• 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.

Did ya wonder...best compacts?! (1 Viewer)

sbpbirder

Well-known member
Well did you wonder? ;)

Last September I was looking for lightweight compacts and was confused as to what to get.
Expensive compacts
Whether to get a cheap additional pair of bins or to swap out our main (heavier) old pairs. Finally we managed to get to a decent shop to try out lots of brands.

We tried out:

Swaro CL 8x25
Swaro CL 10x25
Leica Ultras 10x25
Nikon HG 8x20
Nikon Monarch 7's 8x30
Zeiss Victory 8x20
Hawke Sapphire ED 8x25

...and we ended up with... *drum roll*

a green pair and a sand pair of the 10x25 Swaro's - fab binoculars, very pleased with them. A close call for me between them and the Swaro 8x25's but went for the extra magnification in the end. No problem with them being dual-hinged and very easy to use. :t:

Leicas - were nice, lighter than the Swaros, but not as good optically for me.
Nikons - couldn't get on with the focus wheel position, but also not comparable optically with the Swaros. Tried the lightish M7s to see if we missed (nearly) full-size bins. No.
Zeiss - ditto as per the Nikons optically. Not as happy with the single hinge as I thought I'd be either.
Hawke's - if I'd had a limited budget then these would have been my choice although the hinges were very loose and so the bins felt 'floppy'.

So two more Swaro fans and a very big up to Clifton Cameras. Thanks Martin you are a very helpful and knowledgeable star!
 
Well did you wonder? ;)

Last September I was looking for lightweight compacts and was confused as to what to get.
Expensive compacts
Whether to get a cheap additional pair of bins or to swap out our main (heavier) old pairs. Finally we managed to get to a decent shop to try out lots of brands.

We tried out:

Swaro CL 8x25
Swaro CL 10x25
Leica Ultras 10x25
Nikon HG 8x20
Nikon Monarch 7's 8x30
Zeiss Victory 8x20
Hawke Sapphire ED 8x25

...and we ended up with... *drum roll*

a green pair and a sand pair of the 10x25 Swaro's - fab binoculars, very pleased with them. A close call for me between them and the Swaro 8x25's but went for the extra magnification in the end. No problem with them being dual-hinged and very easy to use. :t:

Leicas - were nice, lighter than the Swaros, but not as good optically for me.
Nikons - couldn't get on with the focus wheel position, but also not comparable optically with the Swaros. Tried the lightish M7s to see if we missed (nearly) full-size bins. No.
Zeiss - ditto as per the Nikons optically. Not as happy with the single hinge as I thought I'd be either.
Hawke's - if I'd had a limited budget then these would have been my choice although the hinges were very loose and so the bins felt 'floppy'.

So two more Swaro fans and a very big up to Clifton Cameras. Thanks Martin you are a very helpful and knowledgeable star!
Same conclusion I reached. I like it when somebody agrees with me. The Swaro CL-P's are the best compacts around in 8x25 and 10x25. If you can stand a little bit bigger the CL 8x30's are a little bit better and more comfortable.
 
I think there's rarely a "best" only what is best for you! So I always chuckle when someone says "they're the best compacts around". Clearly some are demonstrably better in some aspects of performance though.

I ended up buying a pair of the Hawke Sapphire 8x25 just last week after trying the Swarovski (8x20 and 8x25 CL) the Zeiss, Nikon and some others not on the above list.

In terms of viewing performance, my top criteria, followed by the most compact size, the Sapphire was best for me. I could not tell any differences in performance between these and the CL (better of the two Swao) or Zeiss and the fact the Sapphire was more compact swung it easily (and yeah because it was 40% of the cost of the other two here in the UK...!).

In terms of build I guess you must be paying for something with the Swaro or Zeiss as I don't think I've heard of any sample variation quality in the hinges or other parts. Whereas I have heard a few times of looser hinges in the Hawke though I think that can be sorted (or swapped for another new one). Mine though are superb and I can't think how they could be made any better or higher quality. They are such great value in the binocular world.

I took them out in the dusk just last night and I must say I was really impressed at how good they were.
 
...Clearly some are demonstrably better in some aspects of performance though.

