"People without a digital camera and/or a pair of binoculars could fare far worse than the Scope Cam, whose 640x480 camera, and 8x22 binocular, are a nice pair for the price. Yet it's really only a conversation piece, since it's not really a binocular- cam at all."

---from the review

-----------------

Feel free to contribute. As always, review submissions are accepted!

------------------

-------------

Sidebar :

-------------

"The Sweet Roll in a Coffee Shop Joke"...? You never heard it? Well, here's the story, for those who have never heard it, to understand the comparison to it in this review. Guy walks in a coffee shop and says, "I'll have a coffee and a sweet roll," only to be told they're out of sweet rolls. Then the guys asks for tea and a sweet roll, only to be told again; they're out of sweet rolls. The guy keeps asking for different drinks, without getting it through his head they're out of sweet rolls. So, before storming out of the shop, he asks if he can just have a sweet roll. Ha!

Hence the similarity to this product. Meade seems to be making more Scope Cams, all with different features, though all with the same design flaw; the camera is not part of the actual binoculars at all. Until this truly is a binocular-camera, what's the point?

It seems kind of silly that nobody has thought of this before: integrating a digital camera into a pair of binoculars. Think of it: anything you see through the eyepiece --the Grand Canyon, your kid's first hockey match, a squirrel, anything-- can be captured as a 640x480 photograph, downloaded, and even printed. What's even better; it's surprisingly affordable, at well under $79, and falling. However, as with all products: you get what you pay for.

Here's the first problem of an economy-class binocular/digital-camera combo: it isn't, really. Said digital camera is not actually a part of the binoculars per se, and instead uses a third lens, in between the main binocular lenses. The good news is that no focus is required for this camera, which is set permanently at "infinity" (or is that not good news...?). The bad news is; what you're seeing isn't what the camera is seeing per se. This also means that this isn't really a "binocular camera" at all; it's more of a digital camera, fused in between a pair of binoculars.

The layman photographer may be asking: What's the difference? Well, okay, there isn't one really, for casual photography, under even slightly-imperfect photo conditions. Take this photo for example, taken on a cloudy day, late afternoon, all the way from a second story window, at a batch of ivy growing on the far side of an old backyard fence. Okay, so I really need to clean this part of my yard, though that isn't the point. The point is that this is a perfect view of the camera's sense of color and focus, neither of which is that bad at all. What's more; this is a mere thumbnail of the actual picture; take a look at the original picture taken with the Scope Cam, by clicking here. While said 640x480 photo is the maximum quality and size of a photograph taken by the ScopeCam, it's certainly not bad performance for the price.

Again, however, it must be said: you get what you pay for. Consider this second picture, same cloudy day, same time of day, aiming at a tree branch straight ahead. Mind you; from the binoculars, I could see the leaves clearly, just above the loop of wire in the center of the picture. Instead, I wound up with a picture that was not of the leaves, and in fact was of the leaves from a distance, with some of a Fourth of July neon sign in the picture, as well. If I thought I was looking at a leaf dead ahead, that's because through the binoculars, I was.

What went wrong with this picture? Remember: the camera isn't part of the binoculars' actual lenses at all. It uses its own, separate lens, forced at a focus of "infinity." So while I was able to see the leaves as if they were right in front of me, the camera is aimed at what I'm looking at, yet isn't a binocular-view per se. What's more, the camera is around 1cm below the actual binocular lenses, so while I was looking directly above the neon sign through the binoculars, the camera itself was still blocked, hence the view of the neon sign. This is worth taking into account, if you try to use the Scope Cam at your kid's football game, "directly over" the person's head in front of you. Make sure it's way above that head, or you'll get more than you bargained for in the photo!

Now, people who are new to digital photography should take heed of another common limitation with affordable digital cameras: they are not unlike disposable cameras. In other words, if you're not taking a photo outdoors during daytime, you might as well forget it without a flash. Well, being a binocular, the ScopeCam clearly is without a flash bulb, so that leaves you with outdoor use only. The photo offered here is of a standard, indoor hanging light, and it still could only get the light coming out of the decorative shade, and that's it. Clearly, this is an outdoor binocular only. That's what I'm saying.

True, this is a common flaw, for all affordable digital cameras, so it's to be expected. Here's a design flaw that was unexpected: namely, the buttons to control the camera. These are placed at the middle of the camera near the eyepieces, and are extremely easy to press by accident. So easy in fact, the camera automatically shuts off after a paltry ten seconds of non use(!). This can be very annoying the first few times you attempt to use the Scope Cam. For later shots; it's not hard to place your finger over the on button, aim your shot, then turn on your camera and press the shutter button with the same finger, all well under 10 seconds. However, to try and find ways to work around this design flaw would be mere spin control; this is a design flaw, period.

Other little flaws force this to be an unfavorable review, which is a shame, because the concept of binocular-cameras is still a really cool one. Still, there's limitations. Like the way the included bag is so tight, it presses the on button continuously, draining the batteries overnight. Like the way the internal memory does not have a backup so if you didn't download the pictures before the batteries drain then it's bye-bye pictures. Like the way this happened to me the first day of use, forcing me to take stupider pictures of my backyard for this review, and not the cooler photos I had taken earlier. Furthermore, while the drivers to use Scope Cam installed perfectly, the "free" photo-editing software did not, after many repeat attempts. Fortunately I have Adobe Photoshop, so I could import photos directly into a photo-editing tool I already own...though what happens for people who don't have such software already?

Mind you, this is the first time anyone has attempted a binocular/camera combo. So, it's to be expected there would be a few rough edges to smoothen out. However, will they be smoothened out, in time for the next "Scope Cam"...? Maybe, and maybe not. Already Meade is working on two new binocular-camera models; one with its own LCD screen for the camera, and the other with a memory card port, for the photos. However, their attempts all seem to be like that guy in the coffee shop who keeps asking for sweet rolls; they seem to be improving all the wrong flaws, while ignoring the major one. To wit: all Scope Cams are currently a pair of binoculars with a camera stuck in the middle, not actual binocular-cameras. What's is the point of a "Scope Cam," then?

I will say one added thing, in Scope Cam's defense: it does work. For under $80 bucks, you get a working binocular, and a digital camera, too. People without a digital camera and/or a pair of binoculars could fare far worse than the Scope Cam, whose 640x480 camera, and 8x22 binocular, are a nice pair for the price. Yet it's really only a conversation piece, since it's not really a binocular- cam at all. People with their own binoculars and cameras should best wait until a binocular camera is made that takes photos directly from the binocular lens. That would be a Binocular camera. Not this.