8x40+ Porro?? (1 Viewer)

I'm after an 8x40+ with at least 16mm eye relief, a medium field curvature (for the depth of field illusion) and high quality coatings for good contrast. Based on quite a bit of testing, it's probably going to be a porro.

My wife and I are not strictly birders. We are mostly mostly fair weather walkers who enjoy watching whatever wildlife is about. Our priority is that our main pairs of bins are light and compact. After quite a bit of testing we have settled on a Bushnell 7x26 Elite, and a Pentax 9x28 LV (yes I selected a good one) which suit perfectly for about 90 % of our needs. However there are still few outings each year, particularly in the winter months, where a more exit pupil is needed, or a more relaxed view is wanted for extended viewing. I can't justify the expenditure on the big boys for their limited use.

Sorry, it might be heresy, but I don't like the current darlings of the affordables available here, the Hawke Frontier HD, or the Bushnell Legend Ultra HD. I can admire their performance for the price, and would heartily recommend them to others to try, but they don't work for me. The field of view is too flat for my ageing eyes, the contrast a little muted for my tastes, and I'm not keen on the ergonomics. In fact I've not found an affordable roof that fits the bill. (Though those ex-demo MIG Minox HGs on offer really did tempt me.)

The best candidate I've found so far is the Opticron HRWP 8x42. Pretty good optics, good eye relief, smooth focus, (unaffected by the cold), usefully brighter than my compacts, and being a porro it also has that 3D appeal. The most relaxed view I've seen so far. It's shortcomings are a narrowish field of view, 7*, and perhaps surprisingly, the centre field was not quite as crisp as the little Bushnells. Is there anything that is going to better it without spending a fortune?

Good porros are very difficult to find here. Even if I could justify the cost, would the Nikon SE 8x32, for all it's virtues, be significantly brighter than my Bushnells (4 vs 3.7mm EP)? Would a Swift 820 Audubon 8.5x44 have the contrast I'm expecting? I've visited half a dozen specialist shops without seeing either on offer. In fact the only other 'decent' porro I've tried was the Pentax XCF which was rather disappointing.

Is there anything out there that is going to meet my expectations? I would appreciate some help with suggestions for alternatives and particularly where to find them to try.

David

typo said:

The field of view is too flat for my ageing eyes...

Click to expand...

Why doesn't a flat field work with ageing eyes?

Preference is certainly part of it, but I have very little focal accommodation. Apparent depth of field has declined as my presbyopia advances and now seems unacceptably shallow to me in the flatter field designs. A curved field, with the foreground in focus gives me a more satisfying view.

David

Hi...The older version of the Audubon 820..(there is a new one already in the market!!!) is a very nice binocular,and I can reccomend it to anyone looking for a good porro without hessitation..both the non-ED or the ED versions ..depends in your price range ,either one is a great glass..the are not perfect ,of course,..contrast is good,and they have enough punch to get the wow effect,and the 8.5 X configuration THAT THEY INTRODUCED to birding binos,is very succesful,as You can tell....They have some glare, a bit,..or a lot sometimes in exceptionally harsh light...but between the pros and cons there is extra weight in the sode of the Pros..and No,they are not too heavy either(since i mentioned extra weight!) I think You would like them...The new version is ,of course ,a mistery!..
The New Vixen Foresta Porro series with a waterproof body seems very interesting ,and there is ,at least ,one review in this forum indicating that They are actually very good indeed.....

Mayoayo,

Thanks for that. I wasn't aware of the flare issue. That bugs me far more than CA for example. I've also read that the eye relief may be too short for glasses even though it's listed as 17mm. Mine have a pretty close fit, so I hope they might be OK. Can you comment?

The Foresta sounds interesting.

David

typo said:

However there are still few outings each year, particularly in the winter months, where a more exit pupil is needed, or a more relaxed view is wanted for extended viewing.

Click to expand...

With the winter months in mind, are you sure a porro is what you want? The focuser will stiffen up in the cold. Combined with your lack of accommodation, this could prove very frustrating.

I just bought 7x36 roofs for winter use so I can have a larger exit pupil and a smaller compact size and light weight.

There aren't many around but a few that spring to mind are

Opticron BGA SE Classic 7x36 £390ish
FOV is wider than spec'd. More like 7.4* rather 7.2. Makes a big difference to my eye. Very well built with 30 yr guarantee. Compact and solid feeling.
Previous incarnations like the BGA PCAG can be found secondhand sometimes but aren't as bright and crisp as the Classics (at least the one I tried wasn't).

Bushnell Excursion EX 7x36 £175 on Ebay or £100 from USA (Cameraland or Optics Planet?)
I don't know what these are like.

Swift Eaglat 7x36 £480ish here but cheaper from USA.
Some think that they are same bin as the BGS Classics. To look at they are identical with almost the same spec. I would really love to compare some of these with my BGA Classics and settle the argument once and for all.