I ended up buying a pair of the Hawke Sapphire 8x25 just last week after trying the Swarovski (8x20 and 8x25 CL) the Zeiss, Nikon and some others not on the above list.

In terms of viewing performance, my top criteria, followed by the most compact size, the Sapphire was best for me...

In terms of build I guess you must be paying for something with the Swaro or Zeiss as I don't think I've heard of any sample variation quality in the hinges or other parts. Whereas I have heard a few times of looser hinges in the Hawke though I think that can be sorted (or swapped for another new one). Mine though are superb and I can't think how they could be made any better or higher quality. They are such great value in the binocular world.

I took them out in the dusk just last night and I must say I was really impressed at how good they were.

I can't agree with all of your post. I can agree that the Hawke's were a good value compact, with good optical quality. But they were obviously not as good optically as the Swaro's nor were they as well built. Whether that is worth the difference in price is up to the individual.

I bought the Swaro 10x25's because I liked the lovely sand colour. :t: :D
 
The 8x25 CL Pocket has definitely become my compact of choice, and I've used a dozen different ones or more. It has gotten a LOT of use this summer. In fact, I think it's my wife's favorite since after a few hours she complains the 8x32 SV is "too heavy." :eek!:

The Pocket is still a compact--make no mistake about that--and it's no match for the 8x32 SV, but it's the best compact I've used by a solid margin.

The Pocket is goin' out west next, hello Montana and Wyoming.

Mark
 
Last edited:
Jonathand wrote: "I think there's rarely a 'best' only what is best for you!"

That should be the required "signature" for anyone using BF.

Bill
 
I'd love to see a proper technical review between some of these compacts, as I've seen a number of conflicting opinions on some of the most expensive ones.

There are several comments on here that the Hawke is better optically than the CL 8x25. I only tried the 8x25 not the 10x25 so can't comment there. But for me I totally failed to see an improvement with the Swarovski, and that was both in low light and normal light situations.

Maybe sample variations affect things more than we realise, as well as factors about the user, i.e. a glasses wearer or not (I don't and lucky to have no variation between left and right eye either) and their own IPD.

Sometimes I think there is a psychological effect too, that trying a high priced premium product can creates an expectation that it must perform the best.

But hey what do I know, I've only had a few good quality bino's in my time, a few old Zeiss and a couple of Nikon's, so I might still be very much a novice uneducated viewer!
 
You need to inform Leica and Zeiss of your findings. Now that there is a definitive answer they may as well close up shop and go home.
 
No worries, I'm sure they know. But unfortunately for them not everyone can afford a pair.

OK, so you imply the highest price is the best. That's a dangerous race for all of us. I agree that floppy hinges are a no-no, but with regard to optics, a psychological factor can't be excluded unless based on measured tests.

But the most important point, as long as price is no issue, if you are happy with your purchase, you may keep them a bit longer than what's customary for Denco. ;)

As for myself, while I strive for alphas as well, I have by now reached the age where my eyes set the limit, not the optics. Thus, it's definitely questionable whether I'll "upgrade" in the future, given the high levels of quality I already own.
 
I agonized over compacts, primarily for when we travel, for quite a time. Finally decided on Swaro CL-Pockets. I figured given the compromise in the compact form factor, buying more of a premium bin was especially important.

Couldn't decide between the 8x25 and the 10x25. I liked the brightness better on the 8's and the magnification better on the 10's. In the end I decided to keep both, justifying that by thinking my wife and I might each want to use bins, when we travel, at the same time! We love them.

At home we have Zeiss Conquest HD in 10x42 and 8x32. Really happy with these, as well.

All said and done, the Swaro 8x25 CL Pockets are exceptionally nice given the size and weight. That comes at a bit of a price, but amortize that out for a few years and it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things. For size, weight, exit-pupil/ brightness, sharpness... I don't see that they have any competition, really. Hopefully Zeiss and Leica will develop premium 8x25's of their own and one-up Swaro! Let the competition begin! We always gain from increased competition.
 
Last edited:
OK, so you imply the highest price is the best. That's a dangerous race for all of us. I agree that floppy hinges are a no-no, but with regard to optics, a psychological factor can't be excluded unless based on measured tests.

