Full Size Bino Help for TOTAL newbie

[GeneralEverything]

Hey there, stumbled upon your site in the quest for the perfect binoculars. Went through the typical shock of how expensive they could get, and then the secondary shock of the minimum amount necessary to get quality binoculars. After picking my jaw up off the ground, and reading up, sizing up the field, etc., I'm ready to say I want to confirm my personal thoughts, and get some help.

First off, I can be an obsessive type, I like good gear, but, I'm not even out of school yet (higher education seems to go on forever...). So first off, that means that my budget REALLY doesn't have too much flexibility, and that I can take full advantage of large exit pupils (I have rather good night vision even for my age, so the bigger the better- read on). I don't generally wear glasses, so diopter adjustments for comfort are fine, but I don't need the same level others do.

What am I asking for? Well, I can obsess, so I'm going to try to keep it simple, to 2 binoculars, and perhaps a spotting scope in the future. My system (as I envision- constructive criticism helpful) is:
1 Compact Roof (I'm about to pull the trigger on the Zeiss Victory 8x20)
1 Everything else binocular: Huge, heavy, whatever.
1 (Possible, in future) Spotting scope- see anything anywhere (joke).

Compact
The compact is a must, as that is what I will mostly use. The Ultravids seem to be too far out of my price range, even when appearing on samplelist, cameralandny nra/samples, or eagle optics hot deals. I can't wrangle any more than $400 for a compact. I'd like to buy this first, as I will use it the most, and haven't ever had nice optics, big or small, so it will be nice to think something so tiny is so amazing! I'd like my disillusionment to be slow, okay? :king:

Everything Else
Not to be bought concurrently (unless actually cheap enough), but the everything else binocular. Now, I know there are tradeoffs and all that. Let me know about them. I want (good luck, I know): Good low light performance, easy glassing at a distance without eyestrain (both are partially solved by large exit pupils, right?), great detail... yeah, what everyone wants. They can be as big as Steiner Senators, heavy as a daypack; but... I'd like to do $500 or under, and I'm not averse to saving money. Yeah, ouch, I know, and if you have something REALLY worthwhile a little above, then I will consider it, but Leica Geovids are not in my near future. However, while I do love durability, waterproof, etc., I'd be fine with going with porro prisms. I'd like longer distance out of them, but will accept 6x or 7x if that seems to be a consensus. I was thinking either the Minox BD 8x44 BP, the Leupold Cascade porros, or the swift audobon 8.5x44. I've read about superior es, and the EII, but haven't fully gathered information on availability and such. Additionally, I've done my best to extrapolate what the best porros are, and the Swift and SE seem to be the top competitors. I've read all the wonders of the Promaster ELX mumbojumbo (that name... escapes me) and the Hawke, and the Vipers. However, because this is maximum bang for the buck, I don't give a hoot about size, roof prism elitism, weight, or whatever, I just want the best "cover (as much of) everything a compact doesn't" binoculars, though I do want to make a solid investment.

Possible future scope: Probably something cheap if in the short-term, something awesome in the long term. May buy cheap one (sandpiper) to have as a backup anyway and in future have good scope to reach out and see anything. Not a big consideration at this point, but consider that I would probably go at least $900 for the scope, quite possibly reaching into the 1500+ ones (Kowa 883... :smoke:), so you can help me with advice with this range of optics in mind.

Criticism appreciated. Yes, I know, blasphemy to propose only 3 different methods to deal with all my viewing! I may end up making it more complicated, but right now, let's pretend I'm going to make it simple, and you're going to help me, OK ;)?

Thanks for reading, and sorry for any painfully stupid terminology mistakes, assumptions, etc. I will most likely be very responsive to this thread, but... I'm going to have to limit my contact with you all beyond the thread, as my wallet is already shaking in fear at how a simple single binocular for ~$200 has morphed into a well over $1000 plan. :-O

GenEv

[J. Moore]

Hello and welcome to the forum. A few questions. Why do you need a compact? And how compact does it have to be? Compact enough to fit in a shirt pocket, or just a coat pocket, or just generally small binoculars? Regarding the larger binos, why will the weight not matter? Will they just sit around the house? Also, will these be used for birding?

Best,
Jim

[pinsonp2]

I would recommend the Nikon LXL 8x20 for a compact. You can get them at Adorama for under $400 (http://www.adorama.com/NK820LXP.html). They are double hinged and some do not like that feature.

[GeneralEverything]

A real Compact. I know, I know, "but 8x30 IS compact!" Not in my book. I either have the binoculars fit into a shirt pocket, or a compartment of my messenger bag (without taking up much space, it can hold approx 5 thin and light laptops, and looks awkward), or I might as well go with the huge binoculars. I've thought about the tradeoffs, and lord knows I've read about them (was it 24hourcampfire where a poor guy says he wants opinions on Leica 8x20 ultravids, and people inundate him with pentax 8x30s, he starts saying that well, a 8x40 isn't that bad, and gets sidetracked for a few pages until he comes to his senses and realizes he has plenty of good larger format bins, and returns to the desired 8x20 format). I probably will eventually get 8x30s, 8x32s, 8x40s, 8x42s... but I'm playing make believe right now, and I would appreciate if you'd join me ;). The idea of compacts is they go ANYWHERE. I originally was going for monoculars, and played with some zeiss, a Minox macroscope, and realized that small binocs would do it better, but hopefully that gives you an idea on how much compact size is a necessity.

Not for birding (at this point, anyway). I live in a part of the country where there is a lot of beautiful open fields and forest, and plenty of great stuff to look at. I might look at birds with them, but it's for fun mostly; taking in views- I enjoy toys, especially when they come with a community I might get involved with in the future. I do some birdwatching at points, but I've just gotten interested in all of this, so while I'm not a full birder at this point it's nice to be able to get involved when I already own decent equipment. Besides, birders are the most demanding people of optics, so if it's good for birding, aside from astronomy, it is good for just about all else I'd use it for.

Re the Nikons: yeah, I did consider those. Are the views really that much better than the Zeiss? I do like the sexy factor with the victorys... I read some .pdf on a comparison of the zeiss, leica, swarovski, and leica, and the nikon did come out ahead of the Zeiss. I'm open to suggestions, but I'm also probably easily impressed, having never owned anything more expensive than 8x20 bushnell $15 specials.

No offense intended in any reply; if any seems intended, consider my humor to be rather tone deaf. And thanks for the prompt replies!

GenEv

[J. Moore]

For the large binoculars, I would look very closely at the Hawke Frontier ED 8 x 43 model that FrankD reviewed recently. You do not wear glasses, so eye relief will not be an issue, and you might as well get some binoculars that offer a wide field of view rather than some that shrink the field of view to offer better eye relief. (I think the vipers would make no sense for you -- two of their big advantages are eye relief and low weight for an 8 x 42). And if Frank's review is accurate, you cannot get better image quality for the money.

Best,
Jim

[Kevin Purcell]

Just pick one thing for elucidation

The compact is a must, as that is what I will mostly use.

Why? Why not a smallish x28 or even better a x32 which might be a useful compromise until you can get both a full size and a compact.

