• 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.

Entry level 8x56 advice (1 Viewer)

S

SteveTS

Well-known member
This is a relatively inexpensive (iro £150.00), entry level 8x56, Chin., silver coatings, compact, heavy, comparatively wide field of view 115m/1000m, aimed at the recreational wildlife-watching market.

Does anyone own one, or have something similar and care to comment ?

A chum likes my NM5 8x56 but it’s out of budget and she suggested this as a possible amongst a plethora of choices.

Wishing to avoid a hall-of-mirrors what could she expect ?

With thanks.
 
Last edited:
A big glass with low magnification such as an 8x56 is very tolerant of slop in the manufacturing process.
So your friend should expect fairly similar optical performance to your own optics, provided that her unit does not have gross defects in terms of optical alignment/collimation.
Can she check out her glass beforehand or is she a mail order guinea pig?
 
In 8x56 format I can suggest Docter Nobilem 8x56, Mid price, high quality /yes, new AK SLC would be better/ but from my experience Nobilem has very relaxed view, compare to ELSV... And what is also fine, is that Docter has very good customer service, my mother accidentally scrapped box and warranty card, and Docter send me new in 3 days... These old fashioned porro is still competition to new noble roofs, only drawback is average FOV, but corrected at 90%, what is still good. I hope that Docter will inovate these porros, or introduce EDOH 10x56...
 
Samandag said:
This is a relatively inexpensive (iro £150.00), entry level 8x56, Chin., silver coatings, compact, heavy, comparatively wide field of view 115m/1000m, aimed at the recreational wildlife-watching market.

Does anyone own one, or have something similar and care to comment ?

A chum likes my NM5 8x56 but it’s out of budget and she suggested this as a possible amongst a plethora of choices.

Wishing to avoid a hall-of-mirrors what could she expect ?

With thanks.
Click to expand...

For the budget-minded, the Hawke 8x56 Prostalk ED is supposed to be a "best buy" in that configuration. It blew Clive P's mind, and his mind hasn't been blown since listening to Jimmy Hendrix's "Purple Haze" back in 1967, so that should tell you something! ;)

Another member also had good things to say about his 8x56 Prostalk ED.

Here's Clive's comments:

Mind Blown by Hawke Pro-Stalk 8x56 ED

Brock
 
These turned out to be challenging.

The diopter wheel is about 1.5mm wider than the corresponding ring under the left eye-cup ; standing them up on the table the right barrel is a shade longer than the left barrel.

The rubber housing loose under the left eye-cup. Overall the armouring seems thin for the size of the unit.

Plenty of machining and post coating scratches to the rings and a few internal specs of dust.

A few small scratches and small glass inclusions and handling marks & smudges on the prisms.

The inter-pupillary distance to obtain a true circular sight picture in the near field is very narrow.

Sharpness in the centre field average.

Small sweet spot with a very high degree of peripheral field curvature.

Lateral edge distortion considerable at about 30%, and is not refocusable to the edges.

The intention to provide a 'compact' 8x56 is a good one but with such poor QC it is just an interesting diversion. :cat:
 
Last edited:
Samandag said:
These turned out to be challenging.

The diopter wheel is about 1.5mm wider than the corresponding ring under the left eye-cup ; standing them up on the table the right barrel is a shade longer than the left barrel.

The rubber housing loose under the left eye-cup. Overall the armouring seems thin for the size of the unit.

Plenty of machining and post coating scratches to the rings and a few internal specs of dust.

A few small scratches and small glass inclusions and handling marks & smudges on the prisms.

The inter-pupillary distance to obtain a true circular sight picture in the near field is very narrow.

Sharpness in the centre field average.

Small sweet spot with a very high degree of peripheral field curvature.

Lateral edge distortion considerable at about 30%, and is not refocusable to the edges.

The intention to provide a 'compact' 8x56 is a good one but with such poor QC it is just an interesting diversion. :cat:
Click to expand...

Which "these" do you mean? The Prostalk ED? Didn't mention the brand.

Brock
 
Thanks, Gijs, yes I'm familiar with the Meostar although I haven't handled it, I guess it's a £1K bin here.

I have an NM5 8x56 bought in Japan last year and no real need or desire to trade up in this spec.

The initial comparison here was between this and a budget compact 8x56 which caught my friend's attention in terms of perceived value ; no comparison really either optically or in build quality.

It's a good idea though, they've cut the length but not the weight, although that may come eventually.

Best wishes,
 
Last edited:
Samandag said:
These : http://www.amazon.co.uk/Berger-Schr%C3%B6ter-Compact-Hunting-Binoculars/dp/B004CJ8H6Y/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1411296663&sr=8-1&keywords=berger+8x56

There were images attached above.
Click to expand...

Jerry bought a cheap 8x56 from SWFA, forgot the brand, but they looked similar. It was also a stinker and he returned it. Maybe he can chime in with the brand, so you can avoid those, too.

If she wants a decent 8x56, I think she's going to need to fill some pickled pig's feet jars with quarters (or the closest Brit equivalent) and buy a Hawke Prostalk ED.

Btw, what does she need an 8x56 bin for and is she a weight lifter? An 8x42 should work for most birding and even hunting situations. Only in extreme low light is the 8x56 going to "shine" and then only for those whose pupils can open to 7mm. Lots of good choices in an 8x42, with a better bang for the buck.

Brock

P.S. Just saw these 8x50s from Opticron, which only cost $275, that's cheap! You don't see many 8x50s anymore. I like them better than 8x56s, which are overkill for my exit pupils and are usually too heavy. The Opticron 8x50 Discovery weighs 28 oz., same as the 8x42 SLC-HD.

opticron-discovery-wp-pc-8x50-binocular
 
Last edited:
Mal., your question doesn't surprise me, a while back CNN reported that only 30% of Americans had passports.

It's a very big wide bright world out there.

Best wishes,
 
Samandag,
Minox has a nice 8x56 for 749 euros, but that may be too expensive (it is a beautiful instrument though). Steiner also makes a good 8x56, but I do not know the price of it.
Gijs
 
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

T
Opticron Savanna R 8x33 Review
Replies
0
Views
8K
typo
T
I
South Mexico owling trip report April 2013
Replies
2
Views
2K
Hamhed
Hamhed
Frenchy
Taiwan - endemics and spoonbills. Dec 2006.
Replies
1
Views
3K
Mark Bruce
Mark Bruce

Users who are viewing this thread

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