• 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.

10x25 compact advice (1 Viewer)

H

hjay

Member
Hi,

New here - just wondering if anyone had any advice on budget 10x25 compacts? Haven't got a big budget and bins will also be for general and landscape viewing. Must be waterproof.

On my list are:

Olympus 10x25 WP11
http://www.olympus.co.uk/site/en/b/...oculars/leisure_sports/10x25_wp_ii/index.html

Hawke Premier 10x25
http://www.hawkeoptics.co.uk/hawke-premier-10x25-compact-black-binoculars.html

Hawke Frontier 10x25
http://www.hawkeoptics.co.uk/hawke-frontier-10x25-compact-black-binoculars.html

Barr & Stroud 10x25
http://www.barrandstroud.com/product/Barr and Stroud Sahara 10x25 FMC Waterproof Compact Binocular

Bushnell 10x25
http://www.decathlon.co.uk/bushnell-explorer-10x25-id_8115813.html

The Olympus and Hawke Frontier look interesting, both phase coated. But I don't know how much realistic difference PC makes to the average viewer.

Sorry I haven't got more to spend! any advice or opinions on these most welcome.

Thanks
Hugh
 
Any specific reason for 10x25 compacts? Have you handled and used one?

Personally wouldn't recommend them but, needed to ask.

I think if your set on that format an 8x would be better.

Compacts are hard enough to use add in shake from 10x, makes for a very unforgiving binocular.


I personally wouldn't consider a 10x compact at that price point but, you may see things differently.

Bryce...
 
^^^^ I would echo what Bryce has said. I'm not much of a compact user but have found 10x compacts to be too shaky for me. For general and landscape viewing it has to be said that an 8x will give you a comparatively wider field of view and it would widen your buying options.

Good luck with your choice.
 
hjay said:
...both phase coated. But I don't know how much realistic difference PC makes to the average viewer...
Click to expand...

Oh, phase-coating makes a BIG difference, even to an average viewer. But perhaps the better question is whether phase coating is important in 10x25 pocket-roof format bins in this price range. These type of bins tend to be awful, to put it mildly, so whether a unit is phase-coated may be of secondary importance to whether it is even assembled correctly, especially with respect to collimation, alignment, and focus action. Loads of these bins are fuzzy (in one barrel or both) due to poor prism production and assembly. If you are committed to the price and format, my best advice is to go to a shop where you can test them, find a unit that you like, and buy that exact one, even if it is the shop's demo.

If you are committed to the format but can budge on the price, I wonder how much a used Leica Trinovid or Zeiss would cost.

If you are committed to 10x25 and price, but not to pocket roofs, consider a reverse-porro. They tend to be MUCH better optically. Lots of good waterproof choices exist (e.g. Nikon 10x25 Prostaff ATB).

--AP
 
Thanks all for your replies.

Bryce & Samandag - 10x25 for weight, compactness & magnification. I've used compacts before and am not troubled by shake for my uses, but small and lightweight are important - well, essential. FOV is not important, either, I'm looking at specific objects in the landscape, not the landscape as some wide picture.

Alexis - take your point. But as stated earlier, no I can't spend more! It's sub £100 for sure. The reverse porro you mention might be worth consideration, though.

Really I'm not a pure birder. Sure I'll look at wildlife and birds, but these also have specific landscape uses (searching cliffs for geological features etc). They'll also be used on expedition in Borneo - carrying heavy loads (40lbs+) over v.difficult terrain in heat and humidity, so all kit is as lightweight as possible - you don't pack bricks!

Going to the shop may well be the answer, but I thought I'd ask here BEFORE i go to the shop in case there were some hints as to what would be recommended.

Cheers
 
The Olympus 10x25 and Nikon Travelite 10x25 are very clear.
10x25 is handy if you want to take a quick look at what's going on at a known location.
The Travelite is probably more rugged, the Olympus a little sharper, and smaller.
 
hjay said:
............ They'll also be used on expedition in Borneo - carrying heavy loads (40lbs+) over v.difficult terrain in heat and humidity, so all kit is as lightweight as possible - you don't pack bricks!
Click to expand...

Under the climatic conditions you mention, I strongly suggest some waterproof model. It's easy for other models to fog up due to the humidity. And it's really a pain ita if you have to try to get them to clear up again before you can use them again. Reverse porros are usually not waterproof.

(EDIT: I notice belatedly that you mentioned in your original post being waterproof as an important prerequisite.)