I know we all have the feeling that there must be a good compact out there (for a reasonable price) but the evidence is against it. And even the very good compacts are not a "nice" to use for any extended use as even a less good bin with a bigger exit pupil.

So why do you think the compact will be your primary bin?

[GeneralEverything]

For the large binoculars, I would look very closely at the Hawke Frontier ED 8 x 43 model that FrankD reviewed recently. You do not wear glasses, so eye relief will not be an issue, and you might as well get some binoculars that offer a wide field of view rather than some that shrink the field of view to offer better eye relief. (I think the vipers would make no sense for you -- two of their big advantages are eye relief and low weight for an 8 x 42). And if Frank's review is accurate, you cannot get better image quality for the money.

Best,
Jim

Thank you very much Jim. Indeed, FrankD actually was the guy who dragged me into this optics obsession, by cross-posting on another completely unrelated board and made me more curious. In response to an earlier question of yours I didn't see, the binos will probably sit around a lot. However, I'm young, strong, and need to stretch my wallet, so all the talk about tiring myself or my arms carrying it just means that I'll get stronger arms and a stronger neck (if no harness) :-O. I'm willing to revise my set up off what you forumites who are far wiser than I am, but I do have parameters that I'd like to meet.

To Kevin, whose reply came in as I was quoting and responding to Jim, so I can't quote you :-C:
I've read your reviews and responses and know you know what you're talking about. Why would the compact be my primary? Because I'll have it. I'm getting out of class- it's a beautiful cold but clear morning. I've got a 30 minute window, I'm not going back to my room, my bag is already pretty full of books and such. I pull out my compact binoculars, which fit without sacrificing texts for class. I take a look around, noticing the mountains and the wildlife. I jog down to a field enjoy a view for 5 minutes, take a quick look at departing birds, ones soaring on thermals, and the general landscape, then jog back up, and go to my next class. Now, doing that with anything but a fold up pair of binoculars sounds silly, as I'd have to get a new bag, have it weigh more, and they'd be large enough that instead of me adding non-intrusive protective padding, it may (without such protection) hit things as I run off somewhere and my bag trails behind me, or I come to a sudden stop as I round a corner (brick walls) :eek!:.

When it comes to a planned expedition, where I know I'll want some optic bliss, I can make room for a huge honking pair of binoculars. But, a compromise piece would be left behind at least 30% more, if not more like 70% or so. I already carry "ridiculous" things with me all the time (flashlight, pocket knife, etc) so a small pair of binoculars wouldn't be out of character, whereas I'd be a total dork if I humped a larger pair everywhere, and I couldn't anyway.

Besides, the most important thing to remember is: aside from testing out the monoculars, I haven't ever used anything that cost more than $50. So, for someone like you, a compact is a horrible compromise. For me, having mostly used $15 compact bushnells, a brunton echo 7x18 monoc, and occasionally looked through some ~$50 promotional 8x40 or 8x44 binocs that probably weren't even in collimation, they'll probably look pretty darn good to me until I get the aforementioned large awesome binocs. Then I'll cry and look into x32s. I don't really see $$ coming my way in the near future, so buying a compromise piece now would... tie up my funds in a compromise.

All kidding and snarkiness aside, I do respect your opinion as I said before, and value all constructive criticism. Thanks guys, keep it coming.

GevEv

[pinsonp2]

I like the Nikons and the view was just as good to me as the Zeiss I briefly looked through. You really need to look, feel, and touch to find the one that suits you best.

[GeneralEverything]

I like the Nikons and the view was just as good to me as the Zeiss I briefly looked through. You really need to look, feel, and touch to find the one that suits you best.

So I've heard... well, the places I'm considering ordering from aren't drastically different from where most people here shop (i.e., I read about where most people here shop, and that's where I'll stick to), and these places seem to be super good with return policies. I'm not aware that the places nearby stock both nikon lxls and Zeiss Victory compacts, I'll have to check. Thanks for the advice though.

GenEv

[Steve C]

As Jim has told you there is no better value in optical quality for the money you will spend, staying at your $500 limit than you will get from either the Promaster Infinity Elite ELX ED or the Hawke Frontier ED. These seem to be pretty much the same binocular with some minor differences. They are on the big size, but not outlandish for a full size 42 mm binocular. The Vortex Viper is only a touch behind these at pretty much the same price. It is a little smaller and has less FOV, but still a good binocular. You might look at the Vortex Fury binoculars. They are nearly the optical equal of the Vipers and are a bit less $$ at about $350.

Decent, small, compact and cheap binoculars are a different matter. To get a good useable pocket size binocular, you may need to go to one of the top quality brands. There are some less expensive options. I can't tell you much about them as I haven't seen any. I have my eye open and I am personally thinking about takin a look at them. They are the Minox BD 8x24 BR and Pentax DCF SW 8x25. These are both pocket size, double hinge binoculars. They are also phase corrected, buit have pretty narrow FOV. The Minox BV 8x25 BRW is likely worth a look as well. It is a small single hinge binocular, that will work OK in your bag or a large shirt pocket. They are also phase corrected and have a pretty large fov. For a little bigger compact glass, the Bushnell Custom Elite 7x26 ia a very good glass. Not real compact, but small enough for your bag. I have the version from when they were still the Baush & Lomb 7x26 Custom Compact and I like them a lot. They are not really pocket size however.

I would think that for the $500 you could get decent glass with say an 8x42 Fury and a Minox 8x25 BRW. The Fury is about $350 and the Minox is about $150. You could gain some optics experience with these as you get out of college and maybe get a little more disposable income. The Fury binocular would have served me well in my college days as a Biology major.

Order from someplace like Eagle Optics or CameralandNY who will let you return binoculars if they are in out of the box condition after a trial time. That way you can try before you buy. Might be a real good idea with the smaller roof compacts.

[lmans66]

Ditto on what others said...why have the compact? Go for a good 8 x 42 or there abouts...that is what I have used for 20 years and you don't need much more for birding in many respects.

Quality....there is quality and there is perhaps those that go overboard a bit. You can buy the cadillac of Binocs but really, do you need it? If not, save yourself some dollars and get a good mid priced pair and you will be just has happy.

my two cents

[Kevin Purcell]

To Kevin, whose reply came in as I was quoting and responding to Jim, so I can't quote you :-C:

Just copy the test and hit the yellow speech bubble in the toolbar ;)

I've read your reviews and responses and know you know what you're talking about. Why would the compact be my primary? Because I'll have it. I'm getting out of class- it's a beautiful cold but clear morning. I've got a 30 minute window, I'm not going back to my room, my bag is already pretty full of books and such. I pull out my compact binoculars, which fit without sacrificing texts for class. I take a look around, noticing the mountains and the wildlife.

I though that would be the case. Just trying to see what your "use case" is.

I'm all for carrying bins all the time. I've lost a couple of interesting birds just noticed whilst walking because I didn't have bins on me. But the win of carrying any bin might be better than the best possible bin. There are even some sub-$100 compacts that are worth using in this role even 25mm ones like the Nikon ATB (assuming you don't need the eye relief). SteveC's recommendations are good to: the Pentax and the Minox. Heck even the Yosemite 6x30 is 18oz (but a bit larger in size) but it has a great image.