Any way, a bit of food for though for you.

Best wishes
Martin

Thanks Martin,

I neglected to try the Opticron Classics. I didn't think I wanted another 7x but given your comments I'll give them a go.

I don't think waterproof is too important for my needs, so I'm keen to explore the porro options. It's just proving difficult to do so.

I'm a little hesitant to order from the US. In the past I've been hit by surprisingly high shipping cost, VAT and collection fees and more hassle than I would want. I guess your experience is better than mine.

Cheers,

David

Hi David

The Swift Audubons are certainly very good optically but I think their ER is a bit over-optimistic so you would need to check them out yourself (I don't wear glasses).

Whilst I have no doubt that Martin is correct about the FOV of the Opticron BGA SE Classic 7x36 being wider than specced I would imagine that you would find the apparent FOV a bit too narrow at under 52 degrees if you found the Opticron HRWP restrictive (56 deg. AFOV according to the specs).

I noticed from another thread that Kay Optical (who carry a wide range of brands) http://www.kayoptical.co.uk/index.asp hold field events at College Lake Wildlife Centre and that they have one scheduled for Feb 2011 on their website, although it does not state the specific date - it may have happened! I don't know if this is local for you.

Hi Graham,

Unfortunately they don't seem to have any demos scheduled for Tring this year though I know they've been there in the past. They have a couple of used Audubons in stock. I try to avoid the M25 if I can, but on the other hand they also have a SE and the Opticron, so it might be worth the pain.

David

... Good porros are very difficult to find here. Even if I could justify the cost, would the Nikon SE 8x32, for all it's virtues, be significantly brighter than my Bushnells (4 vs 3.7mm EP)? Would a Swift 820 Audubon 8.5x44 have the contrast I'm expecting? I've visited half a dozen specialist shops without seeing either on offer. In fact the only other 'decent' porro I've tried was the Pentax XCF which was rather disappointing.

Is there anything out there that is going to meet my expectations? I would appreciate some help with suggestions for alternatives and particularly where to find them to try.

Click to expand...

David,

I own both the Swift 820 and Nikon SE 8x32, and I'm presbyopic and a bit astigmatic. Increasingly, I prefer to use binoculars with my glasses on — altho I can get along without them.

The Swift 820 is an outstanding optic, period. But, unfortunately, the hard eyecups retract only about 7.5 mm, leaving a minimum stand-off from the eye lens of about 4mm. This is quite insufficient for me to see the whole field or the field stop.

The 8x32 Nikon SE is a very different story, and the one I would recommend for you to try. The outstanding view is legend, of course, and, yes, that will probably be reflected in the price. Although you shy away from roof designs I'd also recommend looking at the 8x32 LX L if one appears. It's also great wearing glasses and shares a similar view quality to the SE.

Neither the SE or LX L come anywhere near the price for new hi-end offerings, and by those comparisons are real bargains.

Let's hear what you get.

Regards,
Ed

I'm surprised no-one mentioned the Nikon 8x40 Action EX. Seems made to order from your description.

I tried these and except for the field curvature, which does not work for my aging eyes, precisely because of my lack of focus accommodation, I thought they were a great buy for the price.

The views are wide (8* FOV), sharp, bright, and contrasty, with a decent-sized sweet spot and field curvature at the edges for that enhanced 3-D effect you're looking for.

The ergonomics are quite nice, with rounded prism housing that allowed me to keep my elbows farther down than many other porros I've tried (this gives better stability and keeps your arms from getting tired as quickly).

They have a listed 17.2mm ER. Nikon is pretty honest about their ER, so that's probably not too far what's listed, though I didn't try them with glasses.

The only negative is the 30 oz. weight. Most 8x40/42 roofs are significantly lighter, but most don't have an 8* FOV either, more like 6.5* at the affordable price point.

One caveat: I have read about problems getting Nikons serviced in Europe? Is that true?

Here ae the specs and some reviews of the Nikon 8x40 Action EX:

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/nikon/nikon-action-extreme-8x40-atb-binocular?tab=customer_reviews#tabs

The 7x35s in the same series (Action EX) are smaller for your wife's hands and still gives you a 5mm exit pupil, but you only save a couple ounces in weight.

If you can live with the weight, the rest seems to fit your needs.

Hi Ed,

The LXL typically sell for about £950 ($1520) over here and the best price for the SE about £530 ($848) against about £180 ($288) for the Opticron HRWP. It's kind of hard to justify those kind of prices for occasional use. Still until I have a look I don't know how tempted I'm going to be...... Just not sure I want to take the risk.

