The Cambridge Pitt Minion ESV

David Dewey will be reviewing the new Cambridge Pitt Minion ESV for The Baptist Times, but we're fortunate to have a sneak preview today, including photos of the brown goatskin and imitation leather editions.

DAVID'S FIRST IMPRESSIONS:
"First impressions are that Cambridge has done a first-rate job. First some general comments, then something about each edition. I won't comment on the translation, except to note it is the 2007 edition with American spellings.

"The Bibles open flat straight out of the box. The bindings are limp, but not floppy; but with such a lightweight Bible, floppy is of little advantage. Both are stitched (Smyth sewn).

"The text is wonderfully clear; there is a little see-through, but no more than you would expect with thin India paper. The centre column for the cross references is a little wider than I would have anticipated but considerably more attractively organised than Crossway's. The references are indexed by chapter and verse number in bold type. I was worried that with my ageing eyesight, the cross-references would be a problem, but they are the model of clarity.

"Both editions I have (thankfully) are black letter, so I cannot comment on the appearance of the red letter. All other Cambridge Pitt Minions offer red letter only, so at least with the ESV there is a choice.

"There is one presentation page, a list of book abbreviations, the ESV preface and explanation of features. There are no book introductions.

"The concordance has 5,900 references in two columns, the same, it would appear as in the newer Crossway deluxe compact editions. I would prefer more references (thinlines have 12k, others 14k) , but keeping the Bible thin (21 mm) has been a goal.

"There are 15 pages of maps (indexed); the colour is neither too garish nor washed out.

"Both Bibles came boxed in the newer style Cambridge boxes.that open in booklike fashion. For the ESV boxes Cambridge uses a greenish-turquoise on an off-white background."

The brown goatskin:
"The brown is quite dark (almost to the point of being slightly dull in indoor lighting; it looks better under natural light). It is warm without being orangey. The distinctive grain has just the right depth coarserness for the size of Bible. There is a single ribbon in a slightly lighter brown. The lining is also a dark brown.

"The goatskins have art gilt edges (gold over red); the others mere gilt.

"There is an embossed edge round the cover, but no gold lining. The only wording is down the spine: 'HOLY BIBLE'; 'English Standard Version' and (at the bottom) 'Cambridge'. The words 'goatskin leather' appear on the bottom of the inside front cover. The spine has bands (for appearance only), though it looks as though there should be one more at the bottom and just above the word 'Cambridge'."

The two-tone"
"This is a tan/burgundy mix; the tan being rich and with an attractive 'grain' made up of lighter and darker shades. The burgundy is redder than most burgundy Bibles and somewhat brighter. The ribbon and lining are also burgundy. The writing on the spine is embossed and there is also an ESV circular logo on the botom left of the front cover. There is stitching around the cover and along the wavy join between the tan and burgundy. I would have preferred solely tan. There are 'bands' on the bands, indented rather than raised and marked in a mid-brown

"A raised edge, extending nearly half an inch, can be felt all round the ratehr thinnish cover where the edge is folded over. My Crossway Personal Size Reference Edition has the same problem. That said, I think I almost prefer the faux leather to the goatskin. That maybe because I like my Bibles in brighter colours. The faux leather opens just as flat as the goatskin and even feels slightly more flexible. However, the goatskin will probably soften with use; the faux leather won't. And which will last longer? Who knows?

"With two, I can use the faux leather as an everyday Bible to carry around; the goatskin can be kept for desk use and preaching."

Lets offer a big thanks to David for sharing this first look at a much-anticipated new edition. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on these and doing a complete review. In the meantime, enjoy the photos!

Comments

[Stan McCullars]

Nice review.

The two-tone is beautiful.

[Scott W. Kay]

Ah, blessed previews! Thanks Mark for posting this with pics. Having absolutely fallen in love with my little black goatskin NKJV Pitt MInion, I can hardly wait for this little brown gem to arrive in the States. Being ESV, I know I'll be giving it the lion's share of use. Now, if those Allan's ESV's would hurry up and arrive too...

[David Dewey]

Just to clarify one point relating to my pictures. Of the two pics demonstrating floppiness, the upper pic is the brown goatskin, the lower one is the faux leather. Surprisingly, it is the more supple of the two (though I am not at all complaining about the goatskin); the faux leather is also a slightly thinner cover. However, I imagine the goatskin will soften up

[Jerry]

Oh, man, you are killing me. I guess that the one that I pre-ordered from Amazon.com will be coming on a slow boat around the horn! They are still showing a shipping estimate of October 6th.

[Matthew]

In all honesty, IMO, these editions seem to me to be a real let down.

