• 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.

Why relatively few low power compacts? (1 Viewer)

BrightIdea

Well-known member
There's something I just dont get.

Low power binoculars seem to have many benefits over their 8x and 10x cousins:

• less hand shake
• potentially greater FOV (Most Else Being Equal)
• better depth of field (again, MEBE)
• larger exit pupil resulting in less critical eye placement
• larger exit pupil for those who can make use of it
• may be even easier to make "good" compared to higher mags

On top of this, who hasnt heard or complained themselves that small compact binos are a huge tradeoff. There are tons of threads about it here and elswhere regarding how lousy most compacts are, relatively speaking, yet a bino in the hand beats none in the bush so we either suffer them or dont bother.

Google "compact binocular" and you come up with thousands of 8, 9, and 10x binocs in the x20, 24, 25, and x28 range.

To me, its maddening.

Where are all of the compact 6x binocs? 6.5?

Heck, while I am at it, where are all of the 5x20 compacts? 6x24's?

Before you jump in an remind me of the exceptionally popular mid-sized viper 6x32, yosemite 6x32, and larger Zed 7x36... Think about why they are popular- great glass at their respective price points coupled with the benefit of lower mag. Why not take this concept down to the next size-category?

With so many bino's on the market now, and China seemingly cranking them out [insert pithy metaphore here], you'd think someone would meet what I think is a market demand.


Why is it a rarity to find a really small 6 or 6.5x, let alone a 5 or 5.5x ?
 
The trouble with compacts is that most have a very restricted FOV. The only exceptions I know of are the Opticron DBA Oasis 8x21 and a similar model from Kite with a FOV of 131 m @ 1000 m but the weight is 340 g, approximately 100 g more than competitors of the same configuration.
Large FOVs require large prisms and the lower the magnification, the larger the prisms have to be to maintain the AFOV resulting in an additional weight penalty.
An illustrative example in another dimension is the Leica 50 mm Ultravid HD series with a very low weight of 1000 g. The 12x50 has a FOV of 100 m (excellent), the 10x50 has 117 m (still excellent) but the 8x50 also has 117 m (somewhat restricted).

John
 
I second the OP and request lower-mag compacts.
The semi-compact Bushnell Excursion 8x28 has a 139m/1000m FOV which is remarkable for such a compact bin.
It would have been even more thrilling as a 7x28 with a 155m FOV, or a 6x28 with a 170m FOV.
The Ultravid 6x24 definitely has no large prisms. It has a FOV of 212m.
 
Last edited:
I cannot help with any 5-6.5x suggestions but I would suggest the 7x21 Olympus Roamer. Surprisingly good optically for the $25 they sell for on Amazon. The centerfield is very sharp...the image is brighter than I would expect for a 21 mm binocular and the depth of field is good because of the 7x.

Keep in mind these are little plastic binoculars but the optics are better than the packaging they come in.
 
Engineering is always a case of tradeoffs, so while I wasnt aware of the prism size vs FOV vs weight issues, I did figure there were at least SOME technical reasons for the paucity of 5.5x22 ultra compacts.

I also think many would give up some FOV and live with weight increase in exchange for reduction in size, improvement in eye placement/ease of use, and generally better image.
 
Like Looksharp65, I have always wished that Bushnell would re-introduce the little 8x28 Excursion roofs in a 6 or 7x.

Bushnell made some of the finest compact reverse porros over 20 years ago, but it seemed like they never set the bino world on fire, and no other manufactures other than Swift seemed to put out anything optically close. It is still hard to beat these old 6x25 Customs or the 7x26's. The 6x25 Customs with their 8* FOV are simply outstanding, and rather hard to come by.

There was a 6x25 Custom that popped up on ebay today from a BF member that only lasted a couple of hours at most:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bushnell-Cu...170732696585?pt=Binocular&hash=item27c0763409

If there was any real demand in the market place for these small lower power binos, manufacturers would be cranking them out by the boatload.
 
The relatively rare Zeiss Design Selection 6x18T* is still one of my favourites because it's so dinky, yet provides a nice image. The more recent Zeiss Victory 10x25 gives a sharper and bigger view, but tends to be more fiddly in use than the diminutive 6x18. For example, you can scan a scene easily with the 6x18, but the 10x25 needs focus adjustments much more frequently, although it's fine for stationary or slow-moving objects.
 
