• 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.

Further confusion over Monarch 5 & 7 (1 Viewer)

bearclawthedonut said:
rdpx:

Handling is very important! The M7 8x30 is small, but at 4.75" - it SHOULD offer a comfortable grip, but unfortunately, Nikon has misplaced the strap attachment location. It's positioned about 0.5" below the eyepiece, instead of being directly below the eyepiece. Thus, its length (for a hand hold) is effectively reduced to 4.25" - too short for a comfortable/secure hand hold for even mid-sized hands. In regard to "black flashes around the edges"; this is PROBABLY due to the small exit pupils (3.75mm). To enjoy a comfortable/stable view each exit pupil must be approximately centered over each eye. This is harder to do with smaller exit pupils. With use you will learn to do this quickly and automatically - without even thinking about it. But it takes a while, perhaps as long as 4 to 8 hours of actual use (not carrying them around your neck - but actually looking through them). However, if you have to fight with them so much that you do not enjoy using them, then you will never get to 4 hours of use. Do not purchase 10x32 binoculars blind. 3.2 mm is a very small exit pupil often yielding difficulties with image brightness during less then strong sunlight conditions.

I would strongly suggest that you try an 8x42, before deciding on an 8x30. The Nikon Monarch 5 weighs 20.8 oz. the Zeiss Terra 8x42 weighs 25.4 oz. Try the Nikon Monarch 5 8x42. The only binocular that I could recommend that weighs over 24 oz would be the Vortex Razor HD 8x42. It is a very, very good handling binocular, but it costs $1200. Unfortunately, its image quality to my eyes, was not significantly better (certainly not worth $1000 MORE) then my old Monarch ATB 8x42. If you want great image quality and are willing to spend $900/$1000, then go with the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42, but it handles like the brick it is.

All binoculars are compromises. Compromises in image quality and/or handling. If the inexpensive Kowa is comfortable for you to use (no eye strain) and it satisfies your image needs, then grab them. Not only will you have a serviceable binocular, but you will also have money left over for touring Napa or Sonoma Valley and perhaps a beach towel or two. Good luck and enjoy your trip to California.

bearclawthedonut
Click to expand...

bearclaw:

Your post is interesting, but I am sure wondering about your connection
to binocular weight and quality. You mention that lighter is better,
and your limit is 24 oz.

That seams odd, are you handicapped by the weight?

The best 42mm binoculars available, are all close to 28 oz. in weight,
and every oz. maximizes your quality of view. ;)

Jerry
 
I'm with Bearclaw on the whole weight thing.

Whilst I understand that a 40lb 12x70 bino on a tripod would give me astonishing detail, I am unlikely to take it on a walk.

;)
 
NDhunter:

Unfortunately, there is very little connection between light weight and quality in binoculars, particularly image quality. The connection is between light weight and excellent handling. The Vortex Razor HD 8x42 ($1200+/-) is a very, very good handling binocular, most particularly as it weighs over 24 oz. The Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42 ($950+/-) has outstanding image quality, but it is very large and very heavy, about 28 oz. I have often bemoaned binocular manufacturers for not making a binocular with Razor HD handling and Conquest HD image quality. Now that binocular would be well worth $1200 to me.

You may enjoy carrying around 28 oz binoculars, but supposing a 24 oz binocular were available with outstanding optics? Which then, would you choose to carry? I refuse to carry a binocular that is much heavier then it needs to be. Nikon has attempted to upgrade their lenses in the Monarch line. Good for them, but they have been very conservative in stepping up to the Monarch 7 levels as they are still bound by price points. What if they put Zeiss Conquest HD lenses in a Monarch polycarbonate frame and offered it for sale at say $1200? Impossible; maybe, maybe not?

The three most important characteristics in good binocular handling are: weight, weight and weight. While this is not true, you get the point - weight is very important.

bearclawthedonut
 
Last edited:
bearclawthedonut said:
NDhunter:

Unfortunately, there is very little connection between light weight and quality in binoculars, particularly image quality. The connection is between light weight and excellent handling. The Vortex Razor HD 8x42 ($1200+/-) is a very, very good handling binocular, most particularly as it weighs over 24 oz. The Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42 ($950+/-) has outstanding image quality, but it is very large and very heavy, about 28 oz. I have often bemoaned binocular manufacturers for not making a binocular with Razor HD handling and Conquest HD image quality. Now that binocular would be well worth $1200 to me.

