• 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.

Nikon Monarch 7 new 8x30 and 10x30 (1 Viewer)

I hate to butt into a good old ding-dong, but i also haven't seen veiling glare in the M7. Yup, you can get some flare when looking where you shouldn't, but most of this is an issue of eye placement, and it can be negated by getting aligned with the small exit pupil, which is where i think a lot of this comes from.
By the way, if you look under the sun, expect some glare. If you drive a car over a speed hump at 60mph, expect the suspension to break.
 
May I inquire how one will get 50 cents worth if there isn't a dimes worth of difference between them?:smoke:

Bob

:-O Clever pun, Bob, but seriously folks, if there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them, then Swaro CL owners are getting royally ripped off to the tune of 7,000 dimes since there's about a $700 difference in price between the 10x30 M7 and 10x30 CL.

Brock
 
That makes me feel better about my order of a M 7 8x30 I placed a few days ago in my local camera store. This morning I received an email that I can pick it up at the store.

Congrats on the upcoming arrival! I hope they do as well for you as they have done for me. They are an excellent performer, if used correctly. As Paddy just mentioned, I also found them to be a bit picky about eye placement, and they will have some minor glare issues when pointed towards a low-sitting sun (many binos do this as well). But their overall characteristics make them a joy to use.

tchuss,
PhilR.
 
:-O Clever pun, Bob, but seriously folks, if there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them, then Swaro CL owners are getting royally ripped off to the tune of 7,000 dimes since there's about a $700 difference in price between the 10x30 M7 and 10x30 CL.

Brock

Dennis, er make that Brock,;)


First, you can't tell that without trying them both out. I know that the eye cups on the 8x30 Swarovski CL Companion fit me well. They fit me better than the eye cups on the more expensive Swarovski 8x30 SLC do from which I can experience some blackouts. I have never tried out the Nikon 8x30 M7.

And second, even with everything being equal some people may simply want to have the Swarovski because they like their looks better. What do you care?

Bob
 
if there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them, then Swaro CL owners are getting royally ripped off to the tune of 7,000 dimes since there's about a $700 difference in price between the 10x30 M7 and 10x30 CL.

After having both in my hands last week at the same time, and alternating back and forth between them, I am not sure there is $700 difference between them unless it's in the construction and warranty. The view was so similar I could not easily tell the differenct. I'm not sure I could tell any difference actually.
 
I hate to butt into a good old ding-dong, but i also haven't seen veiling glare in the M7. Yup, you can get some flare when looking where you shouldn't, but most of this is an issue of eye placement, and it can be negated by getting aligned with the small exit pupil, which is where i think a lot of this comes from.
By the way, if you look under the sun, expect some glare. If you drive a car over a speed hump at 60mph, expect the suspension to break.
Maybe careful eye placement would help. These 8x30's don't have a very big exit pupil so any reflections are going to hit your eyes head on unlike an 8x42.
 
Congrats on the upcoming arrival! I hope they do as well for you as they have done for me. They are an excellent performer, if used correctly. As Paddy just mentioned, I also found them to be a bit picky about eye placement, and they will have some minor glare issues when pointed towards a low-sitting sun (many binos do this as well). But their overall characteristics make them a joy to use.

tchuss,
PhilR.
That is exactly where I had the glare problems with the setting sun. Your right in that almost all binoculars have a problem with those conditions but some are better than others.
 
What did you prefer about the Zeiss 10x42 SF over the Swarovski 10x42 SV besides the larger FOV? What other optical advantages does it have?

So as not to go off topic in the Nikon Forum and start talking about Swaro and Zeiss, I posted my answer to your question in the Zeiss forum. Here is the link.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3234521&postcount=84

Go to the most upper right corner of that post and click on the thread description to see the complete thread.
 
So as not to go off topic in the Nikon Forum and start talking about Swaro and Zeiss, I posted my answer to your question in the Zeiss forum. Here is the link.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3234521&postcount=84

Go to the most upper right corner of that post and click on the thread description to see the complete thread.
Nice complete answer. I really appreciate and I am sure all bird forum members appreciate your good explanation of why you preferred the SF's and it is important because a lot of us are considering the Zeiss SF and we need feedback like this. A lot of thought went into that answer and I can tell a lot of thought went into your decision between the two binoculars. Two fine binoculars but a few differences help make your decision. For a 10x the Zeiss SF has a large FOV and I would imagine that is a big wow factor with using them. Sometimes it is little things that sway our decisions.
 
Last edited:
Nice complete answer. I really appreciate and I am sure all bird forum members appreciate your good explanation of why you preferred the SF's and it is important because a lot of us are considering the Zeiss SF and we need feedback like this. A lot of thought went into that answer and I can tell a lot of thought went into your decision between the two binoculars. Two fine binoculars but a few differences help make your decision. For a 10x the Zeiss SF has a large FOV and I would imagine that is a big wow factor with using them. Sometimes it is little things that sway our decisions.

Bringing this thread round again - i think if there is any 'wow' factor in the M7 8x30, it is to discover that big, wide, bright, clear FoV in what feels like such a compact set of optics. A Tardis binocular, which might only make sense for UK members!
 
I would say the Swarovski CL 8x30's are worth the $1000 if you consider the warranty and how well Swarovski handles warranty problems but I don't like the smaller FOV either.................

Thanks for the reply. I would have bet that you would have said no considering your new fondness of wide angles. A thousand bucks for a binocular at this date with a 372 ft FOV is a lot of money. I guess a case can be made that it is a specialty product and is worth the money for someone looking for small and light from a company with exceptional service. The Monarch 7 8X30 has some quirks, such as touchy eye placement, but I am willing to compromise in order to get the light weight, small size and expansive FOV. I would never accept those issues in a standard 8X42.

Nice complete answer. I really appreciate and I am sure all bird forum members appreciate your good explanation of why you preferred the SF's and it is important because a lot of us are considering the Zeiss SF and we need feedback like this. A lot of thought went into that answer and I can tell a lot of thought went into your decision between the two binoculars. Two fine binoculars but a few differences help make your decision. For a 10x the Zeiss SF has a large FOV and I would imagine that is a big wow factor with using them. Sometimes it is little things that sway our decisions.

Thanks for the kind remarks!

You are right that a lot of thought went into making such a significant purchase. I originally went to a festival last summer to view the pre-production models with the idea of finding out what they were like so I could follow along with the discussions on the Forum. I left with a desire to own one! Three other people with me were also impressed and have or will ultimately purchase a SF.

The wide field of view is noticeable, but it is even more impressive in the 8X42 SF at 444 ft at a 1,000 yards. That is even more than the 435 ft of the Monarch 7 8X30 which members have found impressive for a roof. Then add to that experience the flat field of the SF (although not quite as flat as a SV). I do not currently own a high end 8X42 and was getting close to obtaining one when the SF was announced. My list at the time was the EDG, the SLC or the Zeiss HT. The EDG went off the list because of the Nikon warranty changes. I had an HT that went to my brother so I was leaning toward the SLC just to have something different. Now the SF 8X42 and that 444 ft FOV tops the list, but that is not in the plan for the near future. One thing I need more information on is the rolling ball. I did see some in the pre-production model but I doubt if it was to the point that it would bother me.

I think you would like some of the attributes of the 8X42 SF but you would not adapt to it over the long haul because of your love for smaller binoculars. It is a shame the Monarch 7 8X30 did not work for you because it could be the poster child for a small light weight wide view 8X 30mm class binocular.

Yes, sometimes it is the little things, but in this case, I think it is the sum of those things that make the Zeiss SF work so well.


I assume the Atlas 7X36 is gone since it was not on your list. You gave it what I thought was a positive review a few weeks ago so I figured you would keep it for a while. Assuming it is gone, what was the reason for sending down the road?
 
Last edited:
Congrats on the upcoming arrival! I hope they do as well for you as they have done for me. They are an excellent performer, if used correctly. As Paddy just mentioned, I also found them to be a bit picky about eye placement, and they will have some minor glare issues when pointed towards a low-sitting sun (many binos do this as well). But their overall characteristics make them a joy to use.

tchuss,
PhilR.


The Monarch 7 8x30 followed me home. In the camera store I had the opportunity to compare the Nikons with the Swarovski Companion 8x30.

The Austrian had a wider field of view but not so wide that I got hooked.

Brightness was the same and I couldn't see any difference in color performance. That was around noon and I used the binos just to have a look at bus time tables across the street, watching some bikes standing around and people passing by.

I took the opportunity to have a closer look at the Swaro 8x42 SLC.

WOW!

That's something I would even sell my Zeiss 7x42 BGAT*P for.
 
Dennis,

If you want to maintain what little credibility you have left around here you had better be able to prove that the Maven binoculars are made in China.

Here is the response you received from Maven when you inquired about this issue with them. You posted it here and you are now calling them liars. If I were in their shoes I would sue you! (Mostly for the lack of gratitude you have shown to them for the polite and helpful response they made to you!)

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3180223&postcount=19

Bob

I must have missed Dennis' response......?
 
That makes me feel better about my order of a M 7 8x30 I placed a few days ago in my local camera store. This morning I received an email that I can pick it up at the store.

I didn't have any experience before with this pair of binos because they just had a specimen of of a 10x32 Pro Staff which less expensive than the M7.

Tomorrow is the day....

Elmer,

I hope you get a good sample like the one I tried, and that this isn't what the Day After Tomorrow looks like.

Th-th-th-that's all folks!

