• 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 introduces new Monarch HG 8x30 and 10x30 Binoculars (1 Viewer)

ceasar said:
I guess, and it is only a guess; considering the legendary "inscrutability" of the Japanese;), that they are currently priced the same because the HG is now Nikon's top of the line binocular.

I expect that will change in the not too distant future. It is pretty evident from the number of binoculars that they archived recently that changes are in the works. After all, Nikon is entering its 2nd Century!:king:

Bob
Click to expand...

Bob: I agree with you about Nikon, it is hard to know what is in the planning
stages.

As good as the Monarch HG is, I have the 10x42, I find it is at the top of
the mid-range models, with its light weight, large sweet spot and big
FOV. I find it close to the EDG in many ways.

A nice 32 model is a great addition, and I like that.

Nikon surprised me with the WX astro models, this is a small niche market
but they spent some expense with the design effort needed for this great binocular.

Jerry
 
I tried a new Nikon 8x30 HG. The build quality is better than the M7 but I could see no big advantages optics wise. The eye cups are too short for the eye relief so you get a lot of black outs. There is a very narrow margin of error in eye placement to avoid black outs unlike the new Swarovski 8x30 CL. I agree with Typo because I don't think the HG is as sharp as the M7 either and I see just as much glare. IMO not worth $950.00. I returned mine. But try it you may like it. I'd say if you want an 8x30 for the small size go with the M7 or Maven B.3 at the low end and the new Swarovski 8x30 CL at the high end.
 
Last edited:
[email protected] said:
I tried a new Nikon 8x30 HG. The build quality is better than the M7 but I could see no big advantages optics wise. The eye cups are too short for the eye relief so you get a lot of black outs. There is a very narrow margin of error in eye placement to avoid black outs unlike the new Swarovski 8x30 CL. I don't think the HG is as sharp as the M7 either and I see just as much glare. IMO not worth $950.00. I returned mine. But try it you may like it.
Click to expand...

Why do binocular designers make this mistake over and over again?

M7 was a rather crappy bin in my eyes, if the HG is not better, something is very wrong here.
 
Vespobuteo said:
Why do binocular designers make this mistake over and over again?

M7 was a rather crappy bin in my eyes, if the HG is not better, something is very wrong here.
Click to expand...


Dennis tried them both and came to that conclusion. It is his personal opinion.
You are going to have to compare them yourself to see how they work for you. They have subtle and somewhat different eye piece designs.

Nikon's measured eye relief states that the Monarch 7s have shorter eye relief than the Monarch HGs. 1.1mm shorter in the 8x30 and 0.6mm shorter in the 10x30. FOVs are the same. The MHGs have a field flattener unlike the M7s.

Bob
 
Last edited:
VB
Bob is correct, Dennis found one result regarding ER and these binos but that doesn't mean others will find the same at all. A model I reviewed recently didn't work well at all for me personally when wearing glasses but was perfectly fine without and Troubadoris had no issues at all when wearing spectacles.

This whole topic could use some input from bino designers. I am working on this.

Lee
 
Why do binocular designers make this mistake over and over again?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a mistake, rather it appears to be a design limitation. People wearing glasses require quite a bit of ER, sometimes in excess of 20mm, and it appears that eyecups that extend more than 15mm are not practical to make (they might be too heavy, or too thick when fully collapsed etc).

The interesting question here is whether the number of people using binos w/ glasses is larger than that of users w/o spectacles. It seems that the bino designers have decided in favor of spectacle users as many recent models have a lot of ER.
 
PeterPS said:
I don't think it's a mistake, rather it appears to be a design limitation. People wearing glasses require quite a bit of ER, sometimes in excess of 20mm, and it appears that eyecups that extend more than 15mm are not practical to make (they might be too heavy, or too thick when fully collapsed etc).

The interesting question here is whether the number of people using binos w/ glasses is larger than that of users w/o spectacles. It seems that the bino designers have decided in favor of spectacle users as many recent models have a lot of ER.
Click to expand...

Dead right Peter. IMHO there is no exit pupil/eye relief/eye-cup combination that will work for every single person, with or without spectacles, in the world. The best that can be achieved is for it to work for the largest percentage of people that is possible in practice.

Lee
 
The build quality is better than the M7 but I could see no big advantages optics wise.
Click to expand...

How about the rubber armor? The M7 has an thick armor that can take some beating. I did not like HG armor: rather thin and covering only part of the tubes (no doubt a design choice for saving weight).
 
