• 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.

Compact bins (3 Viewers)

C

Carlton

Well-known member
I'm interested in opinions on compact bins.
My next birding buy will probably be something to fit in my jacket pocket. I tried out a pair of Swarovski 10x25 at the weekend; nice view, comfortable in the hand, very compact when folded, relatively expensive. My local shop only carries a limited range of manufacturers and I'll probably need to look elsewhere before deciding.
What would members put as their top 1 or 2 compacts and why?
 
Another short answer would be Nikon HG-L, can be found for a little over 300 € and it's very good. Best compact is the Leica Ultravid, but expensive.
 
Nikon 8 x 20

I have the nikon 8 x 20 HG L DCF and I am very happy and use them often (I have 4 bins and use these second most). I tried all the others and in my opinion the Nikon is equal to the Leica (at a much lower price) and better than the Swarovski and Zeiss. The eyepieces are quite good and the focus and diopter adjusters are smooth with no backlash. You quickly become comfortable with focus adjustment unusually located at the far end. The image is very good almost to the edge and all important depth of field is good. As often noted, this size encourages you to carry them when you would not carry something larger. Double hinge is very slightly inconvenient but easy to deal with and a solution for folded compactness. All small bins are a poor choice for low light situations. This is a really good choice for a second purchase if you already have a good full-siz bin.

Spunky12
 
Stick to the 8x even at the high end. 10x will be dim in winter. And it feels like looking into a microscope, lining up your eye to the bin.

10x32 may be a different matter.
 
Tero said:
Stick to the 8x even at the high end. 10x will be dim in winter. And it feels like looking into a microscope, lining up your eye to the bin.
Click to expand...

ALL high end companies have 8x20 and 10x25. Same exit pupil. Same brightness. No difference here.
 
I've never got on with double hinged compact binoculars. I find them too fiddly and fussy on eye placement. I would save a load of cash by going for an Opticron Oregon LE WP 8x32 or Discovery WP PC 8x32. They are not that much bigger or heavier, have excellent FOV and close focus and it won't be such a financial disaster when you accidentally sit on them.

Unfortunately they don't have the same cachet as those Austrian and German optics.

Ron
 
NoSpringChicken said:
I've never got on with double hinged compact binoculars. I find them too fiddly and fussy on eye placement. I would save a load of cash by going for an Opticron Oregon LE WP 8x32 or Discovery WP PC 8x32. They are not that much bigger or heavier, have excellent FOV and close focus and it won't be such a financial disaster when you accidentally sit on them.

Unfortunately they don't have the same cachet as those Austrian and German optics.
Click to expand...

Pantomime mode on:

Oh, yes they are ...

I think weight 8oz for the Conquest or 10oz for the Victory is rather different than the 515 grams = 18.2 ounces Opticron Oregon LE WP 8x32 (with no phase correction). Or the 682 grams Discovery at 24.1 ounces That's two to three times heavier!. It's a big difference when you put one in your pocket. They're also significantly bigger.

They're in a different weight and size class. And optical class too.

Whilst the alpha bins do have cachet they also have very good optics. My Victory (unfortunately) is the only compact roof I've ended up being happy with.

The next closest are 1" or so reverse porros: bulkier and little heavier but with decent views. So if you can't afford an alpha compact roof go for a $100 or £100 reverse porro. Opticron Taiga in the UK.

I suspect the only disaster that's happen when I sit on my Victory is to me ;)
 
I really have no problem holding a 10x25 steady, particularly since adopting the thumbs-up (military) hold. The instrument is quite light, and has a twilight factor of 250^.5 = 15.8, which is almost identical to a standard 8x32, i.e., 256^.5= 16. The more diminutive 8x20, however, only has a factor of 120^.5 = 12.6., making it less effective under low light conditions.

So, my choice is an 10x25, which I enjoy in the form of my trusty Swaro SLC (my wife preferring her 8x20 SLC). But other people like different brands, and I might even spring for a Leica or Zeiss if I were buying today. After trying one, however, I don't much care for the 10x25 LX L.

Anticipating some disagreement about the meaning or importance of Twilight Factor, the theoretical issue was settled for me some time ago by Vukobratovich (1989). I've attached his interesting paper for convenience. (See pgs. 339-40, Eq. 5.)

-ed
 

Attachments

  • Vukobratovich 1989.pdf
    866.2 KB · Views: 127
Last edited:
Thanks, Ed, for providing the attachment.

Only glanced at the paper, but it seems excellent. I'm especially intrigued by the discussion on hand tremor types and hand-held efficiency. Have to come back to this at a later date.

