• 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.

Cheap Compact question (carson, brunton, bushnell...) (3 Viewers)

UPDATE:
Last night I compared the two in more depth especially at dusk and I decided I actually like the view on the Olympus better than the Papilio's. So for less money the Olympus tracker's 8x25 are better optically and a much better bargain. I sent the Papilio's back to Amazon.



You returned the Papilio's despite their better FOV and unmatched close focus? The more time I spend with them ( I have the 6.5x21 too) the better I like them. They are incredibly easy to use. They are about as steady as an image stabilized binocular without the quirks of these, and the optics are better too.

How is the DOF on the Olympus 8x25's? I'm still amazed how good that is on the 6.5x Papilio's.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
I really don't care about looking at bugs! I like the 8x better on the Olympus and to be honest I think the DOF looks better on the Olympus even though the DOFshould not be as good at 8x versus the 6.5x on the Papilio. I feel the contrast is better on the Olympus also. I ordered a Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elite to compare with the Olympus and I will write up a review on this thread.
 
I really don't care about looking at bugs! I like the 8x better on the Olympus and to be honest I think the DOF looks better on the Olympus even though the DOFshould not be as good at 8x versus the 6.5x on the Papilio. I feel the contrast is better on the Olympus also. I ordered a Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elite to compare with the Olympus and I will write up a review on this thread.



I didn't look at bugs before, but now since I've the Papilio's I must say it's fun to look at them. And there were occasions in the past I was only 3 feet away from Goldcrests and Firecrests, when I wished I had had the Papilio's.
Not to mention the Nightingale within armlength's distance when I was taking a s**t in the dunes :-O

The Olympus 8x25's sound impressive. I look forward to your comparison with the Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elite.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
I didn't look at bugs before, but now since I've the Papilio's I must say it's fun to look at them. And there were occasions in the past I was only 3 feet away from Goldcrests and Firecrests, when I wished I had had the Papilio's.
Not to mention the Nightingale within armlength's distance when I was taking a s**t in the dunes :-O

The Olympus 8x25's sound impressive. I look forward to your comparison with the Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elite.

Best regards,

Ronald

The Olympus Tracker 8x25 is amazing! What's more amazing is I really only have $20.00 in it shipped to my door. I picked up a New Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elite for $185.00 including shipping so we will see how it is.
 
The Olympus Tracker 8x25 is amazing! What's more amazing is I really only have $20.00 in it shipped to my door. I picked up a New Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elite for $185.00 including shipping so we will see how it is.

I see you went ahead and picked up those 7x26's from BFB, and I can't imagine you won't like the view. Too bad they cost over 3 times the Trackers for a slight optical increase, larger FOV and greater DOF. I got my 7x26 Elites off a post in the Bargain Thread last fall for $125 which makes them a lot easier to keep and like at that price.

Like you, I am not a big fan of compact roofs, but I did pick up a new boxed pair of Nikon 8x20 Premier LXL's last week for $199, and they are starting to grow on me, and at that price I'm not afraid to use them hard and put em up wet. Amazing little binos, but as we all agree, not the best ease of use

I went ahead and ordered a pair of 10x25 Trackers today since the FOV is only about 40 ft less than the 8x25. I figure they will have better resolution and I was looking for something small with a little more punch.

Tom
 
I see you went ahead and picked up those 7x26's from BFB, and I can't imagine you won't like the view. Too bad they cost over 3 times the Trackers for a slight optical increase, larger FOV and greater DOF. I got my 7x26 Elites off a post in the Bargain Thread last fall for $125 which makes them a lot easier to keep and like at that price.

Like you, I am not a big fan of compact roofs, but I did pick up a new boxed pair of Nikon 8x20 Premier LXL's last week for $199, and they are starting to grow on me, and at that price I'm not afraid to use them hard and put em up wet. Amazing little binos, but as we all agree, not the best ease of use

I went ahead and ordered a pair of 10x25 Trackers today since the FOV is only about 40 ft less than the 8x25. I figure they will have better resolution and I was looking for something small with a little more punch.

