[vkalia]

Today, i finally had a chance to take my Minox BD 8x32 BRs out in the field. My initial plan was to compare it with my Pentax 10x43 SPs, which I think are top-notch binos offering most of the performance of the Alpha glass for a significantly lower price. However, I ended up denting the eyecups on the Pentax and they are in for repairs - so I ended up taking these binos out by themselves.

I have to admit - while I care about performance, I am not a pixel-peeper (or its bino equivalent). I refuse to test lenses by photographing resolution charts and the same applies to binos. I plan to use them in the field, and all I care about it is how they perform when it comes to helping me watch and id birds. So please take this report with as many grains of salt as you prefer.

The fit and finish on the Minoxes are really top-notch. The rubber armoring and heft makes these binos feel like quality. The focus knob also turns smoothly enough. The covers are not very functional, however - the eyepiece covers dont stay in place for longer than a few seconds, and the objective covers tend to come off as well. Moreover, the mechanism for attaching the objective covers to the strap doesnt inspire confidence - in practice, I found myself keeping them in the pocket. The Pentax objective covers are attached to the body, which I think it is a much better approach. Still, this is quite a minor issue.

Eye-relief wasnt tested - I dont wear glasses. The eyecups seemes long enough and it was easier to get optimal placement with these binos than with the Pentax (it took longer for me to figure out exact placement with them).

Now, before I go any further - please note that these are my first 8x32s. I used to have 8x42 porros first, and then the 10x43s. Also, these are marginally less bright than what I've been using of late (exit pupil of 4.0 vs 4.3).

In terms of optics/resolution, I am not sure what I think of them.

Sometimes, they appeared fabulous - I was easily able to make out details such as faint markings in the supercilium and coverts, even when the bird was some distance away. I was watching an orange-capped thrush singing some distance away, and these binos revealed every little mark of this pretty bird.

On the other hand, I did occasionally find it hard to acquire perfect focus. With the Pentax, images tended to snap into focus pretty easily. With these, it took a bit of rolling back and forth sometimes to find the perfect focus point. Also, despite my objective observations re. ability to see details as described above, I felt that the images lacked a little bit of "bite" sometimes. This is possibly linked to the focus issue. It could also be a function of the slightly lower magnification of this bino vs my 10x usual optic.

Ability to handle contrast is very good - I was in foliage with a bright sun and didnt have too many problems. A Bonnelli's eagle flew over me, and I was able to get a good look at it despite the extremely high contrast. I am not particularly sensitive to CA, so nothing to really report one way or the other there.

I was also not able to evalue corner sharpness. I rarely tend to keep the binos fixed and swivel my eyebrows, and for the way I use the binos, there was no noticable dropoff in sharpness across the field of view.

So in short - I am fairly well pleased with these binos. Subjectively, however, these binos lack the "wow" factor, which may be an unfair expectation for $450. However, objectively, it is hard to ignore the fact that they revealed a lot of the little details which helped me identify some lifers for me.

I'm going to be birding with these binos a lot more over the next couple of weeks, and will post an update at that point. I suspect that a lot of my problems with these binos may actually be unfamiliarity with the ergonomics and handling.

Regards,
Vandit

[Howard220]

I look forward to your future report. I'm interested in these binocs, but the fact that you have had trouble with finding focus concerns me. Maybe it takes some getting used to, but I think that if they're going to snap into focus at all, you'd see that happen for you the very first time you tried them outdoors in typical daylight. This sounds similar to the new version Eagle Optics Ranger 8x32 I tried a couple of months ago, though I'm sure that what I saw through the Rangers were much worse than what you saw.

I'd love to hear from other BD 8x32 BR owners.

[John Russell]

Vandit,

Thanks for the report.
Just a thought on the focussing issue: maybe left and right eyes are in conflict with one another. Try, using a firm support and alternate use of the objective covers, to obtain a precise setting of the diopter adjustment.

Regards,

John

[matt green]

Originally Posted by John Russell

Vandit,

Just a thought on the focussing issue: maybe left and right eyes are in conflict with one another. Try, using a firm support and alternate use of the objective covers, to obtain a precise setting of the diopter adjustment.