On the topic of compacts, I have owned and used the Ultravid 8x20 for over a year now. Generally, I still consider it the best compact, but there are two aspects which make me wonder whether the Nikon 8x20 HG L may have been a better choice for me anyway. The first is the physical size of the eyecups, which in the Leica are a bit small for my eye-sockets making placement more difficult. I have to brace them against the bone just under my eyebrows for solid viewing, and larger diameter cups would make this easier. The Nikon has somewhat larger eyecups and longer eye-relief, and are easier for me in this respect. The second slight issue is the diopter adjustment of the Ultravid, which I haven't liked as much as I had anticipated based on earlier briefer testing and use. Since my eyes are increasingly finicky as I age, I need to re-adjust diopter from time to time, and for this a system where both tubes can be focused/adjusted simultaneously is better for me. But, the Ultravid is brighter and just as sharp as the Nikon, and looks better too.

Kimmo
 
I've only used the Leica 8x20 Ultravid for about a month now, but I get on with them fine. They are fiddly when it comes to IPD and eye placement, and the double hinges don't help matters. I use compacts while hiking or traveling instead of dedicated birdwatching, so rather than having them around my neck all day they tend to go in and out of the case often. Folding and unfolding double-hinges and fiddling with IPD becomes annoying after a while. In fact I'm looking for a close-fitting case that will hold 8x20 Ultravids unfolded, without simply negating the compact nature of the bins (any suggestions?).

The Leicas are sharp and bright in daytime use but they suffer pretty quick as the light fades. Compared to 8x32's they just fall short. Then again I don't really expect them to compete.

Prior to the Leica I used cheap Minolta Activa 8x25 reverse porros for years. Surprisingly, the sharpness is almost identical to the Leicas, though not quite to the edges. In the center, sharpness is really too close to call. IPD and eye placement are notably less fiddly with 25mm objectives and there is no folding and unfolding. They weigh only a bit more (about 10.5 oz as I recall, compared to 8.5 for the Leica) and are only slightly bigger in the case. The real problem with these old Minoltas is a dingy yellow cast to the image (just bad coatings I suppose). I think these Minoltas may still be sold under the Olympus name (Tracker 8x25) and they get great reviews on Amazon. Maybe the coatings are improved? No one complains at any rate. They sell for $57 and I'm tempted to have a look. Does anyone have experience with the Olympus Tracker?

A top-notch 8x25 reverse porro would be great. You could probably make one for $200 that would equal the alpha 8x20 roofs in any category except weight and size, and even there we're talking maybe 2-3 oz. and only a bit more bulk. They would certainly be easier to use in the field in terms of eye placement and tracking birds on the wing. They wouldn't have the cachet of the roofs--but who cares?

What else is out there? I did try the Nikon 8x25 ProStaff and it didn't cut it for me--not as sharp as the beater Minoltas or the new Leicas. Heavy rubber armor pushed the weight and bulk up as well.
 
Kevin Purcell said:
I think weight 8oz for the Conquest or 10oz for the Victory is rather different than the 515 grams = 18.2 ounces Opticron Oregon LE WP 8x32 (with no phase correction). Or the 682 grams Discovery at 24.1 ounces That's two to three times heavier!. It's a big difference when you put one in your pocket. They're also significantly bigger.

They're in a different weight and size class. And optical class too.
Click to expand...
Point taken Kevin. The Opticrons are in a different class to the Zeiss compacts but I think the 8x32 Discovery makes quite a good case for itself. Compare the specs from the Sherwoods website (one of the best online retailers in the UK):

Opticron Discovery 8x32 - size 108x117mm, weight 390gm (not 682gm!), FOV 131m, minimum focus 1.2m, price £109.
Zeiss Victory 8x20 - size 102x97mm, weight 225gm , FOV 117m, minimum focus 3.3m, price £375.

I still maintain that the differences in size and weight are not that great. As I said, I don't get on with double hinge binoculars so I would probably go for a compact 8x32 instead if I had to have a pocketable binocular. Other people might prefer the undoubted superior optical and build quality of the Zeiss at over three times the price.

Ron
 
NoSpringChicken said:
I still maintain that the differences in size and weight are not that great. As I said, I don't get on with double hinge binoculars so I would probably go for a compact 8x32 instead if I had to have a pocketable binocular. Other people might prefer the undoubted superior optical and build quality of the Zeiss at over three times the price.
Click to expand...

Note the Victory are offset single hinge (and very compact when folded). I'm not a fan of double hinge bins myself.

Ultimately it depends on the depth of your pocket: in both senses ;)
 
And stick to the 6.5x. Finally I did not get excited enough to get the 8.5x. Despite the exciting 8.5x power. It should really have been a 25mm if possible.
 
Has anyone tried the Zen Ray Vista reverse porros? I also see ZR plans a pair of 36s in the future. Not sure how truly compact they would be, though....

edit: 32s.... sorry...
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 15 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.

Similar threads

R
Choosing pocket binoculars
2 3
Replies
55
Views
7K
forent
forent
C
Swarovski Curio 7x21 shaky image
Replies
13
Views
1K
chill6x6
chill6x6
N
Advice: Not too expensive toss in the pocket/bag compact binoculars?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
6K
julay
J
yarrellii
Anyone tried Covert Optics?
Replies
8
Views
1K
pat mitchel
P
dwatsonbirder
Compact comparisons: Low end vs high end
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Rg548
R

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top