[AlbertoJ]

Hello, I´m searching an hight quality compact binocular with 3 or more exit pupil.
Zeiss, Leica, Swarorvski and Nikon only have 8x20 and 10x25, but I´d preffer 8x24, 8x25, 7x25, but with the same or very near optical quality.
What´s about Kowa 8x25 DCF, Pentax 8x25 DCF and Minox BD 8x24 BR ?

[Sancho]

Hola, Alberto. I´ve had Leica Ultravid compacts, but sold them (although they were superb). My current favourite compacts are Opticron DBA Oasis 8x21. I find them excellent, 7.5 degree FOV (widest in a compact that I know of), and they are very sharp and contrasty. They´re not quite as petite as the Leicas, but they are rubber-armoured and feel like "big" bincoculars in the hand.

If you like reverse-porro compacts, you can get similar optical quality to the big-name roofs, for a lot less money. I´ve owned Vortex Vanquish 8x26, and currently have Opticron Taiga 8x25. Both are optically excellent, the former being waterproof with a slightly wider FOV. They are comparatively cheap.
Also recommended by other BFers, are the Olympus Tracker 8x25 and the Nikon Travelite Ex 8x25. I´ve never seen these, though.

Let us know what you get!

[ceasar]

Alberto,
This is probably the best. I don't know if they are available in Europe. Bushnell Elite 7 x 26 Custom Compact.

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

Bob

PS: It is not waterproof.

[jaymoynihan]

Originally Posted by ceasar

Alberto,
This is probably the best. I don't know if they are available in Europe. Bushnell Elite 7 x 26 Custom Compact.

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

Bob

PS: It is not waterproof.

Yes. Better than any of the "alphas", optically. And has held that distinction for about 25 years. The last model to be in production from the 1980's Bausch & Lomb "Audubon Custom" series. I have 2 of these, the old B&L one, and the Elite. I think the latest incarnation is the E2 or somesuch.
The only complaint I have about my Elite model is the horrid little strap attachments. But optically, for a compact, the best.

[denco@comcast.n]

Originally Posted by jaymoynihan

Yes. Better than any of the "alphas", optically. And has held that distinction for about 25 years. The last model to be in production from the 1980's Bausch & Lomb "Audubon Custom" series. I have 2 of these, the old B&L one, and the Elite. I think the latest incarnation is the E2 or somesuch.
The only complaint I have about my Elite model is the horrid little strap attachments. But optically, for a compact, the best.

Have to disagree on the Bushnell Customs 7x26. Had a pair and sold em. I much prefer the optics of the 8x20 and 10x25 alpha's. I have the Zeiss 8x20 Victory's and the Nikon 10x25 LX's. These smaller alphas outperform the larger aperture cheaper glass because of the superior coatings IMO.

[ceasar]

He wants a 3mm or more exit pupil.
Bob

[denco@comcast.n]

Originally Posted by ceasar

He wants a 3mm or more exit pupil.
Bob

An alpha 2.5mm exit pupil IMO outperforms a 3mm exit pupil on a cheaper binocular because of the better quality coatings. I have tried them and found it to be true.

[Yippeekiay]

Has anyone tried the Fujinon 7x28's? If they're anything like the bigger FMTR's (7 and 10x50's) they could be a runner. Had my eye on a few pairs at that auction site but the bids always seem to go higher than my wallet does. Waterproof w/ 7deg FOV, not too shabby but they are IF.

[ceasar]

Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n

An alpha 2.5mm exit pupil IMO outperforms a 3mm exit pupil on a cheaper binocular because of the better quality coatings. I have tried them and found it to be true.

He also specified a non-alpha binocular. I suppose cost is a factor.
Bob

[BobinKy]

Originally Posted by AlbertoJ

Hello, I´m searching an hight quality compact binocular with 3 or more exit pupil.
Zeiss, Leica, Swarorvski and Nikon only have 8x20 and 10x25, but I´d preffer 8x24, 8x25, 7x25, but with the same or very near optical quality.
What´s about Kowa 8x25 DCF, Pentax 8x25 DCF and Minox BD 8x24 BR ?

The answer is simple--Just buy a Leupold Katmai 6x32 and call it a compact.

