Sightron "Blue Sky" II 8x32 (8 Viewers)

Well, it took four months but this thread finally showed up again. Thank you Zelda.

I wish I could help here with your comparison. The 7x26 Elite is one of the few binocular models highly regarded on the market that I have not tried. Part of that is the fact that I like to try most of my bins before buying and I am hesitant about ordering something knowing full well that I may likely return it. The other part is that compacts in general are not really my cup of tea. They have their uses...absolutely but I just don't warm up to them as well as I do mid to full sized models.

The full-sized Elite ED you mentioned is another model I have not owned. I did own one of its predecessors, the open bridge Elite. That doesn't help much though since the current Elite ED is an entirely different binocular. Comments on it here on the forum have all been favorable with the understanding that it has a narrow field of view in comparison to many models with similarly features priced either higher or lower than it. That is the primary reason I have not purchased one at this point.

My expectations in a comparison between the full-sized Elite ED and the Sightron would be something along the lines of the Elite ED having....

-slightly better brightness
-slightly better CA control because of the ED glass
- similarly sized sweetspots with the understanding that the Sightron's field of view is notably wider
-slightly better contrast because of the larger objective and ED glass

Now that might seem like a lot and it may be for some folks. The percentages of difference between these two models in these areas though may very well be small. Hopefully some of the other regulars on here have owned/tried both side by side and can comment further.

FrankD said:

Well, it took four months but this thread finally showed up again. Thank you Zelda.

I wish I could help here with your comparison. The 7x26 Elite is one of the few binocular models highly regarded on the market that I have not tried. Part of that is the fact that I like to try most of my bins before buying and I am hesitant about ordering something knowing full well that I may likely return it. The other part is that compacts in general are not really my cup of tea. They have their uses...absolutely but I just don't warm up to them as well as I do mid to full sized models.

The full-sized Elite ED you mentioned is another model I have not owned. I did own one of its predecessors, the open bridge Elite. That doesn't help much though since the current Elite ED is an entirely different binocular. Comments on it here on the forum have all been favorable with the understanding that it has a narrow field of view in comparison to many models with similarly features priced either higher or lower than it. That is the primary reason I have not purchased one at this point.

My expectations in a comparison between the full-sized Elite ED and the Sightron would be something along the lines of the Elite ED having....

-slightly better brightness
-slightly better CA control because of the ED glass
- similarly sized sweetspots with the understanding that the Sightron's field of view is notably wider
-slightly better contrast because of the larger objective and ED glass

Now that might seem like a lot and it may be for some folks. The percentages of difference between these two models in these areas though may very well be small. Hopefully some of the other regulars on here have owned/tried both side by side and can comment further.

Click to expand...

Thank you Frank. The FOV of Elite ED 8x42 is truly smaller but it doesn't bother me much. I tried the Legend Ultra HD 8x42 with much larger FOV but Elite ED looks obviously higher resolution in the center, bigger sweet spot and better CA control. The 7x26 is a compromise when I really don't want to bring a full size bin for traveling or camping. I've ordered a pentax 6.5x21 papilio and for its closer focus capability. We'll see if I can get from both worlds of the compact Elite 7x26 for birding and the closer focus for bugs/plants on the go.

It sounds I won't gain much from the SII 8x32 which is quite understanable consider its price range. But is it compact enough to beat the full sized 8x42 to bring on trip? I had Bushnell Trophy 8x32 before ($40 bucks from Amazon, wait for 3 months, what is the SII BL 8x32 size vs the Trophy 8x32?

Zelda,

I haven't owned the Trophy either so I can't help you there.

As for compactness, in all honesty I think you may be barking up the wrong tree with the SII Blue Sky. It is lighter in weight than 42 mm models...and the barrels are notably thinner but if your focus is length (ie... compactness) then the 8x32 SII Blue Sky would be the last 8x32 I would choose.

Give me a few minutes and I will see if I can upload a group pic of some of the budget 8x32s that I have on hand for the review. That might give you some idea of the size of the Blue Sky in comparison.

The Sightron 8x32 is very light (only ~17oz) but it is NOT compact, as Frank has noted. It's about the size of the smaller 8x42's (e.g. Nikon Monarch or Bushnell Legend HD) although it has more slender barrels.

