• 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.

New Nikon Monarch X (1 Viewer)

N

Nessus

Well-known member
Nikon has upgraded the Monarch line with two new bins called the Monarch X.
They come in 8.5x45 and 10.5x45. and they now use a dielectric coating on the prisms. So a bit more magnification and light gathering all around, I'm going to assume the rest of the glass is the same. They also went to a
Swarovski style open body construction. No word on whether they improved the eyecups. They are at around the $600 dollar range.

http://www.nikonhunting.com/binoculars-monarch-x.html

Just a heads up for anyone shopping in this range, I think they're brand new. Anyone else heard about them?
 
Last edited:
The Nikon website incorrectly gives the specifications for the 10.5 x 45 in the 8.5 x 45 specs, so we don't know what the FOV of the 8.5x is. That is the binocular that will compete with the Swarovski 8.5 x 42 EL and (more realistically) the Swift 8.5 x 44 HHS Audubon.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/swift/swift-audubon-8-5x44-roof-prism-binocular

CameralandNY is listing the new Nikon 8.5 x 45 at $579.99 but their website doesn't give the specifications. Apparently they are in stock.http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/nikon.pl?page=nikon7532 The Swift HHS is $220.00 lower in price.

Bob
 
Last edited:
See also this thread posted after they appeared at the SHOT Show 2009 with specs and some other commentary.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=132188

I rather doubt the glass or design is the same as the previous Monarchs.

The 10x vs 8x FOV thing ... it's odd that they have the same FOV but if you do the correct math (see the other thread) to get the AFOV the numbers come out correct so it clearly not a simple typo. So I actually beleive those specs even if they are unusual.

That isn't really an open bridge it's rather odd ... take a close look at the photos. Unlike all other open bridge bins it has a big bar down the middle. Not quite open.

I rather suspect they should be a lot brighter than the now rather old Swift HHS design: AR coatings and the dielectric prism will see to that.

One thing I hadn't noticed before is the "Provide optimum traction with soft-grip tactile surface.". Bushnell is also mentioning these "soft grip" features on the new Legend Ultra-HD. Obviously someone is working on it!
 
Last edited:
I wondered in the earlier thread if the bar in the middle of these was there so the binoculars could use the Tripod Adapter designed for the SE's and EII's?
Bob
 
What I have to wonder is how in the world can these possibly compete with the optics of the ZEN, Promaster ELX, and Hawke ED binoculars? The idea of an almost $600 Monarch outselling a $400 ZEN ED somehow can't seem to settle in my mind.
 
ceasar said:
I wondered in the earlier thread if the bar in the middle of these was there so the binoculars could use the Tripod Adapter designed for the SE's and EII's?
Bob
Click to expand...

I doubt it. I think it's marketing move to make them look open bridge probably by just modifying a previous closed bridge design that probably has the focusing elements at the bottom of the bridge (rather than at the top as is needed in a open bridge). Just speculation.

But IMHO it looks dumb.
 
Last edited:
ceasar said:
I wondered in the earlier thread if the bar in the middle of these was there so the binoculars could use the Tripod Adapter designed for the SE's and EII's?
Bob
Click to expand...

I'm going to venture a guess here that the rod is something Nikon is using to sell the open bridge design and eliminate the notion that the open bridge is a weak design. For my own preference it looks abominable.
 
Steve C said:
...For my own preference it looks abominable.
Click to expand...

I don't know, the rod down the center kind of reminds me of my old love, the Zeiss 7x42 Classic. I love the handling of that bino. It was the first (quasi) open bridge I ever owned, and it took the Swarovski EL to displace it from being my primary bino.

--AP
 
I tend to agree that the optics are going to have to be stellar for it to sell. One of the primary reasons the original Monarch was so popular was because it provided several previously high-end only features in a lighter, affordable package. When you start doubling the price you are going to lose appeal.

Other than the Alphas the cost of a decent bino in the market is decreasing not increasing.
 
Alexis Powell said:
I don't know, the rod down the center kind of reminds me of my old love, the Zeiss 7x42 Classic. I love the handling of that bino. It was the first (quasi) open bridge I ever owned, and it took the Swarovski EL to displace it from being my primary bino.
Click to expand...

That's interesting. I'd never noticed that feature of the Dialyt before.

http://www.thescienceshop.ca/images/zeiss/classic_7x42bgat.jpg

I guess it was typical of the porros of the time too now that you mention it. And they weren't open bridge.

I guess the "New Quadrangle Construction" is marketing speak for "open bridge with a steel rod in the middle of it" or "open bridge like your Dad's porros". ;)

In other news the "open bridge porro" from United Optics with external focusing (a bit like the Dialyt )

http://www.united-optics.com/Produc...Outdoor_Binoculars/BW9_Series/BW9 Series.html

Don't get too exited the close focus is at 8m and longer. The look like astro bins rather than hunting bins to me.
 
