[jpurban]

Hi,

I'd like to hear your 7x/8x binocular recommendations for a CA sensitive hunter.

I'm very new to binoculars. I'm a duck hunter and wanted to find a pair of all-weather, compact binos to use when I go hunting -- Some times the birds are just swimming around the marsh rather than flying into my decoys. Or they just keep flying. I figure I should take up birdwatching to help pass the time between shooting volleys. A couple of weeks ago, I had about 200 coots swimming within 75 yards of my blind. They entertained me (and my dog) for hours as we waited for the ducks to come in from feeding.

So, anyway, I was looking for a decent pair of binos and read some good reviews on the Nikon Monarchs. I got a good price on the 10x36 "Dream Season" binos a couple of weeks ago and thought I'd be all set.

That didn't quite work out the way I hoped. I took them out to the field and started to notice purple fringing on the horizon -- it was very noticable and I was NOT looking for it (I didn't even know what CA was until I started reading this forum a few days ago). I also noticed fringing (green on one side - purple on the other) when watching ducks and geese fly overhead against a blue sky background. The CA was noticable even in the center of the field.

In addition to learning that I do not like CA, I learned that my hands aren't steady enough for 10x. I think the relatively small 3.6mm exit pupil probably contributed to making the 10x36 Monarch very sensitive to IPD and eye placement. They weren't very forgiving. So, I think I understand why the 5mm "guideline" for hunting binoculars exists. Guess that means I need to look for lower magnification and a bigger objective lens (42mm).

So, please let me know if you have a recommendation for a quality "hunting" binocular that tends to have less CA than most of the other binoculars.

Thanks,
John

[Kevin Conville]

Originally Posted by jpurban

I'd like to hear your 7x/8x binocular recommendations for a CA sensitive hunter.

I figure I should take up birdwatching to help pass the time between shooting volleys.

Apparently more sensitive to chroma than the sensibilities of the people most likely to read this post here on Bird Forum.

[SteveF]

In my experience, among currently marketed binoculars, ones that have very low levels of CA are the Kowa Genesis 8.5x44 and the Zen-Ray ED 8x43 and ED2 7x36.

At the other end, I've noticed that the Zeiss Conquest ABK 10x40 (I know that you want lower power) showed me a lot of purple fringing.

[kabsetz]

John,

I'll second Steve's recommendation of the Zen-Ray 8x43 ED (or the same Chinese ED binocular under the other brands that sell it) . Or, if you wish to get the last bits of light throughput and don't mind the price, Zeiss 8x42 FL. And, if you can bear the weight, the Zeiss 8x56 FL which will make all your friends jealous and work the best in very low light.

Kevin's comment above implied that people on this forum are by and large rather opposed to hunting, and I actually count myself among those. However, I don't want to be unfriendly or withhold advice from hunters, and besides, who knows if seeing how magnificent the birds can look through premium binoculars might not actually save the life of a few of them.

Kimmo

[spacepilot]

John,

Welcome to BF!

The Zen ED and ED2 are excellent binoculars at controlling CA from the reviews I read. The also have the 30 day return policy. So if you try a pair but decide not to keep it, you are only out of the shipping charge. Besides the larger exit pupil, the light transmission is likely to be noticeably better than you Monarch. If you can't hold 10x steady, the 8x43 format will reach pretty far even in waning light. My 10x42 Nikon SE is still very usable at twilight as far as waterfowls go, but the 4mm exit pupils cause some vignetting when it's darker. The 8x43 format will provide brighter but slightly smaller image in that kind of light, and it will easily reach 200-300 yards looking at ducks.

Ning

[Fireform]

As a fellow duck hunter I have one observation. The Zen-Rays are very sharp in the center field and control CA very well, but are not very compact. Even the 7x36 (which is otherwise close to perfect because it is bright and has a huge field of view) is close to a full size binocular. Personally, I don't like that much binocular on my chest when I'm duck hunting. Although they're a lot more expensive, the Zeiss 8x32 FL and Leica 8x32 HD are also good with CA and are a lot more compact.

FWIW, I go even smaller. I have a pair of Leica Ultravid HD 8x20s. Compacts are an acquired taste but I like these.

[Pinewood]

Hello John,

If you are willing to go for an excellent and expensive glass, try the Zeiss FL line, but either try before you buy or buy from a vendor with a liberal return policy.

