• 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.

High-end binocular advice much needed! (1 Viewer)

Hi Emma,

It would be great if they made an 8x32 that was as bright and showed as much detail as an 8x42 in the same series, but I've yet to try one. Not sure such an animal exists or will ever exist.

As Mr. Wilson said, the Minox 8x42 APO is smaliish and lightweight, so you might get to have your cake and eat it too. There's a video review of that bin on www.bestbinocularsreviews.com that painted a very favorable picture of the bin.

But will the Minox be a bin that you will keep for the rest of your life? At 26, it's not likely that you will keep any bin you buy now for the rest of your life, or at least not use it as your main birding bin. There's always something better a coming around the bend, the Zeiss HT, for example. The 8x32 will be out next year, but meanwhile, if you can find a deal where you can try the 8x42 version when it comes out, which I believe is this month if they didn't delay the release again, you will get an idea of what the latest Zeiss is like.

You will still probably buy another bin by the ripe old age of 36, because it generally takes that long for real advances to take place and manufacturers are already pushing roof technology close to the limit (both in terms of brightness and price), so it's hard to imagine what's next in high end sports optics besides a percentage or two of light transmission, which you won't be able to detect anyway.

Make a list of your likes and dislikes in binoculars, then take a look at allbinos' list of their top 8x32 models and note how each performs in different categories, and which best matches your list.

Then go out and try them. Or if you don't have any stores that sell top shelf near you but have a good credit line on your card, buy one or two at a time, try them out, send back the one you like least and keep the best.

Here's allbinos' reviews (note that the Leupold-Golden Ring 8x32 HD has been discontinued). The other thing to note is that Arek (allbinos' reviewer) doesn't like distortion. So when he takes points off for "too high distortion" like he did for the 8x32 Ultravid, that's his taste, not necessarily what you will find. OTOH, on a bin he rates highly because of having "low distortion" might be so low that if you find yourself in that small but vocal minority for whom "rolling ball" is not a "non-issue," then you probably won't like it.

So don't take the reviews as "gospel" but as a starting point to get to know what the top contenders are out there, and then once you decide on which ones sound like they might suit you, then come back here again and pick people's brains who have used these bins or own them.

I've owned two of the 8x32s in the top 5 - the 8x32 SE, which I still own, though I upgraded to a later model with the latest coatings, and the 8x32 LX, which I traded for my previous model SE. I like porros and I don't bird in the tropics, so they work for me, and the SEs are just as good if not better than the $1K and $2K roof equivalents I've tried.

The 8x32 LX/HG's image is quite good and the HGL version's image is brighter than the originals, but the prisms have sliver coatings, so the HGL won't be as bright as the top bananas with the latest and greatest prism coatings (dielectric) and so my not be suitable for dense forest. They are also a bit on the heavy side, but not as heavy as the Leupolds, which are the only 8x32s I know that some owners use a binoharness with!

Also note that they haven't reviewed the 8x32 SV EL yet, and if you aren't sensitive to RB, that will likely be on your short list of bins to try.

So my recommendation is to do some homework rather than let us spoon fed your information (or perhaps misinformation), chose some specific models that you think you might be interested in, come back, ask some questions you have about those models, then make your short list and go forth and "try before you buy" if at all possible.

Then you'll be set for perhaps 10 years if you're lucky. If you're going to be a guide, you don't want inferior glass, but remember, IDing a bird takes more than just having the best glass you can afford. You got to live 'em, hear 'em, and smell 'em to be a top guide. IOW, use all your senses and gain as much experience as possible.

Horokuru, one of our members, is a guide in Borneo, he might be able to give you some tips. He uses an 8x32 EDG and an 8x32 SE (yes, even in the forest, he takes care of them and puts them in a "dry box" when he returns from a tour). Which reminds me, allbinos also hasn't reviewed dennis former "best binocular in the world," the Nikon 8x32 EDG (better choice than the HGL for your purposes), but perhaps also a bit too heavy for its size.

In truth, no review or advice will help you match what fits you best, as someone said above. But it could help steer you in the right direction, so you know at least what bins to try. Being these are all top glass, your choice will likely come down to personal preferences ("contrasty" vs. "bright," what fits your hands and face best, and which ones exceeds the sum of its parts).

Here are the reviews: (click on "Test"):

http://www.allbinos.com/allbinos_ranking-binoculars_ranking-8x32.html

Good Luck!

