I did notice, but I must have had a brain fart. $ 700 US + shipping.
This is starting to sound too cheap.
Dave
-
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.
Review of NIkon HG "Sample" (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter binomania
- Start date
I did notice, but I must have had a brain fart. $ 700 US + shipping.
This is starting to sound too cheap.
Dave
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
I'm not down on it, just recalling the EDG, that I have almost never seen in the field. Birders don't seem to buy expensive Nikon binoculars. Mid-price, yeah, lots, but over a grand? Nope.
i think Nikon make some great binoculars but have done a terrible job in marketing them. Heck, the EDG wasn't even available in Canada for years after its release and after-market service [in Canada] really doesn't exist.
Last edited:
Without trying them he claimed that if these Nikons were brighter and sharper than the Leica Trinovid HD then the Leica must have been faulty! That's enough for me to dismiss anything further he says!
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Ciao ! Piero - welcome to the forum :t:
Thank you for your impressions of the new Nikon MHG sample. I gather you were quite impressed, thinking it was closer to the EDG, rather than mid way between that and the Monarch 7.
I am interested in the 10x in particular. The next time you get a chance to view the MHG could you pay careful attention to the following questions for the 10x please. :cat:
1. How does the Nikon 10x42 MHG compare optically to the Swarovski 10x42 SV, the Zeiss 10x42 SF, and the 10x42 EDGII?
2. How is Eye relief with spectacles on - is it enough to see the full FOV ? and how is the 'ease of view' with spectacles on?
3. Chromatic Aberration - how does it compare to the 3 Alpha binoculars mentioned?
4. How do you find the "Globe Effect" (Rolling Ball) in comparison to the other 3 Alpha binoculars?
5. Finally, how does the brightness, colour, and sharpness compare to the other 3 Alpha binoculars?
Many thanks Piero :t:
Arrivederci :hi: Chosun :gh:
I have plenty of Nikon cameras and lenses.
Many of the Nikon compacts are bad compared with equivalent Canon compacts.
However the Nikon P610 is truly excellent.
The Nikon 300mm f/4.5 was ridiculously bad.
Old Nikon lenses attract dust like a fly trap.
Some Nikon cameras and lenses are very good, but generally Zeiss are better.
I also have Zeiss lenses and cameras.
Some Nikon binoculars are good, especially lower priced ones are excellent value for money, with consistently good quality control.
Nikon have marketing down to a fine art.
CSI is a glorified, in your face, non stop Nikon advert.
And why not, they must pay big bucks for it.
In my opinion the Conquest HD is better than the Nikon Monarch HG.
Although I only have the 10x42 HD and 8x32 HD.
In my opinion the Canon 10x42 is a class above the Nikon Monarch HG.
Less CA centrally and off axis.
Flatter field.
Less ghosting, in fact maybe none?
Similar AFOVs.
The Nikon Monarch HG is however, maybe 10% brighter or a bit less than the Canon 10x42.
This morning a smallish crow at 118m. Small amount CA Nikon centrally, none Canon 10x42.
Quite a lot of CA off axis Nikon, little Canon 10x42.
Much better off axis resolution Canon.
Canon without stabilizer.
Unfortunately the Canon is very heavy, and the Nikon Monarch is very light.
For most people this will be the deciding factor.
However, Nikon Monarch HG excellent central resolution.
For birdwatchers the Nikon will do well, but personally I think the Conquest HD is better.
But birdwatchers have to give their own verdict as I am an astronomer and the telescopes I use are frankly better than any binocular, although they are quite different.
Horses for courses.
Many of the Nikon compacts are bad compared with equivalent Canon compacts.
However the Nikon P610 is truly excellent.
The Nikon 300mm f/4.5 was ridiculously bad.
Old Nikon lenses attract dust like a fly trap.
Some Nikon cameras and lenses are very good, but generally Zeiss are better.
I also have Zeiss lenses and cameras.
Some Nikon binoculars are good, especially lower priced ones are excellent value for money, with consistently good quality control.
Nikon have marketing down to a fine art.
CSI is a glorified, in your face, non stop Nikon advert.
And why not, they must pay big bucks for it.
In my opinion the Conquest HD is better than the Nikon Monarch HG.
Although I only have the 10x42 HD and 8x32 HD.
In my opinion the Canon 10x42 is a class above the Nikon Monarch HG.
Less CA centrally and off axis.
Flatter field.
Less ghosting, in fact maybe none?
Similar AFOVs.
The Nikon Monarch HG is however, maybe 10% brighter or a bit less than the Canon 10x42.
This morning a smallish crow at 118m. Small amount CA Nikon centrally, none Canon 10x42.
Quite a lot of CA off axis Nikon, little Canon 10x42.
Much better off axis resolution Canon.
Canon without stabilizer.
Unfortunately the Canon is very heavy, and the Nikon Monarch is very light.
For most people this will be the deciding factor.
However, Nikon Monarch HG excellent central resolution.
For birdwatchers the Nikon will do well, but personally I think the Conquest HD is better.
But birdwatchers have to give their own verdict as I am an astronomer and the telescopes I use are frankly better than any binocular, although they are quite different.
Horses for courses.
Last edited:
mfunnell
Registered Confuser
An interesting comment as I'm thinking (in a very vague way - no intent as yet) about 10x bins - and both the Conquest HD and the Nikon HG are in the mix (as are a bunch of other bins including a Nikon EII 10x35). I'm aware you've been using the 8x rather than 10x HG, but it's all grist for the mill. I'd even thought about the Canon 10x42 so your comments there were helpful as well.
