I think I need a pair of versatile binoculars as I will mainly be using them in the mountains (on hikes and mountaineering ascents) for animal observation (mainly in the Alps and Pyrenees since I live in France).
I spotted two Swarovski models, the CL Pocket 8x25 and the CL Companion 8x30 B. They will therefore have a difference in brightness but will it be so obvious and above all will this difference in brightness be worth the difference in weight (150 g.).
Do you have any advice based on your experience?
Welcome to the forum. It sounds like you have some great adventures planned in the mountains. I also enjoy being where it is steep and deep, but not as extreme as the Alps and Pyrenees!
I have zero experience with the CL 8x30 but I owned the CL 8x25 for awhile. I bought the CL 8x25 for the same reason that you are considering it, basically weight for rugged terrain plus perceived quality.
The CL 8x25 that I had was pretty unremarkable to me, especially given the price. I thought that it was a bit sharper than a friend's SLC 8x30 (second to last version, I believe, with very noticeable yellow bias) but noticeably dimmer in low light. I also compared those two, the SLC 8x30 and CL 8x25, to another friend's Zeiss Terra 8x25 and I thought that the Terra was a better value overall even though it was a step behind the other two in terms of optics. For what it's worth, I also owned the last version of the SLC 8x30 and was never really impressed with that model. But I sold it several years before I compared the others. Just throwing that out there as I was never impressed with the SLC 8x30 and may have some bias against that design.
The CL seemed a bit sharper than the other two while the SLC was easier to use (better eyecups and less finicky for eye position it seemed). The Terra was nice to hold compared CL with better exterior grip, while the SLC was by far the most stable maybe due to the extra mass and eyecups that fit my head better. The Terra was not as sharp to the edges as the CL, but in normal use I didn't notice it.
I could probably type more in terms of the comparison that I did, but in the end I sold the CL 8x25 and kept an inexpensive 10x25 that I bought after the three-binocular shootout above. I compared those two models for weeks, if I recall correctly. There was nothing that I could see with the CL at 5x the price that I couldn't with the cheap 10x. And at last light, they were dead even. I expected the CL 8x25 to be a bit brighter than the 10x25 but with my middle-age eyes there was no difference. Both were worse at sunrise and sunset than I expected.
In regards to low light, I don't know what animals you are wanting to view, but if they are ungulates that are more active in low light then I don't know that an 8x in 25mm or 30/32/33mm format would be my choice, at least with my eyes and experience. I also know that weight is a concern, but it was really surprising how much more stable the 8x30 was compared to the 8x25 models. And the comparisons were done without physical exertion involved!
All that stated, I really enjoy viewing animals for an extended period of time rather than simply identifying them or checking them off of a list. To me, I value a really nice image. So although weight is something important on the spec sheet, low values might be detrimental to the viewing experience. But that is just me, and I'm not climbing the Alps!
Last, I only mention the SLC and Terra as examples against the CL. I am not suggesting that you consider those other two per se. My main points being that the CL didn't seem like a good value for my needs, and slightly larger binocular was much easier to use.
Jason
Don't worry, be happy!