I only have experience with a 10x25 Leica Ultravid; that would be perfect for your purposes. But I have recently evaluated some 8x25 models within your price range. You might be happy with a Opticron T3 Trailfinder. It also comes in a 10x25 version: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Opticron-Trailfinder-8x25-Compact-Binoculars/dp/B00629G2QO

I can only speak for the 8x25, but I think the model is quiet decent for the price. Not quite as sharp as the Opticron Adventurer, but much easier on the eye. And compared to the Trailfinder, the Adventurer already feels "like a brick", though the difference is only 44 grams for the 8x25 models. Only limitation, in case you need a model that can accomodate interpupillary distances under 57 mm.
 
Last edited:
OPTIC_NUT said:
The Olympus 10x25 and Nikon Travelite 10x25 are very clear.
10x25 is handy if you want to take a quick look at what's going on at a known location.
The Travelite is probably more rugged, the Olympus a little sharper, and smaller.
Click to expand...

Hi Optic,do you mean the Olympus 10x25 reverse porro?....or the roofie WPII I mentioned?
 
Swissboy said:
Under the climatic conditions you mention, I strongly suggest some waterproof model. It's easy for other models to fog up due to the humidity. And it's really a pain ita if you have to try to get them to clear up again before you can use them again. Reverse porros are usually not waterproof.
Click to expand...

Yes, when it rains out there it REALLY rains!! But thinking about it a bit more, it would be very unlikely to be looking through bins in the rain - far more likely to be sheltering ;) But fogging up from humidty is a pain, experienced it with cameras. There's also the distinct possibility your sack falls in the river from time to time!

You might be happy with a Opticron T3 Trailfinder. It also comes in a 10x25 version:
Click to expand...

Yes, thanks for the tip there. Belatedly i also came across the Opticron T3 and it does sound like it might do the job. Seemed to get quite a decent review here, too: http://shop.featherswildbirdcare.co.uk/reviewT3.html

Thanks for the interest.

ps. looked at the Opticron web site and found it mentioned nothing about the T3 being waterproof...? The Adventurer model is waterproof (nitrogen filled) but no mention of waterproofing for the T3 other than to say it's 'rugged'...!! Hmmm
 
Last edited:
The WP in the full model name denotes that it is waterproof. However I see that's not clear on the website - it is only shown in the picture on the badge on the binocular body! Will get that sorted.

Cheers, Pete
 
I have tried most compacts on the market today and reverse porros seem to be the best value for money. I wouldn't recommend the Opticron T3. I tried it a few times and thought it was junk (sorry to the Opticron guys on here). It wasn't particularly bright, sharp or contrasty. It was an 8x so I imagine the 10x will be worse. I like the T3 8x42 but the 8x32 and 8x25 were very disappointing.

I like the Opticron Verano compact the best out of all the compacts I've tried. They are just under £200 so that might put them out of your budget.

I would also caution against a 10x25. A 2.5 exit pupil and tiny FOV would really diminish viewing pleasure. I would recommend the Opticron Discovery 8x32 which is just as light as many compacts. It is waterproof, phase corrected, light, compact and quite fun to use.
 
Petrus82 said:
I have tried most compacts on the market today and reverse porros seem to be the best value for money.
Click to expand...
Yes, but there isn't much choice in waterproof reverse porros sub £100!

I wouldn't recommend the Opticron T3. I tried it a few times and thought it was junk (sorry to the Opticron guys on here). It wasn't particularly bright, sharp or contrasty. It was an 8x so I imagine the 10x will be worse. I like the T3 8x42 but the 8x32 and 8x25 were very disappointing.
Click to expand...
Well this is how subjective it can be, I guess. Robert (swissboy) quite likes them, you don't. You see my quandary ;)

I like the Opticron Verano compact the best out of all the compacts I've tried. They are just under £200 so that might put them out of your budget.
Click to expand...
Indeed it does!

I would also caution against a 10x25. A 2.5 exit pupil and tiny FOV would really diminish viewing pleasure. I would recommend the Opticron Discovery 8x32 which is just as light as many compacts. It is waterproof, phase corrected, light, compact and quite fun to use.
Click to expand...
Well, as I said before, I'm not really a dedicated birder. But I do need to see some distant objects up close - and they're static and not hopping from branch to branch ;) I'd even go so far as to say I might need 12x25. FOV doesn't matter, clear focus on a distant object does.
 
I would advise against a 12×25 as it will probably be too dim and difficult to hold.

