Any Opinions on Athlon Optics Cronus G2 10x42 UHD Binoculars

[dmcp]

Ok, I see. It sounds like they would be good for me then. I think I saw a thread about someone putting extensions on the eye cups and it helped. I'll see if I can find a link.

 

[dmcp]

it! They are $4.25 and apparently they fit under the original eyepiece covers. https://agenaastro.com/agena-eye-guard-1-25-zoom-eyepieces-id-39-5mm.html

 

[bdloftin]

You might want to try them out before buying. I tried them at Scheels and the rolling ball effect/barrel distortion really bothered me. But I might be more susceptible to that since I notice it some on the Meostar S2 scope (20-70x) at low zooms, while many people only see a minor effect if at all with that eyepiece.

Scheels does offer free returns for a year window, so they'd be great for testing out optics.

 

[dmcp]

You might want to try them out before buying. I tried them at Scheels and the rolling ball effect/barrel distortion really bothered me. But I might be more susceptible to that since I notice it some on the Meostar S2 scope (20-70x) at low zooms, while many people only see a minor effect if at all with that eyepiece.

Scheels does offer free returns for a year window, so they'd be great for testing out optics.

Thanks. I'm in Canada, so shipping and duty might be too much on these if I have to send them back. It makes me think twice about them. I've never tried any binos with field-flatteners, so I'm not sure how sensitive I'll be to it. That's what it comes from, right?

 

[bdloftin]

Yeah, different models with field flatteners often use different formulas. Also everyone's eyes and visual perception are different, so this effect can vary somewhat from person to person.

Here's an interesting article I found regarding the rolling ball effect/barrel distortion vs pincushion distortion.

Distortion and globe effect in binoculars

 

[dmcp]

I've seen that article! I even took his test. I didn't notice the pincushion distortion until the most severe one IIRC. It was neat to try if you've got 2 minutes. http://www.holgermerlitz.de/globe/test_distortion.html

 

[Spiral Horn]

Just took my G2 outside and tried to generate globe effect. Although I panned and twisted enough to make a hilarious YouTube video I could not create any that I noticed. Conversely, globe effect really stands out to me when viewing through Swarovision or my 30-60 eyepiece on my Meopta Spotter. For the record, just because an optic has field-flatteners doesn’t mean it will create noticeable globe effect. Most of today’s engineers build in some planned distortion at the very outer edge of the image to minimize this. Although a perfectly flat image may be an optical engineer’s goal it certainly isn’t the way the human eye and brain naturally perceive the world.

Anyway, after just viewing them again just moments ago I stand behind my review comments. They are surprisingly sharp optics that punch far above their price point. Perfect for my purposes and are my always in the truck glass. No regrets and never felt under-gunned using them. If looking for a binocular and limited to the ~$500 class they are a great buy. To find better one will have to spend double that or more.

 

[bdloftin]

Yep, thanks for the clarification. Just because there are field flatteners doesn't mean there's an automatic rolling ball effect. For the effect to exist, and how severe it is, depend on both the individual viewer's eye structure and perception, as well as the specific amount of pincushion distortion (k value) the manufacturer adds.

Quite a few people have mentioned the rolling ball effect for the Meostar S2 30-60 eyepiece - it must have less pincushion distortion than otherwise to correct for this effect at lower zooms. (I personally bought the 20-70 to avoid this effect, though I still see it some at 20-25x).

Spiral Horn - When you compared the S2 30-60x vs the Cronus 10x42: since there was noticeable barrel distortion with the 30-60 but not with the Cronus, maybe it's safe to say the Cronus lenses have less barrel distortion and might be a safer bet (at least than the 30-60) for the average user with regard to the rolling ball effect. I agree that they are very sharp optics and I might have been tempted to buy them had they agreed with my eyes more.

Dmcp - that's an interesting experiment! I'd say either C or D was the straightest. Could definitely see the pincushion effect with E, and slight barrel distortion with B.

