Browning 8x32 and comments on others
Although still I find myself perversely attracted to all manner of binoculars, I haven't had much stomach for cheap roofs over the past few years when it comes to the business of actually selecting/using/recommending a binocular for birding. I have a rather low opinion of cheap roofs because I have universally found them optically poor to mediocre due to narrow field of view (FOV), poor contrast, excessive chromatic aberration (CA), and small sweet spot owing to astigmatism and more complex aberrations/distortions outside the very center of the field (On the positive side, brightness and color neutrality generally seem quite good). Overall, I haven't found much optical difference between roofs costing $150 and those costing $500 or so, and have thus been ambivalent about the lot. There was a time when price and image quality were only crudely related, especially in the low/mid price range, so we binocular enthusiasts could give good advice about what to try and what to avoid. As of late, however, it seems that overall quality has improved to the point that there are few models that won't do the job, and because so many models are just rebranded clones of each other anyway, I haven't been that interested in keeping up with the various offerings (though I have been pleased to see that we've moved past the era of the ubiquitous 8x with ridiculously narrow 325 ft FOV--many of the latest models have wider fields). The best advice I've been able to give is to look through several pairs of something like the Nikon 8x36 Monarch to find the best individual unit.
A few years ago, I persuaded myself to get an Eagle Optics 8x32 Platinum Ranger thinking that it would be handy for bike rides (lightweight, good warranty) and as a casual use/lender pair. The very close focus (3 feet) appealed to me for butterfly watching as a smaller and much lighter weight replacement for my B&L Elite 8x42. The first unit I got was optically awful (horrible resolution, even in the center), out of alignment, and didn't meet spec for close focus. I returned them and received a much better pair, but they are still pretty yucky due to poor contrast and small sweet spot. Because of the latter, they aren't even very good for butterflying because the field overlap at closest distances doesn't include the sweet spot. Overall, I feel silly for purchasing them, especially given their $300+ price (I consider them my most expensive binocular purchase). They live in the closet now. I promised myself never to buy another cheap roof. My subsequently purchased Pentax 6.5x21 Papilio and Zeiss 8x32 FL became my favorite butterflying binocs, and I carry my Zeiss 8x20 Victory on bike rides.
Still, I've not stayed away from cheap roofs entirely--I've tried various models in stores and have taken a look through other birders' binos when out birding together. Nothing I've seen has changed my attitude about this class of binos. Over winter break (late December), I had a chance to try a variety of models that I hadn't looked at before or in a while. Here are some quick reactions:
Nikon 8x36 Monarch--I like these a lot. The sweet spot is nicely large, there is very little field edge aberration (but there is curvature of field), FOV is reasonable, but CA is excessive as is typically the case for cheap roofs, and contrast is poor in backlit situations due to flare (also typical of cheap roofs).
REI 8x42 XR--impressively compact, nice FOV (367 ft), nice eye-relief, $160. Nice build, and the specs were great but contrast was lacking, CA higher than average, and something was wrong with the element alignment in one barrel of the unit I tried thereby compromising the resolution.
Vortex 8x42 Viper--Nice comfortable view due to excellent eye-relief and sweet spot, though a bit restricted (347 ft FOV). Fast but precise focus, nice ergonomics and styling. These seemed quite functional optically, though they had quite a bit more CA (even in the very center of the field) than my Leica 8x42 Ultravid which have never impressed me w/respect to CA control. Color rendition seemed very neutral to me (I've read that others have found them on the warm side). All in all a fine bino but the price seems high ($500) because I'm not sure how they're any better than the best of the cheaper offerings.
Bushnell 8x43 Elite--Plenty functional, but sweet spot size and field edge performance were unimpressive. Very pricey ($950) given the overall optical quality.
Bushnell 8x42 e2--Shockingly bad. These must be one of the most overpriced binoculars currently available ($500). They have a narrow FOV, considerable astigmatic and other aberrations outside the very center of the field, buckets of CA.
And then, immediately after trying the latter two models at the Bushnell factory outlet/showcase (near the world headquarters in Lenexa, KS), I picked up the Browning 8x32. I knew at once that I wasn't going to be able to resist buying them, despite my promise to myself not to get another cheap roof (Sancho, if you're reading this, I still promise to buy no new optics in 2008--got these on 31 December 2007!) and despite their higher price at the Bushnell showcase in comparison to other stores ($220 versus $150). These are supposed to be optically identical to the Bushnell 8x32 Legend, although I've tried the Legend and have not been especially impressed (unfortunately, didn't think to try them at the outlet). Maybe they've been tweaked since I last tried them 5+ years ago.
