[mike hawley]

Has anybody used Minox 8x32 they seem, to my untrained eye, to be as good as the Leica equivalent and a good deal cheaper (my Yorkshire blood coming out).
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

[scampo]

They might well be - and whose eye is better trained than your own, so long as you looked through them in a variety of lighting conditions (and certainly at dusk) alongside a couple of other top models?

But, in a review last year, the magazine's reviewers didn't like the Minox as much as other more expensive models:

OPTICAL 7
DESIGN AND EASE OFUSE 7.5
VALUE FOR MONEY 8

This is what they concluded: "A competent model and right for the price, but don't compare with the big boys - try them alongside other sub-£500 models."

[Leif]

Originally Posted by mike hawley

Has anybody used Minox 8x32 they seem, to my untrained eye, to be as good as the Leica equivalent and a good deal cheaper (my Yorkshire blood coming out).
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

I just noticed that Robertsons of Bradford do new Minox BD 8x32 BR for £239 which sounds good to me.

I would mention that BW magazine rather liked these bins except that I don't think that they are a reliable guide.

They seemed quite nice to me, but then again I only tried them for 5 minutes out of an open window and that is not enough to form an opinion.

[pduxon]

Never used them but if you can't tell the difference between them and the Leicas...........

[scampo]

Nice one, Peter.

(-:

but to be fairer, in the testing conditions of looking down a busy street (which is all many shops offer)...

[Geoff Brown]

Tried them at the Rutland bird fair last year and if I did not already have some decent bins they would definitely be on my short list to look at again. They do seem to be good value for money and as Minox products were once distributed by Leica presumably cannot be bad at all.

[scampo]

I do wonder if Minox exist at the manufacturing level any longer (they used to make excellent cameras and the James Bond style ultra-miniature cameras). I have a suspicion they might even be made by Leitz.

[Leif]

Originally Posted by scampo

Nice one, Peter.

(-:

but to be fairer, in the testing conditions of looking down a busy street (which is all many shops offer)...

Very true. From what I saw they had a bit more edge distortion than the Leicas. I would guess that they are not quite as bright and contrasty so do not do as well in low light. But that is supposition with no experimental basis. The only way to know is to visit a shop just before sunset, or during daylight view deep shade with both bins (it seems to work).

I find it odd that on this forum interest seems to fall at the two extremes of the price spectrum: decent cheap bins or top of the tree bins!

[scampo]

Ah - they haven't discovered the Nikon Superior Es yet, Leif. Shall we let them into the secret of the brightest and sharpest there is?

[Leif]

Originally Posted by scampo

Ah - they haven't discovered the Nikon Superior Es yet, Leif. Shall we let them into the secret of the brightest and sharpest there is?

Yes. The Nikon 8x32 SE are the tops (in my opinion, though many agree), but not cheap at ~£440. Not waterproof and awful floppy rubber eye tubes though.

The Nikon 8x32 8x32 EII are almost as good, and cost quite a bit less ~£270. I have never tried them, but the 'received opinion' seems to be that they match or exceed the Leica 8x32 BN optics wise. Not waterproof though. And probably not as robust.

[trealawboy]

Originally Posted by scampo

They might well be - and whose eye is better trained than your own, so long as you looked through them in a variety of lighting conditions (and certainly at dusk) alongside a couple of other top models?

But, in a review last year, the magazine's reviewers didn't like the Minox as much as other more expensive models:

OPTICAL 7
DESIGN AND EASE OFUSE 7.5
VALUE FOR MONEY 8

This is what they concluded: "A competent model and right for the price, but don't compare with the big boys - try them alongside other sub-£500 models."

Hello

Sorry, but why are you quoting a magazine review when you've been so critical of them recently, i.e. the large telescopes reviewed in Birdwatching.

Your opening sentence is surely correct. Why bother with the second?

[scampo]

I agree with you and am sorry if I appear inconsistent. My original post indeed included a cynical reference to that review but, on reflection, I took that out but did decide to leave in the quotation.

But... I don't dislike the idea of reviews in general - quite the reverse. Some important aspects of some recent UK magazine reviews have been sorely wanting in my view. Don't you agree?

[Darren Oakley-Martin]

Originally Posted by scampo

Ah - they haven't discovered the Nikon Superior Es yet, Leif. Shall we let them into the secret of the brightest and sharpest there is?

I have a pair of Minox 8x32, they feel excellent in the hand, but the twisting eye cap keeps coming loose which drives me nuts. Also a bit of glare at times. But like everything else, isn't it simply a matter of personal preference and financial constraints?

Not bad bins, but a bit overpriced at £350 a few years back when I was young and impressionable.

[trealawboy]

Originally Posted by scampo

I agree with you and am sorry if I appear inconsistent. My original post indeed included a cynical refernce to that review but, on reflection, I took that out but did decide to leave in the quotation.

But... I don't dislike the idea of reviews in general - quite the reverse. Some important aspects of some recent UK magazine reviews have been sorely wanting in my view. Don't you agree?