Now that said I'd still recommend a lower-end single hinge 28mm or 32mm as a compromise especially if that lets you get to a decent mid or full size bin quicker i.e. if you don't have a lot of money.

I've been doing this myself and getting one with good enough quality and light enough weight without spending much money is a bit of challenge. But there are some good ones out there. And if you are carrying a backpack it's not too difficult to throw a bin in there (even if it more than a pound in weight).

But if you can afford it go for a top end compact they'd work well for your intended use.

As I always say try a few bins before you buy any. You will start to get a feel for them. And you will be surprised

The compact route seems very attractive until you've tried it and then you see all of the compromises involved.

[Tero]

Skip the compact. And there are plenty of 8x32s if you need to travel with a smaller pair later. Look at Vortex, Bushnell, Pentax SP models are on sale now.

1 Everything else binocular: Huge, heavy, whatever.
So go for this first.Go about 25-30 oz in weight and put the money on this one. 8x42 or 10x42.

[GeneralEverything]

Ditto on what others said...why have the compact? Go for a good 8 x 42 or there abouts...that is what I have used for 20 years and you don't need much more for birding in many respects.
[...] Ahh, see, that's the problem. I wondered if I accentuated the birdwatching factor too much. I definitely will watch winged creatures through these binoculars, but to put the percentage of time I will be doing that anywhere above 40% would not be accurate. If I have something that's actually accessible that I have with me, then I'm going to play with it. A lot.

[...]
But the win of carrying any bin might be better than the best possible bin. There are even some sub-$100 compacts that are worth using in this role even 25mm ones like the Nikon ATB (assuming you don't need the eye relief). SteveC's recommendations are good to: the Pentax and the Minox. Heck even the Yosemite 6x30 is 18oz (but a bit larger in size) but it has a great image.

Now that said I'd still recommend a lower-end single hinge 28mm or 32mm as a compromise especially if that lets you get to a decent mid or full size bin quicker i.e. if you don't have a lot of money.

I've been doing this myself and getting one with good enough quality and light enough weight without spending much money is a bit of challenge. But there are some good ones out there. And if you are carrying a backpack it's not too difficult to throw a bin in there (even if it more than a pound in weight).

But if you can afford it go for a top end compact they'd work well for your intended use.

As I always say try a few bins before you buy any. You will start to get a feel for them. And you will be surprised

The compact route seems very attractive until you've tried it and then you see all of the compromises involved. Ahhh, I like your response. Still pushing your agenda, but in a way that fits into my lifestyle :t:. Alright, I'll play ball. Let's say I'll keep an open mind if anyone has any pictures showing size comparisons between x20s, x25s, x28s, or whatever. I don't really know many local places with quality optics. If someone could post comparison pictures (folded, unfolded, etc.), that would be very helpful.

Skip the compact. And there are plenty of 8x32s if you need to travel with a smaller pair later. Look at Vortex, Bushnell, Pentax SP models are on sale now.


So go for this first.Go about 25-30 oz in weight and put the money on this one. 8x42 or 10x42. What would be better in my approx price range besides a Hawke/Promaster? Nearly double to get at a Meostar? Razors? Honestly, without getting into full size alphas, which is a sight too ridiculous at this point, I wasn't aware of anything that really beat them at this point.

As Jim has told you there is no better value in optical quality for the money you will spend, staying at your $500 limit than you will get from either the Promaster Infinity Elite ELX ED or the Hawke Frontier ED. [...] You might look at the Vortex Fury binoculars. They are nearly the optical equal of the Vipers and are a bit less $$ at about $350.

Decent, small, compact and cheap binoculars are a different matter. [...] They are the Minox BD 8x24 BR and Pentax DCF SW 8x25. These are both pocket size, double hinge binoculars. They are also phase corrected, buit have pretty narrow FOV. The Minox BV 8x25 BRW is likely worth a look as well. [...]

I would think that for the $500 you could get decent glass with say an 8x42 Fury and a Minox 8x25 BRW. The Fury is about $350 and the Minox is about $150. You could gain some optics experience with these as you get out of college and maybe get a little more disposable income. The Fury binocular would have served me well in my college days as a Biology major.

Order from someplace like Eagle Optics or CameralandNY who will let you return binoculars if they are in out of the box condition after a trial time. That way you can try before you buy. Might be a real good idea with the smaller roof compacts. I really do appreciate a voice of reason here, giving advice on saving and not implicitly willing me to rob banks. Are there any reviews on the fury, minox, or pentax? I've definitely seen them, but all that is mentioned are the Vipers and Razors, and the Big 3+nikon for compacts. Wasn't there some QC problems with the Fury?

Thanks again guys. Appreciate the advice, as I'm obviously clueless on this stuff. So, just for the record, are Porros dead then? Because I'd heard I could get near alpha bin quality without the price. Is that conventional wisdom wrong?
GenEV

[Steve C]

What would be better in my approx price range besides a Hawke/Promaster? Nearly double to get at a Meostar? Razors? Honestly, without getting into full size alphas, which is a sight too ridiculous at this point, I wasn't aware of anything that really beat them at this point.

GenEV

There isn't anything that will beat them (Promaster/Hawke) optically at the $500 point; until you hit the alpha's. And then the difference is really slim. I've spent some time the last couple of weeks comparing my Promaster ELX ED to top end Swarovski EL, Leica U HD, Zeiss FL, and Steiner XP. I'll get a post together about that and get it up by this evening, I hope.

[Tero]

What would be better in my approx price range besides a Hawke/Promaster? Nearly double to get at a Meostar?
If the oddball brand does not appeal, Pentax SP 8x43 or Vortex Viper
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4654

[Alexis Powell]

I have no argument with your plan to get a good compact, and the Zeiss 8x20 Victory is my second favorite 8x20 after the Leica 8x20 Ultravid BL (I own both). My original, not dielectric coated Victory, was inferior to the Leica in dealing with backlight, but my new, dielectric coated unit (Zeiss replaced the first unit under warranty due to a manufacturing defect), is just as good or better than the Leica in every respect optically. The only things I like better about the Leica are the speed with which I can focus near to far (a practical concern for a butterflyer-birder such as myself), and its sexy metal and faux (?) leather build (an aesthetic bias).

It's true that an awesome 8x32 will give you nearly uncompromised optical performance in a very compact package (the Leica 8x32 Ultravid is my vote for the champ in that regard), but it is also true that the performance of top-end pocket roofs can be stunningly good. In fact, I would recommend getting the best (Leica Ultravid or Zeiss Victory) and being done with it. You'll have the small end covered for life, and you can get a good 8x32 or 8x42 to complement it when you have the money to do so in the future. I wouldn't go with an 8x25 or 8x28--much bulkier than the Zeiss 8x20, too close in size to the 8x32 that you might get down the road, and I don't know of any that are top-notch optically so if you might be tempted (and rightly so) to upgrade in the future.

My pocket roofs get _a lot_ of use; besides being great for any occasion when I want to have a bino with me without noticing that I'm carrying one, they're handy for butterflying (<6 foot close focus and no need for a big exit pupil for viewing those sun loving critters), when I'm juggling secondary importance binoculars with primary importance camera, at theater/dance/orchestral performances, and are a constant companion in my day bag during spring and fall migrations.

