• 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.

Found a use for my 8x25 (1 Viewer)

C

CliveP

Well-known member
To enhance the perception of greatness of my larger bins!!!!!!!!!

Try using a pair of narrow fov 8x25 or something similar or even worse for say mostly viewing from the house during the day and then have a look through your 8x42 or whatever outside. WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I got used to my Sapphire 8x43 and found them quite ordinary. Not after trying this. Eye popping stuff.

Like going from looking through 2 straws to two sky tunnels!

So horrible pocket bins do have a use, if you can stand it.

It's all relative I suppose.
 
Relative only to the two pair you compared.

There are 8x25s with the same field width as your 8x42 Sapphires.

You have made a "hasty generalization" in saying 8x25s have a much narrower view.


I have 7x35 binoculars with a 605ft@1000yard view
that would make your Sapphires view seem quite narrow.
However, it would be a major mistake to say all 8x42s are much narrower than all 7x35s,
or that they were worse.
 
Last edited:
CliveP said:
To enhance the perception of greatness of my larger bins!!!!!!!!!

Try using a pair of narrow fov 8x25 or something similar or even worse for say mostly viewing from the house during the day and then have a look through your 8x42 or whatever outside. WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I got used to my Sapphire 8x43 and found them quite ordinary. Not after trying this. Eye popping stuff.

Like going from looking through 2 straws to two sky tunnels!

So horrible pocket bins do have a use, if you can stand it.

It's all relative I suppose.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what you're saying and I totally agree with it. And not just regarding binos.

I always keep some self repaired ten-twenty dollar junk shop binos to use. It keeps everything in excellent perspective.

One of my favourite old pairs is an old Tasko 7x35 ultra wide angle...its half way to the edge performance is an abomination which would defy description on this forum, but they did have a miniature sweet spot! I recollimated them a few times after dropping them. I've seen great stuff with them because they were in the car door (slammed every day) at the ready. Then I snapped the front eyepiece axle screw head during an overly enthusiastic repair. I miss using them :(

Going straight from the 70's Tascos to some little roughed up Habichts and you'd swear you were suddenly strapped into a star chair looking through big new fluorite 25x150 Hyakutake Fujinons!
 
Last edited:
ceasar said:
There is an 8x25 with a very wide FOV. The Nikon Trailblazer 8x25 ATB.

FOV is 8.2º or 429'@1000yards. I don't believe that is has phase coatings but for 80 dollars what do you want? You can order one direct from Nikon but they are on back order so someone is buying them. Read the 4 good reviews on it below.

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/Nikon-Products/Binoculars/Trailblazer-8x25-ATB.html

Bob
Click to expand...

That is incredible. Didn't know about those!!! Seems to good to be true so I bet what really happens with these is that they do indeed have a wide fov but it is still somehow compressed into an eye straining tiny keyhole view. Does seem ominous that not one of the reviewers comments on the wide view???

I ordered a Minox BV 8x25 (hopefully get it tomorrow) to see if it will improve on my Hawke 8x25 Frontier PC but I'm not confident given that any slight view I've seen of the ocular lenses in any photos seems to show it being very small (just saw the Nikon and they're the same small oculars) and therefore I expect it to be another compressed and cramped view even though it has 119m fov but if it is even a little more relaxed view than the Hawke and handles glare better then it would mean me then having an 8x25 which is at least usable for more than five minutes without strain.

Why doesn't some Co. make a good 8x25 with large oculars, something like the Monarch M7 30mm only a 25mm version.

My M7 10x30 has 117m fov and side by side with my Hawke 8x25 has a similar fov even thought the Hawke has 104m stamped on it but the M7 view seems at least double the size if not more!!! and I don't think this is explainable just by magnification alone. My Hawke 8x43 view seems even larger but it is 140m and I'm betting that Nikon Sportstar(UK name) looks nothing like the same view although it's basically the same spec 8x and 140m, actually it's fov is even larger than the Sapphire.

Something I'm missing in all this?

