• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Some Binoculars with good Eye Relief, and a few other notes.. (1 Viewer)

wdc

Well-known member
United States
Over the past year, I've tried out and/or purchased a fair number of binoculars that interested me in terms of size, recommended optical quality, and most critically, eye relief. I wear bifocals of the seamless kind, and have reached a few conclusions that may be of use to others in my situation. What I've discovered is that I need more eye relief than some of the bespectacled folks on here who have remarked on their affinity/fit with a range of these devices. Also, confirmed that the ER specs are not consistent between manufacturers, which has been well hashed out on this forum.

Here's a list of binoculars that either worked for me, or didn't, along with some brief comments on other aspects of their performance. This is NOT a comprehensive test or in depth review. I leave that to others with far more time and experience. I urge anyone to try before they buy, if possible. It will speed up the process immensely.

------------------------------
Not enough Eye Relief

Opticron Traveller BGA ED 8x32 ER:19mm?
I had high hopes for this pair based on some reviews on the forum, as well as the stated ER spec, which
just doesn’t work. 19mm? Uh-uh. I own other bins with the same, OR LESS, ER and they fit me just fine. I love the form factor of these, and the optics look good, but I can’t see the entire field, unless I push them ridiculously hard into my glasses, or view without glasses, which is not an option for me. They do, however, work fine for my wife, for whom they were intended, so will keep them. It is ironic that these are fabricated in the same facility as the Toric and the Maven, yet the ER spec doesn’t deliver as advertised, while the others do.

Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 ER:16mm
Tried in the store. Nope. Dang! Since my first priority was to see the entire field, I spent no time examining the optics, once I saw they didn’t fit me.

Pentax Papillo 6.5 x 21 ER:15mm
Purchased sight unseen online and kept, even though they don’t show me the entire field. They DO work for other members of the family, so will live in the kitchen next to the flowers and the bird feeder.

Nikon Monarch 7 8x42 ER: 17.1mm
Tried in store. Nope

————————————
Almost fit:

Sightron SII 8x32 ER: 17.5mm
A forum favorite that were close enough to use regularly. A really nice, lightweight binocular. Sold to a family member.

Nikon MHG 8 x 42 ER: 17.8
These are great binoculars. Love the weight and the view, even though I can’t quite see the whole field stop as a crisp, black edge, and am probably missing a bit of the FOV. Perhaps the wide FOV is the culprit in limiting eye relief. They are VERY close, though, and in regular use I don’t think about it. A keeper, but I sure wish they had added .2 mm of ER. The performance of these do make me more curious about the EDG (ER: 19.3 mm)


————————
Good fit:

Pentax 8 x 25 DCF SW ER: 21mm
I’ve had these for 9 years. Good pocket bins for backpacking, travel, and birding in the parking lot at work. I can’t say they are optically superb, but they are a useful tool when you need one.

Leupold Yosemite 6 x 30 ER: 18.5mm
These work just fine. Optics are bright (brighter than the 6x30 Maven in direct comparison in low light) and sharp in the center. The focuser is a bit of a joke… very lumpy, uneven pressure throughout the range. Well, for under a $100 I can’t complain too loudly. They live in the kitchen to look at the birds in the yard. Great for a loaner bin on a bird walk.

Swarovski EL 8x32 ER: 20mm
They fit fine, and the view is excellent. They are much heavier than the Traveler. The focuser feels a bit scratchy or grainy as it revolves. Not a pleasing quality, for what is otherwise a really great instrument. These are primarily used by my wife, though I borrow them occasionally. They are currently at the SONA facility in Rhode Island being repaired (6-8 weeks estimate), after the focus knob snapped off during a hiking accident. As far as customer service goes, they do pick up the phone, and answer their email, so my hopes are high for a happy ending.

Maven B3 6 x 30 ER: 18.3
Tried as a demo unit and returned. Enjoyed the size, weight, view, and mechanicals, but wanted an 8x bin. The 8x30 Maven B3 does not have sufficient ER for me, so passed on that.

Vanguard Endeavor ED II 8x42 ER: 19.5
The first ‘serious’ pair of birding binoculars I purchased about a year ago, after trying out several pairs at a Wild Birds Unlimited shop in Novato. On the same afternoon I looked through the Monarch 7 8 x 42, Conquest HD 8x32, Swarovski El 8 x 32, and a few others. The Vanguard’s ER fit me just fine, had good optics, and were also the least expensive. I was aware that the Swarovski El32s were better, incrementally, in overall field sharpness, less CA, and greater contrast, but they were all slight differences, and even though they added up to a better view, I couldn’t at that time rationalize paying 7x the price. The Vanguards have a MUCH SMOOTHER focus than the Swarovski, btw!

Tract Toric 8 x 42 ER: 19mm
Great fit, and view, for the most part. My one caveat is that I sometimes feel the IPD isn’t narrow enough when I’m viewing at close range, say within 25 feet, chasing kinglets around the foliage nearby, or wrens frolicking in the poison oak just off trail… The focuser is smooth, but a bit stiff for my taste. Interestingly, the Toric eyecups are recessed much deeper than all the other binocs I own, but they still have plenty of ER for me. Opticron, take note.

Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42 ER: 18mm
Perfect fit for ER. Excellent view. I hesitate in going on about these, as it is all subjective impressions, but these have great contrast and detail to my eyes. The quail at the feeder look like Holbein’s portrait of King Henry the 8th..Actually more vivid! ;-). In short, I got the ‘wow’ view from these. The other day I played hooky from work for a few hours to go birding in the Berkeley Hills with ‘em. They are a pleasure to use. Oh yes, and the focuser is almost like slipping on a banana peel. Perhaps too fast/smooth for some, but I really like it. More importantly, the IPD range also fits me a bit better than the Tract for closeup views. I gambled on these, buying them online at Eagle Optic’s recent closeout sale, hoping they would fit me, and was glad they did.
The cons on this pair have been well noted. My daughter picked them up, twisted out the eyecups, and still had to hold them away from her face to get a proper view, so I may avail myself of the alternate cups, as long as they don’t ruin my fit. The rain guard is more like a clingy bathing cap that does not release easily, and the objective cover, a hapless little plastic raft, is the equivalent of what came with the Sightrons, refusing equally to stay put. Rather poor accessories for such an otherwise excellent binocular.

———————————
Disclaimer:
As I mentioned at the beginning my primary goal was to examine binoculars that exhibited the entire field, and then see if the optical quality/price ratio was reasonable.

Though I’ve sat there from time to time, and directly compared the views of some of these, for the most part, I just take them out birding, and appreciate all their good qualities. At this point, once the optics are at a certain level of good, the issues of CA, field of view, overall sharpness of the field, tend to become non issues, once you stop thinking about it, and start looking at birds. If I look for it, I can find some CA in ALL of them, especially on overcast days when looking at tree branches and chimneys and the like, but its not acute or disturbing to me. For comparison’s sake, I have an 80mm refractor ‘kit' that I purchased and assembled in the 90’s from University Optics to look at the comet impacts on Jupiter. It’s a simple doublet, and has a generous helping of CA at the edges of all bright objects, day or night, guaranteed. None of the above binoculars even come remotely close to that level of CA. I still use that scope regularly to get in on a raptor, owl, view the rings of Saturn, or the moons of Jupiter at a moment’s notice. And I keep telling myself… one of these days I’ll get a triplet apochromat… Well, I think I spent all my ‘triplet money’ on binoculars, and its been great fun. I can take friends and family out to bird, and have enough good quality bins to share with everyone.

I will continue to rotate through them, to see if one or the other really stands above the rest, but the fact that they fit my needs and perform well optically, with what are primarily minor ergonomic niggles, is what counts.

I need to express my thanks to the many folks on this forum who have so generously shared their own experiences with a variety of equipment, and also took the time to compare eye relief amongst the binoculars they owned.

Bird away,

Bill
 
Last edited:
Try to get your hands on a Vortex Fury 6.5x30. The eye relief if I recall correctly is 21mm. They were my first pair of real binoculars and I still love them.
 
Very nice summary Bill!

Your point is right on. The eye relief figures from the manufacturers just give a rough ball park about if the binocular may work out. The other part of the equation is the eye cup length and thickness of the eye cup surface.

It is not just eye glass wearers that struggle with eye relief specs, or lack of them. The length of the extended eye cup in relation to the eye relief is critical to a good fit for those that view without glasses.

What is needed is some sort of "net" eye relief figure that lists the eye relief past the surface of the eye cup in the various positions but I do not see that happening anytime soon.

Hopefully your summary will help others for now.
 
... I will continue to rotate through them, to see if one or the other really stands above the rest, but the fact that they fit my needs and perform well optically, with what are primarily minor ergonomic niggles, is what counts.