Although I do not shoot, hunters do a lot for conservation, which benefits bird watchers. I also appreciate your being candid about your interests.

Happy observing,
Arthur Pinewood

[denco@comcast.n]

Originally Posted by jpurban

Hi,

I'd like to hear your 7x/8x binocular recommendations for a CA sensitive hunter.

I'm very new to binoculars. I'm a duck hunter and wanted to find a pair of all-weather, compact binos to use when I go hunting -- Some times the birds are just swimming around the marsh rather than flying into my decoys. Or they just keep flying. I figure I should take up birdwatching to help pass the time between shooting volleys. A couple of weeks ago, I had about 200 coots swimming within 75 yards of my blind. They entertained me (and my dog) for hours as we waited for the ducks to come in from feeding.

So, anyway, I was looking for a decent pair of binos and read some good reviews on the Nikon Monarchs. I got a good price on the 10x36 "Dream Season" binos a couple of weeks ago and thought I'd be all set.

That didn't quite work out the way I hoped. I took them out to the field and started to notice purple fringing on the horizon -- it was very noticable and I was NOT looking for it (I didn't even know what CA was until I started reading this forum a few days ago). I also noticed fringing (green on one side - purple on the other) when watching ducks and geese fly overhead against a blue sky background. The CA was noticable even in the center of the field.

In addition to learning that I do not like CA, I learned that my hands aren't steady enough for 10x. I think the relatively small 3.6mm exit pupil probably contributed to making the 10x36 Monarch very sensitive to IPD and eye placement. They weren't very forgiving. So, I think I understand why the 5mm "guideline" for hunting binoculars exists. Guess that means I need to look for lower magnification and a bigger objective lens (42mm).

So, please let me know if you have a recommendation for a quality "hunting" binocular that tends to have less CA than most of the other binoculars.

Thanks,
John

For duck hunting I would go with an 8x42 because you want alot of light gathering power for those early morning hours and a big FOV to follow the flocks of ducks. The very best which has the least CA would be the Zeiss 8x42 FL. I don't think the 7x42 FL's would have enough magnification for those distant ducks. I think in general and 8x42 would be better for hunters with their better light gathering power. I used my 8x32 Zeiss FL's today and it was nice and sunny here in Colorado and I have to say they are just incredible! Amazingly incredible optics!

[xmeecosmic]

Hi John,

You had stated that you are looking for "low CA" "compact" "quality" "hunting" binoculars and that you had considered the Nikon Monarch "Dream Season" which I see cost from $250-$300. You did not mention your price range but nothing that you wrote in the text would lead me to believe that you are looking for among the priciest binoculars that some true believing Alphaholics are suggesting to you, unless you literally did mean "best" as your title states.

From what I have read on BF and other forums you can meet your requirements quite nicely (depending how you define "compact") by going with any of the 8x open-hinge Chinese roofs like the Atlas Intrepid or Zen-ED and they will not cost you much more than the Monarchs and will perform almost as well as the Alpha class ones for $1500-$1600 less. Also, depending on your budget, are the Meoptas which also get outstanding reviews and which "only" cost about twice as much as the Atlas' and Zens.

Also, since the issue of the ethics of giving binocular advice to a hunter has come up, there is a fascinating, educational, informative, and, of course, controversial thread in "Birds and Birding" entitled "Blue-winged teal...shot..." that those looking at this thread might enjoy (for want of a much better word) looking at or contributing to if you have not already done so.

Good luck on your "hunting" for the right binoculars for yourself but not necessarily on the hunting itself.

Les

[falcondude]

if CA is important to you, the ZEN ED/ED2 is among the best in CA control. From my own limited experience, it is better than the other much more expensive pair I have.

[John Dracon]

John - Sorry to hear of your sensitivity to CA. Some of us who lurk on this web site don't see it, don't look for it, and don't worry about it. If CA interferes with your duck identification at a distance, about the only thing you can do is get a binocular like those mentioned above. My understanding of CA is that it is a function of the type of correction in the lens system or the glass itself, not the prism system. You want a water proof, compact, and dependable binocular with decent optics for duck hunting. The typical hunter is mesmorized by power, but a seven or six power binocular will meet your needs. The relatively inexpensive Leupold Yosemite 6x30 yields a 5 mm exit pupil to help brighten dull days, and it will surprise you in the field. Sure the Zeiss FL 8x32 will fill the bill (I have one) but it is an expensive piece. John