Regards,

John

Might also simply be the fact that 8x32 binocs have a shallower depth of focus, that is to say that objects immediately in front and behind the object in true focus will appear more out of focus than a larger 7x42 or 8x42 binocular.

When viewing through the larger bins more objects both near and far can be perceived in true or near true focus and hence offer a more 'easy on the eye' image.

Matt

[vkalia]

John - it isnt likely to be a diopter issue as I have a visual problem in my left eye which, pending surgery, renders it incapable of showing anything other than shadow/light. I get bino blackouts through it, but not any detail.

Matt - if anything, I would reckon that a lower DoF would make it easier to figure out when the subject is in focus. I was thinking on opposite lines - as these binos have more DoF than a 10x bino, which is what I am used to, perhaps that semi-focus is what is causing this behavior.

I'll post a follow-up in a few days.

Regards,
Vandit

[APSmith]

Vandit,

Thanks for reporting your impressions. I have been considering these, as well as the HGs (Minox).

I have also tried the Pentax SPs in 8x32 and 10x42. I really liked the SPs with two exceptions. The minor one was the strap lug placement and size. The major one is hard to describe, but I think you have hit on it: ["... it was easier to get optimal placement with these binos than with the Pentax (it took longer for me to figure out exact placement with them)."] I too had trouble obtaining and maintaining a suitable eye distance (and to a lesser extent alignment also) with the SPs. It was quite distracting, at least compared to my Nikon EIIs.

I look forward to hearing your further comments. (The Minoxes are about my last hope before settling for the Monarch 8x36s).

APS

[Howard220]

AP, you're in the same position I am (so to speak), but the Monarch's field is too narrow for my tastes. Otherwise I'd be eyeing those, period. I'll wait for Vandit's further evaluations. Were the Pentaxes you tried out of alignment, or did you have trouble aligning your eyes behind the eyepieces?

[APSmith]

Howard,

It was eye alignment.

The narrow field of the Monarchs (8x36) was a bit tight. But, for the great price, they would make a decent back-up waterproof to my EIIs. As I've mentioned in other posts though, they, for me, lacked that tack sharp center that some bins have (including the Pentax). I'm trying to decide if the remaining options under 1K can really best them overall.

APS

[Tero]

Hmm, I would be interested in a Minox vs Pentax 8x32 comparison.

[APSmith]

Originally Posted by Tero

Hmm, I would be interested in a Minox vs Pentax 8x32 comparison.

Me too - ideally including all four: Minox BDBR and HGs as well as Pentax SP and ED.

What else is between $300 and $900 that we should throw in (with that configuration - roof only)?

APS

[Howard220]

Originally Posted by APSmith

The narrow field of the Monarchs (8x36) was a bit tight. But, for the great price, they would make a decent back-up waterproof to my EIIs. As I've mentioned in other posts though, they, for me, lacked that tack sharp center that some bins have (including the Pentax). I'm trying to decide if the remaining options under 1K can really best them overall.

APS

Are you saying the Pentax (DCF SP 8x32) you tried had a tack sharp center, and the Monarch 8x36's don't?

I, too want to see a comparison test between those Pentaxes and the Minox.

Howard

[APSmith]

Originally Posted by Howard220

Are you saying the Pentax (DCF SP 8x32) you tried had a tack sharp center, and the Monarch 8x36's don't?

Yes - but, I had better elaborate (my last Monarch criticism was not well received):

First off - I like the Monarchs, and think they are an excellent value, and think that overall they are hard to beat even at double the price. I have looked through several different pairs with generally good impressions. However, to my eyes, they lack something either in the center or very near it which I want to call lack of sharpness. Others have suggested that side-to-side play in the focussing mechanism may be the culprit, and I definitely agree that it has an effect. But, I believe there is more to it than that. At any rate, despite very much wanting it go away (due to the other fine merits of the model), I have always struggled to get perfect focus with them - tending to go back and forth, searching for sharpness. And when I do think they're as focussed as possible, the sharpness still isn't quite there (or it is so small that it might as well not be) - while in comparison, many others models (including the Pentax) do get satisfyingly sharp.