I need to express my thanks to the many folks on this forum who have so generously shared their own experiences with a variety of equipment, and also took the time to compare eye relief amongst the binoculars they owned.

Bird away,

Bill

It is always pleasing to see someone such as yourself and SteveC going the extra mile for others. Good Job! :cat:

Bill
 
It is not just eye glass wearers that struggle with eye relief specs, or lack of them. The length of the extended eye cup in relation to the eye relief is critical to a good fit for those that view without glasses.

I am firmly in this group―I find it quite difficult to find binoculars that provide enough eye cup extension. It is interesting that binocular manufacturers struggle to cater to both demographics.

By the way, nice overview of your experiences Bill. I am sure many here will find this useful.
 
I am firmly in this group―I find it quite difficult to find binoculars that provide enough eye cup extension. It is interesting that binocular manufacturers struggle to cater to both demographics.


By the way, nice overview of your experiences Bill. I am sure many here will find this useful.

Thanks Jack, If swapping out eyecups allows for more people to use a binocular, that seems like a pretty simple solution, that perhaps more manufacturers could avail themselves of. The 'one size fits all' approach leaves folks on the fringes out of the picture.

Bill
 
It is always pleasing to see someone such as yourself and SteveC going the extra mile for others. Good Job! :cat:

Bill

Thank you very much Bill. Much appreciated coming from an optics veteran such as yourself. In fact, hat's off to SteveC, Chill6x6, FrankD, JGraider, BruceH, and the many others who have contributed so much experience, wisdom, and humor to this forum. Education and inspiration abounds here, amongst the sometimes prickly foliage... ;)

Bill
 
Good job Bill!

I have to say my and your view of what works and what doesn't for eyeglass users varies a little. The Monarch 7 8X42, Conquest HD 8X32, and the Monarch HG 8X42 all work for ME. That's why it really IS important to try before you buy, ESPECIALLY if you wear eyeglasses.

Good post!
 
People who wear sunglasses also need adequate eye relief. I use polarized sunglasses and, though the view is narrowed, the all-day benefit is unsurpassed.
 
Good job Bill!

I have to say my and your view of what works and what doesn't for eyeglass users varies a little.
Good post!

Thanks Chuck. Yes, I had to learn for myself where on the spectrum of eye relief
I land. My accommodation is definitely narrower than yours. Still, it has been real helpful to hear what works for other folks.

Bill
 
People who wear sunglasses also need adequate eye relief. I use polarized sunglasses and, though the view is narrowed, the all-day benefit is unsurpassed.

Pileatus, Can you expand on that statement a bit, specifically the all-day benefit?
And do you wear sunglasses regardless of the environment, forest vs. beach, for example. Thanks.

Bill
 
Thank you very much Bill. Much appreciated coming from an optics veteran such as yourself. In fact, hat's off to SteveC, Chill6x6, FrankD, JGraider, BruceH, and the many others who have contributed so much experience, wisdom, and humor to this forum. Education and inspiration abounds here, amongst the sometimes prickly foliage... ;)

Bill

Yep, I R N optics veteran! And with that, and a buck, I can buy a Coke. :cat:

Bill

Seize upon truth, where'er tis found
On Christian or on heathen ground
Among our friends; Among our foes
Neglict the prickle and assume the rose
—Rev. Isaac Watts
 
Last edited:
Yep, I R N optics veteran! And with that, and a buck, I can buy a Coke. :cat:

Bill

Seize upon truth, where'er tis found
On Christian or on heathen ground
Among our friends; Among our foes
Neglict the prickle and assume the rose
—Rev. Isaac Watts

Not much to add to that but thank you for your service!
 
Pileatus, Can you expand on that statement a bit, specifically the all-day benefit?
And do you wear sunglasses regardless of the environment, forest vs. beach, for example. Thanks.

Bill
First, wearing any eyeglass (correction and/or sunglasses) intrudes on available eye relief and, depending on the optic, I run the risk of losing some of the FOV. My clear prescription eyeglasses are very thin and work very well with all of my optics (8X32 SE, Ultravid 7X42, 8.5X42 and 10X50 SV). My wife's 8X32 SV has the most eye relief of all our optics and I see the full FOV with eyeglasses.

When the sun is oppressively bright (blue eyes here) I wear prescription polarized sunglasses. These are only available in a thicker version than my clear glasses hence I lose more eye relief on all my optics resulting in a narrower FOV. Thankfully, modern optics have enough eye relief and starting FOV to make even this situation enjoyable.

