy. The eyecup assembly feels a bit chancy (-1). The overall quality rates +1. Balance?  Zero adjustments. 

At $780 it is by over $200 the most expensive of the three instruments tested. But built into the price is one of the best warranties in the business (+5 points!) – lifetime with no questions asked. When it breaks for whatever reason, they fix it. Peace of mind doesn’t get any better than this.

SUMMARY   

So is the stuff in the middle worth considering? I’d say absolutely. If you are a beginning birder who wants to give yourself a bit of an edge, look here. If you are a serious birder with optical ambitions tempered by budget realities, you can find a happy balance here.

Don’t think of it as too costly or a compromise. Think of it as a well-considered option.