What binoculars do you use? (1 Viewer)

BruceH said:

What's the status of the Vanguard Endeavor ED 8X42 that I thought you mentioned was a car binocular? I also recall that a Swaro 8X30 CL was in the mix at one time.

Click to expand...

I predict there`ll be an SF before Xmas, then anyone using an SV will be told they need their eyes tested if they think its better than an SF.

I was reading a post the other day from 2005, some poor guy was asking about his 7x35 Nikon and was getting a drubbing about what was the best binocular, nothing changes.

Torview said:

I predict there`ll be an SF before Xmas, then anyone using an SV will be told they need their eyes tested if they think its better than an SF.
..................

Click to expand...

From the thread below, it appears it may be on order.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3005111&postcount=146

They will ultimately be sold off as to heavy/big (42mm) for a birding binocular and replaced by the hoped for Zeiss 8X32 SF! Actually, that may not be a bad route to go if one is up to spending the money and the SF line can match the hype. The SF may end up on many peoples "what do you use" list. On edit: If I were in the market for a high end binocular and was using this thread to get ideas of what to buy, then I would also add the pending Zeiss SF and wait to see how it works out berfore making a purhase.

The eye test comment gave me a laugh. I believe I was told something similar to that when I stated that I preferred the Nikon EDG II 8X32 over the SV!

On 2nd Edit: I use the Nikon EDG II 8X32 or the Nikon E2 8X30 for general birding of closer subjects when mainly walking around.

Torview said:

I predict there`ll be an SF before Xmas, then anyone using an SV will be told they need their eyes tested if they think its better than an SF.

I was reading a post the other day from 2005, some poor guy was asking about his 7x35 Nikon and was getting a drubbing about what was the best binocular, nothing changes.

Click to expand...

Amen, brother! It's like kids at Christmas, they will forsake their old toys to play with the "latest and greatest" hand delivered by Santa himself, until they get tired of playing with them and then start begging their parents for whatever the toy/electronics industry is hawking on TV.

It's like the old Madison Ave. Maxim sez: Give me a child sitting in front of the TV set for for his first seven years, and I'll make him a constant consumer for life.

One thing about being poor, you can still afford to be self-righteous.

Oh, I forgot to answer the OP's question:

The same three bins I've been using for the past 15 years (though not the original samples).

Nikon 8x32 SE (for when I'm out and about)
Nikon 8x30 EII (for close-in birding in wooded areas and my backyard)
Swift 804 Audubon MC (for stargazing and birding from the porch or in the park)

Brock

Still waiting to try one of those Swifts.

Did you have to sale the Vixen I gave you?

Bryce...

I'm down to four that I use most.

The 8x se is the house, bird feeder binocular.
The 7x SLC, the car, short walks really anytime.
8x32 sv, long hikes, travel.
Minox 15x, strictly tripod use from house or static viewing the lake or ocean.

Bryce...

Only 1 pair now for me, Kowa Genesis 8 x 33. Covers every need I have and they're the busines.

Andy

Hello,

A 8x32 Meopta Meostar as my travel and go everywhere binocular. A very nice and good all arounder binocular.
A 10x42 Zeiss HT. My main serious birding, field work and hunting binocular. Great !!
A 10x40 Swarovski W GA. I use it alternating with the HT. Almost as good for my uses. As the HT (I presume...), a binocular made to last more than one generation of users....

Best Regards!

PHA

I've had extended viewing sessions with some highly regarded glass over the last two months and I still think my ED2 8X43 look fantastic. The few things they do wrong are very easy to ignore compared to all of the things they do so well.

Chosun Juan said:

Zen-Ray ED3 8x43 ...... great value! ...... I keep them in the car most of the time, ready to use, or grab for a walk ...... you can buy on-line direct here: http://www.zen-ray.com/shop/binoculars/zened3/zened3-8x43.html


Chosun :gh:

Click to expand...

Nikon EII 8x30 for sunny days
Nikon SE 10x42 for bit more reach and astronomy
Zeiss HT 8x42 for all purpose and rainy days

brocknroller said:

Well, I'm glad you got off the fence, Phil, because the border patrol might have thought you were an illegal trying to sneak in.

Very nice collection, you seem to have all your bases covered. It was also interesting to see how you use your different binoculars, which I suggested earlier might be helpful to the OP.