Tom

I bought the Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elites off of E-bay from the same guy that I bought a pair of Zeiss 8x32 FL's off of about 2 years ago. It was the best deal I could find right now. I think the Nikon LXL's although fussy because of the small exit aperture are the best of the alpha roofs although the 10x25's are better than the 8x20's because of their bigger aperture. I almost ordered the Tracker 10x25's because it seems like the only option but that smaller fov was not appealing to me. That is the ONLY thing I don't like about the 8x25 Trackers is the slightly small fov because I am use to alpha 32mm and 42mm with 400+ fov. But to get a bigger fov means a more expensive and more complex and heavier eyepiece. I also worry that at the price they sell the Olympus for any optical abberrations will be more readily apparent in the 10x versus 8x. It is always more difficult to make a good 10x. That is why I thought I would try the Bushnell Legacy 7x26 because I like these reverse porro's but I wanted to get something with perhaps slightly better optics. I am not sure I will like the 7x though versus the 8x in the Olympus. It is too bad they don't make the Olympus in say a 10x30 or 8x30. they could definitely compete with the Nikon EII and for probably less money. The BIG difference to me with the reverse porro's is that 3mm or bigger exit aperture which makes eye placement so much easier. I can't tolerate 2.5mm or less. That is a little worrisome in the 10x25 Olympus Tracker's. The reverse porro's are brighter than the alpha roofs and also have that great 3D image and almost no CA which is great. They seem to fit my hands well also. Where did you get the Tracker 10x25's? Let me know how you like them when you get them and I will write a review on the Bushnell Legacy's.
 
Last edited:
Although I'm glad Dennis finally tried the Olympus and found them "amazing" (instead of just dismissing all compacts as PIA junk not worth looking through), I want to caution everyone that they are still compacts and have their limitations. If Dennis had an alpha 8x20 side-by-side with the Olympus he might not be so quick to dismiss the alphas. I still have the Olympus and the Leica 8x20 UV and believe me overall it's a bit of a toss-up. The Olympus have the easier view thanks to the exit pupil; the Leica still wins in terms of contrast and color. They are equally sharp (tiny edge to Olympus??--you be the judge). The Leica has a bigger sweet spot. You gotta weigh all that for yourself. But compared with a top-notch mid-size there's not much of a contest--both lose.

Which brings me to my larger point. Comparing binoculars from memory is, perhaps, not very useful. I've done it myself a couple times, but always felt like I was cheating just a bit. On some thread hereabouts, someone mentioned the unreliability of memory in the courtroom and I tend to agree. It's been proven that memory is volatile and unreliable, whether it be childhood memories, murder cases, or anything else. How good is my memory of the view through a binocular I sold two years ago? Hmm. Not too good as it turns out.

So maybe we should refrain from too many memory comparisons. If you have a big collection, go ahead and compare. If you've only got two, don't try to compare to a third you sold six months ago. I wouldn't trust myself to do it. Would you?

That said, let me say that the Olympus is a sweet little bin! A poor man's Leica, as I said two years ago. That opinion hasn't changed, mainly because I still have both and returned/sold maybe six others in the interim. But I've quit on the compact front, until something new and big comes along. Not worth the trouble.

Mark
 
Although I'm glad Dennis finally tried the Olympus and found them "amazing" (instead of just dismissing all compacts as PIA junk not worth looking through), I want to caution everyone that they are still compacts and have their limitations. If Dennis had an alpha 8x20 side-by-side with the Olympus he might not be so quick to dismiss the alphas. I still have the Olympus and the Leica 8x20 UV and believe me overall it's a bit of a toss-up. The Olympus have the easier view thanks to the exit pupil; the Leica still wins in terms of contrast and color. They are equally sharp (tiny edge to Olympus??--you be the judge). The Leica has a bigger sweet spot. You gotta weigh all that for yourself. But compared with a top-notch mid-size there's not much of a contest--both lose.