Brock
 
Last edited:
That's a lot of info ^ :king:

Thanks - I forgot about that review:. http://www.bestbinocularsreviews.com/Minox8x43HG-66.htm
The only thing to note is that it is for the non ED glass version, not the "APO" one, which is even better in the image quality dept.

There's a review on the APO version here: http://translate.google.com/transla...&sa=X&ei=9O5sUJuzGaPWygHOloFA&ved=0CCQQ7gEwAA

The review is accurate in every way, except I think they are listing the price for the regular HG & they list the eye relief as 18 mm when it's really 19.5. Gorgeous pics, though.

A few other things I really like about those Minox bins is that they have a very, very tapered housing, so big hands aren't a required. They also have huge eye relief, should glasses ever be needed.

I would definitely try a few bins out, like the Minox, Zeiss and Swaro.
 
Last edited:
For in jungle, look for waterproof, fully coated optics, 10X max, with larger objective lens (gathers more light, and important in dense jungle is short focus distance.

My favorites for Pennsylvania woodland and brush is cheapo Selsi 7x35 that focus sharp and clear at 15 feet.
 
Emma, best wishes for your career!

Frank et al., with less knowledge about and/or experience of bins than each of most of you I set down these ideas here more for E. to benefit from your responses (if any!) than directly from what I say.

Much as I have appreciated learning of your personal experiences and opinions, it will be most useful to know, in E.'s case and gnerally for Bf. readers, which bins are favoured - in terms of both main spec. (magnif. x obj.d.) and make-and-model - by those who use them to identify or study birds as an essential part of their work. Time for a poll perhaps (by whom and how I cannot suggest!) Sorry if this has been dealt with in Bf.

Two current threads (a few days old) in Bf. re Chandler Robbins show he has been - is still - using an "ancient" 10x50 long after newer technology became readily available. It seems that the great majority of those who lead bird tours or study birds in the tropics today use 8x42. I do know (have read that) Roger Tory P. used a 7x, but it will be interesting to know whether he has said why - e.g., he painted fine backgrounds - and whethr advances in optics will affect the rationale today.

Much as I am moved to wonder by the view in modern bins, the "wow factor" will not help the above people in their work, obviously. It can even be a hindrance in bird observation (as I have found!)

As for a "lifetime" purchase of a bin what I say below is even relevant to those 50 years older than E., considering today's life spans. Firstly, I think that radically new technology to view distance my be "upon us before we know it". (CJ and I have discusse dthis elsewhere in Bf. and he states a preference for "pure optics" but being personal it may not apply to E. and most others.) That could leave you with a "dinosaur". Secondly (leaving aside my fear of the future), even today, in bins readily available, there are great advances in several aspects of technology enabling relatively very low priced models to approach the highest priced in optical quality, and may be soon nearly equal them.

Thus, for a person seeking a bin (a) as a long-term purchase (b) to whom value for money matters (with respect to the present price range) I think it's not too wise to buy a very costly model today.
 
I don't think it is that complex a problem Pompadour.

Binoculars are tools. This is especially so for people who use them in their work or profession. In that case you get the ones most suitable to you individually and for the kind of work you do. Some pros who used to post here like "Otto McDiesel", based on comments in his posts, used Nikon EII's, both 8 x 30 and 10 x 35. Raptor expert and writer, Jerry Liguori uses Zeiss 7 x 45s and 7 x 42s because of their wide FOVs but notes that other powers can be used as long as the binoculars are high quality. He discourages using compacts for raptor watching. Chandler Robbins worked at the Patuxent area of the Chesapeake Bay where 10x likely was very useful.

Quality analog binoculars become dated as new technological improvements are made to the glass over time. We have seen that in the last 30 years, but most should remain useful for a long time if they are properly cared for. Chandler Robbins and his binoculars have proved that. I think they will always be preferred over the new ones made with energy eating digital technology. After all, we are analog creatures living in an analog universe and analog devices fit us better. But, as the writer Wendell Berry observed, the great next division of mankind may be "between people who wish to live as creatures and people who wish to live as machines."

Bob
 
Last edited:
Hi Emma

Hope you haven't drowned under the advice and other musings posted here.

Here is my summing up.

With your need for an A1 top quality binocular that is light and compact then I think your choice lies between Swaro Sv 8x32 and Zeiss FL 8x32. Both are fabulously capable instruments and you will not be disappointed with either of them.

Its no secret that my preference is for the Zeiss, but in objective terms the best discriminators I can point to that seem relevent to your circumstances are that the Swaro is 21mm longer and weighs 30gms more than the Zeiss.