But the most important point, as long as price is no issue, if you are happy with your purchase, you may keep them a bit longer than what's customary for Denco. ;)

As for myself, while I strive for alphas as well, I have by now reached the age where my eyes set the limit, not the optics. Thus, it's definitely questionable whether I'll "upgrade" in the future, given the high levels of quality I already own.

There was at least one report, perhaps two, of floppy hinges on the CL Pocket, but one of the owners who had a floppy CL decided not to send it in for repairs but to hold one side rigid and use the other side to adjust the IPD like Zeiss's one-hinge compact. Would he have been as tolerant if it were a Hawke compact instead with this problem? I'm guessing no. It would have gone back to the store, which is to say, yes, there is a psychological factor.

Even if someone were to bench test the CL against the Hawke and compare resolution, brightness (toughie), CA control, etc., and the Hawke came out ahead in one or more categories, that wouldn't stop Swaro fans from buying the CL, anyway. Included in that psychological factor is the high-brow "cachet" that using a Swaro in the field supplies that the Hawke does not.

Heck, even if you only bird in your backyard, YOU still know that you own "the best," and that alone might be reason enough to pay the extra $$$ for the CL. Not everybody needs to brag about his bins on BF and convince everyone else that his bins are "the best."

In an ideal world where the Madmen of Madison Ave. as well as personal prejudices played no influence, everyone would chose the "best tool for the job" that fit their budget.

"Imagine there's no marketing depts., it's easy if you try...."

One would hope to see less sample variation at the premium level, but some exist none-the-less.

As for myself, give me Liberty Mutual Insurance or give me death.*

*copyright 2014 by brocknroller communications, LLP (submitted to Liberty Mutual for a future TV commercial)

Brock
 
I've had and tried the Zeiss Conquest 10x25, Zeiss Victory 10x25 and Hawke Sapphire 8x25 very recently. The Conquest is nice and small but I found the focussing difficult. I like the Victory, although not as small it feels nice and solid which makes it much easier to hold. The optical quality and the focussing is much better than the Conquest. I was very impressed how sharp the Sapphire is. For that price the performance is great. It felt a bit too flimsy for me though and I didn't like the focus wheel position. I've ended up getting the Victory for myself.
 
I was so busy proselytizing that I forgot to vote! I vote for the Nikon Monarch 7's 8x30. Make sure you buy one with all the innards painted or you'll see "veiling glare" and have to send it to Nikon for repairs.

I don't dig double hinged compacts. For me, the best "compact" is a smallish and lightweight 8x30 such as the M7 or CL Companion. The Sawro is also a good "companion" at football games, according to Proud Papa.

Further thoughts by Jack Handey... instead of the CL Companion, I wish Swaro had made an 7.8* 8x30 SLC-HD with similar ergonomics to the CL Companion, EP-side focuser, and good close focus. It would have been a bit heavier (20 oz.) and larger than the Companion, but it would have provided a better alternative for birders who don't fancy the 8x32 SV EL mustache distortion or its $2K price tag.

The 8x30 CL and 8x25 CL are so close in FOV (7* and 6.8* respectively), aperture, price, and size (the Companion is small for an 8x30 and the Pocket is big for a compact) that other than the ability to fold the Pocket, they overlap.

<B>
 
...

The 8x30 CL and 8x25 CL are so close in FOV (7* and 6.8* respectively), aperture, price, and size (the Companion is small for an 8x30 and the Pocket is big for a compact) that other than the ability to fold the Pocket, they overlap.

<B>

Not much overlap really. The 8x25 folds up and weighs 5.4 ounces less. In the compact realm that's a big difference. I wouldn't even call the 8x30 CL a compact. When you use them the differences become clear.

Mark
 
Last edited:
The Swarovski 8x30 CL has a large focus wheel and a thick rubber enforced exterior which keeps it from approaching compact status.

I have a 1980's circa 8x32 Minolta Mariner which, although longer and heavier than the CL, is smaller; mostly because it has a thinner hard pebbled exterior. The objective covers of the CL are also much too big for the Minolta.

Because of this the Swarovski CL will not fit into the Minoltas very nice leather case.

Bob
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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