• 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.

Vortex Fury 6.5x32 (1 Viewer)

FrankD

Well-known member
I posted a little review of these binoculars on another optics forum yesterday but thought you folks might find it interesting as well.

I always have a bit of mixed feelings when writing a review on any piece of outdoor equipment. I have done some reviews for archery gear, bows mostly, for several years now but only on one other occasion have I tackled a piece of optics equipment. Coincidentally it was another Vortex product, the Vortex Razor 8x42s. Why the motivation you ask? Because Vortex has continued to impress me by offering very high performing optical equipment for any given price point. I have owned several configurations of the Razors as well as the Vipers and now have in my possession the Vortex Fury 6.5x32s.

I have waited with considerable anticipation for the release of the 6.5x32 Fury. The combination of lower magnification power coupled with the typically compact 32 mm body size has the potential to yield a very attractive “grab-it and go” type of binocular. I know many people scoff at the idea of a binocular with only 6.5x magnification being suitable for general use. Most binocular buyers, hunters in particular, seem to prefer the 10x configuration and even tend to think of 8x as being too little for practical use. It was not that long ago though that most folks grabbed the ol’ 7x35 porros for use in just about any application. Despite this I think it takes a great deal of courage for a company to attempt to sell a low power binocular to the general public in this day and age of “bigger is better”.

My review is going to include a practical, and semi-technical, comparison between the Furys, the Leupold Yosemite 6x30s and the Zeiss Conquest 8x30s. These other two bins represent the closest configurations I have on hand to the Fury’s 6.5x32 format. Lets start with the Technical…

The binoculars’ listed specifications are as follows:

Magnification: 6.5x
Objective Lens Diameter: 32 mm
Exit Pupil: 4.92 mm
Eye Relief: 21 mm
Linear FOV at 1000 yards: 445 feet
Angular Field of View: 8.5 degrees
Close Focus: 4.9 feet
Interpupillary Distance: 55-76 cm
Height: 5.3 inches
Width: 5.4 inches
Weight: 22 ounces
Tripod Adaptable: Yes

These binoculars feature (the now almost standard) fully multicoated lenses, phase-corrected roof prisms and Argon gas purged (waterproof) design typically found on many of the binoculars at or above this price point. One nice addition is the use of silver on the roof prisms to increase brightness and contrast. Many roof prism binoculars at this price point and even above typically use some type of aluminum coating which is not as reflective.

Overall Style and Handling:

Physically these binoculars are fairly compact. They remind me very much of a pair of 32 mm Bushnell Legends in terms of both height and weight. At 22 oz. they are a few ounces heavier than many of the other 32 mm configurations on the market but the benefit is a bit of increased stability and a fairly unique level of optical performance (more on that later). Balance is also very good with these binoculars. Their overall shape reminds me very much of the Nikon Premier LXL 8x32s…flared at the neckstrap attachment point but contoured up to objective lenses.

The eyecups are designed quite well. They utilize a form of clickstop design. The eyecups can be set either fully extended, at an intermediate setting or fully collapsed. At the intermediate setting there is enough resistance for them not to collapse even with increased pressure against the bridge of my nose/brow.

The binoculars’ focusing knob is reasonably large with a series of raised lines to help consistent contact. The focusing tension is very good allowing for precise adjustments. The speed of the focusing mechanism is just a little fast for me to call it “perfect” but better than many of the 32 mm configurations I have had the privilege to own. I wonder if this is some inherent design issue with many of the smaller objective (30-32 mm) models. They seem to roll very quickly into and out of focus. Personally I prefer a binocular with a bit slower focuser as it gives the user a bit more control.

The diopter adjustment is built into the central focusing knob and features several small graduations and a large red arrow to help with the correct setting. The user must pull the focusing knob “up” or “out” in order to access the diopter adjustment. A great deal of pressure is required to make this adjustment. That is something I consider a benefit as other similar designs that I have owned can be accidentally popped out leaving the user with a frustrating experience.

Optical Performance:

The optical performance of these binoculars is quite surprising. The first thing that struck me was what appears to be an incredibly large sweet spot (size of the image free from distortion). Initial inspection led me to believe that this binoculars’ sweet spot hovered in the 90-95% range. Careful inspection later revealed a bit different result. The center 50% of the image is, to my eyes, free from a majority of color fringing (CA for you techno-folks) and any type of distortion. The next 30-35% of the image is also very good in this regard. There is the ever so slightest drop off in both of these areas but without really looking hard to find it you probably are not going to notice it. Even the outer 10-15% is fairly flat with a very moderate level of distortion. In this sense they remind me of some of the aspheric eyepiece designs I have tried in the past (Pentax SP, Minox BD BR) though with a generally better field of view.