Unfortunately, Vkalia's description of the Minox BDBR's problem with perfect focus is very similar to my impression of the Monarch's. I wondering if this impression will continue for Vkalia, and if the same holds true with the Minox HGs.

APS

[FrankD]

I posted some comments earlier this month in a comparison between the 8x36 Monarch and the 8x32 Minox BD BL. I thought the Minox's focusing was more precise. The image seemed to roll in and out of focus much more smoothly and consistantly if that makes any sense. I think my experience with the Monarchs tends to mirror AP's. The focus can be very impercise on some units which makes it very difficult to find that perfect level of focus plus it may also just be something to do with the optics themselves. Though the Monarchs are an excellent glass at this price point I think there are others that offer a sharper image (Pentax SP, Vortex Viper).

Out of the comparison between the Monarch and the BD BL I chose the Monarch because I felt the colors were more vibrant and the overall image was brighter (assuming 36 versus 32 mm came into play). The field of view difference between the two was not that noticeable to my eyes despite the fact that I tend to place alot of stock in both true and apparent fields of view in relation to an overall relaxed image.

I hope to evaluate the Monarchs in comparison to the 8x32 Vortex Furys whenever they eventually debut.

[APSmith]

Originally Posted by FrankD

I posted some comments earlier this month in a comparison between the 8x36 Monarch and the 8x32 Minox BD BL (BLBR?). I thought the Minox's focusing was more precise. The image seemed to roll in and out of focus much more smoothly and consistantly if that makes any sense. I think my experience with the Monarchs tends to mirror AP's. The focus can be very impercise on some units which makes it very difficult to find that perfect level of focus plus it may also just be something to do with the optics themselves. Though the Monarchs are an excellent glass at this price point I think there are others that offer a sharper image (Pentax SP, Vortex Viper).

Out of the comparison between the Monarch and the BD BL (BLBR?) I chose the Monarch because I felt the colors were more vibrant and the overall image was brighter (assuming 36 versus 32 mm came into play). The field of view difference between the two was not that noticeable to my eyes despite the fact that I tend to place alot of stock in both true and apparent fields of view in relation to an overall relaxed image.

I hope to evaluate the Monarchs in comparison to the 8x32 Vortex Furys whenever they eventually debut.

Frank,

I researched your earlier comments mentioned in this post. If I'm understanding it all, you actually compared the Monarchs with the BLBR, which is a step down in price from the BDBR which Vkalia has. As best I can tell, the Minox offerings in 8x32 roofs are as follows:

BVBR ~$290.
BLBR ~$350.
BDBR ~$450.
HGBR ~$650-680.

The BR on the end of all these models is a bit confusing.

Your impression about the "BL" as compared with the Monarch is very interesting, since the focus issue (and to a lesser extent the FOV) was the main weak point for the Monarchs. One would expect the "BD" to be no less in any regard and better in some (perhaps color and brightness), and the "HG" to be another step up. Hmmmmm ...

APS

[Howard220]

Originally Posted by APSmith

Yes - but, I had better elaborate (my last Monarch criticism was not well received):
> snip <

However, to my eyes, they lack something either in the center or very near it which I want to call lack of sharpness. Others have suggested that side-to-side play in the focussing mechanism may be the culprit, and I definitely agree that it has an effect. But, I believe there is more to it than that. At any rate, despite very much wanting it go away (due to the other fine merits of the model), I have always struggled to get perfect focus with them - tending to go back and forth, searching for sharpness. And when I do think they're as focussed as possible, the sharpness still isn't quite there (or it is so small that it might as well not be) - while in comparison, many others models (including the Pentax) do get satisfyingly sharp.
APS

I think I know what you're talking about. In a reflecting telescope, at least, I believe that would be attributed to spherical aberration. You just can't get all the rays to come to an acceptable common focus. That would drive me crazy. My Nikon 9x25 Travelite V's are perfect in this regard, so I know "good" when I see it. The new version Eagle Ranger 8x32's I tried could not come to a focus - period. Cheaper Audubon roofs I tried *could* reach focus, but their fields are too narrow for me. (If my Travelites had a 60* apparent field, I wouldn't even be reading these forums!)