--AP

[Tero]

Since you claim to do minimal birding with these, get the 8x20 Zeiss or get the lightest and most compact 8x32 you can find. There are numerous good models these days, but the Meopta may be the best for under 1000. Pentax 8x32 ED comes close, may be even better to some.

[Kevin Purcell]

So, just for the record, are Porros dead then? Because I'd heard I could get near alpha bin quality without the price. Is that conventional wisdom wrong?

Not at all but the problem is (as many have opined here) that there are no op end "modern" porros.

There are some good porros out there:

A second hand Nikon SE 8x32 or Nikon E2 8x30 (if you don't wear eyeglasses ... ER is short) are still excellent bets but they're not waterprooof.

FrankD really likes the Leupold Cascades 8x42 (Opticron HR WP 8x42 in UK). Very sharp. Waterproof. Internal focuser. Rather narrow FOV. You need a very good roof to beat it.

Swift Audubon 8.5x44 ED or non-ED. The "poor man's Swarovski". More bulky than a roof - the main reason for the change to roofs, IMHO, was ergonomics. But the view is good. ER is mediocre. Wide field.

Leupold Yosemite 6x30 or 8x30 just below $100 are both decent porros that you need a roof of twice to three times the cost to beat. It shows what a "modern" porro could be if imagine a hybrid between the Yosemite and Cascades (I guess that would be Shasta or Lassen ;) ) with good ER, waterproofing and fogproofing, internal focus, lightweight composite enclosure.

You can always use Google (site:birdforum.net narrows the search) or the forum search to find reviews and comments.

[jimtrader11]

So I've heard... well, the places I'm considering ordering from aren't drastically different from where most people here shop (i.e., I read about where most people here shop, and that's where I'll stick to), and these places seem to be super good with return policies. I'm not aware that the places nearby stock both nikon lxls and Zeiss Victory compacts, I'll have to check. Thanks for the advice though.

GenEv

I have Zeiss 8x20 Conquest with rolled down eye cups (I wear glasses) and the Nikon 10x25. Both are superb and the Nikon is built like a tank. However, the Nikons irk me due to the focus knob being in front by the objectives instead of the rear like most binoculars. You have to focus them with something other than your index finger. One day soon, I will sell the Nikons just for that.
Regarding your choice of Zeiss Victory 8x20, I think you will be happy with it and it may be better than the cheaper Conquest for you as I think it has twist or pullup eyecups and is waterproof.

[oleaf]

Try Leupold Katmai 6x32. Compact and big bino view... and good price. More compact than you would think. Frank can tell about these as I think he has owned a pair at some time (what pair has Frank not owned?) These little bins could work for all your needs... no kidding!

MeoStars are superb. http://www.holgermerlitz.de/kowa85x44.html

I know Frank can give you the lowdown on this model.

Cheers

[OwenM]

If you're hooked on compacts, get the best you can afford. The ~$100 compact roofs are mostly similar, and mostly garbage. I'm looking forward to checking out the 8x20 Ultravid, myself. I've only heard about the high end compacts, never experienced them...
Consider the Leupold Katmai 6x32(edit: I see oleaf beat me to it!), which are smaller than other 32mm binoculars, and should smoke any compact.
Here's a link to BobinKY's wonderfully entertaining and informative thread on CN-comparing Nikon, Swarovski, and Leica compacts with 32mm Leupold Katmai, Pentax ED, and Minox HG. Scroll down to posts starting on 8/15/07 to get right into the comparisons.
http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/1766625/page/0/view/collapsed/sb/5/o/all/fpart/all/vc/1

[Tero]

Here is a big heavy monster with exceptional optics
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4782

[ThoLa]

..... After picking my jaw up off the ground, and reading up, sizing up the field, etc., I'm ready to say I want to confirm my personal thoughts, and get some help.
....

GenEv

Dear General, Sir!

Instead of joining the band of gospeleers who ignore your statements which have been quite precise, assuming that you don#t know what you are talking about, I shall rather take an opposite approach, assuming you've got a brain to make up your mind with.
If you have managed to successfully pick up your lower jaw and fix it with a few drops of superglue to the upper one you might be interested in reading the review of pocket binos I shall humbly submit by attching it to the end of this message.

A pocket bino is a compromise, yes, but it's also a useful appendage to a full-size instrument.

"Porros" are not dead .... "they just smell funny" (to quote a great american rock pioneer). There are some high quality models left that give excellent results.
Even mid-priced specimens easily give results not visible different from roof prism models costing 3 times as much.

You can#t go wrong in the top league. The field is easy to nagivate: there are but four manufacturers who play in it. Performance is invariably excellent. The rest is up to personal taste.

In the low-price area you get low performance for a low price. You don't expect much, you will not be disappointed.

The mid-priced range (300-1000 USD) is a MINEFIELD !
You may get excellence, you may get total junk. Here it is where every step needs good consideration.

Discriminate measurable performance date from personal opinions!

Good luck, General. Keep your head in the trench.

Major Tom

[Tero]

Major, I think the low end is the minefield. The mid range gives consistent quality but prices vary quite a bit in 500-1000 dollar range for very similar optics.

[ThoLa]

Major, I think the low end is the minefield. The mid range gives consistent quality but prices vary quite a bit in 500-1000 dollar range for very similar optics.

No. Not at all. In the low range you get low performance for low price.


For 600 or 800 (USD or Euros) you can get excellent optical performance such in a Zeiss Conquest or turbidity and dullness such as in a ........ look at the MEASUREMENTS!

At the low end and the top end you get what you pay for.

In between it is practically unpredictable ... unless you have an optical bench to take indisputable measurements.

Sorry, but that's hard fact.

Nothing wrong with low-end or mid-range (if you know what you are doing!),
Tom

[Tero]

Your list of brands in the test is very small. No Bushnell, no Vortex, no Pentax.

[ThoLa]

Your list of brands in the test is very small. No Bushnell, no Vortex, no Pentax.

I did not do the tests;)
You know there are very few tests based on hard facts out there.
You may get a bunch of instruments and do a set of tests according to acknowledged ISO protocols (to make sure they are comparable).
I think it's mainly a problem of costs.

There are some Pentaxes, by the way (a company I know well because I have used their cameras for a long time). Their binos fare well, and in my very personal opinion they are attractive, reliable mid-range instruments giving a good value-for-money ratio.

Tom

[Tero]

As far as the small units go, I do not care too much for a 8x20 alpha bin. The low end and mid end products have a 8x28mm unit in their line these days. I would be happy with a Leica or other top end 8x28mm with a fov of 400ft. I would pay maybe 600 for it.

In your Alula review, I would go for the Opticron*, 25mm, or a similar Vortex Vanquish. Which I would recommend to the original poster as well for a compact. I agree that under 100 dollar 8x25 roof prisms never make most of us happy. Just something to carry around for a quick look on a walk. Mine are Minoltas.

*Second choice would be the Nikon for its widest fov of those tested.