That said, I would NOT look to it as an upgrade/replacement for the Bushnell Elite. It's a different type of bin, and should rather be looked at as a complementary bin for those occasions where you don't want to carry the extra bulk of the full-sized 8x42, yet not sacrifice too much optically. For example, leaving the Sightron in the car or backpack so you know you've got good optics handy whenever you are out and about.

Another option to consider if you want something more compact is the Zen-Ray ZRS 8x32. At only $200 it will offer comparable optics to the Bushnell Legend HD (i.e. bright, wide FOV but with a smallish sweet spot, moderate CA, and plenty of curvature as you approach the edges) but in a much smaller, lighter package. Frank and Steve C currently have this model and a few other recent lightweight 8x32's from other brands, so if they EVER get around to posting their big round-up review we will find out if one of those others is a better choice

Theorist said:

I'm on the fence about giving these a try but I'm worried about CA control. I also wonder how the 42mm version compares.

Click to expand...

I have the 8X42 Sightron II Blue Sky and had a 8X32 BS II for the trial period. I returned the 8X32 for lack of focus travel past infinity, but that is not an issue for most. I would have kept it if not for that one issue.

Optically I think the 8X32 is slightly better. The 8X42 has a warmer color balance that is slightly less natural. It is not bad, but you can see it when looking. That could be an issue for some. I thought the color balance on the 8X32 gave the perception of a slightly brighter view. Even though I think the 8X32 might be slightly better optically, the 8X42 gives an amazing view for the money. It has a nice size center, is sharp, handles glare reasonably well (especially for the price), and has an AFOV of 7.5 degrees or 394 ft at 1000 yards.

I am one of those that can see CA in any binocular when I specifically look for it, but I do not notice it in general use. I can see a small amount of CA in the center when looking and it increases somewhat going out toward the edges. I did not think it was excessive in the center and not much more than units costing hundreds of dollars more. CA seems to vary betwen individuals so my experience may not apply to you.

The appearance of the 8X42 looks a little cheap in photos, but not so much when looking at the real thing. If has held up fine so far and I think it has a lifetime warranty against manufacturering defects. Both models for me have unusable focus mechanisms as you go below 20 degrees F, although some reported that the 8X32 was not a problem in the cold.

Neither are an "alpha", but work well out in the field when one is not trying to nit pick every aspect of the view. Both are very functional (other than cold weather), and provide a great view at an excellent value.

Well, it's about time that this thread got back on top again.

Has there come any other bino that could compete with the SII Blue Sky or is it still the best bang for the buck in the 8x32 field?

This thread is like the Energizer Bunny, it's keeps on going....and going...and going... and going...

To answer Ysterkvisten's question (but don't ask me to pronounce his name!), YES, or sort of. it's an 8x30, the Nikon 8x30 Monarch 7. Even by Frank D's admission, the guy who started the Sightron II Revolution and this never ending thread.

Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar

I tried the M7 8x30 today and was very pleased until I looked close to the sun and the right bin was almost white with glare.
It's probably that unpainted ring that some pointed out. Serial ..0003600-something.
Not fixed yet, but maybe on later deliveries.
Fantastic bins apart from that.
Tried a Kamakura FMC 8x32 and another Kamakura made (but under another Swedish name MagniPro DCF) also 8x32 and they were just as good, but a little heavier. The M7 was I think just a tad sharper, but the Kamakuras had no flare at all.

I am leaning towards the MagniPros as they were only SEK2500, roughly £230, €270 or $380.

Ysterkvisten said:

I tried the M7 8x30 today and was very pleased until I looked close to the sun and the right bin was almost white with glare.
It's probably that unpainted ring that some pointed out. Serial ..0003600-something.
Not fixed yet, but maybe on later deliveries.
Fantastic bins apart from that.
Tried a Kamakura FMC 8x32 and another Kamakura made (but under another Swedish name MagniPro DCF) also 8x32 and they were just as good, but a little heavier. The M7 was I think just a tad sharper, but the Kamakuras had no flare at all.

I am leaning towards the MagniPros as they were only SEK2500, roughly £230, €270 or $380.

Click to expand...

Ysterkvisten,

I saw your post on the 8x30 M7 thread, unfortunately, the sample you tried was a defective one. That's going to hurt the sales on this model. I for one, do not want to keep buying sample after sample, hoping to get a good one and returning it if it's not. What Nikon should do is to release the serial numbers of the defective samples so that when you order one, you can ask the store to check the serial number and reject any bin that is within that defective range. Like car companies, Nikon should issue a recall for those samples from its dealers.They are going to end up at Nikon Repairs, anyway, so why not save the customer the trouble and minimize the bad PR by pulling the defective samples from the shelves? .