Howard

[FrankD]

I researched your earlier comments mentioned in this post. If I'm understanding it all, you actually compared the Monarchs with the BLBR, which is a step down in price from the BDBR which Vkalia has. As best I can tell, the Minox offerings in 8x32 roofs are as follows:

BVBR ~$290.
BLBR ~$350.
BDBR ~$450.
HGBR ~$650-680.

The BR on the end of all these models is a bit confusing.

Your impression about the "BL" as compared with the Monarch is very interesting, since the focus issue (and to a lesser extent the FOV) was the main weak point for the Monarchs. One would expect the "BD" to be no less in any regard and better in some (perhaps color and brightness), and the "HG" to be another step up. Hmmmmm ...

APS

AP,

Yes, you are correct. I was comparing the BD BL not the BD BR. The BD BR should, theoretically, be a step up optically and be a smidge better than the Monarch. I could not say for sure ofcourse as I have never compared the two directly. However, I did own the 7x42 BD BR last year and was relatively impressed by its level of brightness and perceived level of sharpness. Overall durability seemed quite good as well.

I believe one of the major differences between the BL and the BR is the use of an apheric lens in the eyepiece design. If I remember the literature correctly this is supposed to give better edge to edge performance (a larger sweet spot). This does seem to fairly true for the aspheric designs I have owned (Pentax SP in addition) but I also seemed to notice a more pronounced boundary between the image in focus and the outer area of distortion (though the area of distortion is a smaller percentage of the field of view with the aspheric design). I also seem to notice a bit of a halo around that distortion under certain conditions.

Still, I would love to compare the 8x32 BD BR directly to the Monarch 8x36. I have yet to find my ideal 8x30-something though I do feel I have the 8x42 and 7x42 down at this point. ;-)

[vkalia]

Ok, here is part 2, after I have had a chance to use these binos for a week.

In my first report, I forgot to mention how nice a strap comes with these binos. Made of stretchy neoprene, it is very comfy to wear - a good little touch that generally speaks well of the amount of attention that has gone into product design. And those objective covers I maligned - turns out I was too hasty in writing them off as no good. I've been using the binos with the covers attached to my strap, and despite a lot of active walking and tripod-carrying, the covers have yet to fall off.

Ok, now onto the binos itself. They are definitely very finicky when it comes to eye placement. Keep your eyes only slightly off the optimal placement point and you get Mr Hyde - the binos lose contrast (greying out) and create significant amount of eye strain. This optimal point is a bit different from that of the Pentax (and not a natural placement point for me), and I still have to think about where I place them.

Once you get the placement right, the binos tend to be reveal the Dr Jekyll part of their personality a lot more.

You still have to be careful about getting the right focus - the bird doesnt snap into focus as sharply as it does on a 10X; however, I need to try against another 8x roof to see if this is a characteristic of the bino or the depth of field. That being said, as long as you are paying attention to the image, it is quite easy to get the bird into focus. Keeping the binos in the correct place makes a world of a difference.

Once you have focus, the view is bright and the sweet spot is very large - I estimate more 4/5th of the radius. By that, I mean that beyond this distance, there is a noticable drop off in quality and increase in CA. However, I have not tested against field charts to see whether there is a lesser drop-off in the main sweet spot. I tried to test by looking at tree barks, and was not able to make out any noticable drop in resolution under those conditions.

Birding in low light is quite good with these birds - yesterday evening, I had a purple-rumped sunbird and a scaly-breasted munia skulking around deep inside some bushes at around sunset, and even a quick glance with these binos easily revealed all the markings that enabled an ID.

Contrast: Up to a certain degree of contrast - eg, dappled light in a forest - they work really well. But a couple of times, I've had trouble in really extreme contrast situations - a small bird quite some distance away, and with a bright, cloudy sky as background - it was very hard to make out details. This is also the type of situation when it is hard to get the focus "just right." However, we are talking a very small subject in extreme contrast (pretty much the limit of the eye's dynamic range as well), so I cannot say whether other binos would have done better.