Browning 8x32: Optically, these were a breath of fresh air after the Bushnell Elite and e2. The view is pleasingly sharp across the field. Though there is some curvature of field, the sweet spot is very large and there is EXCEEDINGLY LITTLE astigmatism or any other field edge aberration, so it is a wonderfully easy and open view, all the way to the edges. That said, the view (396 ft) does feel a bit restricted in comparison to those of my Swarovski 8x32 EL and Zeiss 8x32 FL (both 420 ft). CA is very well controlled--better than some of my top roofs off-axis, and almost as good in the center as my Swarovski (the Zeiss FL is the lone standout as being especially better in both respects). Contrast is quite good in most situations, much better than I expect from cheap roofs (VASTLY superior to my Eagle Optics 8x32 Platinum Ranger) but not is quite as good in direct comparison to my Swarovski or Zeiss. Color rendition seems very neutral to me, though colors are slightly subdued in direct comparison with the Swarovski and Zeiss. Eye-relief is quite good (fine for my glasses). I'll describe the Browning's one big optical failing below.
Ergonomically, I find the Browning a pleasure in the hand. They don't have the extreme styling of their Legend counterpart. The build is pleasingly solid (lots of metal in the construction where many binos use plastic these days), and they are a bit on the heavy side for an 8x32. The barrels are slim enough that my big thumbs have plenty of room to fit between the barrels underneath the hinge, and are long enough that I can curl my pinkies around the ends of the barrels (my preferred hold) and my thumbs don't rub against the end of my nose. The focus knob falls perfectly under my fingers. Focus has a slightly tight but well lubricated "hydraulic" feel, and has no extra play in it. Close focus is exactly 4 feet, and image quality is excellent. Focus direction is for closer with a pull of the right fingers (backwards from the Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski standard). I've tried them in the cold a few times (down to -15 degrees F) and found that the grease gets stiff but that with first use in the cold the focus seems to break free of the grease quite easily and turns very smoothly and freely thereafter (hydraulic "lubricated" feel is restored after warming up). In size, the Browning 8x32 is a bit longer than the Leica and Zeiss 8x32 and a bit shorter than the Swarovski. Unlike others who have reported the case to be too small, I find it a snug but perfect fit (just the way I prefer), so the Brownings pack almost as well as the Leica Ultra/Trinovid in their leather case, or a Zeiss FL in the Leica case, and pack much better than my Swarovski in their bulky Zeiss case (ridiculously large for the 8x32 FL).
All in all, I've described the Browning 8x32 as being nearly as good as my best 8x32 roofs, and in most respects they are. I've had plenty of opportunity to test them indoors and in the field, and except in direct side by side comparison to my best roofs, I do not find them inferior most of the time. That is something I've never been able to say about a cheap roof prism before.
The Browning 8x32 has one significant failing in comparison to top-end roofs, a failing it shares with every cheap roof I've ever tested. It is the model's one ACHILLES HEEL--lens flare. Direct light, especially when shining from well off-axis onto the objectives can cause the objectives to light up, casting a veil of illumination over almost the entire FOV, destroying contrast catastrophically. On overcast days, it generally isn't a problem, but on sunny days it can be on occasion. Kind of reminds me of the performance of the Zeiss 8x30 Classic. In my test setup indoors, I can create horrific lens flare in the Browning, whereas my Swarovski EL, Leica Ultra/Trinovid, and Zeiss FL 8x32 are largely immune. If fitted with some auxilliary lens hoods, I suppose the problem could be largely eliminated.
All in all, I find the Browning very impressive irrespective of cost. I discovered the lens flare issue in the store by deliberately checking for it (store lighting makes it hard to do this) but decided that for $220 I could accept that failing. Given that these are selling for $150 or less on line, I'm happy to recommend them as I like them much more than the Nikon 8x36 Monarch. Furthermore, these are the first cheap roof that I like better overall (even optically, overall) than cheap porro-prisms. As always, beware unit to unit variation if you give these a try, but the design seems a good one.
--AP
