OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Other Optics > Binoculars
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Meopta 10x42HDs
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

Meopta 10x42HDs

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
ccoker View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: February/13/2008
Location: Austin, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 2041
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ccoker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/04/2013 at 09:13
" but I want to be able to distinguish objects against similar backgrounds for as far away and as long (dark/early) as possible is less than ideal weather."

This is exactly what the HD glass in the Meoptas do

www.TacticalGunReview.com

Pro Staff - Silencer Shop

http://tacticalgunreview.com

Back to Top
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 9042
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tahqua Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/04/2013 at 09:25
I just watched  two does cross through my back yard with my non-HD Meopta 10x42's. I have no problems viewing into cover at 300 yards with these. So I can only imagine what the HD's are like.
I don't see the advantage, if the online specs are correct, in bothering with the 8x32. It looks like the gain is a half inch less in outside  dimensions with a few ounces difference. What do you guys think?
Doug
Back to Top
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 3416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bitterroot Bulls Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/04/2013 at 10:03
Doug,

The difference in hand is really noticeable. The barrels are much smaller, and the 8x32 just has a tiny feel to it. Also they are over 1/2 pound lighter than the 10x42 (21 ounces vs. 31 ounces).
-Matt
Back to Top
Klamath View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/20/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Klamath Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/04/2013 at 10:41
Originally posted by Dr.Pepper Dr.Pepper wrote:

Thanks Klamath,

You were very helpful to me last time I was here. You basically sold me on the Calderas when I was asking about this sort of thing a while ago but at the time I was most curious about the reported merits of a 7x, so I ended up with the ed3.

I guess I don't have any very specific complaints about the ed3 that need upgrading other than there is some little something or other about the eye ups and eye relief that takes a little bit of fidgeting to get just right. It is subtle, but always there. I was able to deal with it at first but I notice it more as time goes on. I am not sure what the deal is, but they don't snap into place.

In terms of where I want optical improvement, it is resolution and contrast. I am not a color or CA man, or an edge sharpness guy, or a guy who moans about the focuser having .1 mm of play, nor do I give a hoot which direction it focuses in, but I want to be able to distinguish objects against similar backgrounds for as far away and as long (dark/early) as possible is less than ideal weather.

Also, In broad daylight without too many heat waves, my ed3 are plenty good, and impressive to me. Then the clouds will visit for a few minutes and I am screwing with my diopters trying to recover some of the beautiful picture I had just a few minutes before, usually just wasting my time until the sun comes back. I know that less light means that the image can't be as good, but I expect that higher optics might be less affected by such lighting shifts. I am talking about sharpness and clarity of lines, not image brightness.

Yes, I am newish and have been led to halfway believe that if I pay enough, I will eventually get battery free night vision, lol! There indeed is this expectation that more $ means better optics and it seems that most guys that upgrade routinely say they wish they had done it sooner. This seems to apply to guys going from Bushnell to Vortex and also to guys going from Zens to Meoptas, and again from there to the alphas.

I enjoy using my bins enough that if I can afford more optical performance, I am reluctant to walk away from it.

The only thing that makes much sense to me about the ZEN 7x43 observations you have is that the eye relief is wrong for you.  I understated that myself as they are not right for me, and trust me here there are few binoculars that give me fits, but I had to get a slip on eye shield from Nikon that they use for their EDG binoculars and the eye placement and usable eye relief became about perfect.  That is a simpler and less expensive solution you might try first.

One of the things I have come to believe is that the absolute quality of the optics is NOWHERE near as important in the ultimate user satisfaction as the way the binocular fits your face and eyes. Nearly as important is the way the binocular balances in your hands when using it.  Don't get the idea here I'm saying a Barska that fits your face is a good idea, I'm talking about acceptable use quality optics, not junk.

I have also come to see a lot of the ...,"its the best money I ever spent"..."should have done this earlier"...seem to be guys trying to convince themselves they did right.  I started my hobby looking for the right alpha for me.  I've concluded it is not there.  The Leupold Gold Ring HD 8x42 is the closest I've come.  It, for me anyway, balances the optics, face fit, and balance better than anything I've tried.  I will concede there are "better" binoculars (in very small degrees) but I'm likely done looking.

If I was looking for a "better binocular" than what I have and IF I did not have the GR, there are three I'd go for.  The Vortex Razor HD, the Zeiss Conquest HD, and third the Meopta HD.  The Meopta is last on my list because I'm a 7-8x user.  Those are as good as the eye can use, IMHO.  I have not seen the new Meopta HD, but there were few flies, if any on the original Meostar.  I'd say find one of those three, or two maybe, you probably won't find anyplace that will have all three.  If one of those tells you that you like it, get it and go use it.  It will take a year for you to get through all seasons and really get a handle on how well it really suits you.

Don't think HD is a magic bullet either, it has little benefit unless you are particularly susceptible to seeing color fringing. Marketers like it because they can make us think it IS a magic bullet.  Side by side you can see differences in color and brightness, but out in the field those differences are actually pretty small.  Just remember the ZEN ED has pretty good ED glass and is as good as nearly anything regarding ED benefits.
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.