Колесный диск LegeArtis SZ22--> 100--> Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP


Reviewed by:
Rating:
5
On 02.01.2019

Summary:

.

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP

бинокль;увеличение 8x;диаметр объектива 33 мм;выходной зрачок 4.1 мм;поле зрения (на 1000 м): 114 м


Обзор:

Бинокль Pentax 9x28 DCF LV обзор и отзыв

Pentax DCF XP 8x33.

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP

Pictures. any information found on this site in any way without the expressed written consent CO-NET Robert Olech Wydawcą allbinos.com.

YouTube


Everything you want to know about the 8x33 DCF XP. Get the scoop on the Pentax 8x33 DCF XP from a large number of expert and user reviews.

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP


YouTube


Pentax 8x33 DCF XP binoculars - 62620 ON SALE. Pentax.

Краткий обзор маленького бинокля Nikon sportstar 8x25


For Sale Pentax 8x33 DCF XP Roof Binoculars. These binoculars caps, straps, case and box.

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP

Replaced the with an Eagle Optics rainguard (fits better than orginal provided), other than that everything else is excellant condition.

These binoculars are extremely bright their 4.1 exit pupil.
Save on Pentax 8x33 DCF XP binoculars - 62620- with.

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP

EXPEDITED SHIPPING on Over 250,000 Products. We understand the that comes with working in a lab.
Pentax 8x33 XP Pdf User Manuals.

Pentax DCF SP Binoculars? - Binoculars - Cloudy Nights

View online or download Pentax 8x33 DCF XP Brochure
BEST value in birding binocular under $1200; bar none Strong opinion, but I owned Leica 8x42 Trinovids, Nikon 8x32 LXL Premiers, these DCF SP's (previously), Leica and Nikon 8x20's, half a dozen other low-end binocs, own Nikon 8x32 EDG's, and, without spending another $1000 or more, you simply cannot get a better value in нажмите чтобы прочитать больше birding binocular.

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP

источник
Dec 19, 2010 You don't have to worry about post-processing with the 8x42 DCF HRc.

It took me a while to get used to the Pentax's ergonomics. After all, I'd been using a Trinovid 7x35 for quarter century.