Last edited:
PeterPS said:
How about the rubber armor? The M7 has an thick armor that can take some beating. I did not like HG armor: rather thin and covering only part of the tubes (no doubt a design choice for saving weight).
Click to expand...
Your correct about the armor. The HG's definitely don't provide as much protection as the M7's. Important if you are using the binoculars hiking and they are likely to get some abuse.
 
PeterPS said:
How about the rubber armor? The M7 has an thick armor that can take some beating. I did not like HG armor: rather thin and covering only part of the tubes (no doubt a design choice for saving weight).
Click to expand...


The Japanese made Monarch HGs save their weight with a lightweight magnesium alloy frame. Their objective tubes are also metal with a leather covering on them except for the interior portion of the tubes in the hinge area.

You can see the frame pictured in the product details of this link on the Monarch HG 8x30:

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/nikon-products/binoculars/monarch-hg-8x30.html


The Chinese made Monarch 7s use no metal in their construction as far as I know. That is another one of the reasons why they cost about $500.00 less than the Monarch HGs.

I have a Monarch HG 8x42 and in many ways it reminds me of my Leica 8x42 Ultravid Blackline which also has black metal objective tubes which have no leather covering. They are very close in weight and almost the same length.

There are good reasons that involve your pocket book to buy a Monarch 7 rather than a Monarch HG because it will do will do a good job at its price but it is not constructed nearly as well as the Monarch HG is.

There will be people who may like it better after trying them both. Everybody is different.

Bob
 
Last edited:
PeterPS said:
I don't think it's a mistake, rather it appears to be a design limitation. People wearing glasses require quite a bit of ER, sometimes in excess of 20mm, and it appears that eyecups that extend more than 15mm are not practical to make (they might be too heavy, or too thick when fully collapsed etc).

The interesting question here is whether the number of people using binos w/ glasses is larger than that of users w/o spectacles. It seems that the bino designers have decided in favor of spectacle users as many recent models have a lot of ER.
Click to expand...

Haven't seen the Nikon 8x30 HG in person yet but to me it looks like it might be a design flaw if too short eye cups are the reason for getting black-outs.

Swaro CL pocket an even smaller bin, have longer eye relief and longer eye cups, so it's possible to do.

Conquest HD had the same problem initially
but Zeiss fixed it for those who needed longer eye cups.
 
Vespobuteo said:
Haven't seen the Nikon 8x30 HG in person yet but to me it looks like it might be a design flaw if too short eye cups are the reason for getting black-outs.

Swaro CL pocket an even smaller bin, have longer eye relief and longer eye cups, so it's possible to do.

Conquest HD had the same problem initially
but Zeiss fixed it for those who needed longer eye cups.
Click to expand...



Regarding the alleged short eye cups on the 30mm Monarch HGs: The Monarch HG eye cups have longer eye relief than the equivalent Monarch 7 eye cups do.

It is possible that they may be too short for some people but not everybody considering how many people having been using the Monarch 7 30mm binoculars since they came out.

As for the Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 B, it has 16mm eye relief. The Nikon HG 8x30 has 16.2mm eye relief.

The reason why the Swarovski CL Companion binocular doesn't have eye relief problems like blackouts has been discussed on this forum a number of times since it was introduced. It has a specially designed eye piece with what has been called and "optical box" that allows the users to place it anywhere on one's brow ridge or even back into ones eye eye sockets with out having blackouts.

I know it works! I have one and I have been using it almost every day. Anybody who has eye-placement problems should try one of these binoculars.

Bob
 
Last edited:
I just don't think the new Nikon HG is really worth twice the price of the M7. There is not enough improvement in the optics. If you have to have an 8x30 the new Swarovski CL is the least finicky but IMO I think a good 8x32 or even better yet a good 8x42 is a better option. Even the CL's eye cups are so small in diameter so they tend to go into your eye sockets instead of resting on them although you don't get the blackouts with them like you do with the HG. The HG is "Blackout City!" You barely move your eyes and you get a blackout. I personally am not tolerating that for small size. I will carry a 32mm or 42mm SV for my birding.
 
Last edited:
[email protected] said:
I just don't think the new Nikon HG is really worth twice the price of the M7. There is not enough improvement in the optics. If you have to have an 8x30 the new Swarovski CL is the least finicky but IMO I think a good 8x32 or even better yet a good 8x42 is a better option. Even the CL's eye cups are so small in diameter so they tend to go into your eye sockets instead of resting on them although you don't get the blackouts with them like you do with the HG. The HG is "Blackout City!" You barely move your eyes and you get a blackout. I personally am not tolerating that for small size. I will carry a 32mm or 42mm SV for my birding.
Click to expand...



