Nikon Action vs Action Extreme (1 Viewer)

I know the main difference is being waterproof but are these two made with the same body, frame, and eyecups? I had the 7x35 Extreme for a week or so as a stadium binocular - nice clear FoV but it was a bit "clunky" in my hands. Thanks.

The Action has rubber eye cups, as far as I remember, the EX has screw out eye cups, not the most comfortable. Not as comfortable as most roofs.

Tero is exactly right. If you want similar image quality and price point check out the Nikon Trailblazers at http://blog.nikonbirding.com/2010/05/new-nikon-trailblazer-review.html and go to www.nikonbirding.com for more information. It is a good fit, lighter in weight (due to the roof prism design), and a bit more durable. I can offer an additional 10% through www.nikonprogear.com if you are interested. That 10% off works for all Nikon products. Let me now if you have any questions. Best of luck!

Best,
Mike Freiberg
Nikon's Birding Market Specialist

Thanks Mike but the reason I tried out the 7x35 Extreme was for the FoV to use as a stadium binocular - just too clunky. The largest FoV in a Trailblazer is 366' so it won't seve my purpose.

After looking more at the specs the standard 7x35 Action appears to have a shorter eye relief than the Extreme - which doesn't help me as an eyeglass wearer.

The eyecups screw out on the better one's but only the objectives are coated. If you shine a light down them you see green on the objective and sheer white on every other surface. If they even had generation 1 Monarch full multi coatings they would be fantastic. I had the 12x50 which was pretty good all in all. Now I have the 16x50 which I only use on a tripod to see the moon or boats or something in good light. (The dimness actually helps a bit with detail considering how bright the moon is.) I'll probably sell them.