[GeneralEverything]

For 600 or 800 (USD or Euros) you can get excellent optical performance such in a Zeiss Conquest or turbidity and dullness such as in a ........ look at the MEASUREMENTS!
[...]
Tom
Hey Tom, maybe I'm showing my true colors (tenderfoot green), but is there some particular warning against a particular make/model you're implying, but don't wish to let others know? Send me a PM if you don't want to say it publicly; but I'm completely oblivious to the etiquette of not insulting makes/models that are inferior. And the figures... I can read them, but really, what matters most is subjective perspectives, as I have had little enough experience I could spout off about diopter adjustments and FOV, but be completely clueless, and not realize how a sticky focus wheel might destroy any leisure binoculars.

As far as the small units go, I do not care too much for a 8x20 alpha bin. [...]
In your Alula review, I would go for the Opticron*, 25mm, or a similar Vortex Vanquish. Which I would recommend to the original poster as well for a compact. I agree that under 100 dollar 8x25 roof prisms never make most of us happy. Just something to carry around for a quick look on a walk. Mine are Minoltas.

*Second choice would be the Nikon for its widest fov of those tested.
Tero, I hope I don't come off as dismissive, petty, or insulting. My post count is low, my lurk count very high. Your contributions to this website are nothing to sniff at, and actually taking time to help me with this choice, I have nothing but respect for you. However, I do honestly want to know: do you carry at ALL times a pair of 25mm, or your preferred formats(?) x28 or x32 at all hours that you are outside of your house? If so, what else do you carry with you? I am looking for a pair of binoculars that will be with me as constantly as I do my cell phone, keys, flashlight, pocketknife. For EDC, or every day carry, people are willing to pay a premium, sometimes like 50% or more to cut some ounces or to lower the overall volume by 10%. Sometimes I don't have my bag with me, and it might go on a belt, or, heaven forbid, pants pockets. If there is a magical way to carry larger binocs with me for 16 hours, every day, ALL the time (until I lay me down to rest), without it being more cumbersome, I'm all ears.

Dear General, Sir!

Instead of joining the band of gospeleers who ignore your statements which have been quite precise, assuming that you don#t know what you are talking about, I shall rather take an opposite approach, assuming you've got a brain to make up your mind with. [...]
Major Tom
Tom, as always, courtesy is met with courtesy, and high estimations of my judgment by a more seasoned member is met with exceeding deference on my part. Alas, to invest in the high end at this point is simply not feasible. No meaningful discernible income at this point = insanity to insist to the powers that be (parents) that purchasing alpha bins is a good idea. And the powers that be have been more than generous with help along my educational career, and my mother being a CPA means that she overlooks my tax returns when helping me out...
"GenEV, what's this $1,200 gone from your account here?"
"Oh, yeah, forgot to tell you! I found an awesome pair of Ultravids on CameralandNY, and had to get them!"
"Umm... that's a stock?"
"No, just about the best pair of binoculars ever!"
"Right... [a few hours later] GenEv, we think you should finish your final semester at another school"
"Really mom? Well, alright, where is it?"
"Just follow the men in the white coats outside..."
Forgive my digression. What I'm trying to say here, is that I'm prepared to invest in some instruments that are investment worthy, but only to a point. Small roofs don't seem to be getting better by leaps and bounds, so that purchase should stay good. The large format bins, however, leap so much in difference every few years, I can't justify going the ramen/no beer/odd-jobs/parents thinking I'm crazy for a pair of binoculars that will have a 3% advantage over ones that cost 1/3. If I do become a police sniper, I will upgrade. But let's talk about that after I (unbeknownst to me!) become a sniper.

If you're hooked on compacts, get the best you can afford. The ~$100 compact roofs are mostly similar, and mostly garbage. Righto. Thanks for the confirmation of suspicions.

Try Leupold Katmai 6x32. [...]
Cheers Yes, I've agonized over them quite a bit. May be in consideration, but I'm trying to maintain the myth of 2 bins at this point! That might not be the truth in the future, but for now, please, let my castles in the clouds stand!!

Regarding your choice of Zeiss Victory 8x20, I think you will be happy with it and it may be better than the cheaper Conquest for you as I think it has twist or pullup eyecups and is waterproof. Again, I want to go as high as possible with compacts... but the price differential between everything and the ultravids... it's killing me. $150 (minimum) could be so much better spent on large optics...


FrankD really likes the Leupold Cascades 8x42 (Opticron HR WP 8x42 in UK). Very sharp. Waterproof. Internal focuser. Rather narrow FOV. You need a very good roof to beat it.

Swift Audubon 8.5x44 ED or non-ED. The "poor man's Swarovski". More bulky than a roof - the main reason for the change to roofs, IMHO, was ergonomics. But the view is good. ER is mediocre. Wide field.
Those cascades are EXTREMELY attractive at the price. What's the cheapest that beats it- a promaster/hawke?

I do know all about the cheaper porros- I'm thinking about getting 2 or 3 yosemites or something when funds are more free to have around in different places.
Since you claim to do minimal birding with these, get the 8x20 Zeiss or get the lightest and most compact 8x32 you can find. There are numerous good models these days, but the Meopta may be the best for under 1000. Pentax 8x32 ED comes close, may be even better to some. Point blank question: are the Meoptas better than the promaster/hawke, and in what ways? Again, considering that my discretionary spending at this point amounts to... I'm going to guess off the top of my head, around $3,000... Yeah. 1/3rd of my total discretionary for the year. On binocs that may not be better than something that's 1/6th my discretionary fund. It won't always be this way; but take that into account- I've got a girlfriend (dates, etc.), champagne tastes, a beer budget... and I need to make it all work! I have saved some money for combined, at this point, of under $1000, and that $1000 mark is the point where I cry (not entirely joking) if the binoculars aren't like having transplanted eagle eyes.

I have no argument with your plan to get a good compact, and the Zeiss 8x20 Victory is my second favorite 8x20 after the Leica 8x20 Ultravid BL (I own both). [...]

It's true that an awesome 8x32 will give you nearly uncompromised optical performance in a very compact package (the Leica 8x32 Ultravid is my vote for the champ in that regard), but it is also true that the performance of top-end pocket roofs can be stunningly good. In fact, I would recommend getting the best (Leica Ultravid or Zeiss Victory) and being done with it. You'll have the small end covered for life, and you can get a good 8x32 or 8x42 to complement it when you have the money to do so in the future. I wouldn't go with an 8x25 or 8x28--much bulkier than the Zeiss 8x20, too close in size to the 8x32 that you might get down the road, and I don't know of any that are top-notch optically so if you might be tempted (and rightly so) to upgrade in the future.

My pocket roofs get _a lot_ of use; besides being great for any occasion when I want to have a bino with me without noticing that I'm carrying one, they're handy for butterflying (<6 foot close focus and no need for a big exit pupil for viewing those sun loving critters), when I'm juggling secondary importance binoculars with primary importance camera, at theater/dance/orchestral performances, and are a constant companion in my day bag during spring and fall migrations.

--AP Right! Your post is one of those that I cut the least out of, because your post is almost exactly my thought process. I'm committed to no longer buying crap, ever. If I buy something, I want it to be worthwhile. If I buy a promaster, yeah, I might upgrade to a Swaro EL, but that promaster is too good to let go to waste... and it would still fit somewhere as a purpose. But I don't buy cheap these days, if I can at all help it.


