• 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.

8x32's; pentax vs leupold vs celestron (1 Viewer)

j-p

Member
I recently joined the group as I was searching for mid sized binoculars. My short list included the Pentax DCF XP 8x33's; the Leupold Wind River Katmai 8x32's; and the Celestron Noble 8x32's. All are waterproof with fully multi-coated optics and phase coated prisms. I ordered all 3 from Adorama in NYC so I could compare them at home and send the 2 "losers" back.
I post this hoping that my humble observations may help someone who also is looking for binos in this catagory. If this my first post is too long, please accept my apologies.
Physically they're all within 1 1/2 oz of ea other. The Celestron is about 3/4 inch taller as I stood them on their objectives. The Leupold had a noticeably narrower focusing wheel than the other 2. I wear glasses so twist-up eye caps were important to me. The Pentax twists up in "clicks" and the Celestron's twist "clickless". The Leupolds twist up in clicks, but they were very sticky, hard to get started. I adjusted the Leupolds eye caps many times, put them down for a couple of days and tried them again. They remained hard for me to get up and down.
I live in a wooded area of NE CT and my lab bench was my picnic table in the back yard. I set up a resolution chart that was included in J. W. Seyfried's book, "Choosing, Using, and Repairing Binoculars. All 3 binos appeared to resolve the chart equally to these 53 year old eyes.
Next I picked out targets in the woods to compare how each handled the various shades of green, brown, and gray. They all gave nice clear, sharp images but while looking in the same general area with all 3, the Celestron brought to my attention a small cluster of light brown oak leaves surrounded by greens, grays, and darker browns. Using that cluster of leaves as my target, which was about 50 yards away, I trained all 3 binos on it. The cluster seemed to jump out more with the Celestrons. I tried other targets with color rendition in mind and I liked the Celestrons better. The differences were ever so subtle, but many of the birds and animals I look for have a measure of brown. The sooner we get on target, or find something we didn't know was there, the better we like it, right?
Turning to the other side of the yard, There's a gentle downward slope throught the woods to an old dirt road about 100 yards away. The road is always brighter because of the break in the canopy. I focused all 3 on a small patch of road I could see through the trees and noticed how easy it was to check out the forest floor with the remaining field of view in the binocs: a rough depth of field evaluation. I would sweep with the road in focus and check out the detail on the forest floor as I went. The differences again were slight, but again I preferred the view of the Celestrons.
As the sun set I had on my "lab bench" all 3 of these binos plus Tasco Halleys Comet Series 8x56, Bausch & Lomb Discoverer in 7x35, and Canon 10x30 IS. As dark approached I compared them all on a small clearing 80 yards out back with a small wood structure,about 4x5 feet, with shades of brown and gray in the wood grain. The 3 new binos showed me things in the near darkness that I couldn't see with my unaided eye. The 8x56's were like light magnifiers, too bad they don't yet make them that weigh less than 20 oz. In the last possible moments before real darkness, the 8x32's showed me slightly more than the 7x35's. The 5mm exit pupil of the 7x35's were bettered by the apparent brightness of 8x with 4mm exit pupil of the 8x32's. The author of the aforementioned book was right on when he says that the exit pupil of the human eye decreases with age. (This subject could be another post). The Canon 10x30 IS dimmed out soon in the evaluation. Even though I love them in the daylight, all of the others were brighter in shadows and fading light.
Now it's really dark and the stars are out. Having a little understanding about telescopes, I agree with the quote from Seyfried's book, "The absolute best test of any optical system is to view the tiny, perfect image of a star in the night sky." The star test reveals how accurately the optical system brings light to focus, how precise the lenses are figured. To do this brace yourself to eliminate the shakes and center a bright star in your glass. Focus past infinity so the light from the star is spread out and the image looks like a dried, white dandelion head. Ever so slowly bring the star into focus and notice how the "dandelion head" in transformed into a crisp star image. The area of diffused light should shrink with the star becoming brighter and sharper in the center of the "dandelion head". With most except for the very best systems, the star will sharpen up somewhere else besides the center of the "head".
With the Pentax, as the "dandelion head" shrank with focusing, the image looked like a small comet. The starlight was more focused on one point of a triangle. With the Leupold, the slow focusing transformed the "head" into a small "half moon" just before focus. The Canon beat these 2, but the Celestron bested them all even though it was not absolutely perfect. Their experience with telescope optics seems to have been carried over into figuring their binocular lenses. Absolute perfection in the star test is the optical holy grail and is not necessary for the majority of us. I would like to get my hands on some of the very best binocs to see how they do.
Back to the comparison at hand based on my limited tests.
Fit and finish, mostly based on fit and feel in my smallish hand, (I'm 5'8"
150 lbs) and eye cup adjustment - Celestron
Resolution - tied
Color rendition - Celestron
Depth of field, apparent and not precisely measured - Celestron
Star test - Celestron
On top of this, the Celestrons are water proof to a depth of 5 meters, the Pentax 1 meter, the Leupolds I'm not sure. Not that I swim w/binos, but the quality of waterproofing is a plus. The Pentax and Leupold have limited lifetime warranties, the Celestron has a lifetime "No Fault" warantee. Also, the Celestrons are 80-100 dollars less than the others.
Just today I put the Pentax and Leupolds in the mail to send back to Adorama. For the endorsement of the Celestron Noble 8x32's, you'd think they'd at least send me a lens cleaning kit or something, but I'm happy w/them. Adorama has a great price and customer service policy also.
What do you think. j-p
 
Greetings!

The Celestron Noble is probably the best pair of binoculars on your list in my opinion - good job on selecting them! However... for semi-budget priced 8x32 binoculars, I have no higher recommendation than Minox BD 8x32. They have a field of view that is comparable to most 7x binoculars, and are crisp and clear from edge to edge. Quite lighweight, and can often be found on sale for around $350-$400.

My other recommendation is to find a pair of older Nikon HG 8x32 on closeout, since the newer HGL models have come out you can still sometimes find the older HG's for around $450-$550. They are magnificent - although a bit heavy for an 8x32.

Best wishes,
Bawko
 
Warning! This thread is more than 19 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