Audubon Equinox vs. Nikon Monarch - Comments on Monarch? (1 Viewer)

Jacamar · Jul 8, 2005

I'm still trying to decide which binocular I should get: the Aububon Equinox HP, or the Nikon Monarch ATB.
In reading some of the threads on BF, I see that some people prefer the Monarch over the Equinox (the old model), and some vice versa. So that doesn't really tell me which is better.

So what should I do; should I go for the Monarch which many people seem to like, or should I go for the Equinox HP which is new and not well evaluated yet? It seems like the Monarchs would be the "safe" way to go, but I don't want to pass up the HP just because it's not well reviewed yet.

If anyone knows of any problems with the Monarchs (even something is small as lens covers) please list them here.

Also, let me know if there are any better 10x binoculars for under $300.

Thanks.

RobConnel · Jul 8, 2005

This may not relate to your questions but my in my experience a 10x binocular need to have enough weight to be stable and even out your natural hand tremors. The specs show both of these as fairly light so I would strongly urge you to make sure you have handled both first. I was told that Zeiss did a study and found 29 ounces to be the steadiest weight in general. I am having a tough time finding a 10x that I can balance well enough to want to spend a lot of time with.

Otto McDiesel · Jul 8, 2005

Jacamar said:
I'm still trying to decide which binocular I should get: the Aububon Equinox HP, or the Nikon Monarch ATB.
In reading some of the threads on BF, I see that some people prefer the Monarch over the Equinox (the old model), and some vice versa. So that doesn't really tell me which is better.

So what should I do; should I go for the Monarch which many people seem to like, or should I go for the Equinox HP which is new and not well evaluated yet? It seems like the Monarchs would be the "safe" way to go, but I don't want to pass up the HP just because it's not well reviewed yet.

If anyone knows of any problems with the Monarchs (even something is small as lens covers) please list them here.

Also, let me know if there are any better 10x binoculars for under $300.

Thanks.

Remember the 8x42 Equinox HP that i wrote about in an earlier post? It's not even six months old and it's already broken. The diopter setting unscrewed out and the whole right ocular lens comes out. It's dim, it's not sharp enough. It was better two months ago . Audubon Equinox binoculars are a piece of garbage.
For up to $300 Nikon Monarch is the way to go. Besides, Nikon has a better warranty. The 8x42 Monarch seems better than the 10x42, and visibly brighter. But if you prefer 10x, that's your choice. Have a look through them before buying, if you can. I would not trade my E2 for a wheelbarrow full of Monarchs, but in Guyana you probably need waterproof binoculars.
Never mind the ideal weight of 29 ounces. Such an idea comes from people who have never hiked across mountain ranges or through jungle for 3 months at a time, with a pair of binoculars around their neck and a 30 pound backpack on their back. What you can balance best (actually I would call this “holding steady”, not balancing) is what fits your hands and your eye sockets best.

Otto McDiesel · Jul 8, 2005

RobConnel said:
I am having a tough time finding a 10x that I can balance well enough to want to spend a lot of time with.

Well, maybe you would like an 8x better.

RobConnel · Jul 8, 2005

Otto McDiesel said:
Well, maybe you would like an 8x better.

I am leaning strongly that way indeed.

Jacamar · Jul 8, 2005

Otto McDiesel said:
The 8x42 Monarch seems better than the 10x42

I might go for the 8x if you can convince me that it really is better than 10x and that the advantages will outweigh the loss of magnification. I have used my brother's Celestron Outland 8x42 and the difference in magnification is very obvious.

I found this review <link> online which says that the Monarch has forest green armoring. Is that true about all models? All the other pictures I have seen of the Monarch show it with black armor. It's not that important, but I would like to know if it is. The review also says that the objective lens caps are quite inferior and don't work well. Again, is that true about all Monarchs? If so, are they bad enough to need replacing? I realize these things are very small, but they do contribute to one's overall enjoyment of the binoculars.

jasonsailing · Jul 8, 2005

Jacamar said:
I found this review <link> online which says that the Monarch has forest green armoring. Is that true about all models? All the other pictures I have seen of the Monarch show it with black armor. It's not that important, but I would like to know if it is. The review also says that the objective lens caps are quite inferior and don't work well. Again, is that true about all Monarchs? If so, are they bad enough to need replacing? I realize these things are very small, but they do contribute to one's overall enjoyment of the binoculars.

The armor is a dark green, darker than traditional forest green, so alot of photos of it look black. It is nearly black. Good luck with your decision!

Jason

Jacamar · Jul 8, 2005

Thanks Jason! That clears up one thing.

I hope someone can answer my other questions because the deadline to have my binoculars shipped is approaching (about a week or so).

Otto McDiesel · Jul 9, 2005

Jacamar said:
I might go for the 8x if you can convince me that it really is better than 10x and that the advantages will outweigh the loss of magnification.