Which brings me to my larger point. Comparing binoculars from memory is, perhaps, not very useful. I've done it myself a couple times, but always felt like I was cheating just a bit. On some thread hereabouts, someone mentioned the unreliability of memory in the courtroom and I tend to agree. It's been proven that memory is volatile and unreliable, whether it be childhood memories, murder cases, or anything else. How good is my memory of the view through a binocular I sold two years ago? Hmm. Not too good as it turns out.

So maybe we should refrain from too many memory comparisons. If you have a big collection, go ahead and compare. If you've only got two, don't try to compare to a third you sold six months ago. I wouldn't trust myself to do it. Would you?

That said, let me say that the Olympus is a sweet little bin! A poor man's Leica, as I said two years ago. That opinion hasn't changed, mainly because I still have both and returned/sold maybe six others in the interim. But I've quit on the compact front, until something new and big comes along. Not worth the trouble.

Mark

I think my memory serves me well on the one big thing I didn't like about the alpha roofs and that was their 2.5mm exit pupil. That singularly was the deal killer for me on those little jewels. It just makes them so fussy for eye placement. It makes them very uncomfortable to use and the Leica Ultravid was one of the worst of the bunch in that respect. I bought one new for $400.00 and sold it two days later because I had so many blackouts. I am comparing the Olympus 8x25 Tracker to my Swarovision 8.5x42 and while it is not exactly fair to compare a $50.00 binocular to a $2300.00 binocular the Olympus surprisingly enough holds up quite well. The biggest advantage of the Swarovision is of course the bigger FOV , the edge sharpness, and the brightness especially at twilight. Other than that I see no huge differences. For the smaller FOV the Olympus produces it has excellent resolution, DOF, and contrast. Now I think if they would make a Leica Ultravid in an 8x25 it could be a different story. I totally agree that no compact will compete with a 32mm or 42mm full size binocular but if you need a compact for portability these little reverse porro prisms are the way to go especially at their price point if you don't need them to be waterproof.
 
I think my memory serves me well on the one big thing I didn't like about the alpha roofs and that was their 2.5mm exit pupil. That singularly was the deal killer for me on those little jewels. It just makes them so fussy for eye placement. It makes them very uncomfortable to use and the Leica Ultravid was one of the worst of the bunch in that respect. I bought one new for $400.00 and sold it two days later because I had so many blackouts. I am comparing the Olympus 8x25 Tracker to my Swarovision 8.5x42 and while it is not exactly fair to compare a $50.00 binocular to a $2300.00 binocular the Olympus surprisingly enough holds up quite well. The biggest advantage of the Swarovision is of course the bigger FOV , the edge sharpness, and the brightness especially at twilight. Other than that I see no huge differences. For the smaller FOV the Olympus produces it has excellent resolution, DOF, and contrast. Now I think if they would make a Leica Ultravid in an 8x25 it could be a different story. I totally agree that no compact will compete with a 32mm or 42mm full size binocular but if you need a compact for portability these little reverse porro prisms are the way to go especially at their price point if you don't need them to be waterproof.

Not exactly fair?? Not exactly sensible. The 8.5 SV pretty much stomps the Olympus overall. But we agree that the little Olympus holds its own within its FOV, and given its flare issues. And what about the color and contrast? The SV is simply tops, if maybe even a tad blue. I'll never sell my Olympus though, and might just buy another in case some bean counter decides to drop them from the lineup. Dennis, I'm glad you agree with me on this one. We've disagreed before.

I was out with the SV yesterday and (not much warbler action yet--this spring is screwy. God knows what the tornadoes did to the little ones) found myself hiking more than birding. My biggest impression? Get these friggin things off my neck! I often find myself hand carrying full-size bins after a few hours. They feel better in hand than around the neck. And don't talk to me about harnesses--what, do I need seatbelts, too?

Anyway, that's why I love the 8x32 FL so much. I made a 1" homemade strap that shaves at least two ounces off the weight and I can wear them all d*** day without complaint. Did that for three days out on Point Reyes in January. All day and I didn't notice them. That's the beauty of 20oz bins.

