• 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.

Recommendations for small alpha 10x32 (1 Viewer)

SeldomPerched

Well-known member
I'm looking for a 10x32. It doesn't have to be Leica but I am now familiar with the Leica footprint (have 8x32 and 7x42 UVHD Plus and love them: no eye relief issues & handle well & I like the colours). It cd just as well be a Zeiss 10x32 FL or a Swaro EL. Or a Nikon.

This purchase would be specifically for reading signposts at a distance, looking for stiles etc while out on self-navigating multi-terrain long distance runs. But I'm after alpha not just because they give me more pleasure but also as the glass would soon enough get bird & wildlife use too.

I realize 10x32 is not the finest spec for a bright view. Also that Leica are among the dinkiest / most compact which matters to me when out running, with the limited storage capacity that entails.

What do you think? (10x25 or smaller is not a route I want to take.)

Feel free to mention Zeiss, Swaro and Nikon if they fit the bill better. If this sounds restrictive it's just that I get something out of pride of ownership; though I know a tool should be judged by its fitness for purpose!

Thank you,
Tom
 
Just to add 2 things:
The features of these brands in 7 & 8 x magnification are fairly well know to me but searching for info on the 10s there isn't much to see.
Greater shake permitting it's still 10x I would need!

Tom
 
Tom
I own Leica UVHD+, Zeiss FL T*, Nikon EDGII, and SW SV FP all in 10x32. Given your stated preferences for smaller size and lighter, you can probably eliminate Nikon because of size and weight and Swaro because of size. Between Leica and Zeiss, Leica is noticeably more compact in actual use and carry. You won't get a sense of this size difference just reading the specs which appear on paper to be very close. Because the Leica is slightly heavier but overall more compact, it feels noticeably heavier in the hand to me than Zeiss but this is not a criticism. One other difference you may want to consider is ER which is 16mm in Zeiss and 13.2mm in Leica. This can make a big difference if you use or sometimes use glasses, the Zeiss will probably be better for you in that regard. However, teh Zeiss also has a much different focusing mechanism than the Leica. Not "better or worse" necessarily, but noticeably faster and stiffer, designed reportedly to "snap" into focus. Since your other bins are Leica the Zeiss focusing will probably take some practice for you to master. For me, all four are easier to hold steadier than 10x42 or 10x50. Because of the real difference in size and resulting perceived difference in weight if possible you should try/compare both to see whether you can hold one steadier than the other. For me, there is no noticeable difference in image shake between the two. One last thing, in certain difficult against the light conditions, the Leica controls glare better than the Zeiss in my experience. Hope this helps.

Mike
 
Hi Tom,

The problem when somebody asks for advice about a specific binocular or format, is that invariably some burk comes along without any knowledge or experience of the format or suggested options and suggests something else instead.

I'm your man! 8-P

I understand that you specifically said that 10x25 is not a route that you want to take, but it seems to me that a 10x25 Trinovid or UV would fit the bill absolutely perfectly. I would have thought that if you intend to use them on long distance runs, the compactness and weight of a good 10x25 would be a huge advantage. As for using them for birding and wildlife, I think that although a 10x32 would obviously be better, I suspect that most here would say that 10x32 isn't the best format anyway and perhaps doesn't have so much advantage over a 10x25, so you may as well not compromise on the compactness and weight advantage of a 10x25. There's also a considerable price advantage as well!

Have you ever looked through a 10x25 Trinovid, or better still a 10x25 UV? I think you would be more than pleasantly surprised at the performance. In daylight these compact gems have stunning performance - and I say that as someone who owns the UVHD+ 7x42 and NV 10x42.

However, please feel free to completely dismiss my response and read the first paragraph again, with the thought in mind that the four letter word beginning with 'b' is the operative one! ;)

Michael.
 
Tom,

I am set up with a Nikon 10x32 EDG and that is enough for me but if if I were looking for a small alpha like a 10x30 or a 10x32 I would get Swarovski's new CL Companion 10x30B. And that is because I have the 8x30 version and it is so good that I have stopped using my best 8x32 binoculars which are pretty good themselves--like the Nikon 8x32 LXL and Kahles 8x32. It goes every where I go.

Bob
 
Thanks, Mike. Very helpful & actually I do have experience of Victory FL though in 8x56 shape; possibly my best glass of all though overkill for the purpose even if I were a marine or a paratrooper. I have heard great things of the 8x32 though strangely the demo copy I tried left me unimpressed. I think the size of the Leica may be better for me.

Tom
 
Bob,

I'd certainly consider your 10x30 suggestion. How do you find it copes in poor visibility or at twilight ?

Good tips there; thank you.

Tom
 
For running / hiking the first that come to mind are Swaro CL 10x30 then Zeiss Victory Pocket 10x25 then Nikon Monarch HG 10x30. Of the two 10x32 I have no experience but I would think the Leica would be hard to beat for compactness. Still the other three I mentioned are optically in the same ball park and are all lighter and smaller. At least in their 8x configurations, I can’t comment directly on the 10x but would probably start with the CL for quality, warranty, durability, etc.
 
Bob,

I'd certainly consider your 10x30 suggestion. How do you find it copes in poor visibility or at twilight ?

Good tips there; thank you.