I do indeed agree.

I tend to read reviews, find them interesting, however much I may agree or disagree with their results. They can however, in no way compare with personally testing out the equipment, under field conditions ideally.

What suits one person may not suit another. I have felt for quite some time, that (with high end equipment at least) the variations in optic quality is small. What really sets manufacturers apart is how they feel in the hand, e.g. weight, focussing mechanism, eyecups, size etc, and this will down to an individual's preference. We all have different size hands, eye sockets ....

Reviews, and for that matter valued opinions in this forum, should only be used to formulate a checklist of equipment for consideration, rather than being a definitive assessment of how well a product may suit an individual.

[scampo]

!00% with you - but it is also true that what seems uncomfortable to begin with can soon settle into something that we find very comfortable indeed. That's a point the magazine revewers signally fail to realsie - such nonsense comments about the Nikon zoom eyepiece being difficult to adjust, or the Zeiss focusing wheel being difficult to find are laughable.

[Leif]

Originally Posted by scampo

!00% with you - but it is also true that what seems uncomfortable to begin with can soon settle into something that we find very comfortable indeed. That's a point the magazine revewers signally fail to realsie - such nonsense comments about the Nikon zoom eyepiece being difficult to adjust, or the Zeiss focusing wheel being difficult to find are laughable.

The Zeiss scope was indeed criticised for having a stiff focus wheel, and the Leica commended for a silky smooth one. Well when I received my new Leica scope guess what? Yup! The focus wheel was so stiff as to be barely useable. I had to use both hands and apply lots of welly. But, after a week or two, it loosened. What a surprise! The BW magazine teseters are a bunch of useless muppets with obvious Leica/Swarovski bias!

[scampo]

You've got it right. Some of the comments they make border on the inane - and yet they believe that they are writing at the level and style their audience requirtes. How utterly wrong (or patronising) of them, eh?

[mike hawley]

Many thanks everybody for your comment and advice.
I guess buying binos is subject to the law of diminishing returns and the difference the extra ££££s make gets less the more you spend. I can't really justify spending £800 on binos so the Minox seem about right for me.
Thanks again for all your help.

[william j clive]

Originally Posted by mike hawley

Many thanks everybody for your comment and advice.
I guess buying binos is subject to the law of diminishing returns and the difference the extra ££££s make gets less the more you spend. I can't really justify spending £800 on binos so the Minox seem about right for me.
Thanks again for all your help.

Pentax currently have a very good range called the DCF SP. They are popular in the USA and are medium price range with performance just below the big guns. The only drawback appears to be the narrow FOV on the 8x43. The 10x43 and 8x32 are much better in this respect. Have a look at the review on:

www.betterviewdesired.com

You can get them from www.amazon.co.uk. They are in the electronics section under Binoculars and are £292 for the 8x43 and £325 for the 10x43.

Clive Jones

[scampo]

Yes -but for that price you could also buy Nikon Superior E for example and own a binocular that has optics equal to the very best available anywhere.

[william j clive]

Originally Posted by scampo

Yes -but for that price you could also buy Nikon Superior E for example and own a binocular that has optics equal to the very best available anywhere.

Hello Scampo

Very true, and I should Know, as I have the 8x32 SE, and very good they are, too. However, I think a new pair costs around £440 and they are not waterproof. It depends on whether Mike needs the waterproofing or not, and how much he wants to pay. Sorry to upset you by reccommending anything other than Nikon :o)

Clive

[pduxon]

Originally Posted by mike hawley

Many thanks everybody for your comment and advice.
I guess buying binos is subject to the law of diminishing returns and the difference the extra ££££s make gets less the more you spend. I can't really justify spending £800 on binos so the Minox seem about right for me.
Thanks again for all your help.

The RSPB and Opticron do bins at the same price. Try and get to use all of them and see what you prefer.

[scampo]

Originally Posted by william j clive

Hello Scampo

Very true, and I should Know, as I have the 8x32 SE, and very good they are, too. However, I think a new pair costs around £440 and they are not waterproof. It depends on whether Mike needs the waterproofing or not, and how much he wants to pay. Sorry to upset you by reccommending anything other than Nikon :o)

Clive

Well - I use Swaro myself! Are the SEs the same as the Superior Es? I thought the latter were about £280-00. I must be getting confused.

[pduxon]

Originally Posted by scampo

Well - I use Swaro myself! Are the SEs the same as the Superior Es? I thought the latter were about £280-00. I must be getting confused.

Oh dear I'm going to enjoy enlightening mr Nikon

The Superior Es = SE and retail at approx £450. The EIIs retail at about £280. There is a review on BVD.

[william j clive]

Originally Posted by scampo

Well - I use Swaro myself! Are the SEs the same as the Superior Es? I thought the latter were about £280-00. I must be getting confused.

So do I! I have the same as you, the 8.5x EL, and there's nowt wrong with them either, if you exclude the slow focus, of course. I wont mention the E11's, Pete's already sorted that.


Clive Jones