[Steve C]

Since the ZEN ED has come up several times, I will suggest another glass. The Swift 7x36 Eaglet is nearly as CA free as any of the ZEN glass, and is within a hairsbreadth of being equally sharp and bright. Opposed to the 7x32 ZEN, it is a typical compact binocular (Fireform is correct about the size of the ZEN 7x36, but it has become my go to glass) being no larger than any of the 32mm compact class binoculars. It does not have the FOV of either the ZEN or most of the 32mm class, but at 374' listed (mine is actually closer to 400'), it is certainly adequate. The fov is the same spec as the Leupold 7/12x32 Switch power, which is also wide enough for me. The Switch power is a great small hunting glass, what with the dual power capability and very compact size.

[LPT]

I also use the Leupold Yosemite 6 X 30 when duck hunting. I like it because as stated by John Dracon it is a light, waterproof binocular with good optics (it is very bright and center-of-field resolution is superb), but also because: 1. It is inexpensive so I don't have to worry about babying it; and 2. 6X allows me to use it in a moving boat. 7X would also be okay, but 8X or higher would be difficult to use because of shake. I am sensitive to CA but, so far, haven't noticed it in the 6X Yosemite (CA is less evident with lower magnifications).

[brocknroller]

John,

It's not surprising that you would see CA in the "Dream Season" Chinese-made Nikon Monarchs. I've only used them in a store, and I could see CA.

Most binoculars today use lead-free glass, which increases the amount of CA, hence, the reason for the addition of low dispersion glass (ED, HD, FL) on various binoculars sold today. (can't wait to get challenged on this!)

And as you go up in magnification (10x/12x), CA increases.

As you can see from the above posts, there are two conflicting needs for hunters - greater brightness, which usually means a larger, heavier bin, and greater compactness (and lower weight) since you are already packing a lot of equipment.

Btw, I think ZR and other Chinese ED bin manufacturers should take note of those needs, because there are still niches to be filled.

I don't know how much you are willing or able to spend. So the first thing to do is set you budget, but it would be helpful to know what bins cost at various price points to do that.

The Monarchs and other "mid-priced" roofs cost btwn $250-$500 (not everyone will agree on the min. and max.).

So the Monarchs are on the low end of the "mid-priced" spectrum and the Chinese "EL" ED clones on the high end.

My guess is if you're a hunter, you're in it for life. So if you can afford a premium bin, it's time to pony up for one that will last you a lifetime.

In off season, you can use it for birding and game "spotting".

A brand that hunters seem to like very much is Swarovski. It's the company's 60th anniversary, so they are offering discounts on their binoculars this year.

A friend of mine is getting an 8x30 SLC for Christmas (he's obviously been very good this year :-).

The SLC has good ergonomics even for users with big hands, however, I'm not fond of the objective end focuser. Doesn't fall in the right place for my hands. His hands are smaller, so the set up works better for him.

He said he likes the front focuser, because it allows him to focus without having to push back his hat like he needs to do with his 8x32 LX.

The LX has a "a larger than average amount of chromatic aberration" to quote Steve Ingraham's review on Better View Desired. I concur, but except in the winter, it usually doesn't bother me.

The Swarovski 8x30 SLC is supposed to have a low amount of CA, according to a group of birding optics reviewers including Michael and Diane Porter.

http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/m...arovskislc8x30

"The optics are superb—sharp, with great contrast and with no chromatic aberration."

My friend Steve has compared the 8x30 SLC with the 8x32 LX so he could comment on that review.

Swarovski fixed his 20 year old 7x30 SLs for free, so the warranty is "lifetime".

I will ask him to post a reply to your question.

If the Swaro is beyond your budget - they cost $899 new - but you might get hundreds off on a demo at Camera Land. I don't see any 8x30 SLCs available right now, but you could write Doug and ask if he expects to get any in soon.

Particularly on an "Alt" version demo (Swaro updated their bins a few years ago and made them a bit lighter, but the 8x30s were light even before the "Neu" version).

http://cameralandny1.reachlocal.net/...swarovski.html

The Zeiss 8x32 FL mentioned above costs $1,899!!! Doug had some on sale for about $750 recently, which was a terrific buy.

If you are looking for a bin closer to the Monarch's price range, consider a WP porro prism binocular rather than a roof, because in general, you will get better image quality at that price point.