If I don't like the Minox BV I might order the Sportstar instead? actually no, I'll probably just give up on pocket binoculars and use the Hawke only if absolutely desperate.

I think it was Albinos that said anything below 30mm objective is basically not worth consideration. Well nothing that I've come across so I'd have to agree .

I expect 25mm bins to be worse than larger say 30mm bins but why are they just so terrible. Why is there such a huge drop in performance between the two?

Yet having said that I actually like the colour and contrast through my Hawke 8x25 and the sharpness is really good and also the brightness in daytime but the view is just to small and straining or maybe that's apparent view? Maybe they just needed larger oculars to make the view look larger or something?

I don't think the Minox 8x25 BV is phase coated and my Hawke 8x25 PC obviously are so I wonder how they will compare in that regard. I see also the eye relief for the Minox is 15.5mm compared with 10mm for the Sportstar which might help the Minox case. I don't wear glasses but I still only get the full fov with the Hawke when the eyecups are fully down so I expect they have something like 10mm eye relief. I can use the M7 with eyecups fully extended and it also has 15.5 mm relief so a good sign for the Minox I think.

Another very confusing thing I noticed is my 10x30 M7 seem to have a noticeably larger exit pupil than the 8x25 Hawke even though this should be the other way around? Interested to see if this is also the case with the Minox.
 
Last edited:
Clive,

I'm not sure people who carry these 8x25 binoculars are concerned with wide fields. Most 8x25s have FOVs of about 335'@1000 yards like my Swarovski 8x25 CL Compact and that is plenty for the intermittent type of use they get. The Nikon is an anomaly and it has short eye relief of 10mm and will be tough to use if one wears glasses. My Swaro's ER is 17mm. It works well with spectacles

That, and I find that the smaller eye cups they have also are a factor. If you are like me and brace them against your eye brows when you use them there is less of them to brace there while finding the proper place to brace them to align your pupils with the exit pupil. This can cause problems with glare in certain light conditions and also partial blackouts in part of the view.

And double hinged compacts can also be a bit harder to find your correct IPD too. All in all, compact binoculars are not as user friendly as larger ones from 8x30 and up are. As I noted, the 30mm binoculars will have larger diameter eye cups than the 8x25s will even though the exit pupil of the 8x25 is 3.1 as opposed to 3.0 on your 10x30.

A few years back I did own an earlier version of that Nikon 8x25 which had a FOV of about 8º. I wouldn't describe its view as "keyhole" at all. It was wide and expansive. I sold it to a friend for $40.00 after he broke an old Bushnell 8x25 he owned. He uses it when he goes deer hunting. I did advise him not rely on it for identification purposes when using it in early morning or twilight conditions.

Bob
 
Last edited:
I have a pair of 8x25 Trailblazers in my "inventory"..
usable sharpness covers about 80-85% of the 8.2-Deg field.
That's the same as the 8x30 Leupold Yosemites,just a bit dimmer.
They both finish off the field with some coma (dimming) and blue chromatics.
The Trailblazers have unusually big roof prisms.

The Barska 8x30 Crossovers hold usable sharpness to 95% of the same field width,
and have more eye relief. The difference comes from an advanced eyepiece...more elements.
 
As the power goes up (for about the same size front opening and length),
the aberrations the eyepiece has to conquer go up, so almost any 10x25
under $300 is badly blurred outside 60%fov. The 12x25 and 16x32s at the
WalMart and Target are a real horror show. I sent feedback that selling cheap
power would put people off of binoculars forever, and a nice 6X30 or 8X30
would bring them back to buy more for the family.

The 8x21s are interesting. There used to be pretty good ones around $20,
(other than narrow), but the quality took a plunge off a cliff 3-4 yrs ago.
Selling 12x25s under $20 only adds insult to injury.

They should bring the 7x25 back....they were great.
 
ceasar said:
Clive,

I'm not sure people who carry these 8x25 binoculars are concerned with wide fields. Most 8x25s have FOVs of about 335'@1000 yards like my Swarovski 8x25 CL Compact and that is plenty for the intermittent type of use they get. The Nikon is an anomaly and it has short eye relief of 10mm and will be tough to use if one wears glasses. My Swaro's ER is 17mm. It works well with spectacles


Bob
Click to expand...

