Binocular ramblings (1 Viewer)

[Tero]

I am going canoeing. Chose an older pair of 8x25 reverse porros. They are not water proof, but did not cost much. My Nikons are 9x25 and are not quite as sharp. If I could go back I would get the Vortex 8x25 reverse porros or a similar Pentax pair. The 10x25s are too dim for all around use.

Though, the 8x32s are still an option. A bit heavy for all day in a canoe.

 

[pete seaman]

Can anyone in the UK help?I would like some lightish 8x bins for use when walking over the local moors all day,I have a mini pair as well as a pair of 12x50's but think something like 8x30 would be better,any suggestions at a reasonable price?

 

[bosun]

Try a pair of Nikula 8x42 roof prisms. Available on e bay for £29.99 + £7.99 postage. They are waterproof & fogproof, Nitrogen purged and rubber armoured.

 

[Tero]

The 8x32s were pretty much what I needed in the canoe, and while camping. Even 7x would have been OK on the water.

I heard a ton of birds in Northern Minnesota, and saw only a small number of them. First time for a Swainson's Thrush singing, several of them.

In the watery environment and having to carry all, 8x42 would have weighed more.

 

[Tero]

I use a 10x Monarch routinely, and have gotten used to it. At some point I got a 10x40 Zeiss Conquest. The optics are pretty good, but it has gotten little use. They are heavy and also the eye cups are not that comfortable.

I am thinking of selling or trading it and getting a Pentax 10x42..I think SP..or a Vortex Viper 10x42.

Thoughts?

I use a Bushnell Legend 8x32 if I do not use 10x, and am quite happy. No plans to get a 8x42. But I could always have one more 8x32!

The problem is really too many choices. I would happily bird with the Zeiss if it was the only thing I had.

I am also thinking that the Pentax 8x32 SP might satisfy all my needs. I would still want a 10x for shorebirds, gulls and ducks. But a scope is usually handy and ready then.

 

[CMB]

Seriously consider the Stokes DLS 10x42 at this time. Compare them side by side because the fit of each is a little different in terms of the eye cups.

The Stokes DLS is currently on sale for $599 and has very nice optics (better than the Viper in that CA is better controlled, and slightly better edge to edge clarity) and has great build quality. It is an amazing price for these bins.

 

[Tero]

Thanks, will check it. Vortex makes all the Stokes ones too. Bit heavy after my 21 oz Monarchs. I have 29 oz Zeiss for which I got a harness, my only one.

 

[Tero]

So much for binocular shopping. I may have to wait a few months. Just replaced my tripod. My old one had too much play. This one is not fancy, but a step in the right direction. Should cover me for a year or two. Or five. I don't see upgrading the scope before that.

Heh, it took 2 years. The old scope is no longer used. The tripods I continue to have trouble with. I hate tripods.

I actually am shopping again I think I want 10x42 in about 21-24 oz weight. Reasonable optics, good eyecups, sturdy.

 

[FrankD]

That 8x32 SP is a very nice package Tero. I had one two summers ago and still think it represents one of the best sub-$1000 bins out there. After our discussion the other day I ordered some new models/configurations to play with. I have an 8x43 SP on the way from Doug as well as a Legend 8x26, Diamondback 8x42 and Ultima DX 8x32 on the way from Eagle Optics. There are some very nice deals out there right now.

 

[ceasar]

Frank,
I love bargains! That Celestron Ultima DX 8 x 32 is interesting. I would think it should be better than the Leupold Yosemite which costs the same. Keep us posted.
Bob

 

[Tero]

Frank, I had the 8x32 SP in my hand last week. Wish I had it instead of the other two I have.

You will find the 8x42 Diamondback pretty sharp, but comparing to the top under 1000 dollar models, you will see the colors are not as bright, a slightly washed out view.

Legends are good, but the availability of different sizes fluctuates strangely.

 

[FrankD]

Bob,

I have been eyeing up those DXs since the day you and I received that Time and Optics catalog. The specs and price always intrigued me so when I say EO had them on sale I just could not resist.

Tero,

A fair summary....I read your Diamondback comments on a thread from last year so I am not expecting too much for the price. Still, the specs are pretty appealing at least on paper. The 8x26 Legend is a configuration/model I have been waiting to try out for some time.

More updates as I get my hands on these bins.

 

[Tero]

The 8x26 looks like a typical reverse porro, but fov is small. The Natureviw 8x30 is something I would like to check out. But, all in all, the Vortex reverse porros are the best bet. I saw the 10x Vortex, but it was dim, as expected. The 8x Vanquish has a decent fov
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4833

 

[FrankD]

Yes, I remember the fov specs being fairly narrow but I liked the build quality and the overall feel in my hands. They weren't "dainty" for a set of compacts but rather sturdy feeling.

I did see several Pentax reverse porro compacts on sale at EO as well for some silly cheap prices. I know nothing about them so I backed off ordering any of them.

 

[Tero]

The Pentax is quite good at 8x. I think it is water proof, now one of my criteria for reverse porros. I had the 10x, of course, for a week, but returned it, finally deciding I only will touch 10x42s and 10x32s in the 10x size. 10x in a compact is too shaky.

 

[FrankD]

The 8x43 SPs arrived today and I am quite pleased. Image quality is most certainly a step up from the Monarch level. I have been comparing a pair of Swift Ultralite 8x42s with the Pentax SPs. The Ultralites actually seem to be a hair brighter than the Pentaxs but with the Pentaxs offering slightly better contrast. I have only just begun to compare so hopefully I will have more comments shortly.

...and the EO order should be here on Thursday. The wife will be gone for the day shopping and I have the boys so there should be plenty of time to tinker with the new arrivals.

 

[Tero]

...and the EO order should be here on Thursday. The wife will be gone for the day shopping and I have the boys so there should be plenty of time to tinker with the new arrivals.

I like to play with new stuff too, but i usually take them to some natural area. I hate to judge a pair only by looking at distant parked cars and reading license plates. But I have returned one pair solely on that test.

 

[FrankD]

I live in a semi-rural area Tero. There is a fairly nice sized field behind my home where I spend countless hours looking at birds or other wildlife. I also live within site of the local "Blue Mountain". One of the hawk watch sites is actually visible from my back deck. On a good day I take the bins out and try to view the turkey vultures that circle that point on the mountain. It has to be a good 3 or 4 miles as the crow flies.

I spent a good portion of the afternoon/early evening comparing the Swift and Pentax to my Zeiss Conquests. I do not like to make hasty comparisons but my initial impressions are that the Swift compares very favorably to the Pentax. That was a bit of a surprise to me as I considered the Swifts at "Monarch level" because of the price. I shouldn't have though because the Swifts looked "better" than the Monarchs when I compared them side by side at the "store".

I should have more to post as time allows.

 

[Tero]

It does seem confusing at first. When you own too pair for a while, you can get used to both and see the faults of each. I originally insisted that my Monarchs were better than the same size Zeiss Conquest, simply because I was used to them, like you get used to a car. They both do have the same amt of CA and sharpness in the middle is similar. Toward the edge, in good conditions with no light coming in from behind, the Zeiss are better. I like the colors of the Zeiss. In backlit conditions nothing I have works, all objects are too dark.

 

[Tero]

Have been trying to sell or trade 2 pairs. It seems almost impossible without eBay and PayPal. I used to be able to sell on eBay with PayPal only for the fees, or maybe it was a credit card.