You may enjoy carrying around 28 oz binoculars, but supposing a 24 oz binocular were available with outstanding optics? Which then, would you choose to carry? I refuse to carry a binocular that is much heavier then it needs to be. Nikon has attempted to upgrade their lenses in the Monarch line. Good for them, but they have been very conservative in stepping up to the Monarch 7 levels as they are still bound by price points. What if they put Zeiss Conquest HD lenses in a Monarch polycarbonate frame and offered it for sale at say $1200? Impossible; maybe, maybe not?

The three most important characteristics in good binocular handling are: weight, weight and weight. While this is not true, you get the point - weight is very important.

bearclawthedonut
Click to expand...

I dont notice 4 oz difference. 3 times that I might notice.
 
I just checked, the wrist watch I wear most of the time is 5 1/4 oz, so if I need to lighten the handling, I'll just put the watch in my pocket.
 
I wonder why the binocular companies even bother publishing how much their products weigh when it is of such manifest unimportance to their serious customers?
 
To bring us back on subject, I thought I should share that I just appear to have purchased a "nearly new" pair of Leupold Mojave 8x32 from eitanaltman. I won't see these until I arrive on Catalina Island in about three weeks but I am really pleased with the result, so thanks to all on here who helped it along with your advice, or just comments...

Also, no-one seems to have anything to say about the whole weird UK/USA price ratio difference between the two binoculars as was asked in the original post.

I guess it is just NIKON being strange. Certainly seems like there is something odd going on, but either way it seems like a WIN for USA buyers of either pair...

Robert
 
I agree that weight is an important consideration, though equally important are how that weight is distributed and how well your hands and face fit the bin. If a bin is awkward for me to hold, it doesn't matter if it's 24 oz. or 28 oz., it will wobble.

My 804 Audubon weighs 29 oz., but feels very comfortable to hold for long periods, particularly for stargazing, for which I use it the most. Even the 45 oz. CZJ 8x50 Ocatrem felt comfortable to hold for long periods because there was plenty of "real estate" for my hands to wrap around and the bottom of the prism housing were flat, giving my thumbs a great platform to support.

OTOH, the 35.6 oz. Nikon Venturer LX felt heavy in my hands, because the weight is more centralized in a closed bridge roof and there was no thumb indents, so I had to support the bin by pushing in at the sides and holding it from above. After a while, my palms would cramp.

Great images in all three bins, but the one I can hold the most comfortably for the longest time will get used the most.

When it comes to 10x, I do prefer more weight. Although the images through the Nikon 10x42 SE were superb and the ergonomics were among the best I've handled, the 24 oz. weight was too light for a 10x42. At 28 oz., the 10x42 SLC-HD hit the sweet spot with its weight, balance and thumb indents. Those three qualities enabled me to hold 10x with exceptional stability.

For me, it's not just about weight alone, but also other considerations that determine how that weight feels in my hands and how steady I can hold the bin.

Brock
 
Last edited:
So still, in the UK the M7 8x30 is $50 cheaper than the M5 8x42. In the USA it is $80 dearer.

Does anyone know anyone at Nikon who can explain who, if anyone, is being shafted, how and why?

R
 
Who knows if anybody is being shafted what with currency exchange differences and import duties and so forth?

Does it make a difference from where they are made and then where they are sold? Japan or China? USA, Europe, Great Britain? Nikon make lots of binoculars, or if you will, has a lot of them made under their own name in different places and sells them in many more places.

Bob
 
I suppose "shafted" is a poor choice of word.

It seems very strange to me though that Nikon price these binoculars so differently in different areas. I was all ready to buy a pair of the M7 8x30s when I came to the US this month. Seeing that they were actually cheaper than the M5 8x42s in the UK made me question that and look into it further and in the end I have gone with some Leupold Mojaves.

To me it seems pretty clear that there is something odd going on with the mark-ups. Either the M5 costs more to produce or the M7 does.

Robert
 
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

D
Help request: some doubts about M5/M7
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
tenex
tenex
L
Nikon Monarch M7, Hawke Frontier HD or Kowa BDII XD for the aged of sixty? All in 8x30
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
Elkhornsun
E
U
Nikon M7 8x30 Glare?
Replies
7
Views
2K
Upland
U
N
Monarch HG 8x42 vs Save for NL Pure
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ratal
Ratal
Emily Taylor
Found a used Monarch X for a cool $90 (10.5x45)
Replies
6
Views
874
Emily Taylor
Emily Taylor

Users who are viewing this thread

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