I'm people and it does concern me ;) I don't really care if others don't care.
I suppose it annoys me because I do like these small bins and would like to use something like this more often but they're just falling short, frustratingly close to being really very good.

Was out tonight with the Hawke 8x25 and I suppose my theory works also in reverse. Having not used my larger binos this last couple of days I found the 8x25 to be more acceptable and I even got some very clear and nice views but in the end I still have knackered eyes as if they're dried out. I can imagine a beginner with these might rightly think they are very good or if they we're just a car pair used for the odd glimpse of something. They actually made me wonder about getting one of the larger Hawke Frontiers.

I did have a Nikon 8x20 Hg and didn't like that either and had an Olympus 8x21 reverse porro and that was worse.

I'm counting on these Minox and if they come tomorrow then sods law dictates I have a dentist appointment and will miss the post.

Don't think I would go with the Sportstar as I can't stand CA and one good thing about the Hawke is they basically have none. The Hawke is probably better so no point. The Hawke could well be better than these Minox. I'll find out some day.
 
Last edited:
CliveP said:
I'm people and it does concern me ;) I don't really care if others don't care.
I suppose it annoys me because I do like these small bins and would like to use something like this more often but they're just falling short, frustratingly close to being really very good.

Was out tonight with the Hawke 8x25 and I suppose my theory works also in reverse. Having not used my larger binos this last couple of days I found the 8x25 to be more acceptable and I even got some very clear and nice views but in the end I still have knackered eyes as if they're dried out. I can imagine a beginner with these might rightly think they are very good or if they we're just a car pair used for the odd glimpse of something. They actually made me wonder about getting one of the larger Hawke Frontiers.

I did have a Nikon 8x20 Hg and didn't like that either and had an Olympus 8x21 reverse porro and that was worse.

I'm counting on these Minox and if they come tomorrow then sods law dictates I have a dentist appointment and will miss the post.

Don't think I would go with the Sportstar as I can't stand CA and one good thing about the Hawke is they basically have none. The Hawke is probably better so no point. The Hawke could well be better than these Minox. I'll find out some day.
Click to expand...

Apart from your initial reasoning, It sounds like you're flogging a dead horse with this little spec of bino.
I tried some 8x30 Nikon monarch 7 recently and they were very small and reasonably priced. I remember at the time thinking these were probably the smallest properly useful bino I'd ever seen. They were really scrawny but punchy!

Edit...oh i see you have them already? What's the main reason you need a smaller glass than the 8x30 Monarch7?
 
Last edited:
CliveP said:
I'm people and it does concern me ;) I don't really care if others don't care.
I suppose it annoys me because I do like these small bins and would like to use something like this more often but they're just falling short, frustratingly close to being really very good.

Was out tonight with the Hawke 8x25 and I suppose my theory works also in reverse. Having not used my larger binos this last couple of days I found the 8x25 to be more acceptable and I even got some very clear and nice views but in the end I still have knackered eyes as if they're dried out. I can imagine a beginner with these might rightly think they are very good or if they we're just a car pair used for the odd glimpse of something. They actually made me wonder about getting one of the larger Hawke Frontiers.

I did have a Nikon 8x20 Hg and didn't like that either and had an Olympus 8x21 reverse porro and that was worse.

I'm counting on these Minox and if they come tomorrow then sods law dictates I have a dentist appointment and will miss the post.

Don't think I would go with the Sportstar as I can't stand CA and one good thing about the Hawke is they basically have none. The Hawke is probably better so no point. The Hawke could well be better than these Minox. I'll find out some day.
Click to expand...

Clive,

You focused in on my 1st paragraph after which I wrote 3 more paragraphs trying to explain why compact binoculars like 8x25s have problems that larger binoculars don't have. I guess I didn't do a good job of explaining. Probably because I can't.