Swarovski released the serial number of the last EL with a pokey focus so buyers could buy a new one with the faster focuser if that was their preference.

If you had tried a good sample, I'm sure you would have liked it and added it to your short list of "Best Bang for the Buck" bins. In fact, if Nikon hadn't messed up, we'd eventually see a long thread on the 8x30 M7 like this one on the Sightron II.

Subrahmanyan

brocknroller said:

Ysterkvisten,

I saw your post on the 8x30 M7 thread, unfortunately, the sample you tried was a defective one. That's going to hurt the sales on this model. I for one, do not want to keep buying sample after sample, hoping to get a good one and returning it if it's not. What Nikon should do is to release the serial numbers of the defective samples so that when you order one, you can ask the store to check the serial number and reject any bin that is within that defective range. Like car companies, Nikon should issue a recall for those samples from its dealers.They are going to end up at Nikon Repairs, anyway, so why not save the customer the trouble and minimize the bad PR by pulling the defective samples from the shelves? .

Swarovski released the serial number of the last EL with a pokey focus so buyers could buy a new one with the faster focuser if that was their preference.

If you had tried a good sample, I'm sure you would have liked it and added it to your short list of "Best Bang for the Buck" bins. In fact, if Nikon hadn't messed up, we'd eventually see a long thread on the 8x30 M7 like this one on the Sightron II.

Subrahmanyan

Click to expand...

I suspect that will never happen, stock market doesnt like anything that may cause a loss of share value. Probably 20% of the owners will return it, the rest will just put up with it. So to ignore the problem puts them money ahead, all the execs get their bonus, wall street gets a little and life goes on.

brocknroller said:

Ysterkvisten,

I saw your post on the 8x30 M7 thread, unfortunately, the sample you tried was a defective one. That's going to hurt the sales on this model. I for one, do not want to keep buying sample after sample, hoping to get a good one and returning it if it's not. What Nikon should do is to release the serial numbers of the defective samples so that when you order one, you can ask the store to check the serial number and reject any bin that is within that defective range. Like car companies, Nikon should issue a recall for those samples from its dealers.They are going to end up at Nikon Repairs, anyway, so why not save the customer the trouble and minimize the bad PR by pulling the defective samples from the shelves? .

Swarovski released the serial number of the last EL with a pokey focus so buyers could buy a new one with the faster focuser if that was their preference.

If you had tried a good sample, I'm sure you would have liked it and added it to your short list of "Best Bang for the Buck" bins. In fact, if Nikon hadn't messed up, we'd eventually see a long thread on the 8x30 M7 like this one on the Sightron II.

Subrahmanyan

Click to expand...

Well, apart from the glare, the bins were fantastic!
So light one almost had to hold them down in order to avoid having them blown away in the wind...
The FOV was really really good.
But that was almost the one thing that separated them from the Kamakura and the swedish branded Magnipro Kamakura.
The Magnipro would be on my list. The Kamakura was equally good but twice the price.

I hope Nikon get this and exchange the ones still in stores and send mail to all registered buyers offering a repair.
That might not happen...

I was wondering when this thread would rear its ugly head again.

I agree with Brock's comments to an extent. The M7 8x30 does fit quite nicely into the "bang for the buck" ranks but the Sightron is still a better value. Part of that is the fact that it still retails for $180 (vs the current $300 for the M7). In the grand scheme of things the optical performance is more alike than not. Personally I find my Sightron sharper than the Nikon with similar percentages of sweetspot size (though the Nikon's field of view is wider). The Nikon has a more neutral color representation and therefore appears brighter for most folks. The Sightron has better contrast in my opinion most likely the result of the warmer color bias.

Also, there is just something about the Sightron view. It just feels more "corrected" for lack of a better term. I believe I would attribute that to a greater depth of focus. My experience with the Nikon is that you are either "in" or "out" of best focus. The Sightron tends to roll into "perfect focus" slower and maintain it longer.

Oh, and we are now at 2 years and 8 months with my Sightron and zero problems.

FrankD said:

I was wondering when this thread would rear its ugly head again.

