• 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.

Advice on light waterproof binoculas (1 Viewer)

Frank D:

You are far braver than I. I would NEVER expose my any of my credit cards to PayPal, which is as I understand is a requirement to make purchases on ebay (as ebay owns paypal). I salute your courage.

Have you seen any reviews on the Vanguard Spirit ED 8x36? It has intriguing specs. 4.9" tall, 18.69 oz, 17 mm of eyerelief and ED glass all for $280. I wonder if it is worth a try? I've seen a couple of good reviews on the Vanguard Endever series (which like the new ZR ED3 is too heavy for me), but nothing about the Spirit ED series. Things too good to be true are generally not. Still, I guess it could be done with a polycarbonate frame. Vanguard's promotional photos appear to sugest that the usable eyerelief might be a good bit less than 17mm's due to the eyecup design?

bearclawthedonut
 
Last edited:
Frank D:

You are far braver than I. I would NEVER expose my any of my credit cards to PayPal, which is as I understand is a requirement to make purchases on ebay (as ebay owns paypal). I salute your courage.

Have you seen any reviews on the Vanguard Spirit ED 8x36? It has intriguing specs. 4.9" tall, 18.69 oz, 17 mm of eyerelief and ED glass all for $280. I wonder if it is worth a try? I've seen a couple of good reviews on the Vanguard Endever series (which like the new ZR ED3 is too heavy for me), but nothing about the Spirit ED series. Things too good to be true are generally not. Still, I guess it could be done with a polycarbonate frame. Vanguard's promotional photos appear to sugest that the usable eyerelief might be a good bit less than 17mm's due to the eyecup design?

bearclawthedonut

After over 10 years on ebay and PP I've never had a problem, and I've never heard or read anything about them having any financial info compromised. But I do have a dedicated bank account and debit card that I use exclusively for Paypal.

Have a look at the 8x36 Bushnell Legend Ultra HD which is a very nice bino. ER is advertised as 15.4mm, but I have not had a problem with my bifocals or progressives, although I generally don't use glasses but test every bino with them. With the $50 rebate, the net cost comes to around $150-$160 or so.

Tom
 
Luca
Bushnell discontinued the Excursion line which had 28 & 32mm binos, and brought out the redesigned Excursion EX, but the smallest bino in that lineup was 7 & 8x36. I imagine Bushnell phased out the 28's as they were too expensive to make for that market segment.

Here is a link to a PDF of the 2009 Bushnell catalog which shows the specs and features:

http://www.bushnell.com/downloads/catalogs/09BSH4873_2009_Catalog_Binoculars.pdf

Thanks! I see however that the Bushnell Excursion 7x28 is a bit out of my weight range.
I think if the Vortex won't suit me, I will try the Pentax 9x28 or DCF SW 8x25...
 
Luca,

I researched this last Spring in prep for hiking season here in Japan. I am also into ultralight backpacking and count grams in my pack. I have spent silly money just to save 100g too!

I do not consider any of the reverse porros as they are generally way too bulky in a 25mm size. Any bino with smaller objective lenses are really special purpose and generally too dim for nature views.

The lightest/most compact fully waterproof roof with phase coatings is the Kowa BD8x25GR at 320g (11.3oz). I am a big Kowa fan and really wanted these to work as I can get them for ~$150 here but unfortunately, I found their image quality lacking, especially the relatively narrow 6.3° field of view (FoV) for their price.

I have never seen the similar sized Vortex Viper so have no comment.

#2 is the Pentax 9x28 at 365g (12.9oz). It too has a narrow tunnel-like 5.6° FoV that should be sharp to the edge but unfortunately is not.

#3 is the Bushnell Excursion. It weighs 486g (17.1oz) including the lens caps, rainguard, and snap-in strap holders or 446g (15.7oz) in its bare state. This binocular has a considerably larger Wide Angle 8° FoV with optics I would say are very good to excellent across most of the FoV. It really is the best choice at US$70 as the other choices will cost 2x-4x MORE $$ and are optically inferior.

Other ways to save weight that are a more efficient use of funds if you have to spend at all. Carrying 120ml less water is all you have to do. Heck, even just getting a haircut can make the difference!
 
Last edited:
Why don't you just get one of the top alpha's? You will have to scratch for a few extra bucks but in the long run they will be worth it to you. These Nikon 8 x 20 Premiers are probably the least expensive of the group. They are waterproof, weigh less than 10 ounces, have a 350' FOV and have almost edge to edge sharpness. I have the 10 x 25 version so I can confirm the edge to edge sharpness.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/nikon.pl?page=nikon7506

Bob
.
 
