• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 8x42 binoculars - opinions (2 Viewers)

pem4348

Member
I'm thinking of buying a pair of Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 8x42 binoculars. I wear glasses.

Does anyone have experience of these and how do you rate them?

What could be a better alternative?

Thanking you in advance.
 
I guess you will have seen from Rob's link some owners views on the Ultra HD. I had expected that a number of people would suggest the Hawke Frontier ED which is a very poplar choice here as an alternative. To be honest I wasn't keen on either. Yes both had low CA (the Hawke was better) but I didn't like the view distortion and ergonomics of either. Please note I seem to be an exception here. You will find enthusiastic comments on both.

You should try these for yourself and as many others as you can. I noted from the List of Optics Events, there is a Bird Fair coming in Tamworth. There should be a good range on offer. http://www.birdwatchers-springfair.co.uk/

David
 
Thank you both for the comments and suggestions, which are very useful.
However, I'm struggling to find a dealer near where I live to try out these bins (Peak District).
Reading through the Legend Ultra HD reviews, it would appear that the outer half of the image deteriorates towards the edge. I wonder how serious this is and whether the Elite ED is better?
I wonder if it is worth paying the extra for the Elite EDs, as the field of view is much narrower on them than on the Legends.
Does anyone have any experience of them both and are there any direct comparison reviews of them both?
 
Once again thank you for the useful advice.
I'm now looking at the Bushnell Elite ED 8x42 or the Minox HG 8x43.
Does anyone have any experience of these two and how would you say they compare? Please bear in mind that I wear spectacles.

Thanks in advance again.
 
I tried a pair and found they didn't have enough relief with my glasses. Definitely try them first.

This seems like an very odd claim to me, as most people who have reported eye relief problems are people who DO NOT wear eyeglasses, with the main complaint being that the eyecups do not extend out far enough in the fully extended postition, thus making them hold them slightly away from their eyes to get the proper ER.

I have had 2 pairs of the 8x42 Ultra HD's and had the same ER problem when NOT wearing glasses. When I tested them with my progressives, bifocals and reading glasses, I had absolutely no problems with ER. In my previous posted comments on the 8x42's, because of the ER problem for non eyeglass wearers, I have suggested that these are better suited to those who wear glasses.

Tom
 
Could he have meant that he lost much of the field of view while wearing glasses?
Bob

Bob
I suppose that could be entirely possible due to different variables such as the thickness of the glasses, nose pieces, set of the eyes, etc. As I look back thru some of his posts, I notice that he states his prescription is quite strong, and has made other references to the thickness of his lenses.

It seems like another reviewer could still use these 8x42's with his sunglasses on and with the eyecups fully extended, based on comments in a previous post.

My comment was in no way meant to disparage the poster, or to imply that he did not see what he reported. I merely made my comments based on my own observations, and others comments so that the OP would not dismiss these out of hand based on one comment. They are very good binos for the $$, and seem to be entirely suitable for the majority of eyeglass users.

tom
 
Tom,
I didn't mean for it to be construed as criticism. I thought his comment needed to be clarified in this instance.
Bob
 
Bob
I didn't take your comment as critiscm, and in fact, your comment stimulated me to think a little deeper into the subject.

Re-reading my post I could see where it might come across as being a little defensive, but that was not my intent.;)
 
Last edited:
PEM,

Since no one has commented so far I'll offer a guess on the eye relief question. My own glasses have thin lenses and a close fit. My Bushnell 7x26 ER is listed at 16mm and the field boundary is sharp for me. When I tried the Minox the ER seemed generous (19.5mm). I could get 'blackouts' with the eyecups down. At the time I didn't try to adjust it out but I guess they should be fine. The Elites are listed as 19.5mm as well. Based on the 7x model I think they should be fine for most glasses as well.

Beyond that I can't help a lot though I think you should note the FOV. It's listed at 330ft for the Bushnell, 379ft Minox.

David
 
Could he have meant that he lost much of the field of view while wearing glasses?
Bob
I meant that I couldn't see the edge of the field of view, but only just. I could see the edge if I pressed them hard against my glasses. So not much FOV lost, but in my opinion, once you can't see the edge of the FOV you can no longer accurately centre them in front of your eyes, and image quality becomes annoyingly erratic and it's hard to avoid blackouts from mispositioning (if that's a word).
 
