• 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.

Nikon Monarch HG wins 1st Place in Field and Stream test of 13 new Binoculars. (1 Viewer)

Nice.
Although they've got the FOV wrong. I've not got the actual figure to hand, but think it's way wider than that.

Assuming you are referencing the 10X42 Nikon HG in the review, then the review shows 362 ft for the 10X42 and that is what Nikon USA is showing in the specs.

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/nikon-products/binoculars/monarch-hg-10x42.html

Could you be thinking of the 8X42 HG which has a FOV of 435 ft at 1,000 yards?


Here is a link to the other post on the F & S 2017 review .......

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=349892&highlight=Stream
 
Last edited:
This kind of blows my mind ......... that it beat out the Noctivid.
I agree, but then again value for money is part of the scoring system which is where Noctovid is let down due to it being the most expensive in the testing group.
 
Yes, I find comparison tests regardless of price far more instructive. Because value for money has been added to the formula, the Nikon MHG magically becomes a better binocular than the Noctovid, yet in pure terms of viewing enjoyment (brightness, resolution, etc), I suspect a shuffling of the top ten would happen.
 
Yes, I find comparison tests regardless of price far more instructive. Because value for money has been added to the formula, the Nikon MHG magically becomes a better binocular than the Noctovid, yet in pure terms of viewing enjoyment (brightness, resolution, etc), I suspect a shuffling of the top ten would happen.

And value for money is such a personal thing. Bushnells usually turn in a solid rather than stellar performance and so give good value but the example tested had focus backlash which wouldn't get a 'value for money' accolade from me. Others may have other priorities.

Lee
 
What is interesting is that in last years Field and Stream binocular test the Sig Sauer Zulu 7 scored 92.3 which bested both the Nikon Monarch MHG(89.6) and the Leica Noctivid(88.3) on this years test for considerably less money. The Zulu 7 is another Kamakura made binocular like the Tract Toric.

https://www.fieldandstream.com/ten-new-binoculars-ranked-and-rated
https://www.outdoorhub.com/reviews/2017/01/31/field-test-sig-sauer-zulu7-binocular/

But Dennis have you seen the Zulu? Its so ugly that if you had it on a shelf in your bedroom you wouldn't be able to sleep. It looks like the result of a mating between a picatinny rail and a toilet brush.

Lee
 
This kind of blows my mind ......... that it beat out the Noctivid.

Bizarre mix of binoculars in this "test". Why add a $2700 bin in the test among bins which are less than half the price then deduct points from "value" stating it's too expensive compared to the others. No kidding lol. The Nvid shouldn't have been included here. Reading the summary of the Nvid it got perfect scores in image and other areas, but lost points for "value" and the condensation defect. Even without the sample defect the Nvid may still be stuck in 2nd place since they deem it's not a value buy. No alpha/top tier bins are value buys or could be categorized under "bang for buck", etc.

This whole test is weird. A comparison of bins at the same price level would make more sense.
 
Yeah, OK for experienced users of optics because they can read between the lines, but newcomers bombarded with hundreds of species of binoculars and looking for reasoned advice? They could shell out hard earned bucks based on unbalanced tests like this.
 
By assigning a number to a subjective, they profess to turn it into something objective, and then reject the best of a series based on that subjective quantity.

Bizarre.
 
But Dennis have you seen the Zulu? Its so ugly that if you had it on a shelf in your bedroom you wouldn't be able to sleep. It looks like the result of a mating between a picatinny rail and a toilet brush.

Lee
Sig Sauer is an arms company so they went for a tactical look on the Zulu 7. It is different but it kind of grows on you. The tactical or military look is popular in the USA for a lot of stuff like guns, flashlights, etc.
 

Attachments

  • zulu7.jpg
    zulu7.jpg
    48.5 KB · Views: 184
Last edited:
By assigning a number to a subjective, they profess to turn it into something objective, and then reject the best of a series based on that subjective quantity.

Bizarre.

Amen. That is also my main objection to Albinos. Field and Stream or other outdoor publications need to get a group of similar binoculars, all 8x42 or all 10x42 and go from there. There is some stuff not there that should be there too.

Chances are there is not a whit of field worthy difference.
 
I mean...it's an interesting article. It has some good info in it. Kind of like difference car magazines "Car of the Year" awards. New cars of the year convertibles, sedans, coupes, etc all tested together. Same here, basically just a review of all the new binoculars. Really iMO in no way can it be a "comparison."

BUT being an owner of the Monarch HG, I have to agree with what they say. All things considered I'm not sure there is a better birding binocular for less than $1000.

Some good info but the final score certainly doesn't always indicate the "best" binocular.
 
Thread hijack alert (sorry).
I burnt some serious brain cells agonising over Nikon MHG 8x42 or Zeiss Conquest 8x32. Despite some helpful advice from a forum member (thank you) in the end I went for the Nikon.
So Chuck, in lieu of Field and Stream test, how do you rate your MHG against alphas like the Noctovid, and are the differences cavernous,

Bill
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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