NDhunter
Experienced observer
Tero:
I agree with you the small reverse porros, seem better than the cheap
compacts.
And remember, "Only you can prevent forest fires".
Jerry
-
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.
Cheap Compact question (carson, brunton, bushnell...) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BrightIdea
- Start date
Tero:
I agree with you the small reverse porros, seem better than the cheap
compacts.
And remember, "Only you can prevent forest fires".
Jerry
I doubt Henry would endorse a Tracker. So I will have to risk this $50.00 on my own. Oh heck if I don't like it I can sell it on E-bay.
Bright:
I think this may be closer, 15% of the Alpha view at 15% of the price.
That is a great deal ?
Jerry
It does not work like that. The final few percents of view quality are always that much more expensive. So one might get 85+% of the (discernible) Alpha view for like 50% of the price. A typical case in point were the Leica APO vs non-APO Televid 77 scopes.
lilcrazy2
Well-known member
Tero is right about the 8x25 Columbia Backcountry's being one of the better compact roofs available due to it's phase coated and silvered prisms which is very unusual in any compact bino under $100.
Here is another apparent deal on a small compact roof - the Vanguard 8x25 Platinum SDT-8230P - magnesium housing and phase and silvered prisms, plus lifetime warranty. Quite an attractive package for $59.95 shipped. I note that BHPPhoto has these for $130 and Opticsplanet for $150,
http://vanguard.factoryoutletstore.com/details/8083/vanguard-sdt-8250p.html?cid=17038&chid=400
While I see that Amazon still has one of the 8x25 Columbia backcountry's available, the price has jumped from $80.25 to $107.58 in the last couple of days.
Here is another apparent deal on a small compact roof - the Vanguard 8x25 Platinum SDT-8230P - magnesium housing and phase and silvered prisms, plus lifetime warranty. Quite an attractive package for $59.95 shipped. I note that BHPPhoto has these for $130 and Opticsplanet for $150,
http://vanguard.factoryoutletstore.com/details/8083/vanguard-sdt-8250p.html?cid=17038&chid=400
While I see that Amazon still has one of the 8x25 Columbia backcountry's available, the price has jumped from $80.25 to $107.58 in the last couple of days.
normjackson
Well-known member
What a pity; was hoping for an update on the Monty Python Yorkshiremen sketch
"Aye, we had such b***s when we were salmon fishin' we used to frighten off grizzlies by pulling ourselves out of 't water onto rock and shaking ourselves dry."
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
What a pity; was hoping for an update on the Monty Python Yorkshiremen sketch
"Aye, we had such b***s when we were salmon fishin' we used to frighten off grizzlies by pulling ourselves out of 't water onto rock and shaking ourselves dry."
Best bit of one-upmanship ever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FatHLHG2uGY
That's my favorite version.
"Binoculars? Luxury! We would have loved binoculars. We had to carry the Wilson Observatory, on our backs, all across Alaska, right over the mountains, and when we got to where we were going, we had to turn 'round walk back across the continent, swim over to Puerto Rico, grab Arecibo, swim back through the Suez Canal pulling the bloody thing behind us, up the west coast, getting eaten alive by sharks six times a day, and when we finally got there, our dad wouldn't even give us a look!
Mark
Last edited:
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
BrightIdea
Well-known member
Update on the update. I reordered carson raven and also grabbed the brunton echo to try. Good news, they arrived quickly. Bad news, both binocs were unusable, as the 2 barrels couldnt be brought into one image. The image through any single barrel was not satisfactory for a $30 binoc, let alone one that retails for far more. They go back for certain.
0-3, and it looks like inexpensive is leaning to "cheap" at this point.
I also ordered the Swift reliant 9x27, which arrived this eve. Its too late to really check them out, but at least they are collimated and the diopter seems to be centered. They are rather large (though light) for a compact. Cursory check and first impressions of the fit and finish are thumbs up. I dig the rubber nubs on the diopter and focus wheel. The eye cups rotate out and are VERY stiff, which IMO is a good thing (one of my only gripes with the Yosemite's is very loose eyecups. I'll check out the image tomorrow.
BrightIdea
Well-known member
Update # 3- The Swifts
I was out with the Swift Reliant 9x27 for a while yesterday.
Very lightweight, absolute minimum IPD was about right for me, so not adequate for those with close set eyes or children.
By comparison noticeably not as bright as 7x36 excursion, 6x Yosemite, or 12x50 nikon. Probably shouldnt be due to Magnification and, in the case of the Nikon, objective size. Apples-Oranges really.
(As an aside, as a result of the extended comparisons, I did learn that the Nikons have a bit smaller sweet spot than i thought and that they have a yellowish tint to them. I never noticed this when using them alone. I find the sweet spot is very sharp though.)
The Swifts were not as sharp as any of the above listed binocs, but not unusably so. At least 40% of edge was out of focus when center was sharp, but it could be re-focused. (this is difficult to determine... how do you guys figure out degree of edge distortion!?)