Bob
I suppose that could be entirely possible due to different variables such as the thickness of the glasses, nose pieces, set of the eyes, etc. As I look back thru some of his posts, I notice that he states his prescription is quite strong, and has made other references to the thickness of his lenses.
You've done some good research there. I probably should have provided a link to the thread I posted to when I tested them:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=170033

Posting #6 is after I'd tested the 8x42s
It seems like another reviewer could still use these 8x42's with his sunglasses on and with the eyecups fully extended, based on comments in a previous post.
I find it odd if so few people are finding these ok with glasses. Perhaps I need more relief than most people for some reason. My glasses lenses are thickish at the edges, but because I'm short sighted, they're quite thin in the middle. I wear them back quite a long way, and if I push them back any further my eyelashes touch the glass. Maybe I've got unusually long eyelashes?

I'm certain I had the eyecups all the way in. I wonder if there was something wrong with them. They certainly looked ok and were new out of a box. They had just ordered them in for me to try.

The posting after mine in that thread (#7) mentions "moderate wrap sunglasses" being fine with them. Sunglasses lenses are very thin all the way across, and perhaps the "wrap" style lets you get the eyepieces a mm or two closer.
My comment was in no way meant to disparage the poster, or to imply that he did not see what he reported. I merely made my comments based on my own observations, and others comments so that the OP would not dismiss these out of hand based on one comment. They are very good binos for the $$, and seem to be entirely suitable for the majority of eyeglass users.
No offence taken at all, I'm glad you questioned it. I'd definitely recommend the OP at least try these binoculars. My comment was only a warning not to buy them sight unseen.

I was very disappointed and surprised that I had to reject them for this reason. I'm still perplexed how 17mm of relief wouldn't be enough, when my old Legend 8x42 porros, rated at 15mm, were ok.

Perhaps the 15mm is underrated. The last posting in that thread (#11) describes how to measure the relief for yourself, but I never got around to measuring it on my Legends. I should do that, as it ought to explain this mystery.
 
The eye relief stated on many binoculars is often not quite accurate. I guess that is why people are advised to try them first.

Bob
 
Pshute
I notice in the Monarch/Legend thread that RJM says he tested the 8x42 Ultra HD's and they had the stated 17mm of ER based on his method of testing. I also note, like many others, that he has to hold them away from his eyes with the eyecups fully out for the proper ER, as did I and that is why I dumped the 8x42 model, and currently only own the 8x36 & 10x42 models.

Several months back when I was selling the 8x42's and 10x36's someone emailed me and was concerned about their glasses hitting and scratching the lenses with the eyecups in the down position. I measured the distance from the top of the eyecup in the down position to the lenses and there was a difference among them of about 3-4mm depending on the model, but I can't find the email to tell which was which now. A quick look at my 8x36 & 10x42 tells me that it would have been either the 8x42 or 10x36 which had the most recession.

Perhaps if it was the 8x42 that had the deepest recession, that might help explain why you had a little trouble getting the full FOV.
 
Perhaps if it was the 8x42 that had the deepest recession, that might help explain why you had a little trouble getting the full FOV.

Obviously Bushnell cut costs by using the same eyecup click-stop for the 8x as they do for the 10x. Some folks cannot accomodate an ultrawide AFoV, especially if it their first time to see it thru a binocular or eyepiece. Sometimes it just takes a little time to adjust to the window-like view vs. the tunnel-like view of most binoculars.

FWIW, it is RARE to find an ultrawide AFoV binocular that also has generous eyerelief. Having too much is ALWAYS better than not enough. There are easy work-arounds for "too much" but some folks just don't think they should have to make the effort. Frankly, if this was a more expensive binocular I would want it to be perfect too. On the otherhand, many folks have ER/placement issues with the highly touted and expensive Nikon SE porro's and don't hesitate to chuck them too!
 
Last edited:
Obviously Bushnell cut costs by using the same eyecup click-stop for the 8x as they do for the 10x. Some folks cannot accomodate an ultrawide AFoV, especially if it their first time to see it thru a binocular or eyepiece. Sometimes it just takes a little time to adjust to the window-like view vs. the tunnel-like view of most binoculars.
Maybe it depends how good your peripheral vision is.
FWIW, it is RARE to find an ultrawide AFoV binocular that also has generous eyerelief. Having too much is ALWAYS better than not enough. There are easy work-arounds for "too much" but some folks just don't think they should have to make the effort.
What could you do? Somehow extend the eyecups? I'll probably never have the problem.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top