Bob
Kentucky, USA

[John Dracon]

If you can ever find a used Nikon Diplomat 8x23 in good condition, it will rival the alphas in the optics area.
John

[Tero]

Though I have looked at the Pentax 8x25s, was not all that impressed. They used to have a 9x28 that was better. But the 8x25 was no better thatn Nikon Sportstar 8x25, which is not phase coated. It is not really bad, either, the Nikon. Better than no binocular in hand. I think the Nikons have gone mostly to the Trailblazer, very similar to old Sportstar
http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular...-atb-binocular
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Sportsta.../dp/B0001HKUZC

[AlbertoJ]

Thank you for reply.

Cost isn´t a factor for me in for life binocular (in a compact binocular of course).

The problem of 2.5 exit pupil isn´t about brightness but ease of use.
If Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski or Nikon make 8x25 or 7x25 binoculars, I´d buy one sure.
I watched through Kowa 8x25 DCF and I liked it, but I haven´t compared it to Alpha binoculars.
And I don´t want low quality level because I want compact binocular complements my Zeiss FL 7x42.

[Tero]

The pocket binos are really an art to make. Not sure how compact you want. I really have pretty much given up on 25mm. The smallest I look at is 28mm, such as
http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular...8x28-binocular
but have not seen those yet.

[spyglass]

I gotta go with Jay & Pennsy Bob on the 7x26 Elite. Combination of substantially larger ep, better fov, easier to get a good hold of (unless you have hands like the poor guy in the Burger King commercial) and at least equal resolution & brightness.....and at 1/3 (or so) the cost of the baby roofs. And Dennis....u say the coatings of the "alfas" make up for a half-again smaller ep? As far as I know, about the same materials are used in all of the FMC binos of today (arcane stuff, like ZrO2, MfFl, et al), perhaps different receipes...I'm puzzled.

[typo]

I'm new here and certainly a novice when if comes to bins, but in the last few weeks, I've tried out about two dozen smaller pairs, including offerings from Zeiss, Bushnell, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Steiner, Viking, Celestron, RSPB and Delta. Apart from reverse porros, I thought none of the sub £200 were worth considering at all. The two standout pairs were the Zeiss Victory 8x20 and the Bushnell Elite (Custom) 7x26.

They are very different beasts, but I can see why they both have fans. Technically I think the Zeiss had the edge. Marginly more resolution (and I do mean marginly), flatter field of view, sharper edges and perhaps a slightly more natural colour balance. However, I liked the Bushnells a lot more. Almost the resolution, a lot brighter, wider fov, better depth/3D perception, more vivid (but still natural looking) colour, better exit pupil, enough eye relief for glasses, more comfortable in the hand, and more natural focus. Of course it's a lot heavier, not waterproof, and a bit less pocketable. It's also half the price.

To me it's a bit like high end hifi. You know that vinyl reccords and valve amps don't give the most accurate sound reproduction but many love the flawed but lush sound. However the imperfections will irritate the hell out of others.

I'm a vinyl and valve man, and loved the little imperfections (or intentional design characteristics) of the Bushnells. I thought they enhanced the viewing experience. If you're a digital kind of person, you'll probably hate them.

David

[spyglass]

Whoops.....that shoulda been MgFl. I got a C(-) in Chemistry...and a C in tpniyg

[ceasar]

Originally Posted by AlbertoJ

Thank you for reply.

Cost isn´t a factor for me in for life binocular (in a compact binocular of course).

The problem of 2.5 exit pupil isn´t about brightness but ease of use.
If Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski or Nikon make 8x25 or 7x25 binoculars, I´d buy one sure.
I watched through Kowa 8x25 DCF and I liked it, but I haven´t compared it to Alpha binoculars.
And I don´t want low quality level because I want compact binocular complements my Zeiss FL 7x42.

Alberto,
The 7 x 26 Bushnell is emphatically not "low quality level." In fact, the current model has improvements in the diopter adjustment over my model. The history of the binocular is one of steady improvement on a proven design.
Cordially,
Bob

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by AlbertoJ

Thank you for reply.

Cost isn´t a factor for me in for life binocular (in a compact binocular of course).

The problem of 2.5 exit pupil isn´t about brightness but ease of use.
If Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski or Nikon make 8x25 or 7x25 binoculars, I´d buy one sure.
I watched through Kowa 8x25 DCF and I liked it, but I haven´t compared it to Alpha binoculars.
And I don´t want low quality level because I want compact binocular complements my Zeiss FL 7x42.