Polarized lenses are truly magical. On a day when I can barely keep my eyes open in direct sunlight the polarized glass instantly reduces brightness and eliminates glare, resulting in a relaxed view that is hard to describe. Though the image is darkened, colors and detail are excellent. Also, the difference between tinted prescription eyeglasses and polarized lenses is breathtaking. I wore tinted for years (various tints available) to save a few bucks...a really stupid mistake. My polarized eyeglasses are single vision with no bifocal. If I'm hawk watching all day in bright sunlight I can put them on around 0900 and remain comfortable until the sun sets. Without them, I'd be "burned out" before noon and miss a lot of birds the rest of the day because I couldn't tolerate the brightness.
 
Last edited:
Polarized lenses are truly magical. On a day when I can barely keep my eyes open in direct sunlight the polarized glass instantly reduces brightness and eliminates glare, resulting in a relaxed view that is hard to describe. Though the image is darkened, colors and detail are excellent. Also, the difference between tinted prescription eyeglasses and polarized lenses is breathtaking. I wore tinted for years (various tints available) to save a few bucks...a really stupid mistake. My polarized eyeglasses are single vision with no bifocal. If I'm hawk watching all day in bright sunlight I can put them on around 0900 and remain comfortable until the sun sets. Without them, I'd be "burned out" before noon and miss a lot of birds the rest of the day because I couldn't tolerate the brightness.

This makes good sense. I have burned my eyes when out painting all day in the Sierra, and know the feeling. I now wear sunglasses on the way to and from where I paint, but generally don't paint with them on. I may try them out for birding. Thanks for the explanation.

Bill
 
Thanks Bill for your excellent review. I was wondering if any of you folks wear a hat with a brim? I wear one almost 100% of the time outside. For me it makes a "big" difference, using binoculars and just looking around in the daytime. Cloud cover or Sunny. I think Chuck from the great state of Alabama might.;)
 
Last edited:
Thanks Bill for your excellent review. I was wondering if any of you folks wear a hat with a brim? I wear one almost 100% of the time outside. For me it makes a "big" difference, using binoculars and just looking around in the daytime. Cloud cover or Sunny. I think Chuck from the great state of Alabama might.;)

I wear a very lightweight wide brimmed hat every time in the warm weather.
In cold weather I wear a winter flap hat.

I have prescription polarized sunglasses which I use rarely on bright sunny days, but most of the time the wide brinmed hat is all I need. I do make sure to wear my sunglasses if there's any snow on the ground on a bright day - very helpful. I can see how polarized sunglasses would be a huge help watching hawks on migration all day.
 
wide brim hat for sure!

Thanks Bill for your excellent review. I was wondering if any of you folks wear a hat with a brim? I wear one almost 100% of the time outside. For me it makes a "big" difference, using binoculars and just looking around in the daytime. Cloud cover or Sunny. I think Chuck from the great state of Alabama might.;)

Yes, I wear a wide brimmed hat when I'm out in the woods, except maybe if it's to hot out. But they sure do help with blocking glare from reaching your binoculars, and this helps contrast too. Especially when the sun is getting low-I like the wide brims that can be easily bent down with one hand while you are glassing, especially useful in strong sidelight.
 
Thanks Bill for your excellent review. I was wondering if any of you folks wear a hat with a brim? I wear one almost 100% of the time outside. For me it makes a "big" difference, using binoculars and just looking around in the daytime. Cloud cover or Sunny. I think Chuck from the great state of Alabama might.;)

I always wear a baseball type cap, and on cold days, I might wear a balaclava under that, or a ski hat over it. I have noticed that the balaclava helps suppress reflections into my eyeglasses that come from behind, and have considered some sort of eye guards that would fit on the earpieces of the glasses. Not that I want more stuff to deal with, or carry more weight on my face, but finding ways to dampen down stray light when viewing with glasses would be an improvement over the norm. Perhaps it is as simple as wearing a broader brimmed hat, as you and GG do.

I regularly change hand positions to block sunlight coming from the side.

Another technique involving hats, that I frequently use, is to grip the brim of the cap along with the binocular, effectively locking the binocular to the head, which does a surprisingly good job of stabilizing the view, as the neck is now the primary source of wobble instead of the hands. I expect you need a stiff enough brim to make that work. If you do it 2 handed it is better, but then you can't re-focus quickly, so I generally do it with one hand.

Thanks for the kind words.

Bill
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top