My guess is that Nikon is going to archive the Monarch 7 soon and keep the Monarch HG.

The arguments over whether to have a 30mm or 32mm for a small binocular will be around for a lot longer.

Incidentally, Dennis, the Monarch HG 8x30 may be "Blackout City" for you but not for everybody because the numbers aren't there. If the Monarch 7 8x30 wasn't "Blackout City" for everybody, the Monarch HG 8x30 with its longer eye relief won't be "Blackout City" for everybody either.

Binoculars are like shoes. You have to try them on to see if they fit you. :king:

Bob
 
Last edited:
ceasar said:
My guess is that Nikon is going to archive the Monarch 7 soon and keep the Monarch HG.

The arguments over whether to have a 30mm or 32mm for a small binocular will be around for a lot longer.

Incidentally, Dennis, the Monarch HG 8x30 may be "Blackout City" for you but not for everybody because the numbers aren't there. If the Monarch 7 8x30 wasn't "Blackout City" for everybody, the Monarch HG 8x30 with its longer eye relief won't be "Blackout City" for everybody either.

Binoculars are like shoes. You have to try them on to see if they fit you. :king:

Bob
Click to expand...
If the eye cups of the M7 and the HG are the same length wouldn't longer eye relief create more blackouts in the HG because it is putting the exit pupil out beyond the eye cups further? The only binocular I have found less than 32mm that is usable as a birding binocular is the new Swarovski 8x30 CL. The rest of compact binoculars have too small of diameter of eye cups or the eye cups are not long enough for the eye relief. That includes the Swarovski 8x25 CL-P and the Zeiss 8x25 Victory. I really think all binoculars under 42mm are a compromise in some way to get the small size. I don't like holding the binoculars on my eyebrows. I would just as soon carry a few more ounces in weight. I will be interested to see other opinions on the Nikon 8x30 HG. I will bet there will be a lot of finicky comments. Time will tell.
 
Last edited:
[email protected] said:
If the eye cups of the M7 and the HG are the same length wouldn't longer eye relief create more blackouts in the HG because it is putting the exit pupil out beyond the eye cups further? The only binocular I have found less than 32mm that is usable as a birding binocular is the new Swarovski 8x30 CL. The rest of compact binoculars have too small of diameter of eye cups or the eye cups are not long enough for the eye relief. That includes the Swarovski 8x25 CL-P and the Zeiss 8x25 Victory. I really think all binoculars under 42mm are a compromise in some way to get the small size. I don't like holding the binoculars on my eyebrows. I would just as soon carry a few more ounces in weight. I will be interested to see other opinions on the Nikon 8x30 HG. I will bet there will be a lot of finicky comments. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

Dennis,

30mm binoculars might not be usable by you as birding binoculars and that is too bad for you but they clearly are usable by many other people for that purpose.

Why are so many of them being purchased otherwise?

You will have to direct your technical question in your first sentence to people with expertise in the manufacture of binoculars. They can't continue to make them if people won't buy them because of blackouts. I can only conclude that the great majority of the people who buy them don't have problems with blackouts while using them.

Bob
 
Bob, how do you know how many are being purchased? How can you conclude that the greatest majority of people are not having problems with such a new product. The only two members that have reviewed them on Bird Forum had trouble with blackouts. Me and Typo. I agree that blackouts can be personal depending on your eye socket depth. I have trouble with smallish eye cups because they go to far in my eye sockets. The new HG's did not work for me but you are correct in that it doesn't mean they won't work for everybody that is why I said to try them you might like them.
 
Last edited:
ceasar said:
The Monarch HG eye cups have longer eye relief than the equivalent Monarch 7 eye cups do.
Click to expand...

Occasionally we see such comments on the BF that require a small correction: the ER of the binos is a fixed parameter that does not vary with the length of the eyecups.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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

dorubird
My new Nikon Monarch HG 8x30, comparative study
Replies
8
Views
5K
dorubird
dorubird
J
Review / Test Hawke Frontier APO 10x42 vs Nikon Monarch HG 8x42
Replies
13
Views
10K
Veracocha
Veracocha
T
Nikon Monarch 7 10X30
Replies
3
Views
11K
Tvc15_2000
T
F
Nikon Monarch 7 new 8x30 and 10x30
9 10 11
Replies
201
Views
206K
PhilR.
P
C
Cabelas New Guide Series
Replies
5
Views
6K
pantanalexpeditons
P

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top