Zeiss conquest vs vortex razors

With all three you get state of the art dielectric prism mirrors.  Meopta is still with 20 year old silver mirror coatig technology.

The Genesis may or may not show you the rolling ball effect.  There is very little pincushion distortion at the edge and absolute edge sharpness can cause some weird things for some.  That is one I'd try before I bought.  I've seen them and am not bothered by the effect and the Genesis is certainly a nice binocular.

Pretty long discussion on Bird Forum with posts from a Meopta rep that say they are silver.  Go to post 22.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=251390

 

The contact I had with Meopta was that both the S2 spotter and HD bins have dielectric coated S-P roof prisms.

 

Maybe I misunderstood, or maybe I was misinformed.

 

In any case, I wouldn't count out the Meoptas based on that spec.  The overall performance is outstanding, and better than the Zeiss Conquest HD, IMO.

 

Don't misunderstand, I'm not counting the Meopta out based on silver mirror coating.  I'm not counting them in or out on anything till I see one.  Since the thread I linked says they have no plans for an 8x42 HD either, then it may be some time till I do see one.  None of the dealers I can get to carry Meopta.

Now I'm really wondering what is up with the coatings.

That really depends on your budget.  The PeregrineXP are surely the equal of the original EL and the SLC-Neu.

As far as I am concerned the gains you will get in quality over the $1,200 level are not worth the price the gain costs.

 

 

Interesting for sure.

 

I have the Meopta HDs in hand now.

 

I had quite a bit of time with the Zen Ray Prime, include using them in the hunting fields of Alaska.  The Primes apparently perform similarly to the McKinley.

 

I did notice CA in the Prime.  I also noticed the field curvature ring Frank noted.

 

The Meopta HD does not have these problems.  The Meopta HD, when right next to my SLC neu, provides an almost identical image, but with better CA control.  I have glassed right to dark with both tripod mounted, and can say apparent brightness is a dead heat. 

 

I think anyone budgeting anywhere around $1000 for bins would benefit to put the Meostar HD at the top of the list.

That is the thread I started on BF.  Same review I posted here.

Matt, I'm not sure what to make of your Meopta comments.  I have no doubt whatsoever in my mind they are a good glass.  However, I have had the McKinley side by side with both the Swarovision and the SLC-HD.  Even the SONA rep at the Winter Wings Festival was impressed with both the Prime and the McKinley.  This may get close to heresy to some people, but I would wager that a LARGE chunk of viewers would initially place the initial image preference as follows.  Swarovision, McKinley, and SLC-HD.  This assumes the binoculars are disguised in some way to fend off any preconceived notion on the part of the viewer that since they are Swaroviski, they are both de facto and de jure the better binocular. This plays a far larger role in selection than many will admit.  The McKinley is flatter at the edge (than the SLC-HD) and the contrast and color balance is just about identical in the SLC-HD and the McKinley.  I also have a PM opinion from somebody I have known for a long time who has recently wrung out both the McKinley and the Meopta who tells me they are identical in optical performance.  I tend to believe that because there is really in practical fact, not any room to squeeze much in between the Gold Ring or the McKinley or the Swarovski.

So, yeah, I'm interested in seeing a Meopta HD.  But the only way I'll get that done is to buy it, and even though they are very probably a hell of a deal for the $1,000, that ain't gonna happen. 

There is what I'm having a problem with.  There simply is not enough room in image difference for even a new Swaro to be "noticeably better than the Prime", nor for that matter, the McKinley either.  I'm having a heck of a time figuring out just how the Meopta is going to get that done...unless you had a substandard Prime...or I have both a cherry Prime and McKinley...or who knows.  

That ring is insignificant.  You either have to be seriously looking for something like that before you see it, or you have to know it's there before hand.  It is almost absent from my Prime, I really have to look for it, and I already know it's there.  In normal use I would never notice it.  EDIT:  I can't see that ring on the new stock Primes I have from the Winter Wings Festival booth.  I know Charles made a couple of production tweaks after the first run.

I may have to bite the bullet and buy a Meopta HD with the idea of wringing it out and returning it, but I really don't like doing that.  But maybe it is  the binocular that finally checks all my checklist points.  I have some that come awful close, but nothing has checked them all off yet.

The Prime, and for that matter the McKinley, do have large ocular diameters and those will not suit a lot of people.  That is one tiny checkpoint on the ideal binocular list they don't quite tick off for me.

I happen to think that anybody should be careful about teaching themselves to look too closely at, or for, minute differences.  Pretty soon even a $2,500 Swarovision will be lacking.

Anyway, I have faith in your high opinion of the Meopta, and if I go with one you will be one reason I did.