Mark
 
Wasn't it yours truly here who queried whether the cases for the large Swarovisions came with wheels on the bottom?;)

Bob
 
Not exactly fair?? Not exactly sensible. The 8.5 SV pretty much stomps the Olympus overall. But we agree that the little Olympus holds its own within its FOV, and given its flare issues. And what about the color and contrast? The SV is simply tops, if maybe even a tad blue. I'll never sell my Olympus though, and might just buy another in case some bean counter decides to drop them from the lineup. Dennis, I'm glad you agree with me on this one. We've disagreed before.

I was out with the SV yesterday and (not much warbler action yet--this spring is screwy. God knows what the tornadoes did to the little ones) found myself hiking more than birding. My biggest impression? Get these friggin things off my neck! I often find myself hand carrying full-size bins after a few hours. They feel better in hand than around the neck. And don't talk to me about harnesses--what, do I need seatbelts, too?

Anyway, that's why I love the 8x32 FL so much. I made a 1" homemade strap that shaves at least two ounces off the weight and I can wear them all d*** day without complaint. Did that for three days out on Point Reyes in January. All day and I didn't notice them. That's the beauty of 20oz bins.

Mark

Yes, isn't it funny what a difference 9 oz. makes when you are carrying it all day. Even that 2 oz. you shaved off the weight with your homemade strap makes a big difference. I birded with the Olympus this morning and I was amazed just how long I could hold them up without arm fatigue even with one arm. I put a Vero Vellini strap on my SV's which is a lighter foam strap and even that weight savings helps a little. Your not exactly suffering with the 8x32 FL's either. They are not quite the view of the SV but they are pretty darn good. I found the 8x32 FL's to be little fussier than the SV's due to the smaller exit pupil but overall they are excellent. Watch this thread for my review of the Bushnell Custom Elite7x26. I should get them tomorrow so I should get some evening birding in before sundown after work. I saw some Bald Eagles in some trees over in an open field by us and I will check them out with the Bushnell's. See how a big bird looks at 7x. Good test for glare too.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't it yours truly here who queried whether the cases for the large Swarovisions came with wheels on the bottom?;)

Bob

Indeed, twas I who brought that up. I was out without my usual shoulder bag so I had no place to put the bins. There seems to be a point, right around 22-23 ounces for me, above which bins become annoying after a while. The 8x32 SE (23 and change) even gets to me after a few hours. The 20 ounce Zeiss never seems to.

Maybe a little workout would help:

neck-harness.jpg

Mark
 
Not exactly fair?? Not exactly sensible. The 8.5 SV pretty much stomps the Olympus overall. But we agree that the little Olympus holds its own within its FOV, and given its flare issues. And what about the color and contrast? The SV is simply tops, if maybe even a tad blue. I'll never sell my Olympus though, and might just buy another in case some bean counter decides to drop them from the lineup. Dennis, I'm glad you agree with me on this one. We've disagreed before.

I was out with the SV yesterday and (not much warbler action yet--this spring is screwy. God knows what the tornadoes did to the little ones) found myself hiking more than birding. My biggest impression? Get these friggin things off my neck! I often find myself hand carrying full-size bins after a few hours. They feel better in hand than around the neck. And don't talk to me about harnesses--what, do I need seatbelts, too?

Anyway, that's why I love the 8x32 FL so much. I made a 1" homemade strap that shaves at least two ounces off the weight and I can wear them all d*** day without complaint. Did that for three days out on Point Reyes in January. All day and I didn't notice them. That's the beauty of 20oz bins.

Mark

Well I received the Bushnell's Elite 7x26 and I remember why I didn't like them the first time. The eyecups don't twist out far enough to get the proper ER for my eyes! The eyecups only twist out about half as far as the Olympus 8x25 Trackers hence creating all kind of blackouts. I have to hold the binoculars about 3/8 inch away from eyes to stop the blackouts. The optics also are not as good as the Olympus. The edges are not as sharp, the on-axis view is not as sharp, and they have more glare when viewing close to the sun. They are also 3.5 oz. heavier which doesn't sound like much but it is when you carry them. The focus is very smooth on the Bushnells and they seem high quality but the eyepiece covers won't even stay on being too loose of a fit. At 1/3rd the price of the Bushnell 7x26 Elite Legacy the Olympus 8x25 Trackers are much better binoculars! The Bushnell's are going back tomorrow.
 