There isn't anything that will beat them (Promaster/Hawke) optically at the $500 point; until you hit the alpha's. And then the difference is really slim. I've spent some time the last couple of weeks comparing my Promaster ELX ED to top end Swarovski EL, Leica U HD, Zeiss FL, and Steiner XP. I'll get a post together about that and get it up by this evening, I hope.
Post was awesome. Just read it. Thanks for the review! Very helpful. Anyway, I'll continue to read and answer posts. In the meanwhile, I'm busy seeing if I can arrange a time to play with another forum member to play with his compacts, to get an idea of what I'm doing! There's a reason I joined as opposed to just lurking...

[Tero]

Meoptas: have not seen them, and very few here have seen the 8x32.

Small and portable: The 8x20s are the best bet for that. Most of them come with a belt pouch. In summer and fall I go without binoculars a lot. But when I have a winter coat I have either an 8x25 or the Excursion 8x28 when outdoors on foot. I find peregrines etc in winter.

[Steve C]

General

Out of curiosity sake, what do you have on your person in day to day "take it everywhere with me" use? For example just you and your shirt and pants pockets, a small backpack, or perhaps a fanny pack or just what. As you are finding out optics choices are more about balancing a set of strong points against a set of weak points and living with the compromise.

If your normal routine is out and about with shirt and jeans pockets only and you need/want a binocular always with you then you're down to an expensive alpha brand compact. Something like the reverse porro like the Opticron Tiags in the attachment from ThoLa's attachment, or the Bushnell Custom Elite. But the reverse porros are not real pocket friendly, save maybe the cargo pocket on a pair of pants. Something like a small digital camera pouch with a belt loop might work here too. As everybody has said, the cheap shirt pocket size compacts don't usually amount to much. If that's what you need/want, then spend for a good alpha compact first. Then work on adding to or stretching the discretionary for something that balances the use you will develop for the compact.

If you have a pack/fannypack, then judge the size of the spot you will carry the glass in and look for something like the Leupold 6x32 Katmi. Or something else compatible with the size.

[oleaf]

Point blank question: are the Meoptas better than the promaster/hawke, and in what ways?

You can ask Frank his opinion as he has owned both.

The 8x42 Meostars have a breath taking view, no "rolling ball" when panning, more compact than most 42's, have one of the widest, flattest FOV's of any other alpha 42 and are priced as a bargain.

I've got the 7x and love them. I made a direct comparison to the current Swaro EL 8.5x and took the Meopta. But don't take my word... try them yourself.

Cheers

PS. Just get the Katmai and enjoy.

[lucznik]

GeneralEverything,

Whatever you do, don't compromise on your logic. It is really spot on. Until recently I have carried a pocket binocular (an 8x25 Pentax DCF MC II) with me at all times and it has often proved invaluable at allowing me to truly observe, rather than just look at, whatever had caught my interest. I recently dropped my compact and knocked it severely out of collimation so; I am without until it is either fixed or replaced. I definitely feel naked without it.

The 30mm class of binocular is useless as a compact. They are O.K. for people who don't use their optics in the early morning, late evening, under heavy cover, or in bad weather. Such people may want more comfrortable regular viewing than a true compact offers but, don't need the added low-light performance of full-size glass. This middle class of optic works great for them. However such binoculars are definitely not small enough for the purposes you described. The 26-28 mm binoculars are just plain useless alltogether; not enough physically smaller than the 30mm class to be any real benefit and not sufficiently larger than the 20mm binoculars to offer any better, more comfortable extended viewing.

Stick with the 8x20 format and buy the best you can. Even my 8x25 sometimes proved just a tiny bit too big for total comfort. For this reason (and for my desire to better the optical performance of the Pentax) I am leaning toward replacing (rather than fixing) my compact.

Here's my short list:
8x20 Nikon Premier LXL
8x20 Zeiss Victory
8x20 Zeiss Conquest

[Tero]

The 8x20 Conquest is a bit of a loser with rubber eye cups, but the optics are impressive enough. If I did not have to pay for them, I would use them. ;)

[Surveyor]

GenEv;

Because of some of the comments above I now realize that my use of compacts is not as unique as I thought.

Since the mid-late 60’s, if I had my wallet with me, I also had a compact bino in my pocket, mostly 8x20 but sometimes 6x20 or 7x20. These days if I know I am going to be out most of the day I carry the Ultravid and if I do not expect to be out at all I will still carry an old 8x20 Zeiss sometimes because they are even smaller. I use compacts far more than the larger bins. I do use larger bins on weekends or at times when I know I am going to be using more than usual, but even then, I still have compacts in my pocket.

If I had limited funds for binos, most of it would be allocated to the compacts because of the time I use them and the need for smaller optics to be better.

I am glad to see that the use of compacts is more wide spread than I had thought from most posts here.

I would heed the advice of others above and not compromise on your perceived needs and requirements.

Have a good day.

Ron

[Alexis Powell]

The 8x20 Conquest is a bit of a loser with rubber eye cups...

For anyone pondering Zeiss Conquest versus Victory 8x20, I strongly recommend steering clear of the Conquest. The optics of the Victory are superior, its build is more solid, and its single hinge asymmetric design allows for a much better hand hold (the Conquest double hinges lack positive stops). Furthermore, the strap and strap attachment of the Conquest is a joke, and its "hang" is poor, whereas the Victory eyelets allow for easy strap adjustment or replacement, and the bino lays flat against one's body when hanging on its strap.

--AP

[Tero]

(lucznik)
The 30mm class of binocular is useless as a compact*. They are O.K. for people who don't use their optics in the early morning, late evening, under heavy cover, or in bad weather. Such people may want more comfrortable regular viewing than a true compact offers but, don't need the added low-light performance of full-size glass.

This is not entirely true. My use is more seasonal. I use 8x32s quite a lot, almost half a year pretty much by themselves even in bad weather. In winter I use 10x42s and 8x42s, mainly due to the cloudy weather and the habitat, open field. If I had some alpha glass 8x32, or maybe a Meopta 8x32, I would probably use it most of the time, with the 10x42 occasionally used in fields.

*But if one wants true compacts, certainly go for 8x20.

[ceasar]

You can still get a Leica 8 x 20 Trinovid for $459.00. It's not waterproof, but it sure is small enough. You can take it anywhere. It will fit in a shirt pocket. I've taken it to concerts and enjoyed using it there. It's optics are 1st rate. http://www.astronomics.com/main/product.asp/catalog_name/Christophers/category_name/U7PT221USP4N8JDJXHW2R079M2/product_id/L820B

You will have enough change left over to get one of these Swift HHS 8.5 x 44 Roof Prisms. It's an excellent all purpose binocular for it's price. Swift thought enough about it to name it after it's founder: Humphrey H. Swift.
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=1156

You will still have almost 200 bucks to play with.:t:

Bob

PS: I forgot to add that this older model little Leica Trinovid comes with a Lifetime instead of a 10 year warranty

[elkcub]

Okay, I expect to get heat, but in my opinion a 10x25 compact has much to be desired over an 8x20 for multi-purpose use. It's slightly larger, but it has more reach and a better twilight factor (15.8 vs. 12.6). An 8x30, incidentally, is only 15.5. I always have my Swaro 10x25 SLC with me, although I could just as easily carry my wife's 8x20 SLC. In fact, I used it exclusively for three years of birding in the early 90s.

