Why don’t the Kowa Genesis Binos get more love?

OP
PredatorSlayer
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,562
I have spent a lot of time behind mine bear and elk hunting and never noticed any kidney beaning. I don’t wear eye glasses, so maybe it would be an issue if you did.
 

Highlands Hunter

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jul 18, 2017
Messages
225
The Kowa Genesis is incredible. I compared the Genesis 8.5x44 to the EL 8.5x42 and I found it difficult to tell a difference. For the price, I would probably take Kowa.
I compared the same Kowa binos to the Maven B6 10x50 and found the color of the Kowa to be better and even the ability to resolve detail seemed a bit better. Overall the Genesis seemed sharper. Oh also the depth of field was better on the Kowa.
 

JGRaider

WKR
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
1,836
Location
West Texas
"Kidney beaning" is simply an eye relief/placement issue. The Conquest HD is well known for it's terrible eyecup design which is why Zeiss will (at least they used to) send you a free pair of extended eyecups if you asked. IME this blackout "problem" is most prevalent in 8x32 class binos.
 

Fritz D

FNG
Joined
Dec 21, 2023
Messages
70
Location
Idaho
"Kidney beaning" is simply an eye relief/placement issue. The Conquest HD is well known for it's terrible eyecup design which is why Zeiss will (at least they used to) send you a free pair of extended eyecups if you asked. IME this blackout "problem" is most prevalent in 8x32 class binos.
Just received an SFL 8x30 and eye-placement is critical, to say the least? I like everything else but the eye placement issues are taking some getting used to?
 

ni7ne

FNG
Joined
Mar 16, 2023
Messages
51
Just received an SFL 8x30 and eye-placement is critical, to say the least? I like everything else but the eye placement issues are taking some getting used to?
Isn't...
objective diameter / magnification
... a rough indicator of how forgiving a given optic will be with eye placement? Exit pupil?
It's why 6x should be normalized on ultra-compact binos.
And why 8x44 and 8x50 are extra forgiving.
 

4th_point

WKR
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
707
Isn't...
objective diameter / magnification
... a rough indicator of how forgiving a given optic will be with eye placement? Exit pupil?
It's why 6x should be normalized on ultra-compact binos.
And why 8x44 and 8x50 are extra forgiving.
There's more to it than merely exit pupil. Eyecups and ability to achieve proper alignment contribute, as JGR posted earlier.

For example, I have a 10x25 and never get blackouts unless I try to intentionally. The exit is tiny.

Yet I was getting frequent blackouts with the Kowa 8x33.

I now have a CHD 8x32 and occasionally get a blackout using the standard eyecup but it's not been frequent enough to bother me. I have the extended cups as well but don't use them.
 

4th_point

WKR
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
707
Back to Kowas...

The 8x33 that I had did not seem very exceptional in use. However, every time I compared it side by side with my 8x42 SLC W B, I was really impressed. Other than the blackouts.

In low light the 33mm was right there with the 42mm, with my middle aged eyes. Even in timber with fading light. Only when it was near complete darkness was there a noticeable difference, which could matter to some people.

Regarding resolution, the 33mm was really good for seeing fine detail but the 42mm SLC was sometimes better. There were times when I could not identify something with the Kowa, but could with the SLC. I have better than 20/20 vision, corrected.

Some of the "wow" and ability to see fine detail with the W B might have been the contrast or color cast. The SLC image was stunning to my eyes, but the glare drove me crazy. That is another eye placement issue, to a certain extent.

Believe it or not, the 8x32 CHD has replaced my 8x42 SLC. I like the smaller overall size, and really enjoy the view. I may have gotten a really good sample but I compared it to several 30-42mm binocs including NL. The only ones with better resolution were the 8x42 NL and 8x40 SFL. The 32mm and 42mm NL had the worst glare of anything that I tried. Zeiss overall were excellent for glare. The 8x42 CHD having the least of any I looked through.
 

Fritz D

FNG
Joined
Dec 21, 2023
Messages
70
Location
Idaho
Just received an SFL 8x30 and eye-placement is critical, to say the least? I like everything else but the eye placement issues are taking some getting used to?
Been a few days now and I’ve spent a bit more time behind the 8x30 SFL-the eye placement problems have almost disappeared and I am quite happy with the ergos, the lack of mass(wow!) and the clarity of the optics. Looking forward to using these in the field when weight is an issue.

Edit: with apologies for derailing the thread?
 

JGRaider

WKR
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
1,836
Location
West Texas
Back to Kowas...

The 8x33 that I had did not seem very exceptional in use. However, every time I compared it side by side with my 8x42 SLC W B, I was really impressed. Other than the blackouts.

In low light the 33mm was right there with the 42mm, with my middle aged eyes. Even in timber with fading light. Only when it was near complete darkness was there a noticeable difference, which could matter to some people.