Porky
 
The Monarch 7 8x30 followed me home. In the camera store I had the opportunity to compare the Nikons with the Swarovski Companion 8x30.

The Austrian had a wider field of view but not so wide that I got hooked.

.................................................................


The Swarovski 8x30 CL Companion had a wider FOV than your new Monarch 7 8x30? That is a misprint, right?

Nikon does make an inexpensive 8x30 Prostaff 7S with a narrow FOV of 342'@1000 yards.

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/Nikon-Products/Binoculars/PROSTAFF-7S-8x30.html

The Monarch 7 has a FOV of 435'@1000yards

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/Nikon-Products/Binoculars/MONARCH-7-8x30.html



Bob
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply. I would have bet that you would have said no considering your new fondness of wide angles. A thousand bucks for a binocular at this date with a 372 ft FOV is a lot of money. I guess a case can be made that it is a specialty product and is worth the money for someone looking for small and light from a company with exceptional service. The Monarch 7 8X30 has some quirks, such as touchy eye placement, but I am willing to compromise in order to get the light weight, small size and expansive FOV. I would never accept those issues in a standard 8X42.



Thanks for the kind remarks!

You are right that a lot of thought went into making such a significant purchase. I originally went to a festival last summer to view the pre-production models with the idea of finding out what they were like so I could follow along with the discussions on the Forum. I left with a desire to own one! Three other people with me were also impressed and have or will ultimately purchase a SF.

The wide field of view is noticeable, but it is even more impressive in the 8X42 SF at 444 ft at a 1,000 yards. That is even more than the 435 ft of the Monarch 7 8X30 which members have found impressive for a roof. Then add to that experience the flat field of the SF (although not quite as flat as a SV). I do not currently own a high end 8X42 and was getting close to obtaining one when the SF was announced. My list at the time was the EDG, the SLC or the Zeiss HT. The EDG went off the list because of the Nikon warranty changes. I had an HT that went to my brother so I was leaning toward the SLC just to have something different. Now the SF 8X42 and that 444 ft FOV tops the list, but that is not in the plan for the near future. One thing I need more information on is the rolling ball. I did see some in the pre-production model but I doubt if it was to the point that it would bother me.

I think you would like some of the attributes of the 8X42 SF but you would not adapt to it over the long haul because of your love for smaller binoculars. It is a shame the Monarch 7 8X30 did not work for you because it could be the poster child for a small light weight wide view 8X 30mm class binocular.

Yes, sometimes it is the little things, but in this case, I think it is the sum of those things that make the Zeiss SF work so well.


I assume the Atlas 7X36 is gone since it was not on your list. You gave it what I thought was a positive review a few weeks ago so I figured you would keep it for a while. Assuming it is gone, what was the reason for sending down the road?
I keep trying 7x because I like the wide FOV and easy to hold steady attributes and great DOF but I come back to 8x because I like that extra punch of magnification. I have three great 8x's so I didn't really need the Atlas and it was a notch down in view from what I have honestly. I think I would enjoy the Zeiss 8x42 SF even though it is a little bigger than the Swarovski SV 8x32 if the optics wowed me enough. I like good optics. The SV 8x32, EII 8x30 and Trinovid 8x32 keep me satisfied for the present.
 
It would be a rare occurrence for an optics reviewer not be be able to spot optical differences between two models.

Guess it depends on how you define "optics reviewer." ;)

I review optics for my own use, only. I'm sure that eventually I could have spotted some differences, but not during the 5 minutes I had both pairs in my hands. The views I saw were virtually identical. Enough that I could not have done a blind test and told you which was which simply from the view alone.

I examine binoculars for their value to me in the field. You know, watching birds and other wildlife... not as an optical engineer. I'm not interested in design, coatings or price until and unless they have an effect on how well I can see my subject. I'm not interested in how many elements a binocular has, which or how many coatings, etc. any more than most bird watchers and wildlife watchers are.

After seeing the Monarch 7 10x30 side by side with the Swaro CL, I would not spend the extra $ to get the CL - the Monarchs are that good, and I own a pair of 10x42 SLC's.
 
Last edited:
The Monarch 7 8x30 followed me home. In the camera store I had the opportunity to compare the Nikons with the Swarovski Companion 8x30.

The Austrian had a wider field of view but not so wide that I got hooked.

Brightness was the same and I couldn't see any difference in color performance. That was around noon and I used the binos just to have a look at bus time tables across the street, watching some bikes standing around and people passing by.

I took the opportunity to have a closer look at the Swaro 8x42 SLC.

WOW!

That's something I would even sell my Zeiss 7x42 BGAT*P for.
I have looked through the Swarovski 8x42 SLC and it is definitely a WOW binocular. Something about the knock out clarity that takes your breath away. I can't put my finger on it.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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