What are THE best Reverse Porro Compacts?

[AnotherNightOwl]

I have seen other threads that have asked/discussed the best compact binoculars, and the majority of the replies were to do with roof prism type binoculars.
I know Tero has suggested it.

Do you own any Reverse Porro Prism Compacts, or used any?

Not sure if they get very expensive.

What in your opinion are THE BEST regardless of price.

What in your opinion are THE BEST waterproof.

Which would you use the most if you had both?

[hornet]

Opticron Taiga - among the best compacts I have used, regardless of type or price. About £85 - outstanding value.

Bought a pair for my parents last Christmas and nearly didn't hand them over!

[ceasar]

The best reverse Porro's are Bushnell's 7 x 26 Custom Compacts. Bak 4 prisms. Fully multicoated. 363' FOV. 16mm ER. 12 ounces in weight. About $250.00 US funds. They are reviewed in www.betterviewdesired.com. Click onto the reference set for compacts. They went under the Bausch and Lomb name when it was written; now they are Bushnell and they have been improved by being fully multicoated since the review was written. I have one. They are bright and sharp with a generous "sweet spot." Cornell University's Ornithology department says these are the only compacts they recommend for serious birding.
Bob

[Alexis Powell]

Do you own any Reverse Porro Prism Compacts, or used any?
What in your opinion are THE BEST regardless of price.

For birding, my vote for THE BEST are the Bausch & Lomb/Bushnell 7x26 Custom. What makes them so good compared to others compacts is their combination of relatively generous FOV (almost 7 degrees), good eye-relief (an honest 16 mm or so), and big (3.7 mm) exit-pupil. I have the original unarmored, mostly metal-clad B&L version (model 61-7261), and its partly rubberized and plastic clad B&L successor (model 61-0726) which is identical in design as far as I know with the current Bushnell version. The older version focuses a little closer (under 6 feet) and I prefer its more compact and old fashioned-looking odd design, but the newer one has better coatings and is brighter. Neither performs against strong backlight as well as do my Leica 8x20 Ultravids. As much as i like them, I think the customs are overpriced for what they are. Oh, forgot to mention in my original post that in the UK the customs are available in clone form as the Monk 7x26 Explorer, which has twist-up eyecups and a different color scheme.

I also have the Pentax 6.5x21 Papilio, which are THE BEST butterflying binocular of any type at any price. They are a bit bulky for compacts (to accomodate their 16 inch close focus) and are not as bright as some others, but are otherwise fine as all-purpose optics. A stupendous product at an amazingly low price.

I also have the Nikon 7x21 Sprint II. Very sharp view in the center, reasonable eye-relief, very cheap, and 54 mm minimum interpupillary make them better than others for kids. Focus is a bit on the stiff side, at least in mine.
--AP

[jaymoynihan]

Bushnell's 7 x 26 Custom Compacts. Have had a pair for quite awhile. All the praise of them is deserved. Still the top compact.

jay

[stbear]

I am still using a pair of these from 30 years ago. It was Bushnell then and a metal frame. Bought a pair for one son when it was under Bausch and Lomb and another pair for for the other son when they switched back to the Bushnell name. Light, clear, bright, close focusing and reasonably priced.

[geedub]

Opticron Taiga - unbelievable for the money!

[Sancho]

Anyone out there have an opinion on the Nikon Travelite V? I heard great things about it, nearly bought one on impulse a few days ago, but then remembered I need new bins like I need a spare armpit. Still, it´s a hard one to kick.... (One day at a time, especially since my entire scope collection replacement in january ;) )

[Alexis Powell]

To any of you who consider the Opticron 8x25 Taiga to be THE best reverse-porro compact, would you care to explain why you think the Taiga is a standout among its competitors with respect to specifications or optical quality? In my experience, nearly every reverse-porro compact costing $75+, and certainly those in the $100 range is optically very good to excellent. To me, the Taiga is not a standout in that crowd--it is fine, but no better than the rest. My opinion of the Nikon Travelite is the same.
--AP

[AnotherNightOwl]

hornet, ceasar,Alexis Powell,jaymoynihan,stbear and geedub.

Thank you for your answers.