The layout, despite being dual column/center reference, looks not so different than the Crossway ESV's. The type appears to be OK at best, but honestly I see no clear favorite traits in this edition. Actually, I think I prefer the Crossway type over the Cambridge anyway...but I guess that's personal preference.

And two tone????? C'moooon! It looks like a binding that came out of the early 90's. One ENORMOUS error I think Crossway bit into was the need for all those novelty covers they now have. I haven't counted, but they must have more than 15 at this time. It seems Cambridge may have bitten out of the same apple. I understand personal preference and all, but when you think Cambridge, you think tradition and consistency. I think they are cheapening themselves in this dabbling of "neato' covers.

Boy what a huge disappointment. I was hoping for better from Cambridge.

[Scott W. Kay]

Matthew,

The typeface looks to me to be the same as the NKJV Pitt Minion. I happen to like it. I actually find it easy to read at this size, and the paragraphed form is a plus. The only oddity to me is that wide center reference column. It makes for a bit narrower text columns, and therefore more line returns in the process of reading. Oh well, not a big deal.

I do agree that the two tone cover is a little beneath the Cambridge tradition. But I bet it sells.

[Rod Summers]

Thanks for the pictures and comments. Would you maybe provide a picture that compares the size to the Personal ESV? How does the font size compare? Brown goatskin... come on!

[Steve]

The font still looks small, but I would also like to see a side-by-side comparison with the Crossway personal size reference. Bible printers have been able to print personal size reference KJV and other versions in nice dark readable-from-arm's-length font for generations, but somehow they have all been stumped by the ESV. I don't get it!

[Richard Zuelch]

They look nice, though I would like to see a verse-by-verse non-paragraphed version also. Now: how many of our children must we sell in order to be able to afford these puppies?

[David Dewey]

I have uploaded to Mark some poics comparing the Pitt Minion (PM) with Crossway's Personal Size Reference (PSR) edition and also the deluxe compact edition. In size the PSR is only slightly larger than the PM, though the latter is less than two thirds the thickness. Comparing the two-tone tan/burgundy PM with the tru-tone PSR, the covers are of similar quality those the finishing is much better in the PM.
The PM font is smaller (6.75 pt, with 7pt line) compared to 7.4pt on (I guess) an 8pt line for the PSR. However, the PM font is a semi-bold; the PSR font is much lighter. Stand back from the page and the difference is obvious. I find both equally readable, and both are better than the font in the deluxe compact(which is 6.55pt).
My only real criticism of the PM is that the concordance has only 5,900 references, the same as the deluxe compact and PSR. The concordance seems to be extravagant in its use of space. Three columns and tighter line spacing and they could have gone for a concordance of 12,000 (as the thinline) or 14,000 (as the classic reference)

[A Jirau]

David,
If you can buy only one...Would you pick the Goatskin or the faux leather?

[David Dewey]

Definitely the goatskin. It is simply much better quality. Though both handle the same, open flat, etc., I imagine the goatskin will last twice as long (by which I mean 100 years as opposed to a mere 50). The goatskin has art gilt edges (red under gold); the faux leather and French Morocco only gilt.
With the faux leather you either like or loathe the vivid colour combination. I like them. The goatskin, however, is a very dark brown, with little sheen, quite flat. It is modest, kind of understated, if you know what I mean.
The black goatskin and French Morocco are both red letter which I dislike hugely, but the ESV is the only Pitt Minion where you have a choice. I think the goatskin is good value at £65 ($130), while the faux leather is a little overpriced at £40 ($80).
Having both, I can use the goatskin for preaching and the faux leather for carrying around, once I have plucked up the courage to leave them out of their boxes! Hope this helps.

[mashmouth]

Well done post, and thank you David for only increasing salivation on this blog-site! :grinning:
I, for one, will not be getting this version of the ESV, however. Why? Isn't the Cambridge nice? Yes! I have a NKJV in PM and love it.
It's just that, how many copies of the same version does one need? The references in the PSR are the same as in the PM, [as well as my calf SCR (which is my fave)], and the text is the same. How many smallish Bibles do I need? (Plus, when the Allans arrives at my doorstep, I will, grudgingly, posses yet another one...whaaah)
I am the only one who could answer that for myself, and I have to draw the line. I really want one though.
I hope everyone enjoys theirs immensely! The wait is almost over for the two most beautiful British versions of the Bible.

[Steve Lockhart]

Scott W. Kay

I think the typeface in all Pitt Minion bibles are the same. The Minion in Pitt Minion refers to the typeface. Also, I checked the first two lines of Genesis 1 in my ESV and NASB Pitt Minions. The first few lines in both translations are identical and line break in the same place. The columns in the ESV are 1 character thinner and the difference is made up by spacing the words ever so slightly closer in the ESV.