What it boils down to is that small binoculars are just harder to use and some people (Here I go again using the word "people"--nothing personal here.) can get along with them better than others. I guess it is part of the human condition.

Bob
 
ceasar said:
Clive,

I'm not sure people who carry these 8x25 binoculars are concerned with wide fields. Most 8x25s have FOVs of about 335'@1000 yards like my Swarovski 8x25 CL Compact and that is plenty for the intermittent type of use they get. The Nikon is an anomaly and it has short eye relief of 10mm and will be tough to use if one wears glasses. My Swaro's ER is 17mm. It works well with spectacles

That, and I find that the smaller eye cups they have also are a factor. If you are like me and brace them against your eye brows when you use them there is less of them to brace there while finding the proper place to brace them to align your pupils with the exit pupil. This can cause problems with glare in certain light conditions and also partial blackouts in part of the view.

And double hinged compacts can also be a bit harder to find your correct IPD too. All in all, compact binoculars are not as user friendly as larger ones from 8x30 and up are. As I noted, the 30mm binoculars will have larger diameter eye cups than the 8x25s will even though the exit pupil of the 8x25 is 3.1 as opposed to 3.0 on your 10x30.

A few years back I did own an earlier version of that Nikon 8x25 which had a FOV of about 8º. I wouldn't describe its view as "keyhole" at all. It was wide and expansive. I sold it to a friend for $40.00 after he broke an old Bushnell 8x25 he owned. He uses it when he goes deer hunting. I did advise him not rely on it for identification purposes when using it in early morning or twilight conditions.

Bob
Click to expand...


Just for clarification I thought all your points were very valid Bob and thanks for your input and thanks to all others also.

It's still interesting to read about these Nikon Sportstars but I can't help being very suspicious of their low cost or why there is no higher end model with such a spec. I suppose it's the soft edges maybe?

I noticed recently the Nikon 8x20 HG selling at £200 here which is almost half price. I wonder is there a new Nikon high end compact on the way or will they do a sort of M7 25mm version.

If I don't get along with the Minox then I think I would be looking at another M7, the 8x30 or maybe something like this
http://www.hawkeoptics.co.uk/endurance-8x32-binocular-green.html

Strange there doesn't seem to be any knowledge here on these Minox BV. Some varied reviews online and good thoughts on Amazon which make me hopeful.

Otherwise the consensus still generally seems to be get a 25mm bin if you don't really need to use them and I guess I might just have to accept that.

Will post again if I ever get the Minox. They're in some postal system somewhere apparently. Probably should have gone for a next day delivery.
 
Last edited:
There are great 8x25s out there...
Swaro CLs, Opticron BDs... Minox BDs ...

There are even cheaper ones that are surprising..
the LL.Bean/Bushnells are pretty flat-field, have decent eye relief..
The main drawback is the lumpy size.
For glovebox binocs, those replaced the Trailblazers.
8x25 Nikon roofs of various years/names are good vest pocket units.
 
OPTIC_NUT said:
There are great 8x25s out there...
Swaro CLs, Opticron BDs... Minox BDs ...

There are even cheaper ones that are surprising..
the LL.Bean/Bushnells are pretty flat-field, have decent eye relief..
The main drawback is the lumpy size.
For glovebox binocs, those replaced the Trailblazers.
8x25 Nikon roofs of various years/names are good vest pocket units.
Click to expand...
.

Yes, my whole problem really is not being able to try any bins without ordering them online. There is very little optical shop retail here and what there is is quite distant from me so I'm always playing I wonder is this one any good, all of the time.

I did own the 8x20 HG L Nikon (I think their flagship compact?) and I like this Hawke 8x25 Frontier PC more despite the glare and rather worryingly I just looked back at the spec for the Nikon 8x20 and it's very similar to the Minox I'm waiting on but hopefully the extra 5mm objective size will help. The Nikon 8x20 also has a 119m fov and 15mm eye relief but I always remember it as a pokey view and not as sharp or vibrant as my Hawke 8x25.