Do try them out. In Focus stock them both, but you may find the following helpful:

Pennine
74 Drake Street
Rochdale
Lancashire
OL16 1PQ
U.K.

Tel. (44) 01706 - 524965

e-mail: [email protected]

Good luck

Lee
 
Thank you everyone for your advice and options and the welcome. It is really appreciated and you have all helped. Sorry for a late reply, the internet here is sporadic to say the least and so my reply is long!

I have a question about 7x42 – this seems like a low magnification and does not seem very popular. I do like a big field of view, but I also don’t want to wish I was closer. Do you think I would miss the extra an 8x gives?

I am wondering if anyone can comment specifically on the Zeiss Victory FL 8x32 and 42 in woodland/forest and whether the 42 is significantly better considering the extra weight. Sorry if I have missed this somewhere!

Marinemaster, you said you swapped from the 7 to the 8 and have also tried the 8x32 over the 42. Can you comment on what each of these are like in woodland/forest, and if so whether you think personally it is worth the extra weight and bulk of the 42s for added brightness?

I think if I were to go for an 8x42 then it would most likely be the Zeiss as the Svaros are just so much.

I will certainly get a harness (or ‘binocular bra’ as my boyfriend says!). I should have gotten one before now, but my current bins are really small so I did fine without.

Those who have commented on the length of time I will likely have these bins before I’m after a new pair, I think you are right and it got me thinking. I think the best option may be for me to go for 8x32, with the mindset that I can change to a 42 later if they don’t work for me in forest. I think it is more a case of if the 32 are not doing the job then I will be forced to swap, rather than finding out that the 42s are too heavy and then swapping for 32. If the 32s work out then it’s a great result.

With this in mind, I am still torn between the Zeiss and SVs. When I first looked into high-end bins I was convinced from looking at reviews etc that they were the ones to get, so it is actually quite reassuring that so many of you favour them.

Kammerdinner, Brock and WilsonsWarbler, I will certainly check out the Minox APO-HG 8x43 if I can and see how they compare. Thank you to everyone else who have made recommendations. I will look closely at them all.

Stephen B, I am in the US for 3 weeks, maybe a little longer, so that is a brilliant idea. I have never had that option in the UK and I usually buy online to save, and so some of my innate anxiety (you made me laugh Chosun Juan!) is based on the idea that once I buy I cannot change my mind. If I can guarantee one thing it’s that we will be birding like crazy in the US, and will have the advantage of doing so in dark winter woods in Virginia (shiver...) and in Florida where I am sure we will find somewhere jungly.

Brock, I would like to assure you that I have done lots of homework and researched and reviewed to death, so I hope you all don’t think I am trying to get an easy answer. I posted here after I got confused and frustrated at the different options and the worry that I was barking up the wrong tree. I am also being very impatient as I have just arrived a few weeks ago and won’t be able to try bins until December |=(|

It is looking like it may come down to the FL 8x32, 8x42 (maybe the 7x42 also) and the SV 8x32. Lucky for me a researcher has turned up with some FL 10x42s so I will go out this evening and give them ago (thus guaranteeing that I will be disgusted at my own bins for the next 2 ½ months!!). The weight and size is almost identical to the 8x42s so I will get a good idea about how they feel after a few hours.

Many thanks to everyone again and please still continue with your great advice and comments :)
 
Actually I can help with the FL 8x32 and 7x42 comments. I owned both at the same time a few years ago. Here is the way I look at the situation. If size and portability are your primary concern (with the understanding that you want the best image quality in a given configuration) then the 8x32 is the way to go.

If you want the most comfortable image quality then the 7x42 is your best bet. The 7x42 FL is hardly what I would call "heavy" but then I have been known to tote around 31 and 36 oz binoculars regularly.

My reasoning for the 7x42 FL is fairly straightforward. For one, it isn't quite the same size as the 8x42 and 10x42 FLs. It is slightly shorter and I think about an ounce lighter. I remember comparing the 7x42 and 8x42 locally the first year I was curious about them. To my eyes the 7x42 was notably brighter and with a more relaxed image because of the larger exit pupil and increase depth of field. If I expected to be birding in dense forest this would seem like an obvious choice because of the bright image and excellent depth of field.

The apparent field of view between the two models is roughly equal (slight advantage to the 8x) but the true field of view is notably larger in the 7x model (405 feet versus 450 feet). This wider true field of view should also aid in heavily wooded areas since most of the birding can be relatively close and fast.