 

[dmcp]

Yep, thanks for the clarification. Just because there are field flatteners doesn't mean there's an automatic rolling ball effect. For the effect to exist, and how severe it is, depend on both the individual viewer's eye structure and perception, as well as the specific amount of pincushion distortion (k value) the manufacturer adds.

Quite a few people have mentioned the rolling ball effect for the Meostar S2 30-60 eyepiece - it must have less pincushion distortion than otherwise to correct for this effect at lower zooms. (I personally bought the 20-70 to avoid this effect, though I still see it some at 20-25x).

Spiral Horn - When you compared the S2 30-60x vs the Cronus 10x42: since there was noticeable barrel distortion with the 30-60 but not with the Cronus, maybe it's safe to say the Cronus lenses have less barrel distortion and might be a safer bet (at least than the 30-60) for the average user with regard to the rolling ball effect. I agree that they are very sharp optics and I might have been tempted to buy them had they agreed with my eyes more.

Dmcp - that's an interesting experiment! I'd say either C or D was the straightest. Could definitely see the pincushion effect with E, and slight barrel distortion with B.

I know what pincushion distortion is, but what's barrel distortion?

 

[bdloftin]

It’s basically the globe or rolling ball effect. If lenses have field flatteners that include 0 pincushion distortion, the natural distortion of our eyes makes the image look convex and slightly rolling while panning. The severity would depend on the individual, as well as how much pincushion distortion is added to the lenses. That’s what I got from the article at least. http://holgermerlitz.de/globe/distortion.html

If the individual had almost no rolling ball distortion from his own eyes, or if the pincushion distortion added to the lenses effectively canceled out the rolling ball distortion from his eyes, then the image would pan well and look natural. But if the mix and match of the whole system yields more rolling ball distortion than otherwise, there would be a noticeable convex-looking image that appears to rotate as the glass is panned. Depending on the individual, the end result could be hardly noticeable if at all, noticeable but not annoying, annoying, or at worst nauseating.

 

[dmcp]

It’s basically the globe or rolling ball effect. If lenses have field flatteners that include 0 pincushion distortion, the natural distortion of our eyes makes the image look convex and slightly rolling while panning. The severity would depend on the individual, as well as how much pincushion distortion is added to the lenses. That’s what I got from the article at least. http://holgermerlitz.de/globe/distortion.html

If the individual had almost no rolling ball distortion from his own eyes, or if the pincushion distortion added to the lenses effectively canceled out the rolling ball distortion from his eyes, then the image would pan well and look natural. But if the mix and match of the whole system yields more rolling ball distortion than otherwise, there would be a noticeable convex-looking image that appears to rotate as the glass is panned. Depending on the individual, the end result could be hardly noticeable if at all, noticeable but not annoying, annoying, or at worst nauseating.

I see. Thanks!

 

[Beetroot]

I can't offer much of a review, but I have these binos and find them rather excellent.

I've not experienced any optical issues, they are easy to get behind on a tripod, have a surprisingly good resolution (I don't have any alphas to compare against). I've used a variety of cheap/mid range binos and the Athlon standout as being some of the nicer ones I've used.

My only complaint would be is they don't do an 8.5x42 version anymore as I'd rather have that magnification range.

 

[Hotmail]

I purchased and currently own a sample of two Athlon Cronus UHD Gen 2 10x42s. I bought the first one just last month and they made me feel really nauseated just looking through them as though looking through prescription glasses that weren't the correct perscription. Extremely dizzying effect even while looking them while stationary. I then compared the first Cronus UHD Gen 2s side by side with my favorite cheap eBay ScoopX UHD 10x42s I bought for around $50 USED open box damaged box condition and the ScoopX UHDs were night and day superior in regards to less chromatic aberration color fringing and wider FOV and lighter weight. I simply couldn't believe it with such a huge price difference of $450 compared to the $50 I paid or even at the current selling price of $62.00 plus $18.60 shipping on eBay for brand new ones. The ScoopX UHDs don't make me feel sick using them. I bought a total of 5 of them and the cheapest was around $50 ($35.00 + $15.00 shipping) while the others closer to $60 and most expensive one was $65 all from different sellers. All of them had beat up ruffled damaged boxes but all 5 of the Binoculars themselves were perfectly fine and ridiculously clear edge to edge so this is in fact sample of 5 tested vs one Cronus UHD Gen 2 then decided to buy another new Cronus UHD Gen 2. Recently received the second one and it's still a little nauseating to look through but not as sickening as the first one as though the prescription glasses is a little better suited compared to the first but still doesn't beat the ScoopX UHD in overall glass quality and with no sick effects looking through 5 of them.