Didn't they make reference to "quadrangle construction" in reference to the EDG's as well. In which case Kevin is spot on with the open bridge take on it.
 
Last edited:
Does the new Monarch X have ED glass with that X? I have monarch 8x42. They are really good glasses when they first came out. Now the competition is just so intense in this price range, I would really hope they can come up with a major upgrade without hiking up price. $600 price tag is kinda steep for me these days.
 
With a casual inspection of the literature the only really characteristic that jumped out at me as being a step upward was the use of dielectric coatings on the roof prism. No ED glass. If it did then I might be able to see the more justifiable $600 price tag.
 
I got my hands on the Monarch X today at the Sportsman's show. Edit: checked my notes, no ED glass, but there is dielectric prism coatings.

Now that rod down the middle is the dumbest (double deleted expletive) idea in ages. For those who wish to reminisce about the Zeiss Dialyt, go ahead, these things feel nothing like the Zeiss. There is literally no place to wrap your fingers around the barrels, it might as well be a solid hinge. It has all of the grace of a rounded edge brick in hand.

The Nikon man joked around about designing a picatinny rail for that bar, so the user can mount "accessories" to the top of the binocular. At least I hope he was joking. There did not appear to be a tripod adapter, so the idea of being able to use the rod for that will have a certain appeal.

Once past that, the optics are very nice indeed. They are Japanese, so in spite of the superficial similarity to the Chinese ED there seems to be no relationship. Comparing to the ZEN ED, the image was quite similar, but the fov advantage clearly to the ZEN and the Zen was a bit sharper image too. But the Monarch X optics are far closer to the EDG binoculars in the both than the original Monarch is to the Monarch X.

The color bias of the X seemed a little warmer than the EDGE they had. This appears the have the makings of a optically very useful binocular.

As posted here, the Premier is indeed the resurrected HG (or whichever was the last version had in production) So they see they have the bases covered with EDG>Premier>Monarch X>Monarch ATB>Trailblazer.
 
Last edited:
Japanese optics in the Monarch X you say?

That alone may be a selling point for some individuals who prefer not to purchase Chinese products.

I am glad to hear the optics took a serious upgrade as they would have had to in order to justify doubling the cost.

....I am still trying to understand the central rod though....

?
 
FrankD said:
Japanese optics in the Monarch X you say?

I am glad to hear the optics took a serious upgrade as they would have had to in order to justify doubling the cost.

....I am still trying to understand the central rod though....

?
Click to expand...

When I stopped by the Nikon booth, and I point blank asked them why would I pay $200 more for a Monarch X with a lesser image and smaller fov, as compared to the ZEN and Promaster, they really could not come up anything other than "Nikon's been around a long time, we stand behind our products....." Valid enough reasons for sure. That is the same thing I got from Leupold.

The rod made no sense even when we were joking about what sort of accessories could be mounted. Still doesn't.
 
Well, I think the Nikon guys definitely have a point. The only thing working against Zen Ray is their time in the optics industry. If they keep putting out products at the quality and performance level of the ED though then that will change quickly.

Still, I want to get my hands around a Monarch X to see what the next generation Monarch looks like.
 
Well, I'll bump this thread up instead of starting a new one. Three weeks ago now, I e-mailed Nikon and asked them if the same actual field of view they listed for both the 8.5 and 10.5 x Nikon Monarch X was correct or if it happened to be a misprint.

The first reply, over a week after the electronic notification they had received the initial question said essentially that they didn't know and were waiting for a response from the Nikon factory in Japan.

I had actually forgotten about even asking the question until I received this response today;

"As you know FOV is determined by the optical formula. It is possible to design binoculars with different magnifications AND the same Actual FOV, as long as the Apparent FOV is changed. In case of the Monarch X, 10.5x models have wider Apparent FOV compared to 8.5x. thus keeping the Actual FOV the same.

Thanks for using Nikon products!"

So it looks like the same actual FOV listed for both magnifications is correct. My original question was a single sentence asking about actual FOV and said nothing about apparent FOV.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 15 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.

Similar threads

J
Full Spec Sheet for Nikon 8X30 Monarch HG
Replies
3
Views
1K
JohnVan
J
has530
8-16x40 XL Zoom...One Binocular to Rule Them All?
Replies
9
Views
2K
tenex
tenex
Ontario
New Monarch M7 8x30 - release date Oct 2021
2 3
Replies
49
Views
14K
ZDHart
Z
brocknroller
The Cure for 8x32 SE Tunnel Vision
Replies
7
Views
2K
John M Robinson
J
KaterinBortle9
Nikon Monarch Fieldscope 60ED-A + MEP 30-60W Review
Replies
3
Views
2K
roch
roch

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top