Last edited:
Why don't you just get one of the top alpha's? You will have to scratch for a few extra bucks but in the long run they will be worth it to you. These Nikon 8 x 20 Premiers are probably the least expensive of the group. They are waterproof, weigh less than 10 ounces, have a 350' FOV and have almost edge to edge sharpness. I have the 10 x 25 version so I can confirm the edge to edge sharpness.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/nikon.pl?page=nikon7506

Bob
.

I am very tempted, but it just feels a bit ... dissolute for me to buy a $600+ binocular, when a $40 one (Olympus Roamer 8x21) does it all except for the water-resistance. I would need to get drenched / fall in a stream 15 times before the Roamers add up to the cost of a Zeiss Victory... and a ziplock bag after all works fairly well. A factor of 15 is a lot. I have a $500 camera when I hike, not a $7,500 one... I drive a $20K car, not a $300K Ferrari... I cannot help thinking there are better uses for the $540 difference.
 
I am very tempted, but it just feels a bit ... dissolute for me to buy a $600+ binocular, when a $40 one (Olympus Roamer 8x21) does it all except for the water-resistance. I would need to get drenched / fall in a stream 15 times before the Roamers add up to the cost of a Zeiss Victory... and a ziplock bag after all works fairly well. A factor of 15 is a lot. I have a $500 camera when I hike, not a $7,500 one... I drive a $20K car, not a $300K Ferrari... I cannot help thinking there are better uses for the $540 difference.

Of course the Vipers are $320. Add $110 and you've got the Nikon, or possibly a Leica Ultravid or Zeiss on Ebay, or maybe a demo from Cameraland. If weight is a high priority, and it sounds like it is, I'd hold out for the 8x20.

Just a thought,

Mark
 
I am very tempted, but it just feels a bit ... dissolute for me to buy a $600+ binocular, when a $40 one (Olympus Roamer 8x21) does it all except for the water-resistance. I would need to get drenched / fall in a stream 15 times before the Roamers add up to the cost of a Zeiss Victory... and a ziplock bag after all works fairly well. A factor of 15 is a lot. I have a $500 camera when I hike, not a $7,500 one... I drive a $20K car, not a $300K Ferrari... I cannot help thinking there are better uses for the $540 difference.

Luca:

Just get the Olympus, you would not appreciate the difference of the
high quality optics, in the small compact, pocket size.

There are "large" differences, so please do not minimize those who do. ;)

Jerry
 
I received today the 8x28 Vortex Viper, and these are my impressions. Please note that I am not nearly as much as an expert as most of you, so take them with a grain of salt.

Construction:

The construction seems to be very good. They are certainly light enough that I can take them with me for long hikes. The focus, and hinges, are butter-smooth. The outside rubber is very pleasant -- I wonder if it will last many decades before getting dry or sticky, but perhaps decades is not a fair unit of measurement for a $300 binocular.

Anatomical fit:

They are generally quite pleasant to use.
One thing I did not like is that the IPD is so incredibly large when the binoculars are folded flat. I cannot believe that there are many humans with the eyes so far apart. I can adjust them fine for me, but I would prefer them to be flatter when adjusted, so that it would be easier to store them adjusted.
Another thing that was suboptimal is that the eye-cups are too small in diameter. The eyecups of my Canon 8x25 IS are wider, and they allow me to rest the binocular on the bones that form the bridge of my nose, and my eyebrows. The ones of the Vortex are smaller. Per se, they would fit around my eye, inside my eyebrow/nose bones, but I do not find comfortable pressing the eyecups against the soft tissue around my nose. So I end up resting the top of the eyecups against the inside bone of my eyebrows, if this makes sense. This is not nearly as comfortable as with the Canon 8x25 IS.
The twist-in twist-out eyecups are a bit stiff for my face, and I wonder if it is safe to store the binocular with the eyecups twisted out.

Optically:

They are a little bit better than my Canon 8x25 IS in the center of field: much less chromatic aberration, more contrast, more definition. They are a little bit worse on the edges, but this is hardly noticeable in use. In use, my eyes tend to look at the central part of the vision field; looking at the sides of the circle of vision of the binoculars feels strange and uncomfortable with both binoculars.
The Vortex Viper are also brighter than the Canon, and at night, they allow me to resolve marginally more stars.
Finally, my pair of Vipers is better aligned than the Canons, even though the difference is minimal.

Both the Canons and the Vortex Viper suffer from flare, when the sun is shining on the front binocular lens, and you are looking at a relatively dark object. Here, the Canons have a slight edge. I wish the front element of the Vortex was more deeply recessed.

Conclusions (for now):

I think they are keepers. The main drawback for me is the eyecups, but looking at alternatives such as the Pentax 9x28, it's not obvious to me that the eyecups of the Pentax are wider. The image quality seems very good to me, and the weight small enough to b easily carried along in hikes, or excursions.