What year is the Swarovski 8x30 W GA? Is there a yellow tint to the image? What I've love to do is buy one of these and then ask Swaro to install the latest optics and coatings.

Also, have you tried the leatherette version and if so, do you find the eyecups on the GA to be more comfortable to use? Can you see the entire FOV?

Brock

Click to expand...

Hi,

I have both the leatherette 8x30 and 7x42 GA. Comfortablity of the eyecups is more or less the same. I wear glasses and need to remove the eyecups to view full FOV.

Andy

Ah well, lurked too long already so maybe as good a point to say "Hi" and introduce myself.

"Most used" is sort of a diffuse list for me - nothing is perfect for everything.

- Nikon 8x32 EDG I most often these days, for general purpose. Main advantages over porros (to me) is fast focus, close focus capability, shock resistance. Waterproof issue is very minor.

- Nikon 8x32 SE when I really want the stereo effect and probably won't want to view something from very close in. I don't worry about weather. Never had a porro fog since my 1970s Bushnell 8x30, which had other issues too. If I don't carry a daypack when it might rain, and other gear, I should probably just stay home.

- Nikon 10x32 HG (not L) when I'm likely to be in mostly open country, or want to view wildlife as opposed to transient birds etc.

- Leupold Katmai 6x32 for walks in dense forest, or using from a vehicle. Or sometimes at a theater or performance. Actually use these quite often. Compact, not particularly light but few worries about dropping a pack containing them vs a porro.

- Nikon 7x35 Gold Sentinel I've had since 1991 - for times when I just don't want to miss anything. Yes, the wide field of view *shouldn't* matter all that much, but these apparently have some inexplicable mojo. I simply see more things more often, as though they somehow attract birds - despite single coatings and other matters.

- Nikon 12x50 SE, for stars and also long-range viewing (e.g., birds and other wildlife on a pond). Mount these on a chest tripod and I can hold them as steadily as a 7x, and still follow moving things. Nicest ergonomics of any bins I've used, and an amazing view.

- Leica 8x20 BC Trinovid, not sure of date but probably from the 1980s, for theater or any time I really don't expect to be using bins much or for long if at all, and light is fairly good. (My wife is a theater nut btw.)

- Minox Macroscope 8x25 monocular, very light and perfect for close-in viewing of insects or other inaccessible things. Perfect companion to a natural history museum. Can act like a 6x magnifier when used at close focus of 1 ft, for examining things in glass cases - best with a lightweight plastic tripod.

- Zeiss 8x30B front-focus monocular (c. 1959-60), for times when I may be viewing in dim light but want something compact enough to fit in a shoulder bag. Amazing optics for the time; in average daylight viewing conditions, would have to do A/B comparison to tell from the SE.

There are others but these usually get used sometime in a typical week.

If I had to choose just one for some unspecified use...I'd probably be bumfoozled.

- Bill

- Nikon 7x35 Gold Sentinel I've had since 1991 - for times when I just don't want to miss anything. Yes, the wide field of view *shouldn't* matter all that much, but these apparently have some inexplicable mojo. I simply see more things more often, as though they somehow attract birds - despite single coatings and other matters.

Click to expand...

Though the outer edges may be soft, I find extra-wide 7x35s to be the best at actually detecting and trending
birds and animals in the first place. You have the field width, and the field depth from the 7x, etc.
I think your mojo is 'big volume', depth times width squared. Motion is seen even where focus isn't sharp,
and you're drawn to it. I scout a new spot with Binolux 11-degrees and then return with ~8.4-degree
Meoptas or the Stream Lines.

OPTIC_NUT said:

Though the outer edges may be soft, I find extra-wide 7x35s to be the best at actually detecting and trending
birds and animals in the first place. You have the field width, and the field depth from the 7x, etc.
I think your mojo is 'big volume', depth times width squared. Motion is seen even where focus isn't sharp,

Click to expand...

Yes, that's it exactly.

Actually, the outer field sharpness per se with the Gold Sentinel Nikon is remarkably good, everything considered. It seems to be more of a field curvature issue. And if you aren't looking at a stage, or at a distant mountain range - if you're out in the woods, the field curvature becomes unimportant because things are at varied distances away from center of your focussed field anyway. More important is spotting movement, or finding that darting bat or swallow fast enough.

OPTIC_NUT said:

I scout a new spot with Binolux 11-degrees ...

Click to expand...

I actually have a Binolux EWA, and some day will get motivated enough to send it out for collimation and cleaning.

You don't have the same resolution off-center anyhow. I respect that some want it
clear all the way across, though. There are Focal/KMart clones of the big-wide-Binolux out there at auctions,
almost spitting images. I mention that because they are revivals 20-25 yrs later, with very clean interiors and fine
(lighter viscosity) Korean grease. About the only thing that didn't work out at the Korean Focal plant
was the vinyl used on those funky green "Siam Cat" eyecups. The wide Swift Nighthawks are
quite similar to the wide Binolux.

OPTIC_NUT said:

You don't have the same resolution off-center anyhow. I respect that some want it
clear all the way across, though.

Click to expand...

All depends on the use I think. Sometimes a very flat field and sharpness almost to the field stop is breathtaking - and very useful. In some other situations, meh.

Actually, what I'd love to see (and doubt I ever will) is:

- 7x32 or 7x35 roof prism (compactness, close focus, shock resistance etc)
- Ultra wide field of view.
- Modern multicoatings.
- Field flattener optics, maybe.
- Lightweight composite construction a la Monarch 7.
- And short eye relief would be fine by me.

But this runs so counter to what manufacturers currently percieve as important that it seems like a very long shot. Also the very wide field may be difficult or impossible to achieve with roof designs? I don't know.

Acceepting one trade-off helps...like the eye relief. Most are vehement on that though.
The value of hearing the bird, then eye-seeing, then bringing the optic to bear. I'm hooked on that now.
I'd take the tradeoff of more objective length, in a 10x. That gets you so much improvement and relief for the ocular.

The 6.5X32 Fury is quite a bit like you describe, but maybe not quite.

woodfluter said:

All depends on the use I think. Sometimes a very flat field and sharpness almost to the field stop is breathtaking - and very useful. In some other situations, meh.

Actually, what I'd love to see (and doubt I ever will) is:

- 7x32 or 7x35 roof prism (compactness, close focus, shock resistance etc)
- Ultra wide field of view.
- Modern multicoatings.
- Field flattener optics, maybe.
- Lightweight composite construction a la Monarch 7.
- And short eye relief would be fine by me.

But this runs so counter to what manufacturers currently percieve as important that it seems like a very long shot. Also the very wide field may be difficult or impossible to achieve with roof designs? I don't know.

Click to expand...

A little Fury review:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=109457
Says there is a very wide sweet spot.
8.5 degrees.....not pushing their luck, but a generous field.
Seems like the eye placement isn't as fussy as Yosemites.

That spot is filled for me with the Meopta 6.5x32s...they have a cranky ocular
but their eyecup tames it perfectly. Crisp to maybe 90-95%.
Against the criteria of weight....they are NOT light, though.
The Nikon M7s are awesome that way.
The Swarovski 8x30 CLs are lighter but a lot less fov.

OPTIC_NUT said:

A little Fury review:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=109457
Says there is a very wide sweet spot.
8.5 degrees.....not pushing their luck, but a generous field.
Seems like the eye placement isn't as fussy as Yosemites.

Click to expand...

Ummm, Fury not quite achieving my desiderata.
8.5 degrees FOV = 51.5 degrees AFOV.
(As compared with 55.3 for SE, 57.2 for EDG.)

The 7x35 Gold Sentinel at 9.3 actual = 59.3 AFOV.
Now, if these were 6.5x with the same AFOV, the FOV would be 10 degrees.
And that would be close to the *minimum* I'd want, for 6.5x.

For another interesting comparison, consider the 9x35A Nikons I have.

(Yeah, I know, entirely different power. But the AFOV appears to be primarily determined by eyepiece design - unless I'm mistaken. Note that 8x, 10x and 12x SEs have the same AFOV.)

So these 9x35s are claimed to have 7.3 degrees FOV.
And they have the shortest eye relief I've encountered, too. But workable for me.
AFOV would then be 59.7 degrees. (So a 7x with this eyepiece should be about 7.4 FOV.)
But...
I've checked these repeatedly against a distant fence and flagging placed at intervals, and measured carefully with long tape, and I get 7.6 degrees with AFOV of 61.7 degrees. So a putative 7x version would have almost 9.8 degrees FOV.

Now that's more like it.
But not really what's on offer these days.