I actually met some-one with an EL 8x32 (I've owned two of those) and I showed them the Hawke as it had a very similar view on that day in bright afternoon light except for the narrower fov and smaller apparent view and they agreed it was similar so there is something good about this Hawke that has kept it with me for several years.

Definitely this is not an ideal way to purchase bins by guessing and ordering online so I'm probably never really finding the best one for me so I accept good enough and sell them on if later I find something that suits me more so quite costly over the years but optics keep updating also so it's good to get something up-to-date now and again.

Hope my latest guess arrives today finally although I have been using the Hawke 8x25 more and actually sort of liking it, I think? Think my eyes and/or brain are maybe getting more accustomed to it with more regular use and I do love that it is so small to go cycling with. Been doing this so that when I get the Minox then hopefully the difference with the Minox will stand out.

Hopefully later today... to be continued.
 
BV arrived

Got the BV. Verdict = rubbish.

Worst thing is the terrible focus in fact I think there is something wrong with it. Impossible to get it to work consistently. Constantly trying to change the dioptre but it does no good. One side wallows into focus some time after the other and this is impossible to fix. I notice the ocular prism reflections don't mirror each other from one side to the other so the prisms are just thrown in any old way and maybe this is the problem?

Objectives aren't edge blackened and there is bottom veiling glare but not as much as my Hawke.

Not as bright or sharp as my Hawke and the view seems somehow more confined which is amazing given they have a wider fov.

The strap lugs are also stupidly placed but I think maybe they are intended to fit in between the fingers? In practice they just annoy.

Feels sturdy and solid which I think is it's best attribute.

Dof is much less than my Hawke also in fact it seems quite bad. Close focus is good with one eye at about 1m which beats my Hawke slightly.

Hawke wins though, pretty easily in fact. I've already packed the BV away as it's not worth giving any more time and that means bad as even if I thought it any way worthy I would at least take it out on my run to check it further but with this I don't see any point.

If I had received a good one then it would obviously have been better but the Hawke still has more strengths. I found it almost impossible to read a sign that I can with the Hawke fairly easily but I think that's to do mainly with the focus problem with these BV.

Obviously pretty disappointing and I would not personally recommend this binocular although I can imagine some might like it. It does have better eye relief than the Hawke so for glasses wearers it may be worth it?

For me I think the Hawke seems like an upgrade from this BV instead of the other way around that I had been hoping for.
 
Last edited:
My Nikon sprint 8X21 I bought years back is a great little binocular. Narrow field of view, and poor eye relief but I have used the heck out of them over the years. I dont think they compare to full size or even compacts, but then they dont take up any room.

Different horses, different courses.
 
perterra said:
My Nikon sprint 8X21 I bought years back is a great little binocular. Narrow field of view, and poor eye relief but I have used the heck out of them over the years. I dont think they compare to full size or even compacts, but then they dont take up any room.

Different horses, different courses.
Click to expand...

Not unlike the Nikon 8x24 "Wall-E" bins I use for baseball and just knocking around. I can live with the 7 degree fov and short eye relief because the images are sharp, focusing is precise and they have a nice heft from all glass and metal construction.
 
CliveP said:
Got the BV. Verdict = rubbish.

Clive, many thanks for the feedback, I will steer clear, I have the Minox 7x28IF which I am not very impressed with, but the Minox BD 6.5X32 IF is an excellent binocular, I think it's comparable with the Fujinon 6x30 IF Porro and half the price. Maybe I just don't get on with compacts !!
Click to expand...
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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.

Similar threads

B
Should I sell my Kowa bd ii xd for Swarovski 8x25 CL/Zeiss pocket victory 8x25?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Mike Crawley
Mike Crawley
I
best pocket/compact binoculars for opera & shows?
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Trinovid
T
C
My search for pocket binoculars; the case for the Maven 7x28.
Replies
1
Views
2K
iseegeorgesstar
I
R
Choosing pocket binoculars
2 3
Replies
55
Views
7K
forent
forent
W
Binocular Care - Traveling to Honduras Mainland and Roatan
Replies
4
Views
724
MiddleRiver
MiddleRiver

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top