I also thought the 7x42 was very well balanced. I did not find it front heavy or back heavy. What this means in practical use is that it can feel much lighter than it actually is. With this thought in mind a binocular with poor balance but a lighter physical weight can feel heavier than it is and can lead to fatigue over an extended period of time. I certainly don't think this is the case with the 8x32 FL but it certainly is a plus with the 7x42 configuration.

Hope this helps.
 
As you say you've done a lot of research you've probably seen Kimmo's review of the Zeiss and Leica 8x32's.

I think you should consider the Leica along with the SV and Zeiss. So much comes down to how they feel in the hands and interact with your face etc.
 
Hi Again Emma

I have both 8x42 and 8x32 FLs. I love the more comfortable view of the 42, not that the 32 is 'difficult' but I do find the 42 more forgiving. Its hard to put into words why if I only had one I would choose the 42. If I try to identify a weakness in the 32 I can't. I would say that for 95% of the time the 32 delivers 95% of what the 42 can do, including in woods and under dark skies. When you factor into the equation the lightness and compactness of the 32 then for many purposes the 32 is the one I pick up and given your stated wish for something light and compact but premium then I would think 32 is the way to go.

I am no expert on x7s but have enjoyed the view through those I have tried. But in the end I regard x7s to be as much a specialist bin as a x10: both are unrivalled at what they do but for me x8 is the great all-round talent.

Lee
 
Re: 7x vs. 8x. I agree that the 7x is a specialist bin. It specializes in dense, dark, woodland/jungle birding, just what Emma is looking for. Really, though, either would be fine. I personally think that the increased depth of focus in close, dense, woodlands makes a bigger difference than the small increase in magnification that would be provided with an 8x.

Again, though, personal preference here makes the biggest differences. I know great birders who prefer 12x, and great birders that prefer 6x. Whatever feels best to you is the one to use. I think the most important thing would be trying various models.
 
Emma,

Regarding your question about the 7 x 42 in your 2nd paragraph in thread #27: The one place where you will notice the 7 x 42's superiority over the 8 x 32 or 8 x 42 is in following small birds through thick foliage in nearby trees and the like. The shorter depth of field of the 8x is a hindrance here. Based on my own experience this superiority extends up to a distance of 50/60 feet from the bird. The closer you are the better the 7x will be.

Bob
 
I think the best option may be for me to go for 8x32, with the mindset that I can change to a 42 later if they don’t work for me in forest. I think it is more a case of if the 32 are not doing the job then I will be forced to swap, rather than finding out that the 42s are too heavy and then swapping for 32. If the 32s work out then it’s a great result.

:)

Seems to me you`v really thought this through Emma and have an ideal approach. Like everyone here I have my own bias, but nothing would persuade me to go back to the weight of a 42 as my only bin.

On a personal front I`v two harness`s (Optech and Vortex) and despise them both, cumbersome and irritating IMHO, do try to spend some time wearing one before you buy.

They can be free to a good home to anyone on Birdforum if I`m pm`d and a postage paid addressed jiffy is sent.
 
Last edited:
Dear Emma,
You had already quite a lot of advise, so I will not repeat the particular binocular models which were already mentioned. However it may be worthwile to consider the following. As a volunteer I worked for quite some time in a binocular store to advise customers. From that experience I advise you to take the time to actually compare binoculars personally before you buy one. I also want to draw your attention to a pair of binoculars that was not discussed on this forum and that is the Kite Ibis 8x42ED. (It has ED optics so low color dispersion). It has an open bridge, is made in Japan by a large binocular producer who makes binoculars for many brands in this world. The binocular has the following properties:
8x42, body with black hardrubber armament, binocular weight 747 gram, close focus 1,5 m, FOV 126 m/1000m, number of rotations of the focussing wheel from close focus to infinity 1,6, the wheel goes very smooth, calculated magnification 8,1x, eyerelief 17 mm, light transmission 86% at 500 nm (twilight vision) and 90% at 550 nm (daylight vision). Colour reproduction is good and so is image brightness. The eyecups have a thread mount (metal ones and not plastic ones as is the case with the Zeiss Conquest HD) and can be removed or attached by the user for cleaning or replacement.The level of user comfort is very high and the instrument is also very goodlooking (that is of course not essential, but it is something extra). The price will be around 1000 euros, but there may be a 10% discount in a number of cases. You can find the instrument on www.deputter.com, which belongs to Sights of Nature in Brugge, Belgium, one of the largest binocular stores in Belgium and with sales to many countries. The company offers a 30-year service guarantee and it has its own repair department. My experience is that it offers a similar service level as Swarovski.
If you do not want the 8x42ED, there is also a 7x42 ED, weight 729 grams and FOV 122m/1000m. Light transmission levels are even a little higher with 90% at 500 nm and 92% at 550 nm.
I hope this will help you with your choice. Lots of succes,
Gijs
 
Hi Emma,

Lots of good advice in all comments above. There are so many binoculars with so many happy users that it is very difficult to choose from reviews from others. Everybody promotes their own brand or model because they are a happy with the combination of offered factors. What they don't tell is that may be they have switched between alpha bins. Anyway, they tell you what works for them but only you can experience waht works best for you.

And that's a mix of sharpness (center and edge), weight, balance, grip, focusser, close focus, field of view, brightness, colors, eyecups etc etc ;)Maybe the only thing that is sure is that you need a 8x becaause of the great FOV which you need in the forest (and you can use this one anywhere though).

It looks like you can't go wrong with a SW, Zeissn Leica or Nikon, but sorry, you can. You can be happy with a $ 1800 SW or a Nikon HGL (or LXL) for $800.

It's all perspective, so if you have a chance please try all them in a good store. Of course you can make a shortlist and set the moneybar before you buy o:D. I'm curious which one you will choose!
 
Following up on Gijs' post, the One Stop Bird Shop in Burnham Deepdale, UK (wherever that is) carries Kites (and also wind socks and chimes:). £799

http://www.onestopnature.co.uk/Kite-Ibis-ED-Binoculars

So does "The Birders Store":

http://www.birders-store.co.uk/prod_desc_KITE001.html?sno=298

Gijs mentioned the warranty , 30 years (not a lifetime at your age, but that will take you into your 50s when you will be nearsighted and won't need to wear glasses for myopia anymore).

The Kite also comes with an Accidental Damage Warranty Cover. If you drop the binocular and it goes out of alignment, if you scratch the lenses, or any other reasonable damage (I'm assuming lighting the bin on fire would not be considered "reasonable damage"), Kite Optics will repair the binocular and charge no more than £75.

But you could "accidentally" run them over with a truck tire to see how they hold up (some people actually do this and post videos on YouTube).

I like the fact that they have a 7x42 configuration, a format that is getting harder to find, although I wish they made that model's FOV wider rather than smaller.

The body style reminds me of the Minox BL BR:
http://www.allbinos.com/lornetki_image/1821_min52.jpg

And the Doctor ED roofs:
http://www.allbinos.com/lornetki_image/1887_doc10x42_1.jpg

The bridges of the Doctor ED and Kite ED look identical. One is made in Germany, the other made in Japan.... curiouser and curiouser.

<B>
 
Emma,

Run for the hills....the yankee doodle bino nerds are after you ;-)

Seriously, you're the only person who will be using your new bins - try out as many as you can and then buy the one's you like the most.

dave..

p.s the Swaro 8x32's would be the one's I'd buy, if I win the lotto on Saturday - oops bino nerd :)
 
Thank you everyone for your advice and options and the welcome. It is really appreciated and you have all helped. Sorry for a late reply, the internet here is sporadic to say the least and so my reply is long!

I have a question about 7x42 – this seems like a low magnification and does not seem very popular. I do like a big field of view, but I also don’t want to wish I was closer. Do you think I would miss the extra an 8x gives?

I am wondering if anyone can comment specifically on the Zeiss Victory FL 8x32 and 42 in woodland/forest and whether the 42 is significantly better considering the extra weight. Sorry if I have missed this somewhere!

Marinemaster, you said you swapped from the 7 to the 8 and have also tried the 8x32 over the 42. Can you comment on what each of these are like in woodland/forest, and if so whether you think personally it is worth the extra weight and bulk of the 42s for added brightness?

I think if I were to go for an 8x42 then it would most likely be the Zeiss as the Svaros are just so much.

I will certainly get a harness (or ‘binocular bra’ as my boyfriend says!). I should have gotten one before now, but my current bins are really small so I did fine without.

Those who have commented on the length of time I will likely have these bins before I’m after a new pair, I think you are right and it got me thinking. I think the best option may be for me to go for 8x32, with the mindset that I can change to a 42 later if they don’t work for me in forest. I think it is more a case of if the 32 are not doing the job then I will be forced to swap, rather than finding out that the 42s are too heavy and then swapping for 32. If the 32s work out then it’s a great result.

With this in mind, I am still torn between the Zeiss and SVs. When I first looked into high-end bins I was convinced from looking at reviews etc that they were the ones to get, so it is actually quite reassuring that so many of you favour them.