Check out the 6x30 and 8x30 Leupold Yosemites. Steve also has a pair of those he could comment on. They only cost about $89.

Frank D. may also be of help to you. He's owned dozens of bins and uses them for hunting and birdwatching.

As far as birders not liking hunting. Well, I hope they enjoy their tofu turkey today. :-)

I don't hunt, and I am against blowing away animals for target practice such as they do with Prairie Dogs out West, but until I become a full fledged vegetarian, I figure I have no right to comment on hunters who eat what they hunt, particularly turkeys!

[kristoffer]

How come that he could sell 8x32 FL that cheap? Think it can happen again?

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by brocknroller

... I don't see any 8x30 SLCs available right now, but you could write Doug and ask if he expects to get any in soon.

I agree about the 8x30 SLC. Doug has several 8x30 SLC NEU on eBay at this moment for $899 or best offer. In my opinion they are a fine choice for hunting applications. CA is minimal and the equipment is very durable. Light weight too. I've had an older model since 1993.

Ed

[denco@comcast.n]

Originally Posted by elkcub

I agree about the 8x30 SLC. Doug has several 8x30 SLC NEU on eBay at this moment for $899 or best offer. In my opinion they are a fine choice for hunting applications. CA is minimal and the equipment is very durable. Light weight too. I've had an older model since 1993.

Ed

I really don't think a 30mm aperture would be best when hunters generally are looking for game at sunrise and sunset when light is lacking. Alot of times you can spot game with a 42mm when it would be difficult with a 32mm.

[ceasar]

Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n

I really don't think a 30mm aperture would be best when hunters generally are looking for game at sunrise and sunset when light is lacking. Alot of times you can spot game with a 42mm when it would be difficult with a 32mm.

Dennis,
You will get an argument about your assertion from Terry Wieland, Shooting Editor of "Grays Sporting Journal." He wrote an article for the magazine about 4 years ago (Jan/Feb issue, I recall) entitled "8 x 30, Who Needs Anything More?" The article isn't available for downloading anymore, but if you can find it, get it. He makes a solid case for the 8 x 30/32, arguing that there is no need to lug around anything heavier no matter the time of day, and the more active you are as a Hunter, the more important the weight factor is. His one proviso is that it has to be what we describe here as an "Alpha" binocular. He has written other binocular articles for the magazine. I recall him describing how he tested them for waterproofing. He tied them to a line and threw them off a dock into 10 feet of water and left them there overnight. If they worked the next morning he kept them.

Bob

[denco@comcast.n]

Originally Posted by ceasar

Dennis,
You will get an argument about your assertion from Terry Wieland, Shooting Editor of "Grays Sporting Journal." He wrote an article for the magazine about 4 years ago (Jan/Feb issue, I recall) entitled "8 x 30, Who Needs Anything More?" The article isn't available for downloading anymore, but if you can find it, get it. He makes a solid case for the 8 x 30/32, arguing that there is no need to lug around anything heavier no matter the time of day, and the more active you are as a Hunter, the more important the weight factor is. His one proviso is that it has to be what we describe here as an "Alpha" binocular. He has written other binocular articles for the magazine. I recall him describing how he tested them for waterproofing. He tied them to a line and threw them off a dock into 10 feet of water and left them there overnight. If they worked the next morning he kept them.

Bob

I disagree with that at least out here in Colorado. I have used binoculars for hunting and most hunters I know use an 8x42 for close cover or a 10x42 if say they are hunting mule deer in open country and some even use 10x50 for low light conditions. A lot of times you can pick up antlers when it is almost dark with a good alpha 42mm or 50mm and you can't with a 32mm. I have done alot of duck hunting and it is important to have all the aperture you can to try to identify the species at dusk and dawn when they are flying around and coming into decoys. I feel for duck hunting an 8x42 would be about perfect.

[brocknroller]

Originally Posted by ceasar

Dennis,
You will get an argument about your assertion from Terry Wieland, Shooting Editor of "Grays Sporting Journal." He wrote an article for the magazine about 4 years ago (Jan/Feb issue, I recall) entitled "8 x 30, Who Needs Anything More?" The article isn't available for downloading anymore, but if you can find it, get it. He makes a solid case for the 8 x 30/32, arguing that there is no need to lug around anything heavier no matter the time of day, and the more active you are as a Hunter, the more important the weight factor is. His one proviso is that it has to be what we describe here as an "Alpha" binocular. He has written other binocular articles for the magazine. I recall him describing how he tested them for waterproofing. He tied them to a line and threw them off a dock into 10 feet of water and left them there overnight. If they worked the next morning he kept them.