I'll probably end up getting nothing as I have an OK set of Opticron 10x50s that probably do most of what I want from a 10x bin, but that doesn't stop me from assessing potential candidates should I decide I want something else...
...Mike
I bought a refurbished Nikon 10x35 EII about 12 years ago at High Point Scientific in New Jersey for $250.00. They had about 6 of them for sale in new boxes labeled "Refurbished" and they all looked like new binoculars. I've been using it ever since when I would like to have a 10x with a wide FOV. I have enjoyed using it a number of times at Hawk Mountain and at Cape May during fall migrations.
It is why I decided to get the 8x42 Monarch HG when it comes out rather than the 10x42. The 10x42HG and the 10x35 EII have nearly the same FOV.
Bob
It is why I decided to get the 8x42 Monarch HG when it comes out rather than the 10x42. The 10x42HG and the 10x35 EII have nearly the same FOV.
Bob
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
When I posted my earlier comments on the pricing in Europe from that one vendor, the thought did enter the back of mind about this possibly being one of those to good to be true scenarios.
I know nothing about that vendor and not much about any of the European vendors other than Jan, who I believe does not deal with Nikon. Maybe some of our European members familiar with Nikon can confirm if this is a legitimate going price for the new HG in Europe.
Nice comments. It is probably hard to beat the Zeiss Conquest HD at that price point. I agree with your comments on the Canon 10x42 IS-L. I had a couple of them and it has probably the best optics of any binocular out there and in discerning detail with the IS turned on there is nothing that will touch it. I couldn't tolerate the weight and size though and I bought the Swarovski 10x50 SV after comparing them for a long time. Handheld, I thought the SV was just a LITTLE bit better than the Canon on the edges but in things like flare control and ghosting the Canon was better. Of course the SV has much better ergonomics than the Canon and is also a very good astro binocular if mounted on a tripod. I know what you mean about your telescopes being better optically. There is no binocular made that will touch a fine APO telescope like a Televue or Astro-Physics because they have such a huge focal length advantage. Astronomy was my hobby for a long time and I had many big telescopes including 10 inch reflectors. If you think the Conquest HD is better than the MHG I trust your opinion. I know I had one and really only the very top alpha's could beat them by a very small margin.
Last edited:
Thanks.
The sample 8x42 Monarch HG is an early production one.
The plus points are a very bright image and excellent central resolution with a good field size.
I would have to test a 10x42 Nikon Monarch HG against my 10x42 Conquest HD, so I cannot give any definitive comments.
I have no intention in getting the 10x42 Monarch HG.
I will leave this to others to test the two obvious competitors.
However, at present I think the 10x42 Conquest HD is hard to beat in its price range.
The sample 8x42 Monarch HG is an early production one.
The plus points are a very bright image and excellent central resolution with a good field size.
I would have to test a 10x42 Nikon Monarch HG against my 10x42 Conquest HD, so I cannot give any definitive comments.
I have no intention in getting the 10x42 Monarch HG.
I will leave this to others to test the two obvious competitors.
However, at present I think the 10x42 Conquest HD is hard to beat in its price range.
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
You said ''much''. Might be down to how we define ''much'', but when talking few % in transmission, much sounds like hyperbole. Same with sharpness - if a modern binocular is ''much'' sharper than another, I would suspect sample variation as even cheap bins. should be sharp enough.
I recently tried the Monarch HD (8&10) against my Hawke Frontier ed ll and Hawke Sapphire...the Nikons were better by quite a margin,,sharp and contrasty and great FOV,,bit of edge softening on the 8x but less than both Hawkes,,though I still think the Sapphire's were great considering the price...
Tried the Conquest 8x32 at Ace optics Bath,,wasn't to taken by them tbh,,you know when you try out new optics,,some leave you stunned,,had that impression with these new Monarch's and the Swaro latest 8x32 but not the Conquests...
The Monarch's compact dimensions yet superb view are seriously tempting me right now...
Tried the Conquest 8x32 at Ace optics Bath,,wasn't to taken by them tbh,,you know when you try out new optics,,some leave you stunned,,had that impression with these new Monarch's and the Swaro latest 8x32 but not the Conquests...
The Monarch's compact dimensions yet superb view are seriously tempting me right now...
I would say the Zeiss Conquest HD is very close to alpha level. If the Nikon MHG is close to the Conquest HD it should be a pretty good binocular.
Buy a pair and write a review for us unfortunate americans that can't get them yet.
The Tract Toric is better than the Conquest HD, I can attest to that. We had them side by side in Africa for 9 days, every day, and it is noticeable.
I'm glad because I ordered a Tract Toric 8x42 based on your review. If it is better than a Conquest HD it is a very good binocular indeed. It would be a better buy than the new Nikon MHG for sure then. I like the looks of it and the specifications. I wrote why I decided to try it on you thread. Using a binocular in Africa for ten days is really the way to test them. Under tough conditions like that it really show a binoculars weak points. Are you a guide in Africa?
Last edited:
"You are correct, James has lots to say about optics he has never laid
eyes on."
That reminds me of somebody else.:-O
denco, no I do not guide over there. 4 of us were on safar. During the mid-day hours when some were taking naps, we would sit around watering holes and watch birds and wildlife. Some of the birds are so vividly colored they look like something out of a cartoon. One, for instance, was a lilac breasted roller....astoundingly beautiful. Africa is an amazing place.
I'm anxious to hear your take on the Toric. Please keep an open mind about the FOV specs.
I'm anxious to hear your take on the Toric. Please keep an open mind about the FOV specs.
