[Howard220]

..until I tried to read a distant license plate (maybe 200 yards away?) with them, and then compared that view directly with my Nikon Travelite 9 x 25's. I don't think the extra half power was the difference -- do you? In the Nikons the numbers and letters stood out clearer; otherwise the other compared views were acceptably similar. I tried them out because I need binoculars with a wider apparent field of view than the Nikons give (60 for the Ravens vs. 50 degrees for the Nikons) and still be lightweight. (The Eagle is only 17 oz.) I guess for $130 I can't have everything. *sigh* Whatever I wind up buying has to be under $200. After reading this forum for several years, and reading mfr. specs, I don't think there's anything out there in my price range that meets all my criteria so... I may still get the Ravens because, sharpness-wise, they may be close enough.

[Tero]

I noticed actually the same thing with my 8x32 Eagle Optics SRT, it gave me more detail than a 9x25. I no longer have the 9x25 to see if it beats any others.

The Raven was not poor and in all respects is a handy birding tool for a beginner, just not all that different from Yosemite. For all that, the 8x Yosemite may have better resolution.

Too many toys to compare.

[Howard220]

Originally Posted by Tero

I noticed actually the same thing with my 8x32 Eagle Optics SRT, it gave me more detail than a 9x25. I no longer have the 9x25 to see if it beats any others.

I'm confused -- my 9x25 showed *more* detail than did the Raven, and I sort of questioned whether or not that is due to the slightly extra magnification of the 9x25. ?

Overall it's not at all a bad binocular -- it just may not be worth $130 to me to get a wider field of view.

[ceasar]

Howard,
These don't have phase coating but they certainly are wide! And under $140.00.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/v...exspitfire8x32

Bob

[Tero]

What I was trying to say is that 8x is like 9x, like 8.5x. Quality of optics more important than actual power. 10x is often distinguishable from 8x.

[Howard220]

Originally Posted by ceasar

Howard,
These don't have phase coating but they certainly are wide! And under $140.00.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/v...exspitfire8x32

Bob

Hi Bob,

Funny you should mention the Spitfires, as I tried them today, too! I didn't like them at all. I only had to look through them for a few seconds to see that the clarity wasn't there, and the focusing was very "fast." That is, a slight turn of the focus wheel can take you right past the point of best focus.

Now here's a consideration that's been holding me back spending $$ on a nice pair I'd really be happy with: the idea of carrying an expensive glass out in the field with the danger of damaging it, or just having it stolen because it's out of the house. (Around here, theft is highly unlikely.) Just this afternoon I realized that in the 80's I was regularly carrying around a Nikon F3and a Nikkor lens or two, not giving it a second thought. So, that blew my consideration all to hell....

Yes, Tero, too many toys.

Howard

[oleaf]

Why not a Yosemite? Or Nikon Monarch 8x36. Both good bins.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular...inocular-black

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular...-atb-binocular

Why did you first consider the Ravens? What are your requirements in a binocular?

Cheers

[ceasar]

Howard,
Here is another small Vortex 8 x 28 Diamondback for the same price as the Spitfire. 360' FOV with phase coating. Did you get to try that one also?

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/v...iamondback8x28

Bob

[Tero]

Looks OK. I have the cheaper Bushnell 8x28 and almost like it. It has some issues, mainly eye cups.

[Howard220]

Originally Posted by oleaf

Why not a Yosemite? Or Nikon Monarch 8x36. Both good bins.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular...inocular-black

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular...-atb-binocular

Why did you first consider the Ravens? What are your requirements in a binocular?

Oleaf, I once bought the Yosemites and sent them right back. Either they were misaligned, or I don't know what... At that time I wasn't willing to set it up to test its alignment; all I know is I was getting a headache from looking at objects at 20 - 25 feet. My criteria are around 8x, minimum 60 degree apparent field, and light weight. The Ravens are 17.3 oz. Currently a nice pair at $4-500 is out of the question with regard to being "comfortably affordable." Vortex Viper 8x32's would be on my short list. The now available Nikon 8x32 SE's would be, too, if I were willing to accept 22 oz. My old Audubon 8.5x44 804R's are great, but too heavy to schlep around at 28 oz, and I don't know if a 6 oz. reduction (Nikons) would be worth $500.

Bob, I didn't look for the 8 x 28 D'backs. I would think that 28mm is too small for my alleged needs. And I think it best I stay at 8x, not 9 as in the 9x36 D'backs I've bugged you about.

Howard

[ceasar]

Originally Posted by Howard220

.................................................

Bob, I didn't look for the 8 x 28 D'backs. I would think that 28mm is too small for my alleged needs. And I think it best I stay at 8x, not 9 as in the 9x36 D'backs I've bugged you about.

Howard

No problem with that Howard. I'm sure you'll find what you are looking for.
Meanwhile I purchased a 7 x 36 Diamondback from Cameraland. Very good price!! So far I'm quite impressed with them. Better than I expected at that price. I'll give a report on them after I've used them for 6 months or so.

That means I'm keeping them!



Bob

[J. Moore]

Originally Posted by Howard220

The now available Nikon 8x32 SE's would be, too, if I were willing to accept 22 oz. My old Audubon 8.5x44 804R's are great, but too heavy to schlep around at 28 oz, and I don't know if a 6 oz. reduction (Nikons) would be worth $500.

I've found that 23 oz bins are so light that I can forget I have them on and look around the car for them. If you're having concerns about even that amount of weight, you might want to consider a different type of strap. Don't know what you are using, but I find a broad neoprene foam strap is great at distributing weight and quite comfortable--and w/o the hassle of a harness.

Best,
Jim

[Howard220]

Originally Posted by ceasar

No problem with that Howard. I'm sure you'll find what you are looking for.
Meanwhile I purchased a 7 x 36 Diamondback from Cameraland. Very good price!! So far I'm quite impressed with them. Better than I expected at that price. I'll give a report on them after I've used them for 6 months or so.

That means I'm keeping them!



Bob

I'm marking my calendar! Good to hear you like them, though I have to ask why you bought them. OK, why did you buy them? :)

Jim, I once did try a wide foam? strap and it didn't help. A harness may be the solution, yes. I'll look into that. I admit I'm ridiculously spoiled by my Nikon Travelites that weigh 9 ounces and can fit in a coat pocket.

Howard

[ceasar]

Originally Posted by Howard220

I'm marking my calendar! Good to hear you like them, though I have to ask why you bought them. OK, why did you buy them? :)

Jim, I once did try a wide foam? strap and it didn't help. A harness may be the solution, yes. I'll look into that. I admit I'm ridiculously spoiled by my Nikon Travelites that weigh 9 ounces and can fit in a coat pocket.

Howard

Howard,
I only have two 7's. A 20 year old or so 7 x 42 Leitz Trinovid BA (With Uppendahl Prisms) and the modern 7 x 42 Leica Trinovid BN that replaced it. I wanted to try an inexpensive one and Vortex fit the bill. I'm not interested in paying $400.00 and up for one of the other's on the market.
Bob