My most used binocular is a 10×25 second-hand Docter that cost me £40 from London camera exchange perhaps five years ago. It really is very nice and I think that it is waterproof even though I don't need that.
In addition, this particular example has perfect hinge tightness. I use it many times a day and fold it and unfold it and just put it in my pocket. The hinge tightness has never varied on either of the hinges.
I have tried some top price similar 10×25s and they are either too sloppy or difficult to use.
I appreciate that I was probably just lucky with the Docter.
The only problem is that one of the rubber eyecups has fallen to pieces but I just put up with this.
Also the black paint where the name is has been rubbed off by the previous owner, so it has had a lot of use but is still in perfect collimation and has beautiful colour rendition.
I also have the smaller eight times Docter, again bought second-hand, but hardly use it.

The Nikon Pro staff 10×25 ATB sounds a sensible choice if you can't find something suitable second-hand.
 
hjay said:
Yes, but there isn't much choice in waterproof reverse porros sub £100!


Well this is how subjective it can be, I guess. Robert (swissboy) quite likes them, you don't. You see my quandary ;)


Indeed it does!


Well, as I said before, I'm not really a dedicated birder. But I do need to see some distant objects up close - and they're static and not hopping from branch to branch ;) I'd even go so far as to say I might need 12x25. FOV doesn't matter, clear focus on a distant object does.
Click to expand...

I think a 12x25 would be a disaster. You are right, it is subjective. Nothing beats trying things for yourself. Good luck in your search.
 
I don't understand why FOV is not important for general & landscale viewing, but of course it's upto your own preference. A cheap 10x25 won't give you a satisfactory view. I'd say nothing below Nikon HGL level.

I would suggest the Hawke Sapphire 8x25 ED. Sometimes you could get them at around GBP150 discounted or second hand.
 
winwinbino said:
I don't understand why FOV is not important for general & landscale viewing.
Click to expand...

Hi, thanks for the comment.. Well I can only say that I'm looking at objects in the landscape, not the landscape as a whole. Imagine seeing a red tractor in a field at say 800m, and deciding you want to see what make of tractor it is - the tractor's only about 4m long. Do I need a wide FOV for that? Objects I'm looking at in a landscape are unlikely to be larger than 30m diameter...and if such objects are relatively close, I won't need binoculars ;)

I can well imagine that if you're looking at flocks of waders or finches on the bird table in the garden, a wide FOV may be preferable.
 
. Hi hjay,
As you say that your budget is restricted to £100 you don't want to waste the money.

For an average person trying to hold a 12×25 binocular steady they will see less detail than when holding a 10×25.
I would think that the only person who could hold the 12 times binocular steady and actually see more than with a 10×25 would be an athlete or trained dancer or gymnast with a pulse of 45 per minute or less and who is able to control his breathing to a great extent.
A person with an average pulse of say 70 per minute and average control of breathing may well see more detail in an 8×25 than a 10×25.

My rest pulse is normally 58 per minute but when I'm not fit it can be 70 per minute.
Although I use the 10×25 I normally have to rest it on a fence or hold it against a lamppost or tree or anything else to steady it.
It is okay if I'm panning steadily following, say an aircraft. But holding it still and steady without any bracing at all I would probably be better off with an 8×25.

What I'm saying is that I think you will be wasting your money if you go for a 12×25. The only way is to actually try various binoculars one against the other. Also with prolonged observations one gets increasingly tired. And a very lightweight 10×25 is more difficult to hold steadily than a larger 10×42. This is related I think to the inertia of the binocular.

So if you have a limited budget you should choose carefully.
 
Thanks Binastro, I think you make some good points there, I'll take those on board.

But perhaps my uses are slightly different than most others here - this is a bird forum, after all. Perhaps I'm cheating a bit trying to get info out of you guys, or perhaps it's just confusing the issue. But I do think my usage is slightly different - I'm not going to be glassing for half the afternoon, it's more a bit of a look at something for a minute and then away. I'm not saying it isn't important to have my object in focus and as clear as possible, but I'm not spending any long continuous time looking at it or for it.

To put this in perspective, my current bins are 'Geonaute 8x21' from (UK people will know this) Decathlon - I've had them four or five years and they're the same quality junk they were when I first bought them! i.e. I've not worn them out because I'm not a heavy user. So I'm an occasional user at the budget end of the market who wants to keep the format small and light and waterproof, yet who wants to get best magnification of distant objects.

And with those demands I know I'm going to have to compromise!
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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.

Similar threads

G
Choosing Binoculars for a Gift (UK)
Replies
16
Views
5K
Petrus82
P
Nomad Z
Bins To Upgrade From B&S Sierra?
2
Replies
20
Views
4K
Nomad Z
Nomad Z
8
Your thoughts on 10x25 compact's ?
2
Replies
22
Views
6K
John Dracon
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top