I know I have too many binoculars. I don't mean this in any pejorative sense, as in it's better to have fewer higher quality instruments, or it's wrong to spend so much on optics, or don't tell the wife and kids I ordered yet another binocular. I just like them. I know it's silly, but there it is. I thought about calling it “crazy” or “a disease,” but there is no need for such drama except with tongue in cheek. Also, I'm sure others have much bigger collections—I'm currently in the vicinity of a dozen. I rationalize this by spreading my binoculars around (in cars, viewing spots in the house, backpacks and emergency kits) and specializing them by use (astronomy, birding, travel, concert/theater).
My oldest binocular is a Fujinon Meibo 7x50 purchased second hand from a local astronomical optics shop in 1986. The actor William Schallert traded them in on the latest FMT model. (Those who are old enough may remember him from movies and TV, particularly as Patty Duke's long suffering father.) This was my favorite astronomy binocular until I purchased a Cannon 15x45 IS in 1998. Until recently, I used binoculars primarily for astronomy. I still use both of these binoculars for astronomy, but these days I am viewing much more often during the day.
My newest binocular is a Zeiss Victory 8x25 acquired new about a month ago. I have really enjoyed using this binocular. In fact, I have used almost nothing else for the past month. My favorite daytime binocular has been a Maven 9x45 B2 that I've owned for a little more than a year. This was by far my most used binocular over the past year, except that I almost always take something smaller when I travel. It is these two, the diminutive 10 oz Zeiss and the large 33 oz Maven that I'm speaking of in the title to this post. I've already reviewed each of these binoculars in more detail. I was skeptical when I first read about them though they were both well reviewed. The Maven seemed too big and heavy, while the Zeiss seemed too small. In fact, looking back at my reviews, to some extent I rationalize the weight of the Maven, and the small aperture of the Zeiss. And yet these two are easily my favorites. The fact that they are so different, and that I love both of them may help to explain why I have too many binoculars.
After a month straight with the Zeiss, I've been out several days in a row with the Maven again. The balance, feel in hand, and mechanics of the Maven are superior to the little Zeiss. They focus in the opposite direction (CC to infinity); this took some getting used to after a month away. The larger eyepieces, and the larger exit pupil make eye placement easier, though I notice that because of how the eyecups meet my face, IPD is much more critical on the Maven, and if it is off I begin to notice CA. I did not notice much difference in speed of focus or close focus and actual field of view seemed about the same even though the Maven is 9x. I can hold the Maven steady with less effort, but the Zeiss was easier to point and get on target, particularly for birds flying in the open. Also I found the Zeiss easier to get focused at the right depth when looking into nearby shrubs or undergrowth. So overall mechanics and ease of view go to the Maven, and maybe handling too, but it is hard to call because they are better at different things. As I've said before, I find weight and bulk more of a problem when transporting it than when birding with a RYO harness. Over the past couple days I have only been out for 1-3 hours at a time I had no problems with harness comfort. But, I thought more than once that if I was hiking further or going to be out for a full day I might pick up the Zeiss. In the past, I would have considered a smaller binocular to be a compromise. It was not so much a concern about low light performance, but rather because nothing could match the view of the Maven B2 until now.
When I first compared the Maven B2 9x45 and the Zeiss Victory 8x25 I said that I expected it to be Godzilla vs. Bambi. After all, the Maven 9x45 was easily better than anything smaller that I owned. I had attributed it to larger exit pupil or larger objective or AK prisms or ... . Instead I experienced exactly the same clarity and color dynamics with the little 8x25 binocular that I saw in the 9x45 under daylight conditions. The little Zeiss is at least a match for the big Maven as long as it is working with enough light. I was also shocked at how well the Zeiss handled difficult lighting compared with my other binoculars. Of course, aperture makes a difference and the Maven gathers more than 3x as much light as the Zeiss, so under dim lighting and with the larger exit pupil, the Maven will be much better. But now it is a functional trade-off of weight/portability vs. low light performance. I can get the same spectacular view and daylight performance from the small Zeiss as the large Maven.
Alan
My oldest binocular is a Fujinon Meibo 7x50 purchased second hand from a local astronomical optics shop in 1986. The actor William Schallert traded them in on the latest FMT model. (Those who are old enough may remember him from movies and TV, particularly as Patty Duke's long suffering father.) This was my favorite astronomy binocular until I purchased a Cannon 15x45 IS in 1998. Until recently, I used binoculars primarily for astronomy. I still use both of these binoculars for astronomy, but these days I am viewing much more often during the day.
My newest binocular is a Zeiss Victory 8x25 acquired new about a month ago. I have really enjoyed using this binocular. In fact, I have used almost nothing else for the past month. My favorite daytime binocular has been a Maven 9x45 B2 that I've owned for a little more than a year. This was by far my most used binocular over the past year, except that I almost always take something smaller when I travel. It is these two, the diminutive 10 oz Zeiss and the large 33 oz Maven that I'm speaking of in the title to this post. I've already reviewed each of these binoculars in more detail. I was skeptical when I first read about them though they were both well reviewed. The Maven seemed too big and heavy, while the Zeiss seemed too small. In fact, looking back at my reviews, to some extent I rationalize the weight of the Maven, and the small aperture of the Zeiss. And yet these two are easily my favorites. The fact that they are so different, and that I love both of them may help to explain why I have too many binoculars.
After a month straight with the Zeiss, I've been out several days in a row with the Maven again. The balance, feel in hand, and mechanics of the Maven are superior to the little Zeiss. They focus in the opposite direction (CC to infinity); this took some getting used to after a month away. The larger eyepieces, and the larger exit pupil make eye placement easier, though I notice that because of how the eyecups meet my face, IPD is much more critical on the Maven, and if it is off I begin to notice CA. I did not notice much difference in speed of focus or close focus and actual field of view seemed about the same even though the Maven is 9x. I can hold the Maven steady with less effort, but the Zeiss was easier to point and get on target, particularly for birds flying in the open. Also I found the Zeiss easier to get focused at the right depth when looking into nearby shrubs or undergrowth. So overall mechanics and ease of view go to the Maven, and maybe handling too, but it is hard to call because they are better at different things. As I've said before, I find weight and bulk more of a problem when transporting it than when birding with a RYO harness. Over the past couple days I have only been out for 1-3 hours at a time I had no problems with harness comfort. But, I thought more than once that if I was hiking further or going to be out for a full day I might pick up the Zeiss. In the past, I would have considered a smaller binocular to be a compromise. It was not so much a concern about low light performance, but rather because nothing could match the view of the Maven B2 until now.
When I first compared the Maven B2 9x45 and the Zeiss Victory 8x25 I said that I expected it to be Godzilla vs. Bambi. After all, the Maven 9x45 was easily better than anything smaller that I owned. I had attributed it to larger exit pupil or larger objective or AK prisms or ... . Instead I experienced exactly the same clarity and color dynamics with the little 8x25 binocular that I saw in the 9x45 under daylight conditions. The little Zeiss is at least a match for the big Maven as long as it is working with enough light. I was also shocked at how well the Zeiss handled difficult lighting compared with my other binoculars. Of course, aperture makes a difference and the Maven gathers more than 3x as much light as the Zeiss, so under dim lighting and with the larger exit pupil, the Maven will be much better. But now it is a functional trade-off of weight/portability vs. low light performance. I can get the same spectacular view and daylight performance from the small Zeiss as the large Maven.
Alan