Бинокль Pentax 8x33 DCF XP

The Pentax just feels different, partly because it's bigger and heavier, but partly because of the way it's sculpted. Javascript Disabled Detected You currently have javascript disabled.
Several functions may not work.
Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.
CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go.
Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.
Hope you all had a fantastic Christmas and that a few of you at least might have some new "additions" to the bino fleet Anyway, to kick of the "in between Christmas and New Year lull", I have a query regarding the newer model Pentax DCF SP binos specificaly the 8x43 and 10x43 models.
Has anyone had a look at these?
This range has full multicoating, phase читать статью, hydrophobic coating, waterproof, fogproof, aspherical lenses, rubber housing, and four stop helicoid eyecups, among other things!
I think 8x would be more desirable for hand holdability general sky viewing and orientation, locating constellations, etc for a compliment to an 8" scopebut the 10x model has a "wider" feel with a 60 degree AFOV I can handhold 10x quit well, but wonder if 8x would be even better.
I am 90% sold on a pair of Swift Audubon 8.
Any feedback on the possible optical differences between the Swift and the Pentax?
The biggest "issue" is the narrow FOV with the Pentax 6 degrees compared to 8.
I am really attracted to the idea of a wide field of view and the wide 70 degree AFOV with the Swift, but am not sure what degree of distortion and loss of image quality comes with this toward the edges of the FOV as a result I believe the central sharpness is fantastic, and have read feedback ranging from "great for scanning the sky" to "wouldn't recommend them for astronomy as they have very noticeable field curvature on the outer 20-30% of the FOV".
The Pentax by their design apparently have a VERY flat FOV mainly due to the narrower 6 degree FOV and use of aspherical lenses in the eyepiece design.
I am at a where I have exhausted all my local suppliers albeit with limited range and have not found any binoculars that I am happy with.
The Pentax are a more expensive, but safer option, albeit with the narrower FOV as their major limitation!
They are a roof prism design slimline.
I'm not fussed too much about the design, just looking for the best I can get in my area with limited cash a common theme among optics junkies.
I have had a look at the PCF range and they have very good optics for their price very narrow FOV however - 5 degree in the 10x50 with only a 50 degree AFOV - tunnel vision.
I also had problems with the very large plastic pullup eyecups as they where too big to sit comfortably between the eyes an example of "good optics - but unsuitable ergonomics".
I must say that aside from the bad ergonomic "fit" for me personally, and the narrowthe Pentax PCF range is one of my favorite as far as build, look, feel, design, etc.
It just doesn't "feel right" - something you can't really explain, but just makes it undesirable despite all it's good qualities.
Anyway, enough dribble for now.
That's true, you can have a Mercedes but if it doesn't drive straight, it's not going to be an enjoyable ride.
I did also pull up the Pentax website and Read about those.
Do you think they are better than the PCF WP's?
Not as much magnification though!
Because I am in Australia, I cannot "try before I buy" the Swift binos which are my preferred favorite at the moment.
It's a bit like trying to mail order a pair of shoes.
Despite a heap of people praising their comfort and durability, you never really know if they are читать больше to fit your feet until you try them on.
I don't have any doubts that they are the best shoe I can get for my money, but ultimately it comes down to "the complete package" not just specs and performance.
Optics for Birding has about only major review on these binos that Https://booksarchive.ru/100/krovat-tetchair-at-815-140h200-sm-s-osnovaniem.html could find: They give them pretty great reviews.
I would say though that in comparison to the PCF WP range, they are significantly more expensive.
I would really only choose the DCF SP's этот Туфли Sandm хорошо the PCF WP's if size, weight, and FOV where an issue.
The only reason I did not pick up a pair of the 10x50 PCF WP's is because the FOV was too narrow 5 degrees and the pull up eyecups did not suit my face I found them too wide to sit comfortably on my face.
