A2GG
Beth
I recently was able to compare my MHG 8x30 with CL-b 8x30 and EL SV 8x32 outside of a store. I was surprised to find the MHG worked better with my eyeglasses compared to the CL. I've read about the new 'eye box' design of the CL-b and how it makes viewing more comfortable. I'm guessing this is something noticed more when not wearing glasses. I found the eye placement slightly more picky compared to the Nikon and perhaps usable eye relief not quite enough. The view was a bit tunnel-like in comparison. Of course, the HG has a much wider true FOV. However, I did not have this impression when I directly compared my original 8x30 CL to the MHG despite 15mm ER listed for the first CL. The eyecups are almost flush with the ocular lenses on the original CL and I think this helped quite a bit.
The CL-b does have a real nice view and, based on quick impressions, I felt it may have a tiny bit more 'sparkle' compared to the MHG. The ergonomics and feel of it is excellent and I think a little better than the Nikon. It's a little bigger than the HG which is quite tiny and feels almost like a compact binocular. I do like the very compact size and super light weight of the Nikon.
I haven't looked through an EL in quite some time. This time it sort of blew me away. It's really bright. It's almost too bright in comparison. It was a sunny day with some snow still on the ground. I found my Leica Ultravid helpful on sunny days providing a comfortable view and I feel the same way about the Nikon HG. While both are bright, they have warmer tones. The resolution of the EL is just incredible. Micro contrast was clearly on another level. I was able to see more softer and very fine details and textures of a birch tree about 15-20 ft away. With the HG I was fiddling with the focuser to try and tune in those super fine details, but it couldn't. I would say macro contrast was similar in both binos. Slower focus of the EL was noticed immediately. I've gotten used to the quick focuser of the HG and I find it very useful when birding.
Eye comfort when looking through the EL was just way better than the HG. I was quite surprised at this big difference. The Nikon seemed quite picky in comparison. It's amazing the difference a slightly bigger exit pupil can make along with lots of extra eye relief. Even the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 seemed to be slightly more comfortable with eye placement compared to 8x30. The EL's sharpness to the very edge was also immediately noticeable. It was sort of strange actually. It's something I think I would need to get used to. The MHG has a flat field, but it's just not as flat and sharp to the very outer edge.
The EL was so impressive I thought for a few days about buying it, but I ultimately decided against it. I have other pressing concerns now and also I like the little HG. It has served me well so far. I enjoy its tiny size and fly weight and also its quick focuser. The view is very pleasing as well. It's a trade off; compact size and low weight, but comes with a little bit less viewing comfort with glasses. You can't have it all. I do notice the yellow-ish (really a subtle cream color) bias often now even without comparing it to anything else. Its warmer tones can make extended viewing relaxing and is helpful on very sunny days.
The CL-b does have a real nice view and, based on quick impressions, I felt it may have a tiny bit more 'sparkle' compared to the MHG. The ergonomics and feel of it is excellent and I think a little better than the Nikon. It's a little bigger than the HG which is quite tiny and feels almost like a compact binocular. I do like the very compact size and super light weight of the Nikon.
I haven't looked through an EL in quite some time. This time it sort of blew me away. It's really bright. It's almost too bright in comparison. It was a sunny day with some snow still on the ground. I found my Leica Ultravid helpful on sunny days providing a comfortable view and I feel the same way about the Nikon HG. While both are bright, they have warmer tones. The resolution of the EL is just incredible. Micro contrast was clearly on another level. I was able to see more softer and very fine details and textures of a birch tree about 15-20 ft away. With the HG I was fiddling with the focuser to try and tune in those super fine details, but it couldn't. I would say macro contrast was similar in both binos. Slower focus of the EL was noticed immediately. I've gotten used to the quick focuser of the HG and I find it very useful when birding.
Eye comfort when looking through the EL was just way better than the HG. I was quite surprised at this big difference. The Nikon seemed quite picky in comparison. It's amazing the difference a slightly bigger exit pupil can make along with lots of extra eye relief. Even the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 seemed to be slightly more comfortable with eye placement compared to 8x30. The EL's sharpness to the very edge was also immediately noticeable. It was sort of strange actually. It's something I think I would need to get used to. The MHG has a flat field, but it's just not as flat and sharp to the very outer edge.
The EL was so impressive I thought for a few days about buying it, but I ultimately decided against it. I have other pressing concerns now and also I like the little HG. It has served me well so far. I enjoy its tiny size and fly weight and also its quick focuser. The view is very pleasing as well. It's a trade off; compact size and low weight, but comes with a little bit less viewing comfort with glasses. You can't have it all. I do notice the yellow-ish (really a subtle cream color) bias often now even without comparing it to anything else. Its warmer tones can make extended viewing relaxing and is helpful on very sunny days.
Last edited: