[Sancho]

In geeky mood today, and maybe in the market for 8x42mm bins next year, I compiled the following which may save time for others in the same boat. It´s a table of specs for Zeiss FL, Steiner XP, Leica HD, Hawke Frontier ED, Swaro EL, and Nikon EDG. I haven´t seen 3 of the models, as two are unavailable in Ireland, and another, anywhere on planet Earth (apart from one pair in the ABA shop, it seems). Note the comparison is not "like-with-like" because the objectives vary from 42 to 44mm, and the EL´s mag is higher. But the table summarises the features that I consider most important. I haven´t included anything about resolution, brightness, edge clarity, CA, etc. - only measurements from the online specifications I was able to find for the comparison. Measurements are metric, prices are euro. Do the conversions yourself. Note also that I accept no responsibility for errors, misrepresentations, lies or fantastical confabulations contained therein.

Sancho, Aspiring Optics Geek

BTW, now I know what I really want....an open-bridge 8x with the eye-relief, exit pupil and nano-coating of the Steiners, but the weight, FOV and price of the Hawkes. And the glass bits of my Nikon EII´s. .

[Steve C]

Sancho,

Don't let the 30 oz weight issue of the Steiner XP deter you. If the weight is correct, they feel lighter, and are noticeable somewhat more compact and actually feel lighter than the Promaster/Hawke. If you concentrate on the weight, then the extra of the Steiner shows up, but it is not immediately apparrent.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by Steve C

Sancho,

Don't let the 30 oz weight issue of the Steiner XP deter you. If the weight is correct, they feel lighter, and are noticeable somewhat more compact and actually feel lighter than the Promaster/Hawke. If you concentrate on the weight, then the extra of the Steiner shows up, but it is not immediately apparrent.

Thanks Steve! Hmmm...interesting. And they have the best exit-pupil and eye-relief of the selection, and are the second cheapest. With aquaphobic coating, always a consideration where I live....

Edit: these bins go by three names...Peregrine (U.S.), Discovery (Europe), and Nighthunter for Hunters everywhere. The quoted prices vary from 870 euro to well over 1,200. I´ve no idea what the pricing policy is, other than "random"....

There seem to be some small variations between the three. I see mention of a "Dual Precision" feature on the Discovery model, enabling each eyepiece to be focussed individually. I´m assuming this is a dual-dioptre doohickey.

[veagle]

Sancho,

Something you might want to take a look at is the optics4birding.com site. I have no connection with them, by the way. But they have a tool that enables you to do side by side evaluations, weighting your own priorities, such as exit pupil, FOV, etc. I don't think they carry the Hawke, but all other models are there. With my set of priorities, the Zeiss and Nikons get the highest scores, but I can tell you it is extremely close, between the top 4, at least. Basically, your going to love any of them. But the tool enables you to say, for example, if eye relief is the most important to me...

They also write some interesting reviews.

Veagle

[Matt_RTH]

I actually did the same thing myself on occasions. While I only wish I was in the market for those models (will jump on the right deal), I think as a template it's very useful.

When I was evaluating the bins I owned and the ones I was looking at, it was quite interesting what jumped out at me. One of the most telling things was twilight performance, I always used the square of the exit pupil as the "twilight factor", as do some online retailers, etc. Very useful info.

Unfortunately the reality the buying decision is probably a mix of taste, performance and quality, which vary from person to person, and even binocular specimen to specimen. I'm sure most of us have used many bins that looked great on paper and were terrible in the field.

I would also add prism type, and all coatings used.

It's quite useful to compare apples to apples and a great tool for consumers to be conscientious.

Matt

[Tero]

I was not able to open the document. Word just closed on me. Summary?

[Dale Forbes]

Originally Posted by Tero

I was not able to open the document. Word just closed on me. Summary?

i just took a screen shot of Sancho's document and attached it as a jpg

[Tero]

Thanks. For long term use, I would go for accepatable eye relief. I do not like birding with glasses, but have to start doing it some day. The Leicas were the shortest, 15.5mm.

Strange how Americans list features in mm as well, but then we list weight in ounces and fov in feet. But fov is measured actually only in 0.1 degree usints and the fov in feet comes from a formula.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by Tero

Thanks. For long term use, I would go for accepatable eye relief. I do not like birding with glasses, but have to start doing it some day. The Leicas were the shortest, 15.5mm.

That´s the boat I´m in, Tero....I need the eye-relief nowadays. Which, I think, excludes the Leicas from the pot. Those Steiners sure look mighty purty though, they seem to have it all except for the slightly (0.3 degrees) narrower FOV than the "currently-non-available-but-far-more-expensive-were-they-so" EDG.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by Sancho

BTW, now I know what I really want....an open-bridge 8x with the eye-relief, exit pupil and nano-coating of the Steiners, but the weight, FOV and price of the Hawkes. And the glass bits of my Nikon EII´s. .

Actually take these Dream-Bins, stick an IS-feature on them, and I´d sing them to sleep every night.....

[NWBirder]

I thought the Nikon EDG was delayed again. I haven't been able to locate a store that has EDG in stock.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by NWBirder

I thought the Nikon EDG was delayed again. I haven't been able to locate a store that has EDG in stock.

It has been delayed, but the American Birding Association online shop has one pair of 8x42 in stock. A pricey item, though....

[Steve C]

Eagle Optics lists the 7x42 and 10x42 EDG as in stock.

[stabor]

Originally Posted by NWBirder

I thought the Nikon EDG was delayed again. I haven't been able to locate a store that has EDG in stock.

I've seen the 8x42 at Optics4birding. Right now they seem to have that, can get the other 42s, and the 32s seem not to be available yet.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by veagle

Sancho,

Something you might want to take a look at is the optics4birding.com site. I have no connection with them, by the way. But they have a tool that enables you to do side by side evaluations, weighting your own priorities, such as exit pupil, FOV, etc.
Veagle

Thanks Veagle, I found it...the "O4B Scorecard". A useful tool....it tells me my preference is for the Nikon EDG 8x42, which although it doesn´t "win" in any of my fave categories, has an overall combination of features that most approach what I want. And it´s the most expensive. (A bit like the STV Proportional Representation electoral system we have here...your fave candidate mightn´t get a seat, but you should end up reasonably satisfied with the selection elected. But they´re more expensive ´cos we have 3-5 representatives for every constituency....)

[MacGee]

Originally Posted by Steve C

Don't let the 30 oz weight issue of the Steiner XP deter you. If the weight is correct, they feel lighter, and are noticeable somewhat more compact and actually feel lighter than the Promaster/Hawke.

But presumably they'll still hang round your neck like a brick?

Michael

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by MacGee

But presumably they'll still hang round your neck like a brick?

Michael

The strap in the Steiner website looks very comfortable...thick and padded. I´m sure that would help.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by Dale Forbes

i just took a screen shot of Sancho's document and attached it as a jpg

Dale...I only just now "blew up" your jpg screen-shot and saw the title...LOL! Should have read more like "Solid Evidence that Sancho is suffering from OCD..."

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by Dale Forbes

i just took a screen shot of Sancho's document and attached it as a jpg

Interesting math. Three 8X42's with three different exit pupil measurements.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by John Traynor

Interesting math. Three 8X42's with three different exit pupil measurements.

Yeah, I promise the maths aren´t mine....just copied off-of someplace. (Mine would be worse.) But is er a simple mathematical calculation of objective diameter over mag, or do the shape of the eyepieces/eyecups affect it?

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by Sancho

Yeah, I promise the maths aren´t mine....just copied off-of someplace. (Mine would be worse.) But is er a simple mathematical calculation of objective diameter over mag, or do the shape of the eyepieces/eyecups affect it?

42/8 = 5.25
32/8 = 4.00
50/10 = 5.00
42/7 = 6.00

[Steve C]

Before we criticise Sancho's math too much, remember they aren't all 42 mm. One (Hawke) is a 43 and one (Steiner) is a 44. And one (Swarovski) is 8.5x.

No I don't personally think there is much to worry about over the difference in how a 30oz vs a 27oz binocular hang around the neck after a whole very hard physical day out and about. That's what binocular harnesses do, lose the effect of the weight. However I do realize that different people have different opinions on weight. Mine is that 30 oz does not bother me. If yours is different, then the 30 oz issue can be real concern.

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by John Traynor

42/8 = 5.25
32/8 = 4.00
50/10 = 5.00
42/7 = 6.00

But they're not all these standard numbers. And they're not far off ...

Zeiss 8x42 FL is 42/8 = 5.25mm. That's correct.

Leica 8x42 is 5.2mm that's 42/8 truncated to 1 decimal place. Marketers, what can you do!

Nikon 8x42 is 5.3mm that's 42/8 rounded up to 1 decimal place. That's correct.

Hawke 8x43 is 5.34mm which is a little off from 43 / 8 = 5.37500 (internal stop? copying error?) but I doubt 35 microns is going to bug anyone.

Steiner is 8x44 is 5.5mm which is correct: 44 / 8 = 5.5

Swaro EL is 8.5x44 so 44 / 8.5 = 5.17647059 is quoted at 4.9mm which is what Swaro say it is! Does it have an internal stop smaller than the image of the aperture at that point? I suspect it does. So it's effective aperture is 41.65mm. Perhaps Swaro didn't want to use the outer 1mm or so of the lens.

http://www.swarovskioptik.at/

[henry link]

Swarovski EL is 8.5x42, not 44.

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by henry link

Swarovski EL is 8.5x42, not 44.

My mistake.

42 / 8.5 = 4.94117647 ... which is just right!