Image quality between the two would most likely be similar although possibly sharper to the edge in the DCF SP as it has aspherical lensesbut always at a price!
It seems that fit is very important to you as it should Жесткий диск Toshiba MK5075GSX />Buy a pair that you have tried and liked, have satisfactory optical quality and be done with it, get on with observing!
You will be glad.
Searching for optics is a means, not an end.
The end is observing.
Pick what you like and get it now that you have researched so hard.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Charlie, happy Swift 8.
It pains me to see you struggle with this so much and at the same time not being able to explore the sky!
Hope you have a good New Year!
They are less expensive and have a 6.
True, they feel about as ergonomic as a block of wood.
The higher cost of Pentax DCF is due to the more difficult process of precisely aligning roof prisms.
Lighter weight but some light lost to internal reflections.
I have both the DCF SP's 10x43and the 8.
For me the first consideration is magnification.
Of course, they're seldom equal in a world with so many choices!
I use the ED's for daylight observing around the house, and the SP's ride in my truck for on-the-road glassing.
I brought them out tonight to do a quick comparison for you, and believe me, I'm no expert.
When viewing the bright Moon, some limb color is seen with both despite the Swift ED glasswith the ED's showing significantly greater internal reflections and ghosting.
Also the eye-reflected moonlight bouncing off the eyelens was more easily seen with the ED's.
But, who wants to look at the Moon with a field glass, anyway?
On to the moonlit starfields.
The ED's have a noticably wider AFOV than the though I wouldn't know how to measure this.
But, there is a problem.
The center-field "sweet spot" in the ED's begins to degrade rapidly appoximately halfway out to the edge, effectively eliminating the apparent field advantage.
In the SP's, the field curvature does not come into play until the 75-80% line is reached.
With this outer area of progressively defocused light, what you have is a central view focused and contrasted, with a band of hazy light surrounding it.
The band is larger and brighter in the ED's creating a less pleasing image to me than the SP's.
Light grasp under tonight's sky, remember was roughly the same as far as I could tell, which makes sense with their near-equal apertures.
And, I noticed no differences in the ability of either pair to produce a sharp image, on-axis.
The SP's will reach focus quicker the the ED's, hardly a concern for astronomers.
Ergonomically, the ED's are heavier and slightly larger than the SP's, though this difference is minor, and both are easy to hold.
The SP's twist-up eyecups are a major improvment over the pull-up cups employed on the PCF's and DCF WP's I have the 8x32.
The ED's rubber cups are comfortable and do fold down.
Your decision now should be as clear as mud.
It was SHOW ER68 Вт, В, выносной микрофон, вх.AUX, вес 3,3 кг, to get some feedback on both the Pentax and the Swift from the same user.
Your feedback was close to what I was expecting wider view of Swift distorted more and was less "pleasing" than sharper Pentax.
I am impressed with the Pentax SP 10x43 based on everything other than the narrower FOV 6 degrees vs the Swift's 8.
That's a big difference!
How does the size of the "clear" view compare between both i.
Overall I am attracted to the Swift based on the FOV - but only if that FOV is reasonably usable.
Every little bit of feedback helpds David.
It's Fantastic, and it all helps in making a по этому адресу decision!
Hope you had a great New Year!
Pentax the winner here, because the edge distortion is a much smaller percentage of the field.
I have read of several people recently who have had to send Pentax models back to their suppliers, presumably as a result of inconsistent quality control.
To Pentax or not to Pentax.
To Swift or not to Swift.
To give up or not to give up.
THAT is the question I will continue on my path of dicsovery it is still enjoyable but will be making a decision soon as I will be travelling нажмите для продолжения March for a week where dark skies will abound and a scope cannot go, so binoculars will be a necessary item for this trip!
Don't give up on me yet guy's.
Notice how Kenny fails to mention WHICH model glasses had to go back?
Not all Pentax binos are made and asssembled in Japan.
Now, having said that, do I also believe Pentax infallible, просто Туалетная вода 212 Carolina Herrera 100 мл.