When i started this, i was meant to have asked for your opinion on THE BEST waterproof porro compact as well. It was not until today that i realised that i had not, so the original thread has now been edited to ask that very question.

If any of you get the chance to reply again, then please do.

[ceasar]

The only reverse Porro's that I know of that are Waterproof are the Nikon ProStaffs and Leupold's Wind River Mesa's.
Bob

[Alexis Powell]

When i started this, i was meant to have asked for your opinion on THE BEST waterproof porro compact as well.

I've looked through past and some presently produced waterproof models by Bushnell, Pentax and Nikon, but none have held my interest because even though their optics are fine, they all suffer from the standard inadequacy of most reverse-porros, namely ridiculously narrow FOV, and waterproofing has never been of much concern to me in its own right.

It's been a while since I paid much attention to reverse-porros, so I did a quick search of what Eagle Optics offers in waterproof models. How about this one--I've no experience with it at all, but its FOV spec is outstanding for a reverse-porro! The Vortex 8x26 Vanquish--it has a 384 ft FOV but retains the standard 15 mm eye-relief, light weight and compact size of other models. Cost is $100. The Bushnell 8x26 H2O also has an excellent FOV (367 ft), but its $50 price doesn't bode well for its optical/overall quality.
--AP

[hornet]

To any of you who consider the Opticron 8x25 Taiga to be THE best reverse-porro compact, would you care to explain why you think the Taiga is a standout among its competitors with respect to specifications or optical quality? In my experience, nearly every reverse-porro compact costing $75+, and certainly those in the $100 range is optically very good to excellent. To me, the Taiga is not a standout in that crowd--it is fine, but no better than the rest. My opinion of the Nikon Travelite is the same.
--AP

Because it is the best of all the models I've tried. I wasn't trying to be definitive, just helpful.

[AnotherNightOwl]

I've looked through past and some presently produced waterproof models by Bushnell, Pentax and Nikon, but none have held my interest because even though their optics are fine, they all suffer from the standard inadequacy of most reverse-porros, namely ridiculously narrow FOV, and waterproofing has never been of much concern to me in its own right.

It's been a while since I paid much attention to reverse-porros, so I did a quick search of what Eagle Optics offers in waterproof models. How about this one--I've no experience with it at all, but its FOV spec is outstanding for a reverse-porro! The Vortex 8x26 Vanquish--it has a 384 ft FOV but retains the standard 15 mm eye-relief, light weight and compact size of other models. Cost is $100. The Bushnell 8x26 H2O also has an excellent FOV (367 ft), but its $50 price doesn't bode well for its optical/overall quality.
--AP

Hi Alexis.

I have just quickly looked at the Vortex site after seeing what you had put about the Vortex Vanquish 8x26.

Have you seen the lifetime warranty they do? It's EXCELLENT.

Below is part of it taken from their website.

Vortex VIP Warranty Makes a Very Important Promise to you!
The VIP warranty is a Very Important Promise to you ... because you are a very important person to us. Each Vortex product is built to last, and unconditionally guaranteed with our commitment to your absolute satisfaction.

You can count on service under our VIP warranty ... it is:

Unlimited
Unconditional
Transferable
VIP warranty works for you
At Vortex Optics, we want you to use and enjoy your optics with complete confidence ... that's why our warranty is so straightforward. Rest assured that if any Vortex Optics product should ever require service, Vortex will repair or replace the product absolutely free — no matter what the cause!

No warranty card to fill out.
No time limit on our promise.
No restrictions on coverage ... even if you transfer ownership of the product.

[AnotherNightOwl]

Hi Alexis.

I have just quickly looked at the Vortex site after seeing what you had put about the Vortex Vanquish 8x26.

Have you seen the lifetime warranty they do? It's EXCELLENT.

Below is part of it taken from their website.

Vortex VIP Warranty Makes a Very Important Promise to you!
The VIP warranty is a Very Important Promise to you ... because you are a very important person to us. Each Vortex product is built to last, and unconditionally guaranteed with our commitment to your absolute satisfaction.

You can count on service under our VIP warranty ... it is:

Unlimited
Unconditional
Transferable
VIP warranty works for you
At Vortex Optics, we want you to use and enjoy your optics with complete confidence ... that's why our warranty is so straightforward. Rest assured that if any Vortex Optics product should ever require service, Vortex will repair or replace the product absolutely free — no matter what the cause!

No warranty card to fill out.
No time limit on our promise.
No restrictions on coverage ... even if you transfer ownership of the product.


If anyone looking in, owns these or has used these (Vortex Vanquish 8x26) could you please let us know what they are like.

[MacGee]

If anyone looking in, owns these or has used these (Vortex Vanquish 8x26) could you please let us know what they are like.I Googled these with "pages from the UK" selected:

Your search - Vortex Vanquish 8x26 - did not match any documents.

Michael.

[AnotherNightOwl]

I Googled these with "pages from the UK" selected:

Your search - Vortex Vanquish 8x26 - did not match any documents.

Michael.

Hi Michael,

I had the same result as you, however after a little more searching i have found a couple of places that sell Vortex. I will do a more thorough search later.

1. www.bid4optics.com/shop/index.php/cPath/21
2. www.cleyspy.co.uk/category.do?category=11

[AnotherNightOwl]

Hi Michael,

I had the same result as you, however after a little more searching i have found a couple of places that sell Vortex. I will do a more thorough search later.

1. www.bid4optics.com/shop/index.php/cPath/21
2. www.cleyspy.co.uk/category.do?category=11


I have not been able to find any others as yet.

I have checked the 2 sites above, and although they sell Vortex binoculars, they do not appear to have the Vortex Vanquish 8x26. A phone call would be needed to make sure.

One other thing. I am not sure if they do their lifetime warranty in the UK. Again, a phone call would be needed to check.

I hope i am wrong.

[Howard220]

Anyone out there have an opinion on the Nikon Travelite V? )

I have the Travelite V 9x25's, made in Japan. I love them. They use BaK4 prisms. The view is clear and contrasty almost all the way across the field; only the far outer portion of the field starts to fall off. Birds look "alive" through them, not flat. The diopter is easy to change with definite click stops, and rubber eyecups fold down.

Mine arrived out of alignment, and I didn't realize that until about 2 years later! All that time I wondered why I had such a hard time viewing through them. I sent them to Nikon and they fixed them in about a week.

Their field of view is a bit too narrow for my tastes: 50.4 degree apparent field = 294 ft or 5.6 true field degrees. But the 8x is even worse: it has the same true 294' field, which at 8x means its apparent field would be uncomfortably narrow (for me) at 44.8 degrees. I'm very happy with my 9x Travelites.

[bitterntwisted]

I have Opticron Taige 8x25s. They had to go back for repair as the centre column broke. However, they were fixed no quibbles at all via In Focus and returned within around 10 days. Second time I've used Opticron service (first was my fault) and both occasions quite excellent service.

As for the binoculars themselves, I do find the FOV very narrow compared to my Swift Audobon 8.5x44s (Mk IV) But then that really has to be compromised in a pocket pair and optically there was little to chose between these and the Nikons IMHO. I went with the Opticrons simply because they were more comfortable for me.

I would have liked a waterproof and very robust pair but there really didn't seem to be anything in the £60 - £80 range that fitted the bill, and that was my budget for bins for "birding when not birding".

Graham

[JDonley]

I have not been able to find any others as yet.

I have checked the 2 sites above, and although they sell Vortex binoculars, they do not appear to have the Vortex Vanquish 8x26. A phone call would be needed to make sure.

One other thing. I am not sure if they do their lifetime warranty in the UK. Again, a phone call would be needed to check.

I hope i am wrong.

Eagle Optics carries them at about $100. They do look interesting and are waterproof.

[AnotherNightOwl]

Eagle Optics carries them at about $100. They do look interesting and are waterproof.

Hi JDonley, :hi:

Thanks for letting me know about Eagle Optics.

I am trying to find them in Great Britain, preferably England, in, or as close to Shropshire as possible.

Regards Deano

[Tero]

Though the Vortex Vanquish looks interesting
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4833
I think some caution is needed. The small end roofs, Spitfire etc, are pretty mediocre. Vortex mid price to high end is worth a look.

[AnotherNightOwl]

Though the Vortex Vanquish looks interesting
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4833
I think some caution is needed. The small end roofs, Spitfire etc, are pretty mediocre. Vortex mid price to high end is worth a look.


Thanks for the advice Tero. :t:

[ikw101]

I have the Travelite V 9x25's, made in Japan. I love them. They use BaK4 prisms. The view is clear and contrasty almost all the way across the field; only the far outer portion of the field starts to fall off. Birds look "alive" through them, not flat. The diopter is easy to change with definite click stops, and rubber eyecups fold down.

Mine arrived out of alignment, and I didn't realize that until about 2 years later! All that time I wondered why I had such a hard time viewing through them. I sent them to Nikon and they fixed them in about a week.

Their field of view is a bit too narrow for my tastes: 50.4 degree apparent field = 294 ft or 5.6 true field degrees. But the 8x is even worse: it has the same true 294' field, which at 8x means its apparent field would be uncomfortably narrow (for me) at 44.8 degrees. I'm very happy with my 9x Travelites.

For the money the Travelite 5 are optically superb. Best used for stationary or slow moving birds. Tracking a bird in flight with the narrow field of view is tricky. Finding it and aligning the bins with your eyes lacks the instinctive alignment you get with roofs or the slight delay whilst your eyes adjust to normal porros. Also has a relatively shallow depth of field. Fortunately quick and easy to focus.

[Tero]

I have two of the Travelite series. Though the rubber eye cup version has some glare, it has slightly better optics to my eye than the one with screw out eye cups (water proof). It is not a big difference, though. At 8x, should be very similar.

[MacGee]

To any of you who consider the Opticron 8x25 Taiga to be THE best reverse-porro compact, would you care to explain why you think the Taiga is a standout among its competitors with respect to specifications or optical quality? In my experience, nearly every reverse-porro compact costing $75+, and certainly those in the $100 range is optically very good to excellent. To me, the Taiga is not a standout in that crowd--it is fine, but no better than the rest. My opinion of the Nikon Travelite is the same.
--APAlexis, there seem to a few families of 8x25s. There's the Nikon Travelite EX and clones (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/HELIOS-8x25-Phoenix-Binoculars-Silver_W0QQitemZ270117262770QQihZ017QQcategoryZ109 55QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem). These share a 6.3° FOV and Nikon-style angry tube shape. And then there's the Taiga and Olympus PC I, which have a 6° FOV and are similar in eye relief, weight and dimensions, leading me to think they too might be clones, despite superficial differences. And then there's the 5.6° FOV Travelite V. Are you saying that they're all much of a muchness? The Olympus got a rave review from Birdwatching.Com (http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/pockets_reviews.html#olympus), and in fact, in the comparison table (http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/pockets_chart.html), the Olympus has higher resolution than the Custom Compact. The Taiga they reviewed is an older version and if the new version is a clone of the Olympus it's not surprising people should react positively to it.

Of course, there's a lot more to binoculars than resolution and anyway the Custom Compact's 7° FOV probably makes up for any small difference, but given that in the UK, we can get the Olympus for less than a quarter (£51) of the Custom Compact's price (£217), maybe it's our best option for pocket binoculars. The Travelite EX's extra 0.3° FOV would up the cost by 50%.

Maybe I'm just trying to persuade myself. I'm looking to buy a pocket pair but as usual am suffering from chronic indecision. Or do I mean indecisiveness?

Michael.

[normjackson]

The Opticron MCF models if you can find them score well for compactness. Also the higher magnification models in the range have good AFOV though the 7x model (FOV similar to Custom) predictably provides the crispest image. A new unregistered Opticron 7x24 MCF available from Kay Optical (advertised in used section) and S/H 8x24 MCF at LCE. Not for specs wearers.
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=806755&postcount=12
Re. waterproof models, the Swift Trekkers are still available in UK @ £150 :
http://www.betterviewdesired.com/compacts/index.html
And the new Opticron HR WP reverse porros are probably very good but not so great FOV.

Edit :
Noticed the Delta compact 8x25 model here looks similar to the Vortex Vanquish 8x26 :
http://www.at-infocus.co.uk/reviews_minis.html

[Alexis Powell]

Alexis,
...Are you saying that they're all much of a muchness?
...the Olympus has higher resolution than the Custom Compact...
...Maybe I'm just trying to persuade myself. I'm looking to buy a pocket pair but as usual am suffering from chronic indecision...
Michael.

Michael,
I'm not familiar with the phrase much of a muchness, but my experience has been that the optics of all the ~$75+ reverse-porro compacts that I have tried have been very good, with nothing to complain about w/respect to resolution in the center-field. All that I have tried have been very functional given the sort of binocular that they are (small size/objectives) and at the same time I don' feel that any distinguish themselves with qualitatively different performance from the others. Nor are their specs very different. So I nominated the 7x26 Custom Compact because it DOES stand out a bit for its specs (wider FOV, better than average eye-relief, larger exit pupil), but I can't say that I think it is in any way stunningly superior or different than the rest [I save those fights for the pocket-roof arena, where optical and ergonomic differences are much more pronounced, jewelry-like fine build quality is potentially part of the equation, and prices are much higher!]. I do agree that the 7x26 Custom is relatively expensive--in fact, I'd say it is overpriced relative to other binos, problem being that if you want the features it offers you have no other choices (except the equivalent and equally expensive Monk Explorer). So if money is a concern, and you aren't obscessive about the differences in specs, don't hesitate to choose one of the other highly rated reverse-porro compacts that is cheaper. Any flaws in performance that you encounter in particular circumstances will probably have more to do with the limitations of the compact reverse-porro breed than the particular model that you get.

As for the difference in resolution between the 7x26 Custom and the 8x25 Taiga--yes, the Taiga should score higher in a test of unboosted resolving power because the limiting factor is the human eye, thus more detail can be seen at 8x (in the Taiga) than at 7x (in the Custom)--and a well built 10x would score even better etc. Both binoculars deliver as much detail in their centerfields as one might hope for in a reasonably well built bino of this size, it isn't a matter of the Custom being fuzzier or appearing less sharp than the Taiga.
--AP

[MacGee]

Michael,
So if money is a concern, and you aren't obscessive about the differences in specs, don't hesitate to choose one of the other highly rated reverse-porro compacts that is cheaper. Any flaws in performance that you encounter in particular circumstances will probably have more to do with the limitations of the compact reverse-porro breed than the particular model that you get.
Okay, I can accept that between a Nikon reverse-porro and an Olympus reverse-porro there will be no optical difference worth bothering about.

My idea, when I got the Papilio 6.5x, was to use that as a general pocket bin, but, as well as not being very compact, as you mentioned, it seemed to me to be below par for general use. I compared it directly with the Olympus PC III 7x21 to check out if my impressions were accurate, and found, to my surprise, that they were. The Papilio has a pronounced warm cast where the Olympus is neutral. The Papilio also falls noticeably short of the Olympus in resolution, contrast and brightness. No contest, really. The Papilio is still well worth having, of course. As an extreme close-up bin, it's amazing. And the fact that it's also quite serviceable for general use is a bonus. It's just that it's not great for general use.

Michael.

[Alexis Powell]

Michael,
I agree that the Pentax Papilio is a beast of a different sort. I agree (and have pointed out previously) that is more bulky and less bright than conventional reverse-porro compacts, but mine are quite contrasty and sharp. If they suffer in the resolution category it is only because of their magnification, not poor optics. Also, though they might be warmer than neutral, the amount is very slight (less than a pre-Swarobright SLC or an old waterproof B&L Elite) and within the range found in many well regarded binos. I bought another unit for my dad and it was the same. I wonder if your unit might be faulty? Your comment about the low resolution is especially troubling.
--Alexis

[DWK]

I recently bought a pair of the great-on-paper Vortex Vanquish 8x26. The only binoculars I had on hand to compare them with was a pair of Nikon Action 8x40 and an Eagle Optics Denali 8x42. I won't comment on their performance vs. other compacts (probably the most useful comparison) but I will comment on them vs. comparably priced full-sized bins they might replace.

Vortex 8x26:

Field of view is ~380/1000; poorer than either the cheap porros or roof prisms outright, and when one considers the edge distortion that affects the outer third of the field, they're really just another pair of compacts with a < 300/1000 field of good viewing. However, you can see motion well in the outer third of the glass, so it helps you keep track of moving birds.

Field depth: No question, naturally it is much narrower than in either full-sized binocular. However, the image does come sharply into focus and the focus knob has a very firm feel to it, covering the whole range of focus distances from 5 feet to infinity in ~1.3 revolutions. Inexplicably, the focus goes past infinity into some imaginary space for another 0.3 revolutions.

Close focus: No lie, the 8x26 bins do go down to around 5 ft. Excellent, far better than either the Nikon or Eagle Optics.

Brightness: 8x26 vs. 8x4x. You get what you expect, but it hasn't been a problem for me. I begin at dawn, but in open habitats. My guess is that forest habitats at dawn might be problematic.

Image sharpness: The Vortex shows larger apparent magnification than the Nikon, which really masks any loss of sharpness. If I had to guess, I would say that the Nikons have an infinitesimally sharper image, but it's really hard to distinguish even with both binoculars in hand. We're talking at the center of the field here, not on the edges, where the Vortex blurs and curves inwards. The Denali cannot compare with either.

Weight, size: This is why we buy compacts, right? The Vortex is bigger than you'd want to put in your jeans pocket, thicker than roof prism compacts, but still a featherweight.

In short, I'm keeping them, and don't complain about the losses in edge sharpness, field of view and field depth because the close focus and image quality are good enough that I can afford to drop down two levels in size.

[MacGee]

Good review. Only academic for me because as far as I know this model isn't available here, but interesting nonetheless.

Field depth: No question, naturally it is much narrower than in either full-sized binocular.This thread on Cloudy Nights (http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/268206/page/163/view/collapsed/sb/5/o/all/fpart/1) shows the moment that our own Henry Link was converted to the idea that depth of field is is solely a function of magnification.

Michael.

[MacGee]

Deano, if you're still looking for the Vortex Vanquish, they're for sale here (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/VORTEX-VANQUISH-8X26-BINOCOLO-BINOCULAR-FERNGLAS_W0QQitemZ170142186398QQihZ007QQcategoryZ2 9955QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem), post free from Italy.

Michael

[Tero]

I recently bought a pair of the great-on-paper Vortex Vanquish 8x26. The only binoculars I had on hand to compare them with was a pair of Nikon Action 8x40 and an Eagle Optics Denali 8x42. I won't comment on their performance vs. other compacts (probably the most useful comparison) but I will comment on them vs. comparably priced full-sized bins they might replace.

Brightness: 8x26 vs. 8x42. You get what you expect, but it hasn't been a problem for me. I begin at dawn, but in open habitats. My guess is that forest habitats at dawn might be problematic.
...
In short, I'm keeping them, and don't complain about the losses in edge sharpness, field of view and field depth because the close focus and image quality are good enough that I can afford to drop down two levels in size.
I have found reverse porros at 8x and 9x useful, 10x gets to be dim etc. I have one pair of 10x Minoltas, no longer sold, that are a bit better, but I hardly use them.

I never put these reverse porros in my pants pocket, but I do carry them on the belt when hiking and in my jacket pocket on casual walks.

They will do as well as the average compact under 600 dollars. Good birding.

Michael, Henry may right in theory, but in practice many 25mm have worse depth of field than bigger ones.

[chartwell99]

If anyone looking in, owns these or has used these (Vortex Vanquish 8x26) could you please let us know what they are like.

I couldn't resist the price and have been astounded at just how good these are. Brightness and image sharpness are virtually identical to my wife's Nikon HG 8 x 20s, with only slightly smaller field of view. Ergonomics are outstanding in all respects, especially focus smoothness. First class cordura case, excellent strap, miserable ocular lens caps (which I replaced with a proper rainguard) and very comfortable and effective retractable eyecups. I understand that the Vortex Vanquish models are made in China (although manufacturing country of origin is not shown on either the binocular or the box) but the perceived build quality is superb. If you didn't know, you would guess Wetzlar before Wan Chai. Maybe I got an exceptional sample, but in my opinion, none of the current Pentax, Nikon or Leupold reverse porros even come close. If you ask their advice, the Eagle Optics folks will try to steer you to the Vortex 8 x 28 Fury at 3 times the price - don't do it, the Vanquish is the way to go.

[Tero]

OK, good, one more 8x choice. Are they small? Even reverse porros vary in size. I like the ProStaffs for size.

[Tero]

I'm not in the need of 8x now, but for that price I might risk the 10x. I once had Nikon reverse porros at 10x and finally sold them as they were a bit dim. There the 9x choice was ideal for me. I can hold 9x reverse porros. At 10x I prefer roofs for holding, but very few cheaper 10x are any good, even 10x28.

[Tero]

OK, I have the 10X Vanquish. They are brighter than I expected, about the same as 9x25 ProStaff (Nikon). Hard to say which is better. I may be able to use these to look for winter sparrows. Both are waterproof.

The 8x Vanquish may be a tiny bit better than 8x ProStaff, for the wider field.

[birde]

I wonder why the Bausch and Lomb Elite 7X24 waterproof reverse porro never got much publicity. Maybe because of price and performance relative to Custom, but they are likely every bit as good plus waterproof. When I was interested in a reverse porro a few years back, I was about to get the Custom 7X26 and found the waterproof Elites for the same price and decided to give them a try. They are superb optically, bright, sharp, clear, great depth of field, and close focusing. Very useable as a 'primary binocular'. Apparent FOV is not bad, not great. They have been a great backup binocular and loaner for me. They are quite superior to my Leica 8X20s for example, but they are bigger of course. They are a bit heavier than the Customs I think.

I also picked up an even cheaper 10X28 Elite once and found them to be practically unusable, which I could have guessed. But the 7X24 is great. They just went with a non-birding friend of mine to Peru and provided many memorable images apparently.

[Tero]

Yes, 7x, 8x and the one 9x give the best value in reverse porros.

[Tero]

The 10x is going back. I liked it but it was too hard to hold steady. I need some 20-25 oz to hold 10x steady. Or possibly small roofs, I hold roof better.

So, my 9x25 reverse porro remains my standard going for walks binocular. Mine is ProStaff, but the Travelites were OK too, I had those as well
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=418
but did not need two 9x. I remember the eye relief being small, but I was able to use them.

[ksbird/foxranch]

Hi we rate the Steiner Champ 8x25 and the Leupold 10x30 Wind River as being the sharpest reverse porros we have used. We compared them to the Nikon Prostaff 10x25 and 9x25 and the Travelite V and the Nikons were excellent but the Leupolds were definitely brighter and seemed sharper, and the Champ is so small while having a really sharp center-of-field that they seemed better as well. We kept the 9x25 Nikon Prostaffs anyway. We have also compared these models (and others I'll mention) to the latest Bushnell Custom and an earlier model. The Bushnells were good (as were the Nikon Prostaffs) but not outstanding in any way. We have a pair of Hoya 9x25s that seem extremely similar to the Bushnells but made even better, and with larger BAK4 prisms. The Hoyas are as heavy as the Leupolds and this is a drawback for both.

A couple of really tiny reverse porros are also good for us. The Hertel and Reuss 6x18 Beet and the Hendsolt 6x18 are both excellent, really tiny and very sharp. These are the best binoculars we've ever used here to take to a stage performance when in the nose-bleed seats. We've tested an 8x24 Zeiss and Zeiss Jena bin but only for one performance of an opera, but both were supersharp and almost had enough IPD for me. The Nikon 6x18 Mikrons and the Carton 6x18x are good but deceptively heavy. The design is the type where the prisms and housing are made of bright aluminum that just barely covers everything. This metal finish gets a bit slick with dew at night, and even though both bins are sharp, there is a bit of fussiness involved with using them.

My wife likes the "cigarette pack" Minolta and Sharper Image 6x18s. They have rectangular exterior bodies and slide apart to set the IPD but none will open wide enough for me to use. They are both pretty sharp though. I have used a pair of waterproof Sharper Image 8x25 reverse porros that are excellent and from the number of times they have bounced down hillsides, they have proven to be extremely rugged and well made. Like the Leupold 10x30s they have front lenses that are extremely recessed into the body (which really protects these lenses), and chunky bodies that easy to hold with 2 hands. In addition the Sharper Image and Leupold bins mentioned here are immersibly waterproof. But the SI bins are as heavy as the Leupolds (I think both have very large BAK4 prisms and substantial waterproofing in the bodies, which both pile on the weight). I eventually decided the Leupolds were everything the SIs were and a bit more magnification so now we hardly ever use the SIs.

On the inexpensive end of the scale, I've often alerted BF readers about times when Olympus' factory center in the USA puts dozens of their refurbed 8x21 bins on sale on Ebay with warranties for $8 and I often buy them for under $10 during those sales. The Nikon Sprint 2 7x20 can be had at times under $20 and they are very good. Neither is waterproof but for the money, who cares.

The Interpupillary distance problem is common in these types of binoculars. The previously mentioned Champs, Olympus 8x21 and Nikon Sprints have IPD of about 75mm. I need a 76-76.5mm IPD. This means I am sometimes straining a bit to use these bins. The Steiner eyepiece design seems to help with this. The Prostaff and Travelite V Nikons are just about 76+mm and so they are "okay" to use as are the SI 8x25s. The tiny Carton and Nikon 6x18Mikrons are also 76+ IPD and "okay" to use. I have a Nikon 5x25 Mikron with an IPD of 77mm so they are easy to use. The Leupold 10x30 has a 77-78mm IPD and it is easy to use as well. I keep the Leupolds handy by an exit door to run out of the house with, in case we need to check on a downed horse in a hurry. The Hoya, Hensoldt and H&R bins are quite astounding with their IPDs as all three have IPDs of over 81 mm. I'm not sure who has a head this large, but I don't see these models in the USA allot.

What is interesteing is that while the Leupold 10x30 Wind River may be one of the sharpest reverse bins overall, there are many standard porro European bins that are lighter and nearly as sharp (my Zeiss 10x30 T*BPs are as sharp and lighter), and many of the 8x30 bins with magnesium or plastic housings are lighter too. The Hoya reverse porro bins we have are machined from steel and they weigh a ton. In fact I have a pair of H&R 10x35 magnesium body bins that are lighter than the Leupold or Hoya bins. The H&R 10x35s aren't as compact as any of the reverse porros, but they fold up pretty well for a pocket, while the Leupolds can't be folded up much at all.

The tiny reverse porros can be held for long periods with one hand. I wouldn't want to do that with the Leupolds although I sometimes do view one-handed when I have a staff in one hand searching for horses in the deep snow, and I need to pull the bins out of a pocket with the other hand. But all of us here use Steiner 8x30s, military 6x30s from Vdf(VAJ) in Czeckoslovakia (from before the breakup), Fujinon 6x30 FMTs and the NATO Hendsoldt 8x30s that all fit into a jacket pocket just as easily as the waterproof Leupold 10x30 and SI 8x25 (waterproof bins are required in the snow), AND the coatings and sharpness on these military-devloped bins are just about the best in the world (the Kern/Leica 8x30s may be the best ever because they were specifically designed to be used viewing over snow in Switzerland). I might be converted to the waterproof Nikon Prostaffs for this purpose someday but not yet.

The cheap Olympus and Nikon reverse porros have replaced all others in our cars and trucks here. Kept in a ziplock plastic bag to defeat moisture/micro-dust, they fit easily into a glove box and that is much faster to access than searching under the seat for a waterproof 8x30 or 7x35. A really high quality 8x25 phase coated roofer might work better, but I don't have any now that have sufficient IPD so I'll just keep looking.

Hope this helps

[mayoayo]

the focus knob has a very firm feel to it, covering the whole range of focus distances from 5 feet to infinity in ~1.3 revolutions. Inexplicably, the focus goes past infinity into some imaginary space for another 0.3 revolutions.


That imaginary space would give people that needs glasses a chance to focus the binoculars without glasses,Thankfully