The old discontinued version of this Nikon 10 x 25 Trailblazer had a FOV of over 400 feet. It didn't have PC either. I don't understand why this one is deemed an improvement.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/nikon/nikon-trailblazer-10x25-atb-binocular

Garrett Wade sells these little Carson 7 x 18 Reverse Porros for $29.95. 488' at 1000 yard FOV. See them in their Nov. Catalog at p 66 along with 2 other inexpensive small binoculars (a zoom and an open frame 8x) and an expensive 2.5x Night Vision Binocular.

http://www.garrettwade.com/field-binoculars/p/28B03.01/

Here is a Kenko 7 x 18 Roof Prism: http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/kenko/kenko-sg-7x18-dh-binocular

This looks like (at $49.00) an upscale version of Eagle Optics very inexpensive Sportoculars. 488' FOV.

Bob
 
Last edited:
I don't know. I haven't tried them but the 7 x 18 Reverse Porro looks tempting at that price. And you can get the Kenkos for much less under Eagle Optic's Sportoculars FWIW.

Bob
 
Well I will be guinea on this one. My fascination with 7x binoculars has reasserted itself lately. You guys would probably get a chuckle out of some of the 7x bins I just recently purchased. I found the little Carsons for $24.99 so I ordered a pair. I will let you know what I think when they come in...and of course in comparison to the 7x21 Roamers.
 
I cannot help with any 5-6.5x suggestions but I would suggest the 7x21 Olympus Roamer. Surprisingly good optically for the $25 they sell for on Amazon. The centerfield is very sharp...the image is brighter than I would expect for a 21 mm binocular and the depth of field is good because of the 7x.

Keep in mind these are little plastic binoculars but the optics are better than the packaging they come in.

You could buy a used 6.5x21 Pentax Papilio for $90.

http://www.astromart.com/classifieds/details.asp?classified_id=755069

Brock

Update: Too late, looks like Frank already bought it!
 
Last edited:
I cannot help with any 5-6.5x suggestions but I would suggest the 7x21 Olympus Roamer. Surprisingly good optically for the $25 they sell for on Amazon. The centerfield is very sharp...the image is brighter than I would expect for a 21 mm binocular and the depth of field is good because of the 7x.

Keep in mind these are little plastic binoculars but the optics are better than the packaging they come in.

Frank, would these be compact enough to fit in bicycle jersey pocket?
 
They fit in my shirt pocket....just barely.

OK Frank, you just cost me 25.30. One of these days I am going to buy the little Leopold roofs. But for now these will have to do. Read a lot of reveiws for this binocular and nearly everyone agreed that it is a good binocular for the money.
 
As long as you aren't expecting a Bausch and Lomb Elite 7x26 when it arrives I think you will be satisfied with it. That and the fact that it doesn't even cost a half of a tank of gas.

;)
 
As long as you aren't expecting a Bausch and Lomb Elite 7x26 when it arrives I think you will be satisfied with it. That and the fact that it doesn't even cost a half of a tank of gas.

;)
Frank, not expecting miracles. As long as it is decent I will be happy with it. Will be used mostly while out riding bike. And if I break it, I ain't lost much.
 
I cannot help with any 5-6.5x suggestions but I would suggest the 7x21 Olympus Roamer. Surprisingly good optically for the $25 they sell for on Amazon. The centerfield is very sharp...the image is brighter than I would expect for a 21 mm binocular and the depth of field is good because of the 7x.

Keep in mind these are little plastic binoculars but the optics are better than the packaging they come in.

Frank, my first impression is that for 25 dollars, this is a sweet deal. Certainly has cheap feel, but optics are pretty good, size is small and very lightweight. Just what I need to carry in bicycle jersey pocket.
Cheap optics sure has come a long way. Got 3 pair of el cheapo's from years ago that are so blurry as to render them useless.
Keep on reporting these good "el cheapo" deals Frank!
 
I am glad you are happy with them. I have two more 7x20-somethings due to arrive shortly. One is the previously mentioned 7x18 Carson reverse porro (close to a 7x20-something) and the other is a Nikon Travelite II 7x20 that I picked up on ebay a few days ago. Will report when they arrive.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 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