I bought a 3rd Athlon Cronus UHD Gen 2 and currently awaiting delivery because I still cannot believe the ScoopX UHDs are better than the way more expensive Cronus UHD Gen 2s and assume the first two are defective.

My Athlon Cronus UHD 10x50 Rangefinder Binoculars appear to be way better than the Cronus UHD Gen 2 10x42s glass-wise which don't make me feel sick looking through them and at least they're optically closer to the image quality compared to the ScoopX UHDs. Sample of just one. I don't like how finiky they are when ranging past 800 - 1000 yards. My Burris Signature HD 10x42 rangefinder binoculars picks up further distance objects way better.

I actually like Athlon brand and only issues I have so far are mostly from their CRONUS line including a 4.5-29x56 scope which I own two of and ones definitely defective straight out of the box while the other is mostly fantastic aside from all of their extremely stiff controls with very sharp edges. Oh and two brand new Athlon Ares ETR 3-18x50s I recently bought and both of them exhibit equally the same nauseating fishbowl wrong prescription effect looking through both on low magnification. I had an extremely expensive Schmidt and Bender scope I returned for refund because of identical nauseating fishbowl wrong prescription glasses effect on low magnification as well.

I don't have any issues with either of my excellent Athlon Midas UHD Gen 2 12x50s and I own two of them. They're at least almost as good as the fantastic dirt cheap ScoopX UHDs. I like to compare optics as a hobby of mine and probably be getting close to 200 Binoculars by now definitely at least well over 100. Of course I don't actually keep them all just the ones that don't suck and were actually worth the money paid and return a lot for refund. I also buy all of my Binoculars and optics with my own hard earned money just like everyone else with no special privilege not even LE Military discount nor Expert Voice member here and not sponsored by anyone or any brand.

Just bought NL Pure and have no plans to return. I want to compare it to my ScoopX UHDs and Nikon Monarch HGs and Kowa Genesis and Maven B5.

 

[Hotmail]

I also noticed the first new Athlon Cronus UHD Gen 2s I bought don't have any serial numbers anywhere and only have a recessed blank rectangular cutout on their underside where the serial numbers supposed to go. Not even the box has any serial numbers aside from the UPC barcode.

Purchased NEW from different Ebay sellers and they weren't cheap.

I even messaged many other eBay sellers selling NEW Athlon Cronus UHD Gen2s to ask whether or not if theirs had any serial numbers with SURPRISINGLY very few replies and one seller was even SHOCKED TO NOTICE HIS DIDN'T HAVE ANY SERIAL NUMBERS EITHER.

I also noticed several other eBay sellers didn't renew their expired eBay $299 and $399 NEW Athlon Cronus UHD Gen 2 listings after I asked if they had serial numbers who didn't even reply to any of my messages.

I noticed that none of my cheap ScoopX UHDs have any serial numbers on any of them either but for under $70 paid for the most expensive one I bought I can't really complain but am totally shocked with the $399 - $499 Athlon Cronus UHD Gen 2 not having any serial numbers.

I just really wonder how they can possibly honor their lifetime warranty without having any serial numbers.

All my other Athlon brand items have serial numbers with matching stickers with serial numbers on their boxes.

I also recently bought some new Bushnell Legend Binoculars from eBay and also frim Walmart and none of the Legends have any serial numbers either not even on their boxes not even a blank Athlon Cronus UHD Gen 2 type rectangular recessed indentation but Bushnell is already well known to not honor their 20 year lifetime warranty anyway.