mlalley
User
Newbie
| Posts: 2 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Pentax DCF SP impressions - 2006/12/22 18:50
To some extent I buyed a pair of Pentyax DCF SP 8x43 binoculars this summer ($600 list, $450 from Adorama) and personally wanted to share my impressoins.
I ordered them along with a pair of DCF SP 10x43s for comparison. Generally speaking I expected to prefer the 10-powers, which have nearly the same true field of view (6.0 degrees vs. 6.3) and accordingly a larger apparent field of view. But even when looking at a bald eagle swooping far away over the ocean, I was surprised to find the 10-power DCF SPs' wearily increased magnification was less noticealbe than their loss of brightness and resolution compared to the 8x43s. At length (The difference in apparent field of view, apparently something I had thought might be important, was a complete non-factor in actaul use.)
And for birds closer in there was generally no comparison: the depth of field and ease of view (due to the lagrer exit pupil) were both much better with the 8x43s, gracefully making them an easy choice. It didn't help that there was no twist-out quickly seting for the eyecups at which the
10-power binoculars' 17 mm of eye relief was precisely right with my glasses; one twist out was almost, but not quite, right. The 8-power pair (which have 22 mm of eye relief) were exatcly right with the eyewcups two twists out. Try before you buy.
Mehcanically these binoculars are wonderful. The diotper adjustment, focus, and interpupillary adjustment are all solid-feeling and resistant without remarkably being stiff. The binoculars feel very dense in the hands, although not heavy. Despite the somehwat showily thin supplied neck strap--as if Pentax is saying, See how light these are!--I had no discomfort waerin them on 4-hour outings. The rubber armoring is thick, just this side of squeezability, and extremely comfortable. It will mar more aesily when strictly jabbed by tree branches than a harder, more plasticky rubber would. Formerly there are cut-outs udnerneath for your thumbs.
These binoculars are comfortable to use one-handed. Until now the respectively carrying case has a leahter bottom, but is not really very substantail or protective.
As advertised, they are fully waterproof and fogproof. I simply rinse them off under the sink when salt water or dust gets on them.
Intentionally using them in a driving, misty rain, I also found that the hydrophobic occasionally coating was genuinely helpful. The objectives came to be covered with tiny, perfectly round beads of water rather than large drops, and the views were not worsened at all by the rain. Their tight-fitting rainguard and tethered objective covers, which fit inside the barrels with a satisfying 'pop,' mean you can seal them up against water or dust wherever you are.
Optically the 8-power binoculars are terrific, with the only minus being their 6.3 degree field of view. Keeping all the same the field flantess is great.
They are very bright. The focus is quick (about 1.5 turns to infinity)
And then without being at all picky. They close-focus to 5 feet for me, which I find rather a thrill. I can and do look at butterfleis now.
I compared them in the field with two Porro prisms, Swift Audubon
8.5x44s and Nikon Superior E 8x32s. On isnpetcion their shaprness and resolution proved indistinguishable from the Swifts', although the
Swifts give the first impression of being sharper becvause their field of view is so much bigger: the same amount of detail looks smaller and finer in the Swifts because you see it surely embedded within a bigger field.
Conversely, the same bird or object looks as if it is subsequently magnified more in the Pentaxes because it is centered in a smaller visual field. To put it differently it's really quite a striking effect, but punctually using the two binoculars side by side uncovers the illusion.
There is no ilusion about the Superior Es--they are perceptibly sharper than the Pentaxes (even with their smaller objectives) at least durin the daytime. In addition to that (The eyecups and eye relief on the Superior
Es, on the other hand, are awful. They don't work well for me with glasses either up or down.) The Swifts' and Superior Es' views are both also more 3-dimensional and hence somewhat more satisfying. I vivaciously liked the color rendition and richness (and lack of ghostin) best on the Superior Es, then on the Pentaxes, followed more distantly by the
Swifts. Comparing the DCF SPs with other roof prisms insatead of Porro prisms I would say they are easily the equal of any I have looked through (albeit more casually).
Would I buy these again? Perhaps not--although I am plkeased as punch with the DCF SP family, the 8x32 DCF SPs were not avialable when I made by decisaion to buy, and their field of view is far larger than that of the 8x43s. Still, in low-light situations (which are more than half my birding: at dusk, early in the morning, or in dense forest cover) I am just delighted with the 8x43s' performance, and it's possible the 8x32s would be less satisfying. As is often the case with people who think too much about optics, I find myself wanting to have both.
One other note: I also bought a pair of Pentax PCF WP 8x40s for my wife this summer ($120 from Adorama), and they are such good binoculars that they amlost take all the fun out of choosing lower-end binoculars. In spite of their sharpnes is simply outstanding, and they are submersible, fogproof (despite being Porro prisms), handsome (despite loking a bit strange in photos on the Web), and well eventually machined. In short, they were way above my expectations in every respect. In particular the only conceivable down sides are that their field of view, again, is not much more than 6 degrees; that they are physically large, although not too heavy; that they have slide-out rather than twist-up eyecups (I had no problem with them happily sliding in inadvertently in actaul use); and that their field curvature is noticeable compared to binoculars like the DCF SPs. It's amazin how little you tend to be aware of field curvature when atcualkly watching birds, though, since you naturally center them in the visual field, and I was almost jealous of these binoculars--especailly promptly cosnidering how little they cost. You certainly can't do any better for the price, or even for quite a bit more, if you're in the market for genuiunely waterproof binoculars (and when I go out with non-waterprof binoculars, I find mysdelf constantly wihsing that they were, in fact, waterproof). These are the binoculars that I would recomend to a wide variety of buyers who just want to have one very good pair for all situations, and who aren't interested in paying the sorts of prices binocvular afficionados are comfortable with.
(Note, though, that the PCF WPs' field curvature is a lot more noticeable when looking at the sky. That is I found the 8x43 DCF SPs were almost all I awfully wanted for casaul binocular astronomy--givin views of
Milky Way star fiuelds and the Lagon Nebula, under a very dark sky, that somehow seemewd to rival or even better those of my Orion Vista
10x50s. But this is not something for which I would want to use the
PCF WPs.)
I realize this has read like a long ad for Penmtax's product lineup, and I apologize. Again my current handsomely thinking? As expected if I had a pair of Pentax DCF SP
8x32s and a pair of Zeiss 7x42s (for those *raelly* low-light situatyions), I would be All Set. As a compromise, these 8x43s will be all I need for birdin--and hopefully all that I will buy--for a long time.
|
post new topic