David

Brock,

If it's not the age of my eyes, then we'd best settle on progressive eccentricity as the cause of this particular preference. (My son is keeping a tally of my other foibles. It's getting rather disconcerting)

Thanks for the suggestion. I haven't discounted the Nikon EX, but was slightly discouraged by the 10x which is the only one I've found on demo. The contrast seemed fairly low and seemed prone to internal reflection, but the test was inside a store and probably misleading. It's worth another look if I can find them.

My wife wears size 5 1/2 gloves! The Bushnells 7x26 are too bulky. Part of the reason she chose the 9x28. I'll probably need to find a tripod mount for the porros or get some Yosemites as well.

David

David - Occasionally on Ebay the older Bushnell featherweight 8x40 CF will come up for bid. If in good conditiion they are quite good. They may for around $100 American or less. Good luck with your search.
John

typo said:

Hi Ed,

The LXL typically sell for about £950 ($1520) over here and the best price for the SE about £530 ($848) against about £180 ($288) for the Opticron HRWP. It's kind of hard to justify those kind of prices for occasional use. Still until I have a look I don't know how tempted I'm going to be...... Just not sure I want to take the risk.

David

Click to expand...

David,

WOW, you folks pay one hellovalot for optics! I'd say the SE is the better way to go ... and once done (assuming they work for you), problem solved. Incidentally, I paid $500 for my SE and $699 for the LX L. That's just about half of your cost.

Ed

Graham Osborne said:

I would imagine that you would find the apparent FOV a bit too narrow at under 52 degrees if you found the Opticron HRWP restrictive (56 deg. AFOV according to the specs).

Click to expand...

Hi Graham and Typo,

you would expect the BGAs to feel restricted and tunnel like but they're not.

I have to say that I put very little stock in AFOV figures. I find them to have very little practical meaning. I have discovered that I find that some bins with narrow AFsOV feel more comfortable than those with wider ones. I think eyerelief plays a large part here.

I found the 8x HRWPs FOV to be way too narrow but I have looked through 8x Veranos with the same 6.3* FOV and found them quite comfortable.

With the two bins in question here, the low mag of the BGA creates the low AFOV but the narrow FOV of the HRWP creates the low AFOV of the HRWPs. So with the BGAs you see much more stuff than through the HRWPs even though their AFOV is much smaller.

Another example would be an 8x bin with a 7* FOV versus a 7x bin with an 8* FOV. Same AFOV of 56* but give me the 7x with the wider FOV every time. You simply see a bigger area of stuff through it.

In short, if the narrow AFOV is caused by low mag then I don't find it a problem. If it is caused by narrow FOV then I do find it a problem.

Just goes to show that the old adage of "try before you buy" is very true.

Best wishes
Martin

Typo...The glare is not a big issue with the 820...but there is some .as elkclub pointed is an outstanding binocular...the eye relief is short and doesnt allow for the whole FOV to be seen with glasses,although 17mm are specified..I use now a Swift Ultralite 8x32 with 15mm eye relief and has better eye relief than the 820.I was happy with the FOV that I saw with glasses though...the 8x32 SE is exceptional ,for sure..since is not waterproof can be less trouble to use the focuser in cold weather,because it offers less resistence than those sealed .I wear glasses and I prefer rubber folding eyecups enyway(If they fold right!)...there is one for sale in the forum,as we speak,in US$,and not a bad price either!!!!
Nikon Action ,I dont think is as nice ,but is less expensive .
I havent use them further than a fast peek at a store,but the internal focus porros like MINOX,LEupold,etc..are very nice,if You can live with FOV restrictions
The little Vortex 8.5x32 might be an option too,I had the 6.5 and didnt like the extra long eye relief(had to hold the binos half a foot away from my face!),plus had a weak left barrel(a bit too much distorsion),but a good specimen of the 8.5X(less eye relief)can be a nice little binocular....

Martin,

Though I haven't done a systematic comparison, I think I'm inclined to agree with you. A Yosemite 6x30 has a 48* AFOV and feels like a big picture, and the Pentax 9x28 with 50.4* feels pretty cramped. Beyond the magnification I'm not sure how it works, but you're right in that some views with the same magnification seem big or small regardless of stated FOV. It's a shame the EII doesn't work with glasses. That really sounds like it has the issue covered.

David

Mayoayo,

Thanks for the comments. I'd looked at the specs for the Ultralite and been discouraged by the numbers. I'll give them a try if I can find them.

Regards,

David

mayoayo said:

I wear glasses and I prefer rubber folding eyecups enyway(If they fold right!)

Click to expand...

A lot of interesting preferences here. Why would you notice what kind of cups they have if they're either folded or wound right down?

I wear glasses too, and I've been avoiding fold down cups, but would always fold them right down too if I had them, so I don't know why. I go through phases of winding the cups out just a tiny bit so I can only just see the whole field of view (on the assumption that it reduces blackout) then leaving them right in.