Bob

Hunting optics expert John Barsness also recommended good quality midsized bins for hunting in his book Optics for the Hunter, and also on 24hrcampsite.com's hunting optics forums:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthr...pics/538822/18

Here's a post from the above thread:

"I've compared 8x32 and 8x42 binoculars of the same make and model a number of times under hunting conditions, and find that no matter how well-made the 8x32's you lose at least 5 minutes of good viewing light at the end of the day.

That said, with really good 8x32's that 5 minutes is usually outside of legal shooting hours."

There are no "legal birding hours," and in birding you are looking at tiny birds not big game and want to see more "close-up detail" than you need to see for hunting. Unless, as Dennis pointed out above, the "prey" is small game.

So I don't think the "middies are as good as full sized bins" axiom always applies to birding, particularly in the cloudy Northeast during late fall and early winter.

I used to think so, and bought my midsized 8xEII, 8xSE, and 8xLX based on Steve Ingraham's advice on Better View Desired:

"In theory, an exceptional 32mm glass should show all of the detail the human eye is capable of seeing."

That was excerpted from his review of the 8x32 SE.

I was outside yesterday at 4 p.m., and I am not exaggerating when I say it was as dark outside. Sunset was around 4:40 PM, but it was completely overcast so there was almost no sunlight at 4.

It was a little brighter, but not much at 3 p.m.

At this time of year, under these "daytime twilight" conditions, my exceptional 32mm "glass" did not show me all the detail my half-human eye was capable of seeing.

I could see the outline of a bird, and I could tell you if was a Blue Jay or a smaller bird, and maybe take a guess at an ID, but I had to rely as much on sound as sight.

Under the same conditions, with the full sized FMC Audubon I could more easily distinguish a nuthatch from a titmouse. With the 8x50 Octarem, I could see some field marks on them.

While hunters are out in the woods looking for bears and deer, I'm looking for 6- to 7-inch-long Cedar Waxwings feeding on berries in the bushes in my thickly wooded backyard as they make a stopover on their migration south.

Under bad lighting, it can be a challenge to distinguish a Waxwing from a Blue Jay, so feather details become important.

What applies to hunting doesn't necessarily apply to birding, because the needs of the user can be different even under the same weather conditions.

[ceasar]

Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n

I disagree with that at least out here in Colorado. I have used binoculars for hunting and most hunters I know use an 8x42 for close cover or a 10x42 if say they are hunting mule deer in open country and some even use 10x50 for low light conditions. A lot of times you can pick up antlers when it is almost dark with a good alpha 42mm or 50mm and you can't with a 32mm. I have done alot of duck hunting and it is important to have all the aperture you can to try to identify the species at dusk and dawn when they are flying around and coming into decoys. I feel for duck hunting an 8x42 would be about perfect.

Dennis,
I expected you to disagree. But you aren't disagreeing with me, you are disagreeing with Wieland, and you should read his article first. If you contact the magazine, I'm sure you can get a copy of it. I expect he will be glad to hear your opinion.

As far as hunting in a duck blind in crepuscular conditions, you might be better off with a 7 x 50. You really don't have to worry too much about their weight if you have a place to set them down or if you are sitting down most of the time.
Bob

[Steve C]

I dunno, by the time I was 12 I could identify any duck that was likely to be seen where I hunted without a binocular. ID was important because there were some ducks that were restricted in the bag limit or were not even allowed. Shotgun range is a close in affair, generally not much past 40 meters or so. Field and Stream magazine back, in those days published a neat little field guide, actual shirt pocket size, that was an excellent learners primer for duck and waterfowl ID.

I have come to the conclusion that there really is no difference in a decent hunting binocular and a decent birding binocular. Hunters seem to like a slower and stiffer focus than birders and some, myself included tend to prefer a binocular with a warmer color bias, because that seems to improve contrast with earth tone colors, such as separating deer from sage, plum brush, mahogany and rocks. I have asked many questions of a binocular over the years and frankly, the hardest answers have always come when hunting, not birding.