This weekend I will spend a couple of days hiking, and I will report here my impressions of the binoculars in the field.

Many thanks to all who provided advice! And, I think I am starting to see and appreciate the qualities of good binoculars!
 
Luca,

I don't think the Pentax LV would would solve the issues you mention. The eyecups are a stiff rubber and comfortable, but combination of an external diameter of 35mm (1.4") and extending only 11.3mm (0.44") mean I have to rest them under my eyebrows as well. The flare and ghosting is also pretty poor compared to my other pairs.

David
 
Many thanks to all who provided advice! And, I think I am starting to see and appreciate the qualities of good binoculars!

Thanks for the update, Luca. But be careful: this binocular business is addictive and leads to all kinds of crazy squabbling.;)

I'm still looking for the ideal compact. I suspect the key is just to admit that compacts will never equal mid-sized, will never equal full-sized, will never equal the bird in hand.

Mark
 
Luca,

I don't think the Pentax LV would would solve the issues you mention. The eyecups are a stiff rubber and comfortable, but combination of an external diameter of 35mm (1.4") and extending only 11.3mm (0.44") mean I have to rest them under my eyebrows as well. The flare and ghosting is also pretty poor compared to my other pairs.

David

Thanks, David.
The diameter of the eyecup rim (the diameter of the ridge that rests on my face, not the external diameter of the eyecup) is 31mm on the Vortex Viper 8x28, and 38mm on the Canon 8x25 IS. I find the latter much more comfortable. How much is this ridge diameter on the Pentax? I am wondering if there are simple semi-soft rubber eye-cups that I could slip over the binocular extensible eye-cups; that would be a simple solution to make my Viper perfect. The eye-cups are really my only gripe. Resting the binocular on the inside of the eyebrows works well during the day, but was difficult to do when looking at the night sky.

Luca
 
Luca,

[snip]

Other ways to save weight that are a more efficient use of funds if you have to spend at all. Carrying 120ml less water is all you have to do. Heck, even just getting a haircut can make the difference!

Thanks, I will look at the Bushnell excursion.

What you say about water is very true. I tend to carry most of the water for my family, and it's not unusual for me to have 4 Kg of water in my pack in preparation for a hot day! I hike on the Sierra Nevada, in California, where the weather can be hot and very dry. What I should really do, and will do, is buy one of those pumps that filter the water from streams and lakes (it's not safe to drink w/o filtering). Then maybe I can carry bigger binoculars!

Luca
 
Thanks, I will look at the Bushnell excursion.

What you say about water is very true. I tend to carry most of the water for my family, and it's not unusual for me to have 4 Kg of water in my pack in preparation for a hot day! I hike on the Sierra Nevada, in California, where the weather can be hot and very dry. What I should really do, and will do, is buy one of those pumps that filter the water from streams and lakes (it's not safe to drink w/o filtering). Then maybe I can carry bigger binoculars!

Luca

This is off topic, but in the Sierras what you need is a Steripen, an ultraviolet light pen. Anywhere the water is clear it does the job. Excuse the plug, but the thing is genius, much better than a pump. I use it here in PA all the time. I've used it in the mountains all over.

You may have trouble getting it through airport security though. One TSA guy pulled me aside and said, "Your electric toothbrush looks kinda funny."

So I had to explain what the heck it was.

Mark
 
Thanks, David.
The diameter of the eyecup rim (the diameter of the ridge that rests on my face, not the external diameter of the eyecup) is 31mm on the Vortex Viper 8x28, and 38mm on the Canon 8x25 IS. I find the latter much more comfortable. How much is this ridge diameter on the Pentax? I am wondering if there are simple semi-soft rubber eye-cups that I could slip over the binocular extensible eye-cups; that would be a simple solution to make my Viper perfect. The eye-cups are really my only gripe. Resting the binocular on the inside of the eyebrows works well during the day, but was difficult to do when looking at the night sky.

Luca

Hi Luca,

Not quite clear what you are looking for. I'll try to describe it more clearly. The twist up rubber surround to the ocular is 35mm diameter. At the top rim it is about 4.4mm wide. However it is not flat. There is a small ridge near the edge of the circumference about 1mm tall.

Hope that helps.

I seem to remember someone describing using a section of cycle innertube to modify eye-cups somewhere. Would that work?

David
 
Luca:

Congratulations, you've purchased one of the best available compact binoculars. I can not abide either the very tiny 8x20's or any of the reverse poros due to my wide set eyes and my eyeglasses. Your 8x28's are small binoculars; your Vipers are well made and will last and if you should have a problem, Vortex's customer service is excellent.