Pardon me for questioning your question, but what do you mean exactly by ease of use? Why would all the alpha companies without exception make 8x20 and 10x25 models if they were not the best suited to compact applications?

If money were no object then I'd certainly take another look at the Alphas, since they are the only ones that will complement your Zeiss FL in quality. My preference is for the 10x25 configuration.

Ed

[AlbertoJ]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Pardon me for questioning your question, but what do you mean exactly by ease of use? Why would all the alpha companies without exception make 8x20 and 10x25 models if they were not the best suited to compact applications?

If money were no object then I'd certainly take another look at the Alphas, since they are the only ones that will complement your Zeiss FL in quality. My preference is for the 10x25 configuration.

Ed

Hello Elkcub,

Ease of use means it´s easier watch through a 3 or 3.5 exit pupil than 2.5 mm, because if you move your eyes or binocular (although movement was minimal) you see the black edge round the exit pupil. And the sensation is as if the quality of vision was worse than if your eyes and binoculars are perfectly aligned.

I have look through Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski 8x20 and 10x25, and I liked them a lot optically, but I must try them again and compare to the best non Alpha binoculars with a 3 or more mm exit pupil.

[spyglass]

Well, I wouldn't necessarily say the "Alfa" mfrs do everything right..... they've wet the bed on few occasions. And the driving factor seems to be how small they can make a bino that'll work. The ease of use thing Alberto mentioned is, to me, quite a big deal. Over the 50 yrs I've been an avid bino user, I've found one of the most annoying things when you're trying to get a quick look at something is having to find the center of a very small ep. I think that 3.2-3.3mm is just about the minimum for this, then up to about 6mm. Conversely, I've never seen a real advantage to a 7x50 (except on a boat) over a 7x42 or 8x50. That is MHO and certainly an open gate to disagreement.

[spyglass]

I'd add that an 8x25 Alfa would get my interest.....doubt I'd give up the little Elite, but maybe....

[jaymoynihan]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Pardon me for questioning your question, but what do you mean exactly by ease of use? Why would all the alpha companies without exception make 8x20 and 10x25 models if they were not the best suited to compact applications?...

Interesting question, something in a sense, that I have wondered about at times.
My guess:
The Alpha compacts first arose in the European hunting market. They would be used for quick looks over quite a distance, by a person not wanting to pack a full size model. They still are to come out with their own "new" design for birds/butterflies. Given their excellent mid-sized 8x models, they may never do it.

Bausch & Lomb traditionally optimized for three basic customers:
Inexpensive general purpose
Boaters
Birders.

We often forget, that B&L dominated birding optics prior to the 1970's. While the Alphas (exspecially Zeiss) had a following with birders in the 20th century, the Euro Alphas started out primarily catering to hunters. Then in the 1980's really started to design for the birding/bird study market.

Disclaimer: i use the bushnell/B&L only for compacts. Otherwise, i use Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Swift. It ain't a brand thing for me. :)

[Kammerdiner]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Pardon me for questioning your question, but what do you mean exactly by ease of use?

For me, in terms of exit pupil, "ease of use" means the bins come up and you have the view with little or no fiddling around to line up the exit. I'm guessing it's harder to achieve for those of us wearing glasses because there's no natural way to line up the bins, i.e. no eyesockets to settle them in. So with little exit pupils, you find yourself fiddling around with them, bouncing them around to get the view.

I've always found 3mm to be about my minimum, and it just gets easier as you go up from there. I have always used 8x25's and never had any problems.

But, some exit pupils are easier than others. I recently found a Nikon 10x25 (2.5mm) that had an easier view than the Leica 8x20 (also 2.5mm). I bring it up and have the view immediately. With the Leica, four out of five times I'm juggling them. Whether it's because of eyepiece design, eyecup design (my best guess), subtle differences in eye relief--I don't know.

Similarly, my Zeiss 8x32 is fussier than my Pentax 8x32, and even my 8x32 SE. Again, I'm not sure which factors are involved.

I had stopped using full-size for awhile, but recently picked up the Zen 8x43. Man, the view is big and easy! The view just sits there like you're looking out a picture window or something.

[jaymoynihan]

... "ease of use" means...

To me, that means both the ergonomic aspect, and the "easy view" as Aficionados of the Swift Audubon series or Zeiss 7x42 BGATP users often term it, .
Not only are they simple and swift in the hand, but they "get out of the way" optically. It is like your eyes relax when you look through them.