Tom

I have never tried a Swarovski CL Companion 10x30 so I can't speak for that.. I have used my 8x30 version many times in dark, overcast conditions and I never wished I had my Nikon 8x32 LX L instead at those times.

When birding in twilight conditions I always used one of my 7x42 binoculars. I probably would never use an 8x32 or 8x30 at that time unless it was the only binocular I had with me.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Michael:

I disagree with you about a 10x25 being a good choice here. I have experience with both sizes
and the 10x25 may have excellent optics, but in use it is fiddly and not very friendly for viewing
for any length of time.

I feel that being very lightweight and small is not always a good thing, unless it is for travel, quick looks,
or pocket ability.

Jerry
 
For running / hiking the first that come to mind are Swaro CL 10x30 then Zeiss Victory Pocket 10x25 then Nikon Monarch HG 10x30. Of the two 10x32 I have no experience but I would think the Leica would be hard to beat for compactness. Still the other three I mentioned are optically in the same ball park and are all lighter and smaller. At least in their 8x configurations, I can’t comment directly on the 10x but would probably start with the CL for quality, warranty, durability, etc.

Thanks, Josh - plenty to choose from and think about there. I have opportunities to try most of these out at two stockists during the next few weeks.

Happy Easter,

Tom
 
Tongue in cheek, may I recommend the Nikon anniversary micro?
https://www.adorama.com/nk715se.html

Hi Tom,

The problem when somebody asks for advice about a specific binocular or format, is that invariably some burk comes along without any knowledge or experience of the format or suggested options and suggests something else instead.

I'm your man! 8-P

I understand that you specifically said that 10x25 is not a route that you want to take, but it seems to me that a 10x25 Trinovid or UV would fit the bill absolutely perfectly. I would have thought that if you intend to use them on long distance runs, the compactness and weight of a good 10x25 would be a huge advantage. As for using them for birding and wildlife, I think that although a 10x32 would obviously be better, I suspect that most here would say that 10x32 isn't the best format anyway and perhaps doesn't have so much advantage over a 10x25, so you may as well not compromise on the compactness and weight advantage of a 10x25. There's also a considerable price advantage as well!

Have you ever looked through a 10x25 Trinovid, or better still a 10x25 UV? I think you would be more than pleasantly surprised at the performance. In daylight these compact gems have stunning performance - and I say that as someone who owns the UVHD+ 7x42 and NV 10x42.

However, please feel free to completely dismiss my response and read the first paragraph again, with the thought in mind that the four letter word beginning with 'b' is the operative one! ;)

Michael.
 
Michael:

I disagree with you about a 10x25 being a good choice here. I have experience with both sizes
and the 10x25 may have excellent optics, but in use it is fiddly and not very friendly for viewing
for any length of time.

I feel that being very lightweight and small is not always a good thing, unless it is for travel, quick looks,
or pocket ability.

Jerry

I take your point Jerry, and I agree that they can be fiddly and not something for long term viewing. I would still have thought, however, that they would be perfect for these specific requirements:-

This purchase would be specifically for reading signposts at a distance, looking for stiles etc while out on self-navigating multi-terrain long distance runs.

I think it's just the issue of using them for birds and wildlife at some future point that would make a 10x32 a more sensible option.
 
I take your point Jerry, and I agree that they can be fiddly and not something for long term viewing. I would still have thought, however, that they would be perfect for these specific requirements:-

This purchase would be specifically for reading signposts at a distance, looking for stiles etc while out on self-navigating multi-terrain long distance runs.

I think it's just the issue of using them for birds and wildlife at some future point that would make a 10x32 a more sensible option.

Fiddly may be an issue when your heart is hammering, your legs wobbling, your breath gasping and your arms trembling and every second counts. But maybe that's unavoidable.

However the OP may be looking for a very small and light instrument or possibly a featherweight monocular even more than for a good view.

A friend of mine got a mini Zeiss roof 40 years ago -oh, but we greybeards were all young and some even nimble- and still has it, and I don't think it's an accident that the Nikon 7x15 was remade and running around $200 from Japan sellers on the bay - some people clearly value size. Also there may be no reason to go for an alpha, maybe a Zeiss Terra or even a "toy" is more than enough in a situation where a device can get severely abused.

Edmund
 
Last edited:
Tring, you've lost me there, I'm afraid. Not sure I understand your post.

Probably me being a bit thick!

Tom

Tom,

If you're running, even after a short break, you are going to have a pulse rate way over your resting rate. That is not conducive to a steady hold particularly with a 10x bin.

Many years ago I used to do competitive small-bore target pistol shooting. It was sufficient motivation for me to give up smoking, because smoking increases one's pulse rate. I think in your situation you'd get just as much information from a 7x or 8x bin, not a monocular as they are even more difficult to hold steady.

John
 
Don't discount a 10x32. They don't deserve their bad rap. They are very bright even under low light. The twilight factor is almost equal to an 8x42. I have the 10x32 SV and it surprised me how good it is. Eye placement feels as easy as my 8x32 SV and you can actually see more detail in low light. A 10x25 from any brand or even the Swaro 10x30 CL are NOT going to be as good as the 10x32 SV. Don't let anybody tell you they are. The SV is Swarovski's best binocular and for good reason. I would get the 10x32 SV. You can try the Zeiss 10x32 FL. It won't have as good of ergonomics or as sharp of edges but you might like it.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 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