I agree with Brock's comments to an extent. The M7 8x30 does fit quite nicely into the "bang for the buck" ranks but the Sightron is still a better value. Part of that is the fact that it still retails for $180 (vs the current $300 for the M7). In the grand scheme of things the optical performance is more alike than not. Personally I find my Sightron sharper than the Nikon with similar percentages of sweetspot size (though the Nikon's field of view is wider). The Nikon has a more neutral color representation and therefore appears brighter for most folks. The Sightron has better contrast in my opinion most likely the result of the warmer color bias.

Also, there is just something about the Sightron view. It just feels more "corrected" for lack of a better term. I believe I would attribute that to a greater depth of focus. My experience with the Nikon is that you are either "in" or "out" of best focus. The Sightron tends to roll into "perfect focus" slower and maintain it longer.

Oh, and we are now at 2 years and 8 months with my Sightron and zero problems.

Click to expand...

Let's take a closer look at that price differential. The Sightron II does not have ED elements. The fact that you have to pay only $100 more for ED glass with the Nikon 8x30 M7 should make it at least as good bang for the buck as the Sightron II. To my eyes, the ED glass in the M7 does a great job of controlling CA, something I appreciate, particularly in the winter with its bare tree limbs and gray skies.

Not sure about Sightron's warranty, but you also have to factor in Nikon's No Fault warranty. Anything goes wrong, $10 + return shipping and the bin will be repaired or replaced. Hard to beat that in the "under $300" price segment.

Also, the M7's resale value would likely be greater because of Nikon's brand recognition, which you can add to the "bang for the buck." Despite your great promotion of the Sightron II, the brand is not well known. Somebody looking at one for sale on Astromart or eBay is going to be scratching his head, and will have to use a search engine to find this thread to find out how good they are. Of course, the resale value shouldn't be a concern for you since you've had the Sightron II for nearly 3 years, which must be a new record for you!

You mentioned the depth of focus of the two bins. When I first got the M7 the weather was beastly, March going out like a lion instead of a lamb and spilling over into the beginning of April. Even yesterday was nasty, the low temp. last night was near freezing. Old Man Winter is fighting hard not to give up the ghost this year.

Probably due to the low light levels from the dark overcast skies, the depth of focus on the M7 seemed shallow. That was a turnoff for me, and I didn't think I would want one because of it. However, as soon as I was able to try the bins under sunny skies that depth of focus issue disappeared. The focus was still faster than my Nikon porros, but not nearly as fast as the Quick Draw McGraw Nikon 8x32 HG or the Buzz Lightyear Terra ED.

I will really have to try the Sightron II sometime to find out why this thread was able to garner 833 posts. The fact that you think the Sightron's image is sharper than the Nikon's is surprising since Nikon makes binoculars with very sharp optics, going back to my WF bins in the 1980s, and I was very impressed with the resolution of the M7. If what you found is not just a subjective impression (which it could be based on color contrast), then the Sightron II retains its crown as the "best bang for the buck" in the "under $300" roof segment, and there will be another 833 posts to follow!

Brock

I doubt most users would know a good one from a defective one. And I expect that holds for most optics scopes included. Add into that the users own eyesight limitations albeit due to faulty prescription contacts or glasses in many cases or uncorrected natural eyesight and I would imagine there's a lot of optics out there that aren't stellar and ship/slip through the cracks. :smoke:

Oh, btw... Nikon? Logical? Mmmmmmmmm???????????? Of course, based on the above statement being at least to some degree true, they probably consider letting the situation slide to be a logical approach. I don't know how many are affected but say only 10% or 25% come back to Nikon service for the problem they would be way ahead of doing 100% if they are OK with that from a corporate standpoint.

I did see a TV add for Nikon Glasses lenses so maybe thats where their focus will be ongoing and where they expect to make their money???

I wouldn't mind looking through a good M7 to compare to my sightron because someone stated the M7 was much better. I have to say the sightrons strike me as a bargain for the price, the weight, and the performance. It [SBS] would definitely serve the purpose for most users. I suppose like anything else, if you don't have something better to compare it to you would be perfectly happy and content esp. at the price point.

