Pentax PCF WP II 10x50 and the Opticron Imagic TGA WP 10x50

[SteveNickolls]

Last year I posted briefly about my pair of Opticron Imagic TGA WP 10x50 binoculars and promised a review. Time has just rocketed by but when my son recently received a pair of Pentax PCF WP II 10x50’s the time had definitely come to compare and contrast the two.

What’s in the boxes? Both pairs came sturdily packaged from FLO and un-boxing each one revealed the carrying cases-the Pentax being a softer case lacking a carry strap (I believe you are meant to use the binocular strap when the binoculars are being carried in the case). Inside each there was a binocular neck strap, cleaning cloth, brief user guide together with warranty documentation in each box. Both neckstraps were fine and were wider for the area around the neck for added comfort-the Opticrons being 32mm wide compared to 28mm for the Pentax. Most importantly inside the cases were the respective binoculars (see attached photo) the Pentax are shown (left) and Opticron's (right) together with their cases.

I have tried to sum up a lot of comparative information in the attached table Pentax PCF WP II 10x50 and the Opticron Imagic TGA WP 10x50 pdf.pdf.

Build-both binoculars feel solid in the hand and seem well built. They also feel well balanced in the hand and would be comfortable to hand hold for a while dependent upon the user. The Pentax is the more ‘beefy’ of the two pairs weighing in around 200g heavier than the Opticron’s and also has the stockier eye cup design. We generally use our binoculars on tripods, each with a led finder to maximise steady views and observable detail so weight is not an issue. Both binoculars have an integral tripod adaptor socket at the end of the central focussing shaft for connecting the binoculars via an ‘L’ bracket to a tripod. Both pairs are waterproof and nitrogen purged to prevent internal fogging/mould growth.

Eye cups-both binoculars have semi-hard rubber eyecup assemblies (rather than soft eye cups) which can be raised to match the desired eye relief of the user. The Opticron’s eye pieces did not ‘fall back’ to a stop when put to the eyes whereas the Pentax could slip back to a stop position if undue pressure was applied to them. Neither eye piece helped to shield stray light from the edges as would be the case with traditional soft eyecups.

Focussing-both models have crisp focussing. The Pentax has a feature allowing the user to lock the centre focus mechanism. This is operated by pushing the central focusing wheel forwards (once focus is perfect) and into the locked position. If you’re the only user of your binoculars and you only view the night sky then this is a ‘focus once, lock and forget’ capability and is a useful preset under cold conditions when wearing gloves.

Styling-the Opticrons are a traditionally shaped porro binocular, the Pentax while also a porro design have a more futuristic design. The Opticrons are however well shaped for hand holding having a black rubber covering and ribs to help with grip. The Pentax design while smoother on the surface is ergonomically styled for good handling.

Features-as previously mentioned the Pentax has a click-lock focussing feature. The Opticrons can be fitted with an optional ‘Universal Tele-Adapter UTA 2.5x for Binoculars’ converting one half of the binoculars to x20 magnification though I have not purchased the adaptor to comment upon.

Issues-while both pairs have individual objective covers that fit well, at the eyepiece end both use a one piece rain guard which could easily fall off the eyecups in the dark. The Opticron’s rain guard can however be attached to the binocular strap.

Dioptre use-I could not find information on the dioptre range of the Opticrons. The Pentax has a click stop mechanism with a range of +/-2 housed in the right eyepiece.

Views.  We are happy with both pairs of binoculars as they both give lovely sharp views and suddenly come into focus. Both pairs show good colours of stars and seemed equally bright. The Opticron’s have a slightly wider field of view but in practice this is not much noticeable and both binoculars have a sharp image across much of the view but to me the Pentax seemed somewhat better in this regard. I didn’t notice any internal reflections in either binocular.

Which were best? It was a very close and I would say a personal call-my son preferred the Opticron’s (I think because they were both lighter in weight and smaller in size and he does hand hold his binoculars more than me) and I happily swapped them for his Pentax which I seemed to get on better with, the binoculars just felt more comfortable.

I hope this is of interest and some help to anyone trying to compare these two binoculars.

Cheers,

Steve

[Damo636]

Very nice report Steve, thanks for sharing. I was about to pull the pin on the Pentax PCF recently when a William Optics ED popped up for sale in the classifieds. The WO is really nice but heavy for a 10x50 & I often wonder would if I made the right call. Your findings echo that of many users of the Pentax, a quality instrument with a supersharp fov (albeit slightly narrower than most of it's competition)

[Astro_noob]

I recently purchased the WO 10x 50 Ed as well. Whilst researching I was very close to purchasing the opticrons instead but could not find enough information on them to decide. In the end the ed objective won out.

The WO are very sharp but as you say heavy handheld. The individual focus is also something that didn't quite make sense to begin with but now is second nature even for bird watching.

If I ever get a chance I will compare them against either the opticrons or the pentax. In the pentax favour is the 30 year guarantee.

[SteveNickolls]

Hi,

Thanks Damo636 and Astro_noob for your feedback. Glad you found the review interesting. It would be great Astro_noob if you could ever compare the WO with either the Pentax or Opticron's. :-)

Cheers,

Steve