The second characteristic that strikes me is the incredible depth of field. For those folks unfamiliar with the term it basically refers to the distance in front of and behind a focused point which continues to remain in focus. For example, if you focus on an object that is 15 feet away then the distance in front (12 feet for example) and the distance behind (18 feet) which is also in focus demonstrates the binoculars’ depth of field level. There has been considerable discussion as to whether this amount is determined solely by the magnification of the binocular or if other factors also come into play. The depth of field on the 6.5x Fury is excellent. Very little adjustment of the focusing knob is needed at most short distances (under 20-25 yards) in order to obtain a sharp focus on any object.

Speaking of sharpness (or apparent resolution) the Fury displays an excellent level of it. I have not measured it at this point but without comparison to either a more expensive roof or a porro prism binocular I doubt most individuals would find fault with this binoculars’ ability to resolve fine details. In a direct comparison with the Leupold Yosemite and the Zeiss Conquest the Fury shows a little bit less sharpness but not to the point where it leaves you wishing for more.

Brightness is similar to sharpness in my comparison above. While only using the Fury I did not feel as if the image was dim or dull at any time. However, the Fury’s image was a level dimmer than that of the 6x30 Leupold Yosemite. This is not too unexpected though considering porro prism binoculars, by design, tend to be brighter at any given price point (with the exception of some of the highest end roofs). One must also consider that in order to achieve a fairly wide, flat, undistorted field of view then a more complicated eyepiece design must be utilized. The more glass utilized typically means the more light lost going through each glass surface (though fairly marginal considering the quality of today’s lens coatings).

Nitpicks/Suggestions:

I had suggested this in another thread discussing the 6.5x32 Fury. It has been mentioned that the eye relief from this binocular is extremely generous (21 mm). Because of this at least two eyeglass wearers have been able to see the full field of view with the eyecups in their intermediate position. I also needed to utilize the intermediate eyecup position because of the shape and arrangement of my eyes and nose. Collapsing the eyecups fully still gave me a full field of view but also required more critical eye placement in order to avoid blackouts.

It has been my understanding that in many eyepiece designs eye relief and field of view are directly correlated. With many of the more sophisticated and more expensive binoculars you can achieve acceptable levels of eye relief (15 mm or better) while still being able to obtain a very wide, predominantly undistorted, field of view (think of the 8x Zeiss, Leica, Swaro and now new Nikon models). In less expensive roof prism units you could have a wider field of view but at the expensive of a lower level of eye relief, a greater amount of edge distortion or both.

The 6.5x32 Fury produces a True Field of View (TFOV) of 445 feet which, in general, should be considered very wide. The Apparent Field of View (AFOV) of this model hovers right around the 56 degree mark which is generally average. What I would like to see done is a bit of tweaking with the eye relief and field of view. If this binocular could achieve a true field of view (while still maintaining the size of the sweet spot/level of distortion) in the 9.3 degree range (488 feet) then that would yield an apparent field of view in the 60 degree range. Maintaining an eye relief level of 17-18 mm would be preferred.

Second, this is a bit of a small nitpick but I have a little issue with the diopter. With almost all of the binoculars I have owned I require little to no adjustment of the diopter. Leave it at the “zero” setting and my eyes are perfectly in sync. Whenever I buy or use a binocular that requires me to adjust the diopter (especially far away from the zero setting) it sends up a bit of a red flag for me. This is the case with this particular unit of the Fury. I also ran into this issue with one of the pairs of Vortex Razors I owned and spoke with some of the folks at Vortex about it. They reassured me that the actual setting of the diopter was not as much of an issue so long as it did not create excessive eyestrain. I did not experience eyestrain with either unit but would still like to see quality control picked up a notch to catch this and correct it. Call it peace of mind if you like rather than any practical issue.

Conclusion:

Allowing a binocular at this price point to have an incredibly large sweet spot coupled with excellent depth of field and an incredibly wide true field of view will make this an instant hit among hunters and birders alike. I do not believe it is going to turn many of the high power nay-sayers away from their choice of optics but it will appeal to a lot of the guys that require a binocular to perform extremely well at close quarters. I have been taking this binocular along with me just about everywhere I go. I have yet to find a single application where I was left feeling like I was handicapped in any way.

The optical quality of the 6.5x32 Fury pleases me as it promotes a very relaxed viewing experience. Color representation, brightness, sharpness are all at acceptable levels especially for this price point. For many of you folks waiting for that 7x30-32 mm roof prism model I think it may have finally arrived.
 
Frank,

With 70 reads and no comments I felt the least I could do is say "Thank you" for posting this here. True I read it first elsewhere and even commented there, but I think it valuable here as well.

Best!
 