Well I received the Bushnell's Elite 7x26 and I remember why I didn't like them the first time. The eyecups don't twist out far enough to get the proper ER for my eyes! The eyecups only twist out about half as far as the Olympus 8x25 Trackers hence creating all kind of blackouts. I have to hold the binoculars about 3/8 inch away from eyes to stop the blackouts. The optics also are not as good as the Olympus. The edges are not as sharp, the on-axis view is not as sharp, and they have more glare when viewing close to the sun. They are also 3.5 oz. heavier which doesn't sound like much but it is when you carry them. The focus is very smooth on the Bushnells and they seem high quality but the eyepiece covers won't even stay on being too loose of a fit. At 1/3rd the price of the Bushnell 7x26 Elite Legacy the Olympus 8x25 Trackers are much better binoculars! The Bushnell's are going back tomorrow.

Now you might understand why in my earlier posts, I said I liked the older B&L 7x26 Customs (pre 2004) or the Bushnell 12-0726 model with the rubber eyecups better. They simply fit me perfectly with no fooling around with the eyecups which never want to stay completely up, and don't have the ER issues for non eyeglass wearers. On the new Elites, I have to hold them about 1/8" away from my eyes as well to avoid the blinkie blackies. I'll probably sell my Elites in the near future as well, but will never get rid of the older Customs, and will look for a spare.

I don't find the Trackers sharper on axis, but I do find them sharper near the edges, which is to be expected since the Customs have a much larger FOV and a bit more field curvature. I pretty much predicted you would not keep the Elite Customs.;)

Tom
 
Dennis,

Well I do agree about the price and the weight, but that's about all. Like I said before I found the Bushnells sharper, have no flare, much less CA, and much better contrast. I guess I'm not surprised by the different view on contrast. I've noted before that some people see it and others don't. (Why that is I've not sure. Could be down to the heterogeneity of the L receptor or the way the brain processes contrast I guess). I normally wear glasses to use them, and the eye relief on the Elite is just perfect for me, but even without they sit in my eye sockets just fine.

I can't argue with the opinion that the Trackers are a bargain though, just the Elite/Customs are much better in my opinion.

Enjoy the Trackers.

David
 
Dennis,

Well I do agree about the price and the weight, but that's about all. Like I said before I found the Bushnells sharper, have no flare, much less CA, and much better contrast. I guess I'm not surprised by the different view on contrast. I've noted before that some people see it and others don't. (Why that is I've not sure. Could be down to the heterogeneity of the L receptor or the way the brain processes contrast I guess). I normally wear glasses to use them, and the eye relief on the Elite is just perfect for me, but even without they sit in my eye sockets just fine.

I can't argue with the opinion that the Trackers are a bargain though, just the Elite/Customs are much better in my opinion.

Enjoy the Trackers.

David

The Bushnell's custom Elites are some of the worst binoculars I have tried and I have had ALOT of binoculars. They have WAY more flare than the Olympus, less resolution on axis, there CA control was no better than the Olympus and for my eyes the Olympus had better contrast. For the life of me I can't understand why there eyecups don't extend further! They were absolutely terrible for me for blackouts! Again I had to hold them about 1/8 to 1/4 inch from my face to stop the blackouts. The light cone just was not hitting my eyes right! Even then there is no way they are sharper! I would definitely never recommend these for anybody. They went back to the seller in 30 minutes. They did not work for me at all. I hated them! Uggh! Give me my SV 8.5x42's I want to get the bad taste of the Bushnell's out of my mouth! They remind of binoculars you would see at Walmart. No more Bushnells for me.
 
