8x40+ Porro?? (1 Viewer)

brocknroller said:

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

Click to expand...

They seem to have similar specs to my Bushnell Legend 8x42 porros. I liked them, but they're waterproof like the Action Ex, and I found the focusing just too stiff.

Martin/David

I will have to bow to your experience of using the BGAs and Yosemite respectively as I have not tried either. Martin - have you tried the Vortex Fury 6.5x32? I have just obtained a pair (8.5deg TFOV) and I am very impressed with them. David - perhaps this is another option for you, although again neither porro nor 8x! I know that Looksharp who is a glasses-wearer also rates them highly. They are now discontinued but I believe there may still be some available. Apologies for complicating matters further.

Pshute/Graham,

Thanks again for the observations. All useful information.

I think I might have tried the Fury 6.5x32 at the same time I originally tried the Bushnell 7x26 along with a bunch of other reverse porros and 8x20 and 8x25s and other smaller pairs. If I'm correct they were brighter and wider view as you would expect. However the Bushnells won that shootout hands down. But then, as we have established, my preferences may be unconventional.

I seem to be particularly sensitive to different coatings and the resulting contrast. It appears that men are pretty variable in their colour sensitivity, particularly to the red end of the spectrum, so I guess it's not surprising that opinions differ. I took little notice at the start of where pairs were made and what had which coatings, but the European brands and some Japanese made pairs appear to work best for me, and on the whole the Chinese made ones don't work so well. The colour of the coatings seems to be a clue. A deep purple seems to work best.

I'm guessing, with the price consideration, the answer is likely to be a Japanese made pair, but with the Japanese brands having assembly plants in China and elsewhere I could be totally wrong.

David

Ultra lite

typo said:

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

Click to expand...

David, I am using a Swift #763 Ultra Lite 8x,32..The Old Ultra lite,not the newer Ultra porro...I dont think they make a 8x32 in the new series.....These are allegedly the same binocular that very well regarded Celestron and Vixen Ultima series.I found them New on Eb@y,a while back,and bought them,..I actually wanted to try them for years!...the 8x42 has a narrowish FOW ,but there is nothing in the specification numbers of the 8x32 that looks actually bad..436' at 1000Y,15mm eye relief(true,It doesnt makes eyeglass users all that excited,but It actually allows me to see the entire FOV)..15 feet close focus is the worst of the features,but my pair focusses down to 10 feet,and I can focus at 8.5 without my eyeglasses..18.5 Oz.....Not waterproof though,and that would may be a problem ,with heavy field work and mild abuse..but in the other hand ,the focus is very smooth
You can still find these ,I think as the Vixen GEOMA porro 8x32..I would like to know if someone has compared this old Ultralite with the Nikon E II 8x.....


The foldable eyecups?..they seem a bit less intrussive when folded,and they are a bit more predictable ..unless well designed and well made,the other types(pull-on,screw-out..etc)can be problematic.

typo said:

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

Click to expand...

I use my EIIs with glasses and can see the whole field of view. Try before you buy is what I say - you may be pleasantly surprised!

Paul

Mayoayo,

Thanks for clarifying that. I had been thinking the new 8x42 porro, and that is listed as 6.5*. Getting models mixed up now.

The Geoma apart from the eyecups still look like a different mechanical build, but the same specs. Another one to look out for. Although cosmetically rather different, The first one on the page here looks related as well.

http://www.claritas-online.co.uk/products/general_purpose_binoculars.htm

Not exactly what I had in mind, but very cheap for a Japanese made pair.

Thanks,

David

PS I phoned the Hilkinson guy, and he knows about some their stuff being alternatively badged elsewhere, but not that one.

Paskman said:

I use my EIIs with glasses and can see the whole field of view. Try before you buy is what I say - you may be pleasantly surprised!

Paul

Click to expand...

Thanks. Just when I thought I'd crossed one off the list, it jumps back on again.

David

I haven't managed to schedule a trip to the more distant outlets to try other porros, but I stopped by the my closest one (and least favourite) to try to compare the Opticron HRWP with Martins suggestion the Opticron BGA Classic 7x36. They didn't have it. I compared the HRWP to the Bushnells again and pretty much confirmed my first thoughts. Just a shade behind the Bushnells on contrast, but it the extra EP meant I could see much further into the mist we have today. I like field curvature, but maybe just a little more than ideal (for me) on an 8x. On balance still very positive.

I don't have a need for another small pair but couldn't resist trying a couple while I was there. The Minox BV 8x25... don't bother! The other was the Opticron BGA Traveller 6x32 which has recently been discontinued and is now discounted.
http://www.opticron.co.uk/Pages/traveller.htm
Ugly and unconventional yes, but I found it very appealing. It feels like it's built to take a few knocks. The view reminded me of the Yosemite 6x30, but coat pocket sized. When I looked for it I could detect the lack of phase coating, but very bright for a compact. While the AVOV is the same as the Yosemite the view felt bigger. Not as good as the Bushnells (or probably the Yosemite) but more versatile?

David

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...

Nikon 8x32HGL on offer for £619 here

Nikon 8x32 SE £399 here

The 8x32 SE is a good price considering I paid a bit more years ago when they first came out.

Dipped,

I was given the heads up on the SE, and it's one of the places I hope to get to. That looks like a good price on the HGL. I hope to try some closer to home.

Many thanks,

David

The HGL handles great,..Is a beautiful binocular,..but the amount of CA in the image is not acceptable..PEntax ED 8x32 should be around the same price ,and It creates a nicer image all together..the HGL makes impossible to look at dark birds fliying against a bright sky,the image just explodes into a yellow/magenta UFO..In some conditions the view is superb,but is sadly limited in that regards..
The Pentax ED is a good glass..and the Leupold Golden ring 8x32 ,both HD and non-HD versions,get really good reviews...the non HD should be inexpensive if you can find one on Ebay..but now this is derailed into bargain mid size roofs!!!!

mayoayo said:

..but now this is derailed into bargain mid size roofs!!!!

Click to expand...

Is that unusual? To quote the guy today on the subject of porros "nobody wants 'em... they're dinosaurs " . Contrary to the opinions of some I'm not derailed yet. Just trying to keep an open mind.

David