Thanks for the review Frank. It reads to be objective, which I appreciate.
I agree with you in that I'd gladly trade some of that eye relief for more FOV. The small Fury's are also a wee bit heavy.
They'd be golden at 18-19oz and 480-490' at 1000 yard view.
 
Last edited:
In a direct comparison with the Leupold Yosemite and the Zeiss Conquest the Fury shows a little bit less sharpness but not to the point where it leaves you wishing for more.

To me, this is a damning appraisal. If I can see a difference in sharpness between binoculars of approximately the same magnification I figure something is wrong (or unacceptable) with the weak one.

--AP
 
I would not expect to have to mess with the dipter at 6.5x, maybe at 10x. My Nikon Sporters, 10x, were that way, my Monarchs are not.
 
To me, this is a damning appraisal. If I can see a difference in sharpness between binoculars of approximately the same magnification I figure something is wrong (or unacceptable) with the weak one.

--AP

It's a subjective appraisal, like the rest of the report, and there is nothing wrong with that. What Frank has given us is an analysis of what appears to be a relatively compact, sturdy, easy to use, all purpose binocular, suitable for beginners, birders on a budget, and people looking for a useful 2nd binocular to have handy.

At it's $300.00 selling price, I would be surprised if there weren't some problems cropping up in individual units. The diopter might be one. Likewise, the impression of lack of sharpness, which can be tested further. I don't think you can get much more FOV with out getting more distortion at the price it is now being sold at. More expensive oculars would be required, and how much more FOV do you need? It's about the same as the Nikon 8 x 30 EII and the 8.5 x 44 Swift Porro now. Not bad for a Roof Prism!

I may get one for my wife, because of it's ease of use, with and without glasses, which she uses or doesn't use as the spirit moves her. I can compare it to my Eagle 6 x 32 Platinum and to my Leica Trinovid 7 x 42, and to my 6 x 30 Yosemite, if I can ever get it back from my brother!

Bob

ADDENDUM: 3/18/08--These binoculars are no longer in stock at Eagle Optics as of this date. http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4836
 
Last edited:
Hi Bob,If we start seeing a lot of Vortex 6.5x32 Fury's on EA Ebay site as returns, we would know if there is any problems. Sounds like a very nice binocular with very good eyecups that adj. and stay there as well as having enough ER. I wish my wife would like to have one.:) Frank D is pretty picky and with him liking this binocular is a very big plus.
Regards,Steve
 
Last edited:
I have been waiting for a review of these for over a year now. Thanks, Frank!

Unfortunately, one of the big advantages of this power binocular is the ability to use them at dawn and dusk to find birds in trees or animals in brush. The fact that they are a bit dark negates that advantage. I was hoping that the silver coated prisms would make these bincoculars among the best in light throughput, but, apparently that is not the case.

Still waiting for a 6.5 to 7 power binocular with a 450'ish field of view, weight of 20 oz +/- 2 oz., compact size, waterproof construction, large "sweet spot" and state of the art light throughput. Seems that this one has it all, except for the state of the art light throughput.

For now I will stick with my B&L Discoverer 8X42 porro prisms. They are fairly lightweight and have a good field of view, but I believe that the 8 power is too much for my purposes and they sure aren't compact.

Don
 
Sorry for not posting back sooner gentleman.

Don,

Actually I think the light throughput is actually quite good. They are just a shade dimmer than the Yosemites. I would easily put them at the same level as the 8x30 Conquests in terms of brightness.

Alexis,

My initial comments were in reference to what I would call apparent resolution. I did not test them against a resolution chart though I have one handy now. Part of my impression may be due to the fact that they have a fast focus and I prefer a slightly slower one. It is easy to overcompensate.

I had a further opportunity to utilize this bin under my favorite critical conditions...hawkwatching atop one of the local mountains. John Traynor and I spent several hours hoping for a Golden Eagle to appear (he saw one but I arrived a bit too late). We compared the the little Fury against the Zeiss FL and Leica Ultravid 7x42s as well as the 8x32 Nikon SEs. In truth, though not in the same class optically as these bins they really were not that "far off" either. They had a greater level of edge distortion and the image was not quite as sharp but I still think they held their own quite well. At the lower magnifications we are talking about here I think it might actually be easier to create a higher level of image quality.

Bob A,

Thank you. I had a feeling one of you kind folks would eventually find reason to comment. ;)

Tero,

The diopter is about plus 5 from center but it does not require readjustment depending on distance or if I pick the bins up after not using them for a time. I cannot say as much for some other bins I have owned.

Bob,

Interesting about Eagle Optics. I wonder what the explanation could be. Oh, and check your pm's shortly.

Steve,

I could easily see myself owning these bins. The fairly large sweet spot, excellent depth of field and overall size makes them very appealing.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 16 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