Kammerdinner, Brock and WilsonsWarbler, I will certainly check out the Minox APO-HG 8x43 if I can and see how they compare. Thank you to everyone else who have made recommendations. I will look closely at them all.

Stephen B, I am in the US for 3 weeks, maybe a little longer, so that is a brilliant idea. I have never had that option in the UK and I usually buy online to save, and so some of my innate anxiety (you made me laugh Chosun Juan!) is based on the idea that once I buy I cannot change my mind. If I can guarantee one thing it’s that we will be birding like crazy in the US, and will have the advantage of doing so in dark winter woods in Virginia (shiver...) and in Florida where I am sure we will find somewhere jungly.

Brock, I would like to assure you that I have done lots of homework and researched and reviewed to death, so I hope you all don’t think I am trying to get an easy answer. I posted here after I got confused and frustrated at the different options and the worry that I was barking up the wrong tree. I am also being very impatient as I have just arrived a few weeks ago and won’t be able to try bins until December |=(|

It is looking like it may come down to the FL 8x32, 8x42 (maybe the 7x42 also) and the SV 8x32. Lucky for me a researcher has turned up with some FL 10x42s so I will go out this evening and give them ago (thus guaranteeing that I will be disgusted at my own bins for the next 2 ½ months!!). The weight and size is almost identical to the 8x42s so I will get a good idea about how they feel after a few hours.

Many thanks to everyone again and please still continue with your great advice and comments :)

Emma,

Good to hear that you did your "homework" before coming to the forums, that helps a lot. Most "newbies" who come here for purchase advice haven't, and so it's really tough to make recommendations since they are starting from square one.

At your age, a 7x42 would be great to have under the canopy since you should be able to make use of the 6mm exit pupils under very dim light. Using your "binocular bra" would help take some weight off your neck during long treks in the woods. Btw, if your boyfriend uses a binohaness, call it a manzier. :).

But it's not just about the carry weight, it's about the lifting weight, which might not seem much at first, but after lifting your bins to your face a hundred times in a full day's outing, they will feel like they've gained weight. If you plan to switch off from bins to a scope, then it shouldn't be too bad. But it's hard to beat the light weight of the 8x32 FL. But as Frank said, there's a trade-off. The better depth perception and the less focusing you will have to do because of it may be worth carrying the extra weight.

In my experience, most midsized roofs give a 2-D image, which makes it harder for birds to "pop out" of the background, and if the bin has a fast focuser, which the FL does, this exacerbates the depth issue.

I think you'll find that the 8x32 EL gives up less depth perception and gives more precise focusing. If I weren't allergic to "rolling ball" and bins were the tool of my trade, I'd buy one. The ergonomics of the EL are such that they fit a variety of hand sizes. Small hands, medium sized hands, or BROCK-sized hands will all find a suitable and comfortable grip with the baby EL. That's part of its "magic". The other part is how they manage to get people to fork over $2k for the bin. ;)

Here's Frank D's review of the Zeiss 7x42 FL along with a comparison to two other 7x bins.

http://www.opticstalk.com/zen-ray-7x36-ed-zeiss-7x42-fl-and-nikon-7x35-e-co_topic18841.html

As to whether to chose an 8x or 7x, and if a 7x will do the job, you'll find some comments on this thread:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=235385

If this winter is like last, you won't even notice that it's winter in Virginia.

Brock
 
Emma,

In our experience, birding guides in other countries carry either 8x or 10x binoculars; we've never seen a guide with 7s. Mike Malone at Pelee Wings in Leamington, Ontario carries lots of binoculars -- but no 7s -- he says they just don't sell.

Your fully-dilated pupils will certainly be larger than 4mm, the size of the exit pupil in 8x32 binoculars. Full-sized 42mm binoculars will be noticeably brighter in deep shade. Robert Dean, one of the illustrators of The Birds of Costa Rica, used 8x42 Zeiss FLs as of a handful of years ago.

IMO the binoculars for use in deep shade worth comparing are the 8/8.5x42s (in no particular order): the FLs; the forthcoming HTs; the Swarovski SVs; and the Swarovski SLC HDs.

One of our birding colleagues uses 15x50 Canon IS binoculars, which he carries with a bandolier-style strap, finding -- as does Pete Dunne -- that this distributes weight effectively, and prevents binoculars from swaying back and forth. For the same reason, another birder who leads trips in Ontario carries his binoculars in a largish pocket of the jackets he prefers.

Mike
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 12 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