And then you would become like so many members here who find themselves disappointed with optics because their this or that is just slightly better say resolution etc.. Of course you know the discontent sewn comparing one thing to another. The average Joe given one of the items compared sent out to use it would likely be totally happy. Just saying.

brocknroller said:

Ysterkvisten,

I saw your post on the 8x30 M7 thread, unfortunately, the sample you tried was a defective one. That's going to hurt the sales on this model. I for one, do not want to keep buying sample after sample, hoping to get a good one and returning it if it's not. What Nikon should do is to release the serial numbers of the defective samples so that when you order one, you can ask the store to check the serial number and reject any bin that is within that defective range. Like car companies, Nikon should issue a recall for those samples from its dealers.They are going to end up at Nikon Repairs, anyway, so why not save the customer the trouble and minimize the bad PR by pulling the defective samples from the shelves? .

Swarovski released the serial number of the last EL with a pokey focus so buyers could buy a new one with the faster focuser if that was their preference.

If you had tried a good sample, I'm sure you would have liked it and added it to your short list of "Best Bang for the Buck" bins. In fact, if Nikon hadn't messed up, we'd eventually see a long thread on the 8x30 M7 like this one on the Sightron II.

Subrahmanyan

Click to expand...

To me living in Sweden, the price including customs fees and shipping would be about $250 for the Sightron. Still a bargain.
Not that it makes and difference, but the M7 and the others binos I tried were all made by Kamakura. But so are man more brands. They are Huge!

I almost got vertigo when I tried the M7s. Never felt that sensation before. Addictive to say the least!
But the glade!
The horror, the horror...

Jan

brocknroller said:

...Nikon should issue a recall for those samples from its dealers.They are going to end up at Nikon Repairs, anyway, so why not save the customer the trouble and minimize the bad PR by pulling the defective samples from the shelves?...

Click to expand...

That's not going to happen for the reasons given already by others and because Nikon's track record dealing with design/manufacturing flaws that aren't dangerous (e.g. lens light leaks or SLR autofocus calibration as compared to lithium battery flaws) is to ignore, then deny, then grudgingly accept returns for warranty repair but without officially announcing as much, then maybe officially accept returns but still while denying that there is any general flaw with the product. The latest scandel/saga of the D600 shutter (I'm sure you'll find many accounts on the web if you want to read up on it) is a perfect example.

--AP

Brock,

IMHO, like many, probably including me for awhile at least, you are placing far too much faith in the presence of ED glass. That is likely just what marketers count on too. We have been told many times about the benefits of CA control and ED glass. Well the Sightron doesn't have it and it controls CA very well. My Theron Wapiti LT does not have it either and it controls it very well. The Leupold Mojave does not have it either and I am still trying to induce my first glimpse of CA. The Mojave controls CA so well, I had to check with Leupold to see if they had decided to include ED glass...they had not.

As regards the Monarch 7 it has ED glass and is no better in regard to any image characteristic than the Mojave.

Ysterkvisten : For all europeans, you can buy the BSII in Slovenia - Authorised dealer : http://www.optics-trade.eu :t:

DadraFromFrance said:

Ysterkvisten : For all europeans, you can buy the BSII in Slovenia - Authorised dealer : http://www.optics-trade.eu :t:

Click to expand...

I saw that. €188. Are they ok?
Have you bought anything from them?

Steve C said:

Brock,

IMHO, like many, probably including me for awhile at least, you are placing far too much faith in the presence of ED glass. That is likely just what marketers count on too. We have been told many times about the benefits of CA control and ED glass. Well the Sightron doesn't have it and it controls CA very well. My Theron Wapiti LT does not have it either and it controls it very well. The Leupold Mojave does not have it either and I am still trying to induce my first glimpse of CA. The Mojave controls CA so well, I had to check with Leupold to see if they had decided to include ED glass...they had not.

As regards the Monarch 7 it has ED glass and is no better in regard to any image characteristic than the Mojave.

Click to expand...

I haven't tried the Mojave or the Theron, but I am sensitive to CA unlike a few members on here who I suspect might also be color blind. After all, if you can't distinguish red from green, how are you going to see CA??? What I see and others see through the Mojave and Theron might be very different than what you see.

However, CA was most definitely a problem with the Nikon 8x32 HG, and I am not alone in that complaint. The M7 controls CA way better. It's also lighter by 9.6 oz! and easier to handle with its open hinge. But most importantly, the M7 costs $900 LESS than the HGL/Premier. Sure the build quality is better on the HGL and it has field flatteners, but those two qualities aren't worth $900 more, IMO.

To me, that should be more of a concern to Nikon than how the M7 competes with the Mojave or Theron. Do any birders even use Therons? I don't think their website would be of much interest to most birders:So the comparison could be apples and kumquats.

Photos and Testimonies

Brock