Nobody can answer this for you, really, because it is a subjective matter.
10x roof prism binoculars in that price range seem less bright and contrasty, and all optical flaws (of which they have many) seem more visible in the 10x than the 8x.
On the other hand, 10x is more difficult to hold steady, but if you do hold them steady they provide more detail.
8x binoculars of the type we are talking here seem to have crisper images. For some reason, at the $300 mark, manufacturers turn out better 8x's than 10x's. 8x will also provide a wider field of view.
It really depends on what you are using them for, or what you prefer.
I prefer 10x. But if i were to choose between a really good 8x and a so-and-so 10x, i would take the 8x in a heartbeat.
Finally, at the $300 roof prism mark there will be plenty of variation from sample to sample. Whatever you choose, I hope that you get a good sample.
I would not be worried about lens caps. Lenses are quite a bit more important for birding.

Jacamar · Jul 9, 2005

Otto, I saw your post about the Equinox Customer Service. That really changes things for me because I was beginning to consider the Monarch over the Equinox HP. Thanks for correcting what you said earlier.
Have you ever looked at the optics4birding.com scorecard? The Equinox HP always scores much higher than the Monarch.
I realize that this is "electronic" and not based on peoples personal comparisons, but I think it is something to consider.

So what should I do now; should I be safe and go with the Monarch, or should I take a chance and get the Equinox HP which may be a better binocular?

Bill Atwood · Jul 9, 2005

If I had to pick between the 2 sight unseen I would go with the Monarch. I have looked at the non HP Equinoxes and thought they were garbage as soon I as I saw them. Handling them and looking through them confirmed my opinion.

Jacamar · Jul 9, 2005

Bill Atwood said:
If I had to pick between the 2 sight unseen I would go with the Monarch. I have looked at the non HP Equinoxes and thought they were garbage as soon I as I saw them. Handling them and looking through them confirmed my opinion.

So you don't think the HP would be improved enough to be worth considering?

Otto McDiesel · Jul 9, 2005

Bill Atwood said:
If I had to pick between the 2 sight unseen I would go with the Monarch.

Me too. In fact, if i had $300, if at all possible, i would save another $200 and get a Nikon Venturer LX 8x32. They can be found for less than $500 and are well worth the wait.

Jacamar · Jul 10, 2005

Eagle Optics speaks of a redesigned Monarch that "has all the same great features [as the old Monarch] but with added phase coatings, internal center focusing, and it's lighter weight". How recent is this "new PC" model?

Otto McDiesel · Jul 10, 2005

Jacamar said:
Eagle Optics speaks of a redesigned Monarch that "has all the same great features [as the old Monarch] but with added phase coatings, internal center focusing, and it's lighter weight". How recent is this "new PC" model?

About 3-4 years. The older ones, 8x40 and 10x40, were not phase coated. The new ones, 8x42 and 10x42, are.

Swedpat · Jul 10, 2005

Jacamar said:
Eagle Optics speaks of a redesigned Monarch that "has all the same great features [as the old Monarch] but with added phase coatings, internal center focusing, and it's lighter weight". How recent is this "new PC" model?

I'm a bit hesitant about the importance of the phase coating. Last year I compared the 8x42 Monarch to the 8x36 Sporter. The impression I got was that the Sporter (which hasn't phase coating) was in par to the Monarch in sharpness, but had the advantage of larger FOV. My comparison wasn't very careful, however. I just wonder what importance the term "phase coating" has in reality and wonder if it's in a certain extent a selling argument more than a visible improvement of the image quality...

Patric

Jacamar · Jul 11, 2005

I've decided on the Nikon Monarchs. I'm not sure yet whether I will go for 8x or 10x. Today I will go birding with my 10x and my brother's 8x and see how well the 8x works for me.

Jacamar · Jul 14, 2005

Yesterday I ordered the Nikon Monarch 8x42 from Eagle Optics.
I'll let you know what I think about them when they arrive.

Bruce M. Bowman · May 18, 2006

Nikon Venturer LX ??

Otto McDiesel said:
Me too. In fact, if i had $300, if at all possible, i would save another $200 and get a Nikon Venturer LX 8x32. They can be found for less than $500 and are well worth the wait.

I thought the Nikon Venturer LX was replaced by the Nikon Premier LX. No? The Premier was supposed to be the same as the Venturer with some improvements.

Bruce

Bruce M. Bowman · May 18, 2006

E2? What is it?

warranty. The 8x42 Monarch seems better than the 10x42, and visibly brighter. But if you prefer 10x, that's your choice. Have a look through them before buying, if you can. I would not trade my E2 for a wheelbarrow full of Monarchs, but in Guyana you probably need waterproof binoculars.

Sorry to have to demonstrate my ignorance. What's an E2?

Audubon Equinox vs. Nikon Monarch - Comments on Monarch? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Guest

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread