• 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.

6-7x COmpact Binocular comparison (1 Viewer)

I would second Steve's comments. The optical improvements in my Raven (in comparison to the Yosemite) seem fairly easily noticeable. I would pay the extra $40 considering the improvements plus the already inherent appeal to these bins.
 
I'll definitely take your (and Steve's) word for it. If the right side was as good as the left they would be winners. Even so, viewing individual tubes it seems like the E2 still wins in overall image quality, and it's certainly smaller, so the Raptors are going back today. I imagine if I want to try them again at some point in the future they (or an improved version) will still be around.

FrankD said:
I would second Steve's comments. The optical improvements in my Raven (in comparison to the Yosemite) seem fairly easily noticeable. I would pay the extra $40 considering the improvements plus the already inherent appeal to these bins.
Click to expand...
 
Quality control at the lower price points is always suspect (heck, even the higher price points at times). I would not doubt that you have a "bad" barrel. Why not send them in to be looked at as Steve suggested?
 
There is also the issue of early in the production run so there may be production issues they haven't ironed out ("What do you mean they don't know how tight to make that screw ... you do it just so").

The rule of never buy version 1.0 of anything applies!
 
FrankD said:
We all bought Zen ED gen 1's.

;)

Yeah, yeah, I know. :)
Click to expand...

Actually we really ended up buying v 1.1 and helped fix at least one 1.0 production issue (focuser friction not set correctly on some bins).

I'm particularly thinking of the first bins of the production line. After the first couple of batches are done they should have most of the overlooked items sorted out.
 
do you see any big difference between 6x and 7x? From my experience, going from 8x to 7x, the only first impression was larger field of view. Then, the less magnification comes in when I compare them together.
 
No, I do not see a big difference, but it seems like it is a bigger difference than there is between 7x-8x. It very likely is just me, but I do start to see a bit smaller apparent image at 6x. However 6x is fine for me unless the distance gets pushed. As a note of interest, the ZEN ED 7x36 I have will clock any other 6-7x glass I have at distance. The images seem no bigger, but detail is far more easily seen.
 
My use is for less than 500 ft. So I think 6x might be good for me. But since I already have a 7x36, I don't know if the extra FOV with 6x will be any useful.
 
blizdas said:
I think this thread is interesting in that it touches upon an aspect of binocular use that most people tend to overlook. This would be the binoculars "user-friendliness". The lower power bins are so comfortable to look through, especially when you are trying to observe objects like birds which are constantly on the move. Too often people assume that lower power means that they will see less which is generally not the case, at least within the context of birdwatching. A wide field of view and good depth of field will help most birders more than that extra 2-3x.
It would be nice to see a resurgence in the popularity of these lower power models.
Click to expand...

totally agree with the statement. After using my 7x36 ED2 for a while, I am amazed that I can actually see better with 7x than a few 8x/10x binos I have. The field of view and deeper depth of field do make a big difference. It is one area that bigger is not necessarily better.
 
I have both the Bausch & Lomb 7x26 customs & the newer Bushnell Elite 7x26's. The newer ones have horrid strap attachment rings. Other than that, they do slightly outperform the orginal customs, optically. But not by much. I think the latest version is the "E2". It has Bluetooth...
Just kidding about the bluetooth. Anyway, all three are still the "reference standard" for compacts, optically. Not waterproof though.
 
Jay.....horrid strap attachment rings? They swivel....one of the best things to come along since.....night baseball or.....french fries....or....whatever. That, plus the twist-ups and the more substantial body, make it the best of the compacts. I've been buggin' the folks in Kansas City to boost the objectives to 28mm, cook up some plossls or orthos to make the fov a full 8*, and seal the obj end (ala Canon IS). No luck so far but if all of us who like the little bino start harpin' about it......
 
Thanks for those interesting comparisons, Steve.

I almost didn't read this thread because it was labeled "6-7x COmpact Binocular comparison," and with large hands and typical cloudy skies, "compact bins" are not my cup o' tea.

But when I actually read your OP, I realized that you weren't writing about true compacts, in the marketing sense of the word, but rather 6-7x midsized bins.

Most manufacturers, stores, and reviewers designate bins below 30mm aperture as "compacts"

http://www.optics4birding.com/bushnell-excursion-8x28-11563.html

Here's Steve Ingraham's review of several compact bins:
http://www.betterviewdesired.com/compact-binoculars-bvd.php

The ZR 7x36 ED2 is not even "compact" in the generic sense of the word, being only 7/10 of an inch shorter than the full sized ZRs.

Compacts are what Ingraham nicknamed "jewelry bins" (literally, in the case of Swaro crystal compacts, which are studded with diamond crystals):
http://www.opticsplanet.net/swarovski-idomeneo-binocular-46102.html

Notice the Swaros are called "pocket bins." Someone on another thread thought pocket bins should be made into a separate category rather than being lumped in with compacts, particularly reverse porros, which don't easily fit into most shirt pockets.

Not to be schoolmarmish (that job's already been filled elsewhere :), but I would like to see a standardization of binocular terminology so that when someone sees the word "compact bin" in a thread title or review, he knows the discussion is about reverse porros or roofs below 30mm aperture and not a 7x36 midsized bin that's almost 6 inches long!
 
brocknroller said:
Thanks for those interesting comparisons, Steve.

I almost didn't read this thread because it was labeled "6-7x COmpact Binocular comparison," and with large hands and typical cloudy skies, "compact bins" are not my cup o' tea.

But when I actually read your OP, I realized that you weren't writing about true compacts, in the marketing sense of the word, but rather 6-7x midsized bins.
Click to expand...

Strange what we can miss sometimes :eek!: I surely did call them compacts and you are right to point that out. Sort of embarassing.

Hey Skipper, who is that Klingon in your avatar anyway?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 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.

Similar threads

A
Entry - Midrange Binocular Recommendation ($500)
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
Binovehje
B
dwatsonbirder
Compact comparisons: Low end vs high end
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Rg548
R
D
Zeiss SFL 8x40 This Year's Best New Birding Binocular!
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
AlphaFan
A
J
brief comparison between Vanguard Endeavor ED 2 / ED4 10x42
Replies
0
Views
510
jackjack
J
J
Do you consider Resale Value/Opportunities due to Brand Recognition?
Replies
14
Views
704
Patudo
P

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top