It may be argued that it's hard to hold steady, but my experience is that you learn how to use it, just as with the 8x20.

If I were buying today, the Ultravids have a lot of appeal, but Swaros are still not out of the running with updated Swarobright prism coatings. Nikons LX also deserve a look.

Buy for the long term. Enjoy every minute of ownership.

Ed

[Alexis Powell]

...in my opinion a 10x25 compact has much to be desired over an 8x20 for multi-purpose use. It's slightly larger, but it has more reach and a better twilight factor...

I followed a similar logic when I bought my first premium pocket roof (a Leica 10x25 Trinovid BC). I think the argument had some merit back then and that the 10x25 made up for some of the optical deficiencies of these tiny binoculars. However, the latest pocket roofs are so good, I'm not tempted to use my 10x25 (or a more recent 10x25 model). Instead, I favor the 8x20 for their, in my case, overall equal or superior specs and optics (see below).

With respect to the Leica Trinovid pocket roofs--I find the eye-relief of the 8x20 on the short side for glasses use. Also, the performance of the Trinovid against the light is not nearly as good as the Ultravid or Zeiss Victory, so they often reveal themselves as optically compromised tiny bins (the magic of the Ultravid and latest Victory is how well they manage under tricky lighting conditions). A caution about 10x--the close focus is not nearly as good as the 8x models, thus limiting their utility for butterfly watching. I find this very disappointing, both because I watch butterflies and because pocket roofs have so much potential to be superb for this use. Among the 10x, the Ultravid has the best close focus, and the Trinovid has the worst (it is an irritatingly long, even for some birding, ~16 feet).

--AP

[ThoLa]

You can still get a Leica 8 x 20 Trinovid for $459.00. It's not waterproof, but it sure is small enough.

Bob


Yes, it IS waterproof.

T

[lucznik]

The 8x20 Conquest is a bit of a loser with rubber eye cups, but the optics are impressive enough. If I did not have to pay for them, I would use them. ;)
Eyecup design is always a non-starter issue for me because I never use them. They are always in the fully-down position to accomodate my eyeglasses.

[lucznik]

This is not entirely true. My use is more seasonal. I use 8x32s quite a lot, almost half a year pretty much by themselves even in bad weather. In winter I use 10x42s and 8x42s, mainly due to the cloudy weather and the habitat, open field. If I had some alpha glass 8x32, or maybe a Meopta 8x32, I would probably use it most of the time, with the 10x42 occasionally used in fields.

But Tero, You've just supported my basic premise. Based on the seasons, the habitat, and the weather you are using an 8x42 or 10x42. The 8x32 you are using for more everyday use, during the daylight and in good (or at least non-cloudy) weather.

But you can't, I would bet, slip that 8x32 into your pants or shorts pocket to carry everyday and everywhere, no exceptions and no excuses. An 8x20 will do this.

Notice that I did say that the 30mm class of binocular was useless as a compact. It is the 26-28mm binoculars that I consider to be just generally useless alltogether.

[lucznik]

For anyone pondering Zeiss Conquest versus Victory 8x20, I strongly recommend steering clear of the Conquest.

I have no argument with you that the Victory is superior in almost every way to the Conquest. (If memory serves, I do believe the Conquest can be folded down into a slightly more compact unit.)

In my case however, it may come down to a matter of basic economics. I simply can't spend more than I have and the Conquest is less expensive and therefore more attainable.

Of course, if I do buy it, I'll sit and ponder what I might have given up by not being just a bit more patient...

[Tero]

But Tero, You've just supported my basic premise. Based on the seasons, the habitat, and the weather you are using an 8x42 or 10x42. The 8x32 you are using for more everyday use, during the daylight and in good (or at least non-cloudy) weather.


We are almost in agreement. I am leaning toward the one binocular solution for most use. It will be something like a 9x36 with wide field.

I almost had a pair in hand that was going to be my benchmark which to improve from, Excursion 8x36 EX. But my unit had a messed up dioter, so back it went.

Prety soon the alphas will be suffering as the mid range cathches up. Only build issues and ergonomics will compete then.

[Alexis Powell]

Yes, it IS waterproof.

Leica claims the Trinovid to be "Splashproof, salt-waterproof, according to DIN 58390-73-01-1."

The Ultravids are waterproof to "0.5 bar (up to approx. 5 m water depth)"

I've no idea how those standards compare, but the marketing has definitely stressed the waterproofing of the Ultravids in a way that was never done with teh Trinovids.

--AP

[Kevin Purcell]

Leica claims the Trinovid to be "Splashproof, salt-waterproof, according to DIN 58390-73-01-1."

The Ultravids are waterproof to "0.5 bar (up to approx. 5 m water depth)"

I've no idea how those standards compare, but the marketing has definitely stressed the waterproofing of the Ultravids in a way that was never done with teh Trinovids.

Me neither but ...

Perhaps because the latter exceeds JIS 6 (surviving immersion at 1m depth for 5 minutes) and the former doesn't: splashproof isn't immersion and sounds a bit more like JIS 4.

Perhaps this was the standard when the Triovids were introduced comparing say with the Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt (the waterproof then later water-resistant bin).

BTW, DIN ISO 9022 seems to be the modern spec to test against. It replaced DIN 58390 in 2000. But there seem to be no Internet copies around.

[ceasar]

Leica claims the Trinovid to be "Splashproof, salt-waterproof, according to DIN 58390-73-01-1."

The Ultravids are waterproof to "0.5 bar (up to approx. 5 m water depth)"

I've no idea how those standards compare, but the marketing has definitely stressed the waterproofing of the Ultravids in a way that was never done with teh Trinovids.

--AP
The Astronomics ad cited above states that the Trinovids are "shower proof and dust proof" and specifically states "No" under the category "WATERPROOF".
Bob

[Pileatus]

Trinovid waterproof reference:
http://en.leica-camera.com/nature_observation/trinovid_binoculars/accessories/3779.html?

PDF says the compacts are waterspray resistant.

The older Leitz Trinovid line was, as far as I know, not waterproof.

John

[ThoLa]

Leica claims the Trinovid to be "Splashproof, salt-waterproof, according to DIN 58390-73-01-1."

The Ultravids are waterproof to "0.5 bar (up to approx. 5 m water depth)"

I've no idea how those standards compare, but the marketing has definitely stressed the waterproofing of the Ultravids in a way that was never done with teh Trinovids.

--AP

Hello!
that's what I meant: ".......salt-WATERPROOF"
The same is true for the little Zeiss Conquests.

They can be used in moist weather (rain, tropics,...) without any problem.

But they are not able to withstand water that exerts a considerable hydrostatic pressure (i.e. they must not be immersed and remain under water for prolongued periods of time).

Trinovids and Zeiss Conquests are not for divers!
Full stop.