Regarding resolution, the 33mm was really good for seeing fine detail but the 42mm SLC was sometimes better. There were times when I could not identify something with the Kowa, but could with the SLC. I have better than 20/20 vision, corrected.

Some of the "wow" and ability to see fine detail with the W B might have been the contrast or color cast. The SLC image was stunning to my eyes, but the glare drove me crazy. That is another eye placement issue, to a certain extent.

Believe it or not, the 8x32 CHD has replaced my 8x42 SLC. I like the smaller overall size, and really enjoy the view. I may have gotten a really good sample but I compared it to several 30-42mm binocs including NL. The only ones with better resolution were the 8x42 NL and 8x40 SFL. The 32mm and 42mm NL had the worst glare of anything that I tried. Zeiss overall were excellent for glare. The 8x42 CHD having the least of any I looked through.
I understand completely and feel the same way about my 8x42 SLC's. My new Razor UHD 8x32 is on the verge of replacing the SLC for the same reasons you mentioned. It is outstanding.
 

OneH

FNG
Joined
Sep 11, 2024
Messages
32
Because when using high end glass, the "best" is always subjective. For instance, I found the 8x32 UHD superior to the Genesis 8x33, and IMO the NL's stand alone as the best hunting binocular known to mankind. Ergonomics play a big factor as well. That's why I always say you've got to try 'em for yourself, as your eyeballs may see things differently than mine, and vice-versa.
I too prefer looking through my 8x32 Razor UHDs than my Kowa Genesis 8x33s I recently purchased however I dislike the excessively slow 3 1/2 revolutions on the UHD's focus knob which feels rather heavy compared to my Razor HD and hopefully it loosens up with some use.

I was unimpressed with this recent purchase and expected better since i already owned the 10x33 version of the Genesis which really pops while the 8x32 not so much if at all and it's really hard to believe they actually come from the same specific model lineup based on how different these are in regards to sheer optical quality. I also recently bought a Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 and Leupold BX3 Mojave 8x32 at around the same time as this Genesis and prefer glassing with the HG and the much cheaper BX3 a close second and was really tempted to send this Kowa back for a refund but quite hesitantly ended up passing the 14 day return policy and I would have returned them had I been normal person but I collect binoculars as a hobby of mine and to me it's probably realistically not worth keeping for the price they normally charge but I bought them on sale.

I do appreciate their sheer lack of CA (I personally really hate CA when glassing and avoid buying optics with well known CA) and like the smooth bare metal textured focus knob which focus rather quickly kind of like a Maven but not as noisy.

I was kind of shocked that the Razor UHD 32s are much larger than I had expected and are really close to the actual size if my Razor HD 8x42 while I was looking forward to a small compact bin and so I just recently ended up buying both of the Vortex Diamondback HDs in 32s which actually feel like mini Razor HDs in hand and in overall construction and have surprisingly decent glass for cheap and good enough for back yard glassing from your porch when you don't really need to see that far or to have cheap decent bins for the glove compartment.

I had considered buying the 10.5x44 Genesis when they were on sale for $799 but already have the large heavy Razor UHDs and SIG ZULU 9s and 10s and Maven B2s and B5s with Abbe Koenig prisms which I highly doubt Kowa can beat anyways and their published FOV didn't seem wide enough for me either.
 

4th_point

WKR
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
707
I too prefer looking through my 8x32 Razor UHDs than my Kowa Genesis 8x33s I recently purchased however I dislike the excessively slow 3 1/2 revolutions on the UHD's focus knob which feels rather heavy compared to my Razor HD and hopefully it loosens up with some use.

Sometimes slow focuser is a good thing, for hunting binocs. Maybe less so for birding or action sports.

I don't mind some resistance in the focuser, as it keeps it from inadvertently moving when going in and out of a chest purse.
 

4th_point

WKR
Joined
Jun 14, 2022
Messages
707
I do appreciate their sheer lack of CA (I personally really hate CA when glassing and avoid buying optics with well known CA) and like the smooth bare metal textured focus knob which focus rather quickly kind of like a Maven but not as noisy.
I used the Kowa 8x33 for grouse hunting in the snow for a season. The lack of CA was impressive!
 

JGRaider

WKR
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
1,836
Location
West Texas
Sometimes slow focuser is a good thing, for hunting binocs. Maybe less so for birding or action sports.

I don't mind some resistance in the focuser, as it keeps it from inadvertently moving when going in and out of a chest purse.
This is exactly one of the reasons I'm so impressed with the UHD, the slow focus is much easier/quicker to get sharp image that a fast focus bino like the Conquest HD, where you're constantly overshooting the sweet spot for sharp focusing. Super fast focus is more for the birdwatching crowd IMO. I also find the focus tension perfect, and uber-smooth.
 

Latest posts

Featured Video

Stats

Threads
349,673
Messages
3,683,800
Members
79,991
Latest member
SleepySprout
Top