If the contrast was a little less extreme or the bird a little closer, no problems. In the exact same situation, with the bird a little closer to me, a quick 1 second glimpse before it flew off helped me ID it as an ashy prinia.

I've also been complaining that the image doesnt snap into focus - but a flip side of that is that the depth of field is quite good, so even when you roll the focus knob a wee bit on either side, the bird still remains in focus. That can be quite good for scanning foliage, etc. As these are my jungle birding bins, that's not a bad thing.

So in summation:
- very good optics with a wide sweet spot
- good low-light abilities
- picky when it comes to placement
- focuses well enough & easily enough with practice - although doesnt snap into focus; however, high depth of field compensates
- very good performance up to medium/high contrast; not effective under really extreme contrast situations

I am a lot happier with these binos now than I was when I first picked them up. My only kvetch with them is how finicky they are when it comes to eye-placement. However I had the same problem with my Pentaxes, and got used to it after a while - let's hope the same happens here. And I have to admit - these binos just look and feel nice to hold.

Am I happy enough to keep these binos? Yes
Would I buy them again? Possibly, but I'd compare them with other 8x32s re. the eye placement issue first.

If I get the chance to try them against another pair of 8x32s, I'll do so and post my thoughts. I also have a pair of Vortex Viper 8x42s on order, completing the trifecta of binos that I'll be using - at some point, I'll do a rigorous comparison of all 3 binos.

Regards,
Vandit

[vkalia]

Originally Posted by FrankD

I believe one of the major differences between the BL and the BR is the use of an apheric lens in the eyepiece design. If I remember the literature correctly this is supposed to give better edge to edge performance (a larger sweet spot). This does seem to fairly true for the aspheric designs I have owned (Pentax SP in addition) but I also seemed to notice a more pronounced boundary between the image in focus and the outer area of distortion (though the area of distortion is a smaller percentage of the field of view with the aspheric design). I also seem to notice a bit of a halo around that distortion under certain conditions.

Frank, that is *exactly* what you get with the BD BRs - the area of distortion is a very small percentage - maybe the outer 15% of the radius - but there is a pronounced halo at that point.

For me, it was far enough on the extremities to not be an issue. If I needed to see something there, I'd normally move the binos anyway.

Vandit

[FrankD]

Vandit,

Thank you for verifying that I was not the only one to see this. I agree with you. Under 99% of the conditions I put both aspheric models (Minox and Pentax) through it was not noticeable.

[ceasar]

I have noticed the same halo effect on my BD Minox BR 10 x 32 Aspheric's. Correct IPD minimizes it or makes it disappear. Edge distortion is minimal. My biggest criticism of them is their short Depth of Field especially when compared with my Nikon 10 x 42 SE, which, to be fair, is not fair.

Bob

[vkalia]

Addendum - I just realized that there is a contradiction between my first post and my recent one re. eye placement and ease of getting a good view.

I am not sure how to describe it. On my first couple of days in the field with these puppies, it was simply a matter of bringing them up to my eyes and bam... I had a great view. More recently, however, I've noticed occasional instances of eye-strain when using these binoculars - and yesterday, it was quite bad, which was probably weighing on my mind when I wrote the report above.

Tomorrow is another day afield, and now I am curious enough about these binos to perhaps make it a proper "bino test" day. Will post some additional comments, if any, tomorrow evening.

Until anything changes, my recommendation would be: the optics are very good but I'd really recommend trying the ergonomics for yourself to see how they work with your eyes.

Vandit

[davem]

Originally Posted by APSmith

As best I can tell, the Minox offerings in 8x32 roofs are as follows:

BVBR ~$290.
BLBR ~$350.
BDBR ~$450.
HGBR ~$650-680.

The BR on the end of all these models is a bit confusing.

Hi all,

hope I can clear a few things up here and make life simpler for us all!

'BR' is Minox Germany's designation for a pair of roof prism binoculars so we do tend to ignore it as it only serves to confuse people. The only Minox bino not to 'officially' have this designation is the BP (Porro) prisms.

Therefore, if you drop the 'BR' from all Minox bino designations you'll end up with what we (in the UK at least) use to separate the different ranges.

The available Minox 8x32 (-ish!) binos are as follows:

8x32 BL, 8x32 BD Aspheric (if you can still get them - none left in stock here and they have now been superseded by the 8x33 HGs (where you get a lot more bino for not a lot more money))

As far as we know, there doesn't look like being an 8x32 in the new BV range or at least it won't be for the foreseeable future if Minox do ever decide to produce one.

Hope this helps!

Dave.

[APSmith]

Originally Posted by davem

As far as we know, there doesn't look like being an 8x32 in the new BV range ...

Sorry for the (added) confusion everyone. (I mistakingly thought the BV came in 8x32).

THANKS DAVE FOR THE CLARIFICATION!

APS

Vkalia: I'm anxious to hear further reports comparing the SP and BD, especially concerning the eye placement issue.

[vkalia]

Sorry for taking so long, guys. The monsoons hit really hard the last week or so, and its been pouring down rain.

I've gotten a lot comfier with these binos now. The biggest change between my initial uses of these binos and now is that I've gotten used to what the optimal placement for them is. I think I tend to be a "masher" - my natural instinct is to push these binos against my eyes and they dont do too well there (neither do the Pentax 10x43 SPs, come to think of it). Once I overcame that, the view became a lot more comfortable.

Re. the focus issue: I think it is a depth of field issue. These binos have a larger DoF and that, coupled with improper placement, is what was throwing me off. Once I figured out the optimal placement for these binos, it became quite easy to get them to focus.

Once the ergonomics are resolved, these are really nice binos to use. As long as I have been able to get my binos on the bird, I have been rewarded with *lots* of detail and have been able to make out all the relevant field marks. I am beginning to see why people say that a good 8x32 may be all the bino that one needs.

The one negative I have with these binos is that they cannot resolve a lot of detail for birds that are very far away. How far is "very far"? I am crap at judging distances, but let me put it this way: I was looking at a few small birds far enough that they occupied a small portion of the frame, but were magnified enough that I expected to be able to make out some markings. However, I was not able to do so. This appears related to the 32mm objective, if I understand the BVD article on birding binos, and so may not be related to these binos at all. Also, the contrast was very high in that instant.

I point this out in the interest of presenting all aspects of the bino. To me, this negative trait occured when trying to view birds that were far away enough to push the limit of what can reasonably be viewed on an 8x32. Certainly, for all "normal" birding distances, these binos performed immaculately.

And a related note - I got mugged by my retriever pups, and they managed to get me to drop the binos, throwing off the right eyepiece. I had got these binos through a friend in the US, who had mailed them to me. As there is no Minox presence here, I was wondering how to get them serviced. I emailed BF's own resident Minoxian, Dave Morgan, and he was kind enough to mail me the spare parts gratis (despite my willingness to pay for damage caused by my own carelessness) - saving me atleast $100 in shipping, not to mention time and trouble. That is excellent service by Minox, IMO.

I am a lot happier about these bins now, and given a chance to revisit my purchase decision, I'd buy them again. I'm going to Thailand on the 20th for some work, and plan to squeeze in a few days at Khao Yai - I'll be taking these bins with me.

Vandit

PS: I just ordered a pair of Vortex Viper 8x42s - thus spending enough on binos in the past 3 months to have bought a pair of Ultravids or FLs. Do I need help? Are there meetings i can attend for my problem?

[APSmith]

Vandit,

Thanks for another detailed report. It appears that you, like others, have found these to be quite effective. Your hands-on field impressions make alot of sense, and describe in laymans terms the same impressions I've had with various models - great for comparison.

Of course, I'm still wondering abouth the Minox HGs. Soon, I will have either the BD, the HG, the Kahles in 8x32, or the Monarch 8x36 (again), and will likely post some comments.

APS