In all these are IMO not true compacts unless you have big pockets. Being light, you could, however, wear them around your neck all day.
The extra magnification is neat to have, the FOV was for me very usable, but I'd opt for higher quality glass if/when I decide to go the higher mag route.
This is the quality I am expecting, except in a package 33% smaller (carson raven size).
Since the other 3 recent purchases were so lousy, I came away rather pleased with these overall. FWIW, my wife liked them best.
Likes: ergos, light weight, size, price, better than expected image for a small $80 compact 9x. Attractive and solid diopter/eyecup/focus knob.
Dislikes: min IPD too big. Not as bright or sharp as I'd like for binocs this size.
In the end I am returning them because they are redundant, as they are they are for all practical purposes the same size as my 7x36 excursions (though quite a bit lighter).
Next up... those funny looking reverse Porro's everyone keeps recommending!
I was out with the Swift Reliant 9x27 for a while yesterday.
Very lightweight, absolute minimum IPD was about right for me, so not adequate for those with close set eyes or children.
By comparison noticeably not as bright as 7x36 excursion, 6x Yosemite, or 12x50 nikon. Probably shouldnt be due to Magnification and, in the case of the Nikon, objective size. Apples-Oranges really.
(As an aside, as a result of the extended comparisons, I did learn that the Nikons have a bit smaller sweet spot than i thought and that they have a yellowish tint to them. I never noticed this when using them alone. I find the sweet spot is very sharp though.)
The Swifts were not as sharp as any of the above listed binocs, but not unusably so. At least 40% of edge was out of focus when center was sharp, but it could be re-focused. (this is difficult to determine... how do you guys figure out degree of edge distortion!?)
In all these are IMO not true compacts unless you have big pockets. Being light, you could, however, wear them around your neck all day.
The extra magnification is neat to have, the FOV was for me very usable, but I'd opt for higher quality glass if/when I decide to go the higher mag route.
This is the quality I am expecting, except in a package 33% smaller (carson raven size).
Since the other 3 recent purchases were so lousy, I came away rather pleased with these overall. FWIW, my wife liked them best.
Likes: ergos, light weight, size, price, better than expected image for a small $80 compact 9x. Attractive and solid diopter/eyecup/focus knob.
Dislikes: min IPD too big. Not as bright or sharp as I'd like for binocs this size.
In the end I am returning them because they are redundant, as they are they are for all practical purposes the same size as my 7x36 excursions (though quite a bit lighter).
Next up... those funny looking reverse Porro's everyone keeps recommending!
Are you saying the Olympus Trackers 8x20's are as good optically as an alpha roof prism like a Leica Ultravid 8x20? Well, I had $45.00 worth of E-bay Bonus Bucks so I snagged a pair for $15.00 shipped. I want to see if they are better than the Olympus Roamer's. I read your comparison of the Ultravid to the Tracker's and it was quite interesting. It sounds like a compact Nikon EII. Another case of the much cheaper porro being as good as the much more expensive alpha roof like the Nikon 8x30 EII and the Zeiss 8x32 FL.
Last edited:
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
No, I didn't realize the 20mm Roamers were also reverse porro. The 25mm Trackers are a whole different binocular. I never looked at the 8x20 Roamers so I can't comment on them. I'll only vouch for the 25mm Trackers.
Mark
Edit: Actually it seems there's a roof 8x21 and a reverse porro 8x21, both Roamers, neither of which I've seen. It's the reverse porro 8x25 Tracker I'm talking about, have been talking about all along. The Amazon price seems to jump around on a daily basis, perhaps in response to some kind of search engine that checks forums just like this??? Sounds like capitalism to me. Caveat emptor.
Last edited:
These are the ones I bought on that auction site we all know. Actually the
specifications look pretty good on them. BAK4 porro prisms, twist up eyecups, 16mm ER, FMC lenses, 8.2 ft.Min.Focus but a little narrow on FOV 315'. Not bad though.
Olympus Tracker PC I 8X25 Binocular
Product Description: The Tracker PC series is Olympus' stylish line of compact porro prism models. They've got a distinctive silver & black finish unlike others offerings, and feature fully multicoated lenses. Twist-up eyecups satisfyingly lock into place, and of course ±2 dioptric correction is integrated.
Lens coatings shield you from UV rays
• High-index BaK-4 porro prisms
Prism Type: Porro
Magnification: 8x
Objective Lens Diameter: 25 mm
Angle of View: 6°
Field-of-View: 315' @ 1000 yd / 105 m @ 1000 m
Minimum Focus Distance: 8.2' / 2.5 m
Exit Pupil Diameter: 3.1 mm
Eye Relief: 16 mm
Interpupillary Adjustment: Not Specified By Manufacturer
Focus Type: Center
Tripod Socket: None
Weatherproofing: None
Dimensions (WxHxD): 4.49 x 1.89 x 3.86" / 114 x 48 x 98mm
Weight: 9.88 oz / 280g
Attachments
Last edited:
BrightIdea
Well-known member
$15 shipped for the tracker? Wow. Instead of throwing them away when you are done, I'd be interested in purchasing them so you can recoup your outlay.
;-)
;-)
That's only because I had an Ebay Bucks certificate for $45.00. They actually cost me $60.00 with shipping.
My girlfriend has the Olympus PCI 25X10 and, despite being a porro fan, I still prefer the Silva Lite-Tech 25X10...
I got the Olympus Tracker 8x25 today and I have to agree with you Kammerdiner they are amazing little binoculars. Every bit as good and better in some ways than the alpha roofs. I have had just about all the alpha roofs at one time or another and you are right these are as good optically as any of them and better in these ways. They are brighter because of the 25mm aperture and the fact that they are a porro they transmit more light. Also, as you say eye placement is much less fidgity with the bigger 3mm exit pupil versus the 2.5mm in the 8x20 alphas. I bought a pair of Leica Ultravids 8x20's on E-bay once for $400.00 new and to be truthful I only kept them a few days because I had so many blackouts and eye placement was so difficult on them. The Olympus Trackers remind me of the Nikon EII in ways because it is as good or better than much more expensive compact alpha roofs. Another porro that slays the big name roofs. I find they fit my hands better than the tiny Leica Ultravids too. The focus is smoother than the Ultravid and roll-up eyecups work as good as the alphas and lock in place perfectly. It comes with a nice little case which attaches to your belt and a nice strap and eyepiece covers. You really don't need objective covers because the objective lenses are inset pretty deeply. One big advantage over the alpha roofs is the startling 3D images the porro gives you and they have amazing DOF for such an inexpensive glass. Like you say you don't have to worry about them like you do your $600.00 Ultravids either and for that reason they get more use. The edge sharpness is very good too in fact it is remarkable. Overall a very good compact and one of the best I have seen regardless of price. I was comparing them to my Swarovision's 8.5x42 at sunset and I know that is not a fair comparison! But I will tell you the little suckers held there own. Amazing little binoculars and I highly recommend them. I have heard the Pentax Papillo 6.5x21mm are really good to for a compact and I may try those. Look for a review.
Last edited:
BrightIdea
Well-known member
I appreciate your assessment, thanks very much.
Having been underwhelmed thus far, I am taking the (earlier) advice and grabbing a pair of Trackers soon.
Having been underwhelmed thus far, I am taking the (earlier) advice and grabbing a pair of Trackers soon.
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Whew! I thought we'd never get that straightened out.
It's not that the little cheap roofs are all bad; it's just that I have yet to see one as good as, as small as, as light as, the Olympus. The only thing that matches them is an alpha.
I still have the Columbia Kruger 8x25 roof, and it's alright. It's worth the $80 I paid for it I guess. The contrast is not too impressive, especially in backlit situations, the sweet spot is smallish and seems oddly asymmetrical, they're big, and must weigh a pound or more in the case. But I'll use them for kayaking since they're cheap and waterproof.
And Dennis--you have the 8.5 SV and haven't commented on them? What gives? For me, that thing just breaks the optics spell. I'm set for life (full-size anyway).
Mark
It's not that the little cheap roofs are all bad; it's just that I have yet to see one as good as, as small as, as light as, the Olympus. The only thing that matches them is an alpha.
I still have the Columbia Kruger 8x25 roof, and it's alright. It's worth the $80 I paid for it I guess. The contrast is not too impressive, especially in backlit situations, the sweet spot is smallish and seems oddly asymmetrical, they're big, and must weigh a pound or more in the case. But I'll use them for kayaking since they're cheap and waterproof.
And Dennis--you have the 8.5 SV and haven't commented on them? What gives? For me, that thing just breaks the optics spell. I'm set for life (full-size anyway).
Mark
Let's just say the Swarovision 8.5x42 is the best 42mm binocular I have ever seen in my life and I have had ALOT of binoculars in my life as we all know. It is a leap forward in optics and is above all else I have seen. I had to buy them! They are almost magic the image is so good. I have never seen anything like them. Simply amazing!
lilcrazy2
Well-known member
Dennis
Glad you like the little 8x25 Trackers, as I have thought they were a real hidden gem for the 6 months I have owned mine. One thing that can make them a little better is to black out the silver coating which extends about 3/8" up inside the objective tubes and causes a slight amount of veiling glare in certain viewing situations.
Tom
Glad you like the little 8x25 Trackers, as I have thought they were a real hidden gem for the 6 months I have owned mine. One thing that can make them a little better is to black out the silver coating which extends about 3/8" up inside the objective tubes and causes a slight amount of veiling glare in certain viewing situations.
Tom