The eyecups are small, basically they are about the same diamiter as the barrel frame. Any larger would have increased the bulk of the binoculars. When I use them without my eyeglasses I rest the upper surface against the lower surface of my eyebrow (bone). This allows for a steady one hand hold and is comfortable to me.

Be very glad that you do not wear eyeglasses. That minor flare that you mentioned is nothing comparded to light bouncing around my eyeglass lenses/frames and/or back and forth between my eyeglass lens and the binocular's ocular lens. It can happen either facing the sun or facing away from the sun. At times I can only effectively look through one barrel and at other times I must shade my eyeglass lenses with my hand. A bit awkward when holding my bins with one hand (the other hand holds Sadies leash, so she does not get into the pond with the ducks).

The chief criticism of the Vortex Fury 8x28's is that due to the very large depth of field combined with their fast focus, one does a lot of back and forth focusing - searching for perfect focus. Some find this very annoying. I've gotten use to it, but this issue will never completely go away. I find that all fast focus binoculars have this problem, but it seems much worse to me in those with a shallow depth of field.

Good luck and enjoy them.

bearclawthedonut
 
BIG surprise.

I bought a pair of Olympus Tracker 8x25 reverse porros: I had bought some Olympus Roamer 8x21 for my daughters, and these were just too cheap to pass up buying as a comparison.

The surprise is that they are noticeably better than the Vortex Viper 8x28.

The Viper are not bad at all, but the Olympus Tracker have NO chromatic aberration in the center, and an incredible clarity. I can see more -- I can read finer print, and when the print snaps into focus, it really snaps -- no very slight chromatic aberration halos around. Tree branches against sky are also similarly sharper. And they are lighter!

So now I am undecided. Part of me wants to keep both: the Tracker for nice weather, the Viper when it's snowing, stormy, or when I go kayaking. Part of me thinks it's unreasonable to keep a $300 binocular that is very good, but not nearly as much as a $80 one.

I knew that porro prisms tend to perform better, unless you go to very expensive roof prisms, but this was a surprise, because when I had only the Viper, I could really find no fault in them; only by comparison I noticed that even better binoculars can exist.

In any case, I have gotten completely used to the eyecups of both, and they are both great binoculars. The build quality of the Vortex is superior. But the Tracker perform so well!
 
Last edited:
Bearclawthedonut is essentially right.

Today I tried the Vortex Viper 8x28 and the Olympus Tracker 8x25 in the field.
Both binoculars are wonderful.
I completely agree that the 8x25 or 8x28 are much nicer to use than the 8x20, due to exit pupil size, and the difference in weight is not relevant for me.

In the field, the optical difference between the two binoculars is very minor, and indeed difficult to assess. I continue to think that the Olympus Tracker have a slight edge in resolution; the Vortex Viper are perhaps slightly better in difficult light and contrast situations.

However, in the field it was evident that optical performance is not all. The Vortex were generally easier to carry (better ergonomics and strap), and have a higher-quality construction that shows.

In the end, I will keep both. I love the construction quality of the Vortex Viper, along with the fact that they are waterproof, and carry a no-question-asked perpetual warranty. They are pretty much what I was hoping to get: binoculars that are easy and pleasant to use, and that I can carry with me in any weather. The Tracker are simply too nice and sharp for the price to send back -- and my family has already taken a liking to them, so I am sure they will not stay unused.

Many thanks to all for the advice!
 
In the field, the optical difference between the two binoculars is very minor, and indeed difficult to assess. I continue to think that the Olympus Tracker have a slight edge in resolution; the Vortex Viper are perhaps slightly better in difficult light and contrast situations.

Luca,

I'm not surprised you find the Olympus sharper. I have yet to see any compact that is sharper. When pushed, the Olympus may have some problems with glare, as you say. But that sharpness is amazing for such a light, little binocular.

I once took it on a two-week backpacking trip and left my Leica 8x20 Ultravid at home. It's that good.

I did end up trying the Bushnell Elite 7x26. It's the brightest compact I've seen, with superb color and contrast, easy eye placement, and excellent build quality. Possiby the best all-around view I've seen in a compact, though at 7x it won't outresolve the 8's. Not waterproof though, and heavier than advertised--more like 13.5 ounces than 12.

Anyway, enjoy the new bins!

Mark
 
Luca

You have discovered like many others that the 8x25 Olympus Tracker is simply an outstanding little reverse porro. If you blacken the inside of the silver objective tube ends, you will find that it will cut down on some of the glare issues.

It's a shame you never got to compare the $70 8x28 Bushnell Excursions against your 8x28 Vipers, as I think you might find the results quite surprising for the price difference.

Enjoy

Tom
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top