берете nary a QC issue?
Not on your life!
Frilby, have you considered Swarovski?
I can import them cheaper but again suffer from the warranty issues, etc.
How about this one Kenny!
The reason I ask is because Pentax also do an 8x32 DCF SP which has a 7.
Given that the 8x43 and 10x43 binos are quite sharp to the edge, would it follow that the 8x32 should also be sharp?
Am I shooting myself in the foot by dropping so low in aperture?
I have a pair of Nikon 10x25 roofs at the moment and they a pretty great right across the 5 degree FOV, and in fact I use these more than the "loan" 10x50 binos 7 degree FOV I got recently mainly because the Nikon is much sharper while the 7 degree FOV of the 10x50's is fantastic!
I'm happy to find a medium ground between sharpness and wide FOV, but herein lies the />Where do I draw the line?
If I discount the Swift for now.
The Minoltas look good on paper, 8.
I will get there!
The online journey continues.
These wobblers were in the mag 7.
I suspected that this may be the case.
I am really tempted with the Pentax SP 10x43 binos with the only exception being the 6 degree FOV and the fact that Kenny and a few others have swayed me towards 8x rather than ссылка на продолжение for better hand holdability.
The Pentax 8x43 SP's are still tempting Maktec MT951, 570 100 мм this regard but they only have a 50 degree AFOV tunnel vision and this is the very thing I was trying to avoid and ссылка на страницу reason why the Swift 8.
I will continue to ponder.
You see more and the stars are brighter.
For my part I tend not to bother about the FOV, as I use the Binos to see objects and providing I can get all the Pleiades in view, who cares what else you can see.
If we want FOV,we ссылка на продолжение use our naked eyes.
Do we really want to see the Pleiades when looking Orions belt??????
O the joys of being retired!
I have a panoramic view of towns on one side and the hills on the other.
I have to say the different fields of view did not bother me at all, even when panning through 360 degrees, as you still tend to focus on one thing as I said above.
What was most noticeable was the light gathering power of the 10x50's so it was "no contest" I can hand hold both pairs in the daylight, but prefer a tripod for stars on the 10x50.
Both are great Binos, but I cannot really see me using the 8x40 much from now on.
I LIBERTY DF-90 the 10x50 for Astronomy, and eventually might buy some 20x60 or 20x80.
I just intend to learn and enjoy the sky should we ever get another clear night!!
If I was younger 9x63 might be the best, as they would be easier to hand hold Light gathering power and eye relief seems to be the answer at my age for stargazing Thats my lot for what it's worth.
I do try to keep as much information to hand as I canoften by printing out from my PCbut this is only a casual hobby of mine that I squeeze in between my regular 45 hour per week job and being a husband ,father of five and grandfather!
I cannot possibly recall every single detail of everything I readand in the case of Pentax binocularsso many PCFs DCFs SPs WPs and all else does little to assist mental retainment.
What I DO understand however is that complaints in the cases to which was referring related to at least two highly rated spotting scopes I temporarily forget the P reference for these10 x 50 Porros and not the cheaper XCFs -- which I have also heard varying reports about and 8 x 42 and 10 x 42 Roofsboth of which are generally very highly rated, and probably for very good reasons.
I appreciate that ANY manufacturer is capable of producing a "lemon" and repeat that I have no reason to dissuade anyone from purchasing any Pentax product indeed only weeks ago I actually recommended a Pentax 10 x 50 to a member of this very forum --and he is one delighted owner now apart from my repeated warnings of the fact that narrow fields of view are not everyone's cup of teaeven if they do invariably equate to flatter fields more preferable for astronomy than the wider field models that I happen to prefer for "all round use" myself.
That said it does seem to me that when Pentax DO try to produce a binocular with an "average" TFOV e.
I may be wrong -- it certainly won't be the first time!
Make no mistake --if someone offered me a pair for £100 UK -- I would bite their hands off!
So many people who would appear to be far more interested in binocular astronomy than I am seem to share a VERY high Campbell Jen Franklin and Luna Go to the Moon of the 10 x 30 IS specifically for that use --so I am presuming that they can't ALL be wrong?
The only time I've ever really spent a LOT of time stargazing is when I've been on holidays to Mediterranean or Canary Islands wherecompletely unlike my home location of LancashireEnglandit has been SO warm and with incredibly clear skies that I could have quite happily laid there ALL night taking in the thousands of stars ,even without binoculars.
When there are SO many stars and I know from personal visits to AustraliaFiji and New Zealand just how many can be visible from over in your читать of the woods Frilb then I simply cannot understand how even 30mm binoculars can fail to satisfy.
Apart from apparantly having edge performance rated as THE VERY BEST that Todd Gross and other renouned "experts" have ever seen in ANY binoculareven at 10xImage Stabilisation of SOME sort is all but essential for me personally -- and I dare say for many more people than either care to admit or actually realiseor both.
FinallyALL I am trying to do is HELP -- nothing more -nothing less!
And you're still married?
Does your wife have an equally tolerant sister who is willing to immigrate to the US?
If so, please send me her phone in a private email.
Somewhere along the PCF III?
The earlier PCFs II?
For many amateur astronomers, it was a fair trade off.
It was for me before increasingly cloudy weather drove me to using my optics for birding and nature study.
Hey, binoculars work during the day, who would have thunk it!
My 20X60 Pentax with only 2.
The PCF Vs also exhibited an objectionable amount of false color, though not as bad as the 1999 version of the Obie 15X70, which had the worse color correction I've seen in a bin.
Except for bright stars, the Obie wasn't too bad on the night sky, but for terrestrial use, forgetaboutit -- birds looked like they were painted with smeared water colors.
So when I started applying bins, and particular my Pentax PCF V, to terrestrial use, two shortcomings, from a birder's perspective, came to light: narrov FOV and false color.
The other problem, which you mentioned, was the spotty quality control, and that was my experience with Pentax.
The 20X60 that I ended up with, and later sold, was the THIRD one I purchased.
On the first, the right eyecup wouldn't stay fully extended, and the second was miscollimated.
I also had a fourth, the WP version, which didn't seem as sharp as the PCF V, and it felt significantly heavier.
And those oversized hard plastic eyecups aren't everyone's cup o' tea.
BUT, for the price, the optics are very sharp, and if you have enough patience to look for DSOs or can rig up a laser pointer or finder on a "C" adapterthe 16X60 and 20X60 Pentax PCF V bins represent two of the best buys in astro bins.
Then Pentax set out to conquer the birding market by introducing the first, or one of the first, mid-priced roof prism bins with phase coating prior an exclusive feature of premium roof bins with their DCF WP series.
Soon similar P-coated roofs were popping up everywhere -- Orion Savannah, Leupold WindRIver Olympics, Eagle Optics Rangers, and others.
Okay, now I'm a birder so I naturally wanted one.
I then picked up another friend's 8X32 Superior E.
The FOV was wider than an 8X Pentax 7.
That day my brief but passionate love affair with Pentax was over we'll always have the Double Clusterand my love affair with Nikon began.
But the Superior E was no cheap date, and it would be quite a while before I could afford to woo her into my collection.
Whether or not Pentax has improved its quality control with its PCF WP series, I don't know.
But there was a time, when ordering a PCF V was hit or miss affair, but the hits were very exciting indeed, as long as you pointed it UP.
Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Комментарии 11

Добавить комментарий

Ваш e-mail не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *