$400 in a 8x30 what would you do? (1 Viewer)

Nix,

In light of your predisposition to rolling ball, I am somewhat at a loss to say anything. However, I think you are likely on the right path when you identify field of view. Since rolling ball is caused by magnified movement around the periphery of the view, it seems to stand to reason the if one increases/decreases that periphery, one increases/decreases the chance of, or the effect of, rolling ball. That coupled with the fact that the distortion present in our own eyes can either correct for the effect, or not correct for the effect, as the case may be.

I tend to agree that the Zeiss 8x30 are good, but not top end glass. Having said that, they are possessed with a narrower fov than many other 8x30 class glass. So I think you may do well with them and I "THINK" you may not get the rolling ball effect you seem plagued with. A "good" glass you can use is a better deal than a "better" glass you can't use.

EDIT: It occurs to me that the Leupold Katmai 8x32 is a small, rather narrow fov, glass with good optics you may want to look at too.

You are in a position, that only you can tell what it is you either do or do not like, so I think you will have to rely on your own eyes and maybe you find yourself in a position where you have to return way more than you keep. So, I'm going to tell you to go for the Zeiss.

Nixter,
I would give Eagle Optics 8 x 32 Ranger a try. It has dielectric prisms now, costs under $300.00, has good eye relief, reasonably wide FOV at 393' @1000 yards and weighs just under 20 ounces. And best of all Eagle has a 30 day no fault right of return policy. If you don't like it you can return it. Ask about it.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/eagle-optics/eagle-optics-ranger-8x32-binocular

I've had one of their older model 6 x 32 Ranger Platinums for nearly 8 years. That one was made in Japan. Don't know if these new ones are though.

Bob

Agreed Steve I will see more, however I'm slinging some oldie LW 22x80 up now. Can't hold them rock steady, yet pulls is a decent pic, but by comparison assists the not quite as old 12x36 DCF in appearing sharp as tack. I am surprised and delighted by the 12x36 in bright clear skies. I have a tripod and was going to mount the 22x and use a 15x for when I needed to move around and quick fly-bys.

Steve C, thanks for the input. It was a done deal before I started the thread, howevah I figured I would seek various opinions whilst I await delivery. The plus is if it doesn't work out I'll have the differing suggestions from which to work. I realize it's not an alpha model, yet I presume even the lesser wares to be of sturdy quality build.

I'm content w/12X36 and it probably isn't phase corrected, so in light of that view the Conquest w/more recent coatings should come out smelling like a rose. If I've no issues panning & scanning then the 360' FOV will appear as wide view compared to some of my others.

Thanks Bob I'll keep them in mind as I like the try and return policy. I've read good things about the Ranger & EO.

Nix
I saw your edit of the Nikon 12x36 when you had them first listed as 9x36. These are the Nikon 'D" compact series which were made in 7x26, 9x30 & 12x36. They are not phase coated, nor FMC, but are decent enough little old binos that have the styling look of the earlier Leitz Trinovids.

Since you have the 8x32 Sightrons which Frank has described as being one of the better 8x32's around, and similar in view to the Nikon 8x32 SE's, I guess I am curious what you don't like about them and feel the need to "upgrade?" to the Conquests for more than twice the $$?

In reading your posts, it appears you mostly have the rolling ball/equilibrium issues while scanning and panning vertically instead of horizontally. I don't recall much discussion on BF about vertical issues, as it all seems to be horizontal issues that are discussed. While I have very few issues with any bino regarding rolling ball or horizontal scanning, almost all binos give me a "disturbing" sensation when rapidly panning up and down.

Tom

Yes those old Nikon DCF binoculars are decent performers as long as one does not do a critical comparison against porro prism binoculars of the same vintage and maker. They come up a bit short in clarity.

Yeah I read my post and realized I had put 9 instead of 12. Too many bins and way to much time behind the screen.

Tom, the SIIBL 8x32 look good and unlike some others they don't bother me in a left to right pan and thought this was my affordable holy grail, but as soon as I scanned up I get what I call the fountain sensation. I guess it's rolling ball, but it looks like at the top of the glass that the entire 180* is a water fountain whilst if I recall correctly the bottom half draws in opposite and if I change direction and pan down then the fountain flips if that makes sense. The fountain flowing up, or down, and out is on the leading edge of an up or down scan.

I can subdue the sensation by not looking in cluttered woods/scatters/foliage. Close proximity seems to encourage/accelerate/exaggerate the feeling. However, w/the narrow FOV binoculars I feel as if I could drive looking through them. No problem w/vertical scan.

The colours and view from the Bushnell E2 7x26 and ZR ED2 7x36 are great if I don't move them about. ED2 being worse in motion and E2 having a 360* fisheye effect to me in motion which is different than my fountain feeling.

Compared to the 22x80 the 12x36 comes out looking as alpha.

Yeah, it kinda blows that I've dropped close to five bills on good glass that isn't good for me except w/limitations. Ho, Ho, Ho I see presents under the tree,

Nix
All binos have a certain amount of built in pincushion, with some being more noticeable or pronounced than others nearer the edges, and others starting closer to the center. I have noticed that some binos that show a moderate amount of PC in a side to side scan, show very little in an up and down scan. On binos that show a more pronounced PC effect side to side, particularly near the edges, also show more in an up and down scan, I guess resulting in what you would call the fountain effect. Stand about 20 feet away from a door frame using the edges, top and floor as reference points, and slowly scan side to side and up and down, and see if you can pinpoint the pincushion patterns that bother you the most between the various binos.

I tried this experiment a little while ago using 10x42 Legend Ultra HD's, Olympus Magellans, and Zen ZRS HD and the results were quite interesting.

Tom

I see varying amount of PC looking at trees, but I've learned not to toy w/ones that bother me. The SIIBL 8x32 is real close and I can use them it's just that I can't throw them up as others and I might be able to become accustom to them w/time. They only bug me in a vertical and I never thought about lenses being different between vertical and horizontal relationship.