• 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.

Review, Leupold Mojave BX-3 8x32 (2 Viewers)

Eyecup/eyepiece comparison for usable eye relief....
 

Attachments

  • eyepiece.jpg
    eyepiece.jpg
    200.5 KB · Views: 229
  • eyepiece 2.jpg
    eyepiece 2.jpg
    252.8 KB · Views: 187
Last edited:
Lastly, a little digibinning comparison in image performance between the Mojave, the Countryman HD and the Nikon M7. My apologies for not perfectly centering the tree in each image. Difficult conditions at the time. Still, it will give you some idea....
 

Attachments

  • t1.jpg
    t1.jpg
    681.2 KB · Views: 410
  • t2.jpg
    t2.jpg
    742.8 KB · Views: 383
  • t3.jpg
    t3.jpg
    762 KB · Views: 407
Last edited:
Frank,

Thanks for the images. Side by side the Mojave and the Opticron appear to have points of similarity like, the dioptre adjustment, but quite different in other ways. Look forward to your comments on how the view compares.

Putting the Monarch 7 in the mix adds some spice. I've still only seen that pre-production sample at BirdFair back in the summer which got me very excited. Very interested in your thoughts.

David
 
Frank,

Interesting observations for sure. Now I'm going to have to get my hands on the M7 8x30. Its image in your picture seems to beat its bigger M7 x42 siblings. It looks like there is little to no real differences in the images of the three.

I did have the impression the M7 8x30 would look smaller alongside the Mojave than it seems to in your pictures.

The spring waterfowl is in full bloom here, one of the things that makes this place a birder's mecca. I have been using the Mojave extensively over the last several days. I continue to be impressed at its ability to resolve detail at distance and am able to remark again how well it handles CA, glare ,and any stray light issues.
 
I have a few minutes to share some thoughts. I would like to start with the Countryman versus Mojave.

After comparing the two side by side I would say that my earlier comments are, for the most part, accurate. I have no doubt that the eyepieces and optical train are the same. The image performance in the case of apparent sharpness and sweet spot size appear identical. The Countryman has a more neutral color representation and does appear brighter in normal daylight conditions. You can see the slightly warm color bias in the Mojaves' picture above.

The Opticron Verano was a bit more of a challenge to the Mojave. In terms of centerfield apparent sharpness I did not notice a difference. The sweet spot size is notably larger on the Verano...less field curvature and astigmatism. The Verano also has a more neutral color representation and appears to have better brightness as a result. Interestingly enough, though the true field of view specs are identical I received the impression that the apparent field of view was larger in the Verano. The same was the case with the Zeiss Conquest HD and the Nikon Monarch 7 (though the latter does have a listed .3 degree wider true field of view as well). I believe this is the result of the specific type of edge performance that each of these bins offers in comparison to the Mojave.

The Conquest HD was very similar to the Verano overall in just about every way. So my comments on the Verano apply to the Conquest as well. The Conquest appeared to be ever so slightly brighter than the Verano, and subsequently the Mojave as well.

The Nikon M7 was a bit of a surprise. I have read all of the comments on here before and after it was released. I had relatively positive expectations towards it but was unprepared for how much I would like this binocular. It is a superb little glass. Loved it and for a variety of reasons. For one the optics are impressive. Just as bright as the Conquest in my opinion with a notably more immersive feeling to the image. The wider field of view coupled with the larger oculars (and narrower diameter eyecups) just made me feel like I fell into the image. The apparent brightness, contrast and sharpness were all excellent. The sweet spot size was very good..a little better than the Mojave but not quite as good as the Verano. Off axis performance wasn't distracting in the least.

Ergonomically the focus wheel speed and feel were perfect for my tastes. The tactile sensation generated by the rubber armoring was as pleasing to my hands as the original Swarovski EL 8x32. "Like a glove". Nikon is going to sell a ton of those.

So, to summarize, I compared the $280 (least expensive retailer) Leupold Mojave to four competitors. The least expensive of the group retails for $100 more than the Mojave. I couldn't find any retailer that had the Nikon less than $376. The centerfield performance in all areas except color representation was equivalent to all of the other four. Only in the areas of color representation (and subsequently apparent brightness) and size of sweet spot did I feel that the other four truly bettered the Mojave. So, as is often the case in the binocular market, if you want slightly better optical improvements in various areas then you have to pay more money to achieve it.