Last edited:
I hated them! Uggh! Give me my SV 8.5x42's I want to get the bad taste of the Bushnell's out of my mouth! They remind of binoculars you would see at Walmart. No more Bushnells for me.

Wow, you REALLY don't like the Bushnells. But if you need to get the bad taste of the Bushnell's out of your mouth, maybe you had them adjusted incorrectly?;)

As for CA and on-axis sharpness, I'm not surprised you found the Olympus better. They are literally as sharp as nearly anything out there on-axis, and I've always found the CA very low. Contrast maybe surprises me, but then you seem to think Olympus compares well to the SV on that score, which, to my eyes, is simply wrong. Maybe it's the "heterogeneity of the L receptor" (was that a joke, by the way, or is there such a thing??). I think it's more about brightness. My eyes have reached the point where extra light really helps and birding here in PA means a lot of woods and cloudy days. As you say, the edges hold up very well, but then the FOV is a bit restricted so you might expect that.

Anyway, welcome to the Tracker club. I've been using them since 2001 and won't go back. Enjoy.

Mark
 
Maybe it's the "heterogeneity of the L receptor" (was that a joke, by the way, or is there such a thing??).

No joke. Besides the recognised colour blindness there are number of common variants in the L Opsin gene (Red) particularly in men which result in small difference in the peak colour sensitivity. Not an easy read but it's in the scientific literature.

......there is a clear variation in the color matching of people with normal color vision. Measurements of color matching are obtained from an anomaloscope in which the observer is asked to match a monochromatic yellow light with a mixture of red and green lights (a Rayleigh match) (10, 15). Close inspection of anomaloscope settings for a large group of Caucasian males classified as having normal color vision shows that ~40% of them require slightly more red in their mixtures than do others. These differences are small in comparison to the large discrepancies found in color deficiencies but are nevertheless highly consistent.......

.....This polymorphism is the result of a single nucleotide difference in the gene that changes the genetic code for the amino acid at site 180. In some individuals, site 180 contains alanine, whereas in others the site is occupied by serine. As detailed above, the presence of serine at site 180 produces a visual pigment that is slightly more long-wave sensitive than one with alanine at site 180. Those individuals with serine at site 180 in their LWS cone opsin thus require less red in their color match than those with alanine and vice versa......

http://physiologyonline.physiology.org/content/13/2/63.full

The brain also has a processing layer that compares blue/yellow and red/green, so it is quite likely that the perception of contrast will differ between individuals though I've found no study that has looked at this specifically.

Apologies for the rather tangential post.

David
 
The Bushnell's custom Elites are some of the worst binoculars I have tried and I have had ALOT of binoculars. They have WAY more flare than the Olympus, less resolution on axis, there CA control was no better than the Olympus and for my eyes the Olympus had better contrast. For the life of me I can't understand why there eyecups don't extend further! They were absolutely terrible for me for blackouts! Again I had to hold them about 1/8 to 1/4 inch from my face to stop the blackouts. The light cone just was not hitting my eyes right! Even then there is no way they are sharper! I would definitely never recommend these for anybody. They went back to the seller in 30 minutes. They did not work for me at all. I hated them! Uggh! Give me my SV 8.5x42's I want to get the bad taste of the Bushnell's out of my mouth! They remind of binoculars you would see at Walmart. No more Bushnells for me.



LOL Hahaha,

Thanks, looks like you immediately made up your mind. Same here, the first look through a pair of binoculars has to be WOW! If it's not, you'll have to look further. Everyone's eyes are different, I've not tried the Bushnell 7x26's, but maybe if I did I'd like them tremendously.

I've got immense pleasure from my Pentax Papilios 6.5x21 but even the length of the strap seems to make a difference to my eyes. Short-strapped they perform less well than 4 inches longer. How can that be?
I've even experimented with the twist-up eyecups, the left one a little bit out and the right one fully down, to get an even touch on my (apparently a-symmetrical) specs and I can notice a difference in the image.

I'd never take another bin that hasn't got twist-up/twist-down eyecups. It's just so much more convenient.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
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