It all boils down to the following: if the Trinovids fall into a pond you have to jump in immediately to retrieve them (= you must hope your wristwatch is WATERPROOF), if Ultravids fall into a pond, you can take off your shoes and shirt and fold your clothes neatly and arrange them in the grass before you ... jump in and retrieve your toy (take again attention of your wristwatch).


Why marketing inflates a minor "improvement" in this respect?
guess !! ;)


Tom

[GeneralEverything]

Hello!
[...]
Trinovids and Zeiss Conquests are not for divers!
Full stop.
Tom
Not to break up your guy's party, but let me say: this purchase is only going to be one of the newer/better models; and the trinovid and conquest don't fit the bill. Again, the Ultravid, which I would love, and salivate over having the Leica name, is not in contention, unfortunately, due to the premium, doesn't seem realistic. I can find the Zeiss for well under $400, and can't find the ultravid for less than...$650? Maybe? I really don't know. No place that discounts heavily seems to have them. I could possibly squeeze out $450 for an ultravid, as I have heard they are the best compacts ever. Aside from that pipe dream, I am leaning towards either the Victory or the LXL. The LXL I will have to see and hold, to see how large it actually is... looks rather large, and if the Zeiss offers a significant portability advantage, I might just sacrifice image for portability.

We are almost in agreement. I am leaning toward the one binocular solution for most use. It will be something like a 9x36 with wide field.[...]
Tero, I can definitely see the logic behind this. Maybe when I have a job with a car that is nearby, or my behind is parked in one place most of the time, I could follow this outlook, but I'm highly mobile- and unpredictable adventures abound. Thus, I must fracture the field with multiple bins.

I have no argument with you that the Victory is superior in almost every way to the Conquest. (If memory serves, I do believe the Conquest can be folded down into a slightly more compact unit.)

In my case however, it may come down to a matter of basic economics. I simply can't spend more than I have and the Conquest is less expensive and therefore more attainable.

Of course, if I do buy it, I'll sit and ponder what I might have given up by not being just a bit more patient...
Hehe... same feeling here, except it's about the victory vs. the ultravid... sigh, compromises do suck, don't they?





If I were buying today, the Ultravids have a lot of appeal, but Swaros are still not out of the running with updated Swarobright prism coatings. Nikons LX also deserve a look.

Buy for the long term. Enjoy every minute of ownership.

Ed Really? All the data I've seen (possibly without this update on the swaro) always gave the Swaro high marks for ergonomics, but lost most every contest to other compacts. If there is something I don't know, then stop me from being ignorant!!;)


GenEv;

Because of some of the comments above I now realize that my use of compacts is not as unique as I thought.

Since the mid-late 60’s, if I had my wallet with me, I also had a compact bino in my pocket, mostly 8x20 but sometimes 6x20 or 7x20. These days if I know I am going to be out most of the day I carry the Ultravid and if I do not expect to be out at all I will still carry an old 8x20 Zeiss sometimes because they are even smaller. I use compacts far more than the larger bins. I do use larger bins on weekends or at times when I know I am going to be using more than usual, but even then, I still have compacts in my pocket.

If I had limited funds for binos, most of it would be allocated to the compacts because of the time I use them and the need for smaller optics to be better.

I am glad to see that the use of compacts is more wide spread than I had thought from most posts here.

I would heed the advice of others above and not compromise on your perceived needs and requirements.

Have a good day.

Ron
Yeah, I've found this phenomenon with a lot of products- everyone touts the advantages of larger items, but secretly, or perhaps, a silent majority, quietly enjoy their "compromise" pieces. Big is better, with most everything. Sometimes, however, big just won't work.

GeneralEverything,

Whatever you do, don't compromise on your logic. It is really spot on. Until recently I have carried a pocket binocular (an 8x25 Pentax DCF MC II) with me at all times and it has often proved invaluable at allowing me to truly observe, rather than just look at, whatever had caught my interest. I recently dropped my compact and knocked it severely out of collimation so; I am without until it is either fixed or replaced. I definitely feel naked without it.
[...]
Stick with the 8x20 format and buy the best you can. Even my 8x25 sometimes proved just a tiny bit too big for total comfort. For this reason (and for my desire to better the optical performance of the Pentax) I am leaning toward replacing (rather than fixing) my compact.

Here's my short list:
8x20 Nikon Premier LXL
8x20 Zeiss Victory
8x20 Zeiss Conquest
Good short list. Of course, the field is pretty small when it comes to these things, so saying I've looked at all your choices really means nothing. My vote would be for the LXL, if you were able to carry the 8x25, if uncomfortably. The LXL, from pictures I've seen, looks like I'll need to see it in person before I pass judgment on if it is small enough for me. But aside from size, it is essentially the 2nd best (1st in some ways), with only the $$$ Leica Ultravid beating it.


General

Out of curiosity sake, what do you have on your person in day to day "take it everywhere with me" use? For example just you and your shirt and pants pockets, a small backpack, or perhaps a fanny pack or just what. As you are finding out optics choices are more about balancing a set of strong points against a set of weak points and living with the compromise.
[...]
If you have a pack/fannypack, then judge the size of the spot you will carry the glass in and look for something like the Leupold 6x32 Katmi. Or something else compatible with the size.
My Every Day Carry is, generally, shirt and pants, but usually have a small messenger bag. Problem is, the bag won't be devoted to optics exclusively. It's gotta carry other adventure necessities: GPS, mini first-aid kit, p-cord, camera, multi-tool, flashlight, cell phone, change, pen, pencil, notebook (small), lighter/survival firestarter (I don't smoke), handkerchief, maps of the area, extra batteries, and, ahem, "protection" (of the little foil packet kind). That's what I can remember right now, there might be a little more. On my person, a pocket knife, handkerchief, flashlight (different from earlier one)- sans bag- add the phone and protection.

Binoculars are just another tool I find useful. I explore them and the associated community, and do enjoy such things. However, I like doing a lot of different things, and though I may involve myself with a community, I do not stay wedded to one hobby. Hence my handle, General Everything: I like everything with expensive toys in general, I like to have command of everything, etc. I mostly like to buy once and then never again. I check in on gear every so often, see if the new stuff is worth the money. But I like to have premium gear. It makes me feel I am less vulnerable to technological improvements, and that I actually have taste (yeah, I know, I'm lying to myself o:D).
Cheers,
GenEv

[iporali]

Wow, what an entertaining thread! :t: Welcome to BirdForum, General!

The LXL, from pictures I've seen, looks like I'll need to see it in person before I pass judgment on if it is small enough for me. But aside from size, it is essentially the 2nd best (1st in some ways), with only the $$$ Leica Ultravid beating it.

You pretty much nailed it here. The Ultravids are considered the best by many, but the LXLs (if you can stand stupidly located focusing wheel) and the Zeisses are very close and the Victories have even some design advantages. If you can't afford the Leicas, you have no reason to be embarrassed to carry the Zeiss or Nikon (more important is how well you can find and ID the birds).

Don't let the others talk you into buying anything else than true compacts if they are the ones you would carry with you.

Just FYI, here is a nice review and a couple of pics of the LXs and the Victories for size comparison http://www.betterviewdesired.com/Compacts-about-pockets-and-wallets.php

Best regards,

Ilkka