All for now.
 
Last edited:
Frank,

Many thanks for posting your comparison.

Although a couple of places have the Mojave 10x32 I can't find the 8x32 on sale in the UK. Opticron don't offer a Countryman HD 10x32. I wonder if the Mojave 8x32 is too close to the Opticron to be sold here?

The Monarch 7 made a big impression on me as well. Interesting you didn't see the glare some have reported. I guess it's something I need to check thoroughly for myself but really hope it doesn't damp my enthusiasm for the model. (Already sold one of my binos to make space for it. ;) )

I've mentioned before I found some differences in sharpness between the other models mentioned. Sounds like you found them somewhat closer. Food for thought!

Thanks again,

David
 
The Monarch 7 made a big impression on me as well. Interesting you didn't see the glare some have reported. I guess it's something I need to check thoroughly for myself but really hope it doesn't damp my enthusiasm for the model. (Already sold one of my binos to make space for it. ;) )

I hope you don't mind if I jump in here. I've had the 8x30 M7 for a few months now. I am also very impressed at how good it is. I don't think it provides as good an overall view as the Conquest HD (as one would reasonably expect), but I have to say that I don't miss the Zeiss at all when I am using the M7. They are surprisingly close.

Anyway -- I have not found glare to be a problem. I do see it along the lower portions of the view when I am glassing in the general direction of the setting sun, but that is about the only time I see it. For my use, the small amount of glare that is present is not an issue.

If you need a smaller bino as perhaps a backup to high-end glass, or just need something small and light in weight for all-day hiking, you can't go wrong with the M7.
 
Phil,

Thanks for the reassurance. From what I've seen there is so much to like about the M7 I'd be content to forgive a small niggle, particularly in a binocular this price. (It's much more irritating in a $1600 model. ;) ) Figured it would be ideal for hiking and travelling.

It could be there is some sample variation. There is quite a bit in the full size M7s I've tried, but this baby is from a different supplier we are told. I recall that someone here noted an unblackened surface in theirs that might have been the culprit. There is a store a couple of hours from me lists both the Monarch and the Kite Lynx that I hope to visit sometime soon.

David
 
Typo,

I forgot to mention something about the comparison between the Countryman and the Mojave earlier. If you look at the objective lens comparison pic that I posted earlier you will note the difference in coating color. I have a strong feeling that this is the primary difference in optical performance between the two binoculars. The color bias and apparent brightness could easily be explained by the difference in coatings. I believe the Opticron's probably yields a higher light transmission value but I am certainly not complaining about the Leupold's.

I will be sure to check for stray light issues the next time I get to sample the M7 8x30. I will also be sure to look through the objective end to note any exposed/non-blackened surfaces.

David,

The Verano 8x32 that I tried this past weekend was very sharp. It actually seemed to offer better apparent sharpness than the unit I reviewed last year.
 
The last few posts have led me to the conclusion that the Nikon Monarch M7 30 mm has to be a completely different binocular than the M7 42 mm. It seems there was a post from Jan VanDalen stating that the Kite Lynx 8x30 and the M7 were made by Kamakura with the Lynx being built with better materials. I am under the impression the M7 42 mm are from Nikon's Chinese source.

I don't want to buy an M7, but I may need to do that because I need to see one myself. My local dealer seems to have no plans to carry them either. My main source of curiosity stems from the fact that the Mojave 8x32 offers a clearly superior image to the 8x42 M7. I do not offer that as a criticism of the M7, just my evaluation of the side by side performance. If I had an M7, I'd use it and go look at stuff without complaint, but I think, and I think many others would too, that the M7 42 mm is not as bright nor does it have the color saturation of the Mojave. The edges of the Mojave are clearly superior to the edges of the M7 42 mm. Those differences between the Mojave and the M7 42 seem to be at least partly reversed judging from Frank's description of the Mojave vs the M7 30 mm. It may be that the presence of ED glass elements in the MZ 30 mm are part of the observed difference.

The Mojave comes in a bunch closer to the performance level of my Leupold Gold Ring HD 8x42 than does the M7 8x42. The GR 8x42 is ahead of the Zeiss Conquest HD when I have had those two side by side. However the local dealer has no Zeiss Conquest HD at the moment for the Mojave comparison.

MPeoples, you are welcome!
 
Last edited:
I look forward to reading your thoughts on the comparison when the time comes Steve. I did not expect to like the Nikon M7 8x30 as much as I did. For future reference I believe my recommendations for relatively inexpensive 8x32s are going to be the the Sightron SII at $180, the Leupold Mojave at $280, the Nikon M7 at $380 and the Opticron Countryman at $480.

You can't really go wrong with any of them. It really boils down to feel and how much refinement you want.
 
The last few posts have led me to the conclusion that the Nikon Monarch M7 30 mm has to be a completely different binocular than the M7 42 mm. It seems there was a post from Jan VanDalen stating that the Kite Lynx 8x30 and the M7 were made by Kamakura with the Lynx being built with better materials. I am under the impression the M7 42 mm are from Nikon's Chinese source.

Steve, It was a Nikon representative that told me that the M7 x30s were made in a different factory to the x42s. It was George de Putter of Kite who claimed the shared development and differentiating options for the Lynx. Gijs, Jan and possibly others have mentioned that the Kite Japanese made models are made by Kamakura Koki. I don't recall that anyone has confirmed the speculation that the M7 and Lynx are made by Kamakura China or not.

David
 
Steve, It was a Nikon representative that told me that the M7 x30s were made in a different factory to the x42s. It was George de Putter of Kite who claimed the shared development and differentiating options for the Lynx. Gijs, Jan and possibly others have mentioned that the Kite Japanese made models are made by Kamakura Koki. I don't recall that anyone has confirmed the speculation that the M7 and Lynx are made by Kamakura China or not.

David
David,

Thanks for the input. I have to think there is some functionally observable difference in the M& 30 vs 42 mm. Something is going on to place perspective on Frank's comments comparison with the Mojave 32 vs the Monarch 7 30 and the difference I see with the Mojave 32 and the M7 42. In our past review history, Frank and I have rarely differed in our respective opinions on any particular binocular, so I believe what Frank says he sees. I tend to think the design of the M7 30 mm has to be a better one, and a different one, rather than a scaled down M7 42 mm. I actually don't think it is as easy as just downsizing all the pieces, so there is probably a design difference. Whether the design is from the same or different factories will certainly have some relevance.

Here is the thread I was thinking about when I remembered Jan's post. I didn't find it earlier because I was not looking in the Kite Lynx threads.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=271312&page=2
 
Steve,

I'd missed that post by Jan. It seems a bit odd that when Kite's owner was emphasising the points of 'superiority' of the Lynx to the M7 he didn't mention the country of manufacture.

David
 
I don't want to buy an M7, but I may need to do that because I need to see one myself. My local dealer seems to have no plans to carry them either.


I you want to try them before you buy, you can borrow mine if you want. If this interests you , PM me and we can work out the details.
 
I you want to try them before you buy, you can borrow mine if you want. If this interests you , PM me and we can work out the details.

PM inbound ;). Thanks.

I'm most interested in seeing for myself the up close and personal differences only field use can really give. As to whether I wind up buying one or not depends on how much better I see it (or don't as the case may be) vs the Mojave.

Maybe Frank and I ultimately won't agree here as much as we mostly do. Anyway, I won't know until I have them both close to hand.
 
When I look at the Leupold site the Leupold 8x32 BX-3 Mojave has a mfg #118636 but when I look at some web sites (B&H , SWFA) they show the mfg#117985. Are these the same binos ?
 
When I look at the Leupold site the Leupold 8x32 BX-3 Mojave has a mfg #118636 but when I look at some web sites (B&H , SWFA) they show the mfg#117985. Are these the same binos ?

They have to be. There has only been one model of the Mojave 8x32, there have been two production runs (I think) but no model changes. It is getting to the point where I question just about anything I see on a company website. It should not be that way, but the web masters of today do not necessarily know how to focus a binocular (it seems) let alone be able to sort out the proper specifications. By far the best thing to do is call customer service and point out the error.

FWIW the number on the box 117985 ;).
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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