Twilight performance is the single most over rated aspect of a hunting glass. It gives you some small advantage for maybe five or ten minutes. Quite frankly, if you can't see what you need to see with a decent x32mm glass, the you have no business with your finger anywhere near the trigger, particularly if the time is evening. I can't count the times I've watched the sun come up or go down when afield. A 4-5mm pupil is almost always enough. Besides that, in a hunting situation, the final arbiter of either taking or not taking a shot is determined by the scope on the rifle. Please note that is not to be considered condoning the practice of using the rifle scope to substitute for the optics afforded by a decent binocular or spotter. A decision to shoot should usually be reached before you touch the rifle, and should be abandoned if the scope does not meet the immediate demand.

[John M Robinson]

As a hunter both big game and ducks, I generally agree with the proponents of the 32 mm glass. To me the extra few minutes of twilight viewing isn't a factor, the thing I like about the larger 42mm glass is the easier eye placement and bigger "picture window" view, that's why I bought the 8x42 Ultravids over the 8x32s. Then after using them for a hnting season I realized that they were too large and heavy for my liking, so I bought a 8x32 Trinovid BN and 8x32 Nikon SE. I had issues with black-outs with the BNs, and the SEs were perfect so I sold the BNs and carry the SEs everywhere. The only time the 8x42 Ultravids come out is if it's raining.

From his original post, it sounded like he was using the bins for distant birdwatching in the middle of the day when the shooting is slow. Like Steve said, being on a boat compactness shouldn't be a factor, depending on if the boat is secure against shore or perhaps bobbing in waves, steadyness could be an issue, so we have a conflict between needing extra power for distant viewing versus low power to counter the motion of the boat, as a long time boat captain I vote for the fujinon 7x50s. I used them for years at sea and they are wonderfull, I don't recall CA issues with them either, but I wasn't looking for it then. Does anybody know if that is an issue with them, being 7 power porros, I wouldn't think so.

John

[denco@comcast.n]

Originally Posted by jpurban

Hi,

I'd like to hear your 7x/8x binocular recommendations for a CA sensitive hunter.

I'm very new to binoculars. I'm a duck hunter and wanted to find a pair of all-weather, compact binos to use when I go hunting -- Some times the birds are just swimming around the marsh rather than flying into my decoys. Or they just keep flying. I figure I should take up birdwatching to help pass the time between shooting volleys. A couple of weeks ago, I had about 200 coots swimming within 75 yards of my blind. They entertained me (and my dog) for hours as we waited for the ducks to come in from feeding.

So, anyway, I was looking for a decent pair of binos and read some good reviews on the Nikon Monarchs. I got a good price on the 10x36 "Dream Season" binos a couple of weeks ago and thought I'd be all set.

That didn't quite work out the way I hoped. I took them out to the field and started to notice purple fringing on the horizon -- it was very noticable and I was NOT looking for it (I didn't even know what CA was until I started reading this forum a few days ago). I also noticed fringing (green on one side - purple on the other) when watching ducks and geese fly overhead against a blue sky background. The CA was noticable even in the center of the field.

In addition to learning that I do not like CA, I learned that my hands aren't steady enough for 10x. I think the relatively small 3.6mm exit pupil probably contributed to making the 10x36 Monarch very sensitive to IPD and eye placement. They weren't very forgiving. So, I think I understand why the 5mm "guideline" for hunting binoculars exists. Guess that means I need to look for lower magnification and a bigger objective lens (42mm).

So, please let me know if you have a recommendation for a quality "hunting" binocular that tends to have less CA than most of the other binoculars.

Thanks,
John

Here's a good duck hunting binocular! You will be able to see them "quack"! The Conquest's I had were pretty good at controlling CA. Better than the Monarch.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/z...conquest525008

[ronh]

John said "as a long time boat captain I vote for the fujinon 7x50s. I used them for years at sea and they are wonderfull, I don't recall CA issues with them either, but I wasn't looking for it then. Does anybody know if that is an issue with them, being 7 power porros, I wouldn't think so."

John's not noticing CA in the Fujinon in the harsh light of boating certainly suggests it can't be too bad. But, although I am a great fan of this Fujinon myself, I have unwillingly entered the ranks of the CA sensitive. I find it quite noticeable (what used to be considered average/good, actually) in the Fujinon. There are theoretical reasons the low power and large exit pupil should help, but for me it's no escape.

I'd rate the Fujinon excellent in almost every way as far as optical quality. But I couldn't recommend it to anyone for whom CA is a primary concern.
Ron