• 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.

Looking for tiny mono/ binocular (1 Viewer)

pluton

Well-known member
Hello,
I have several models of binoculars, with different magnifications and diameters ,but I need one that is very small but of quality, to carry it more or less continuously or to places where I can not take the others,and not only would I use it to see birds, but also landscapes, architecture, airplanes, etc... I would like to know your opinions on this topic, among other options I have thought ,maybe in some good monocular, that fits anywhere and in any pocket, or sometimes some small "tiny" type Trinovid or ultravid 8x20, to mention some..., I don’t know if there is a big difference in size between the monocular and one of these "tiny" binoculars. Well, Thank you for your advice. greetings, Pluton
 
Pluton,

Check out the thread "Tiny, Miniature, Pocket instruments" for a good discussion of your question and lots of useful pictures comparing size and shape of various options both binocular and monocular.

Mike
 
If you want small I would try the tiny Nikon Mikron 7x15. It easily fits in your pocket with it's leather carrying case. It is a lot smaller than the Trinovid or Ultravid 8x20 and performs almost as well because it is a porro. A monocular will be smaller but with only using one eye you lose the advantages of binocular vision like DOF, 3D and ease of viewing. I never cared for a monocular for those reasons. Here is the Nikon Mikron 7x15. It is available in a 6x15 also. They are about $359.00.

https://www.adorama.com/us 114773...5DPP54f66P86bPFhTVNnxbX9cS3s3o9caArjbEALw_wcB
 

Attachments

  • nk715se.jpg
    nk715se.jpg
    16.5 KB · Views: 44
Last edited:
Yes, lots of useful reports and recommendations, it's also useful to suggest your preferred budget / spending range.
 
Responding to a PM from the OP for the benefit of a wider audience. I have the Leica Trinovid 8x20BL, Ultravid 8x20BL, the Monovid, the Nikon 5x15 HG and 7x15 HG monoculars, the Nikon 7x15M CF Anniversary Edition binoculars and the Zeiss 8x25 Victory Pockets.

Of these, the Victory Pocket are by far the best, but they are also much bigger than the others. Also spectacle-wearers seem to like them better than people who don't wear glasses.

The Monovid is half a pair of Ultravid 8x20, so no optical surprises, they are identical. The focuser is ergonomically better (bigger grip area, stronger knurling), and you have the close-focus accessory lens, even though it is fiddly to use. I wrote up my impressions here:

https://blog.majid.info/leica-monovid-review/

In terms of EDC (Every Day Carry) use, I rotate between them depending on mood and circumstances. Right now I am toting the Zeiss 8x25, but 2 weeks ago it was the Nikon 7x15 binoculars, and before that the Nikon 5x15 HG monoculars.

You will need to decide whether you are prepared to lose binocular vision and the more stable view afforded by binoculars in the interests of having something small so you can carry it with you always. If you wear glasses I would advise against the Nikon 7x15 HG or 7x15 binoculars.

The 5x15 HG is incredible compact, very well made, and you can just carry it around your neck all day and not even notice it's there. The Monovid is brighter, can be used as a standoff 8x loupe (more like 4x equivalent because of the long distance) and because of its greater weight and inertia, has a more stable view. The Ultravid 8x20 are even more stable as all binos are compared to monoculars. The Victory Pocket are practically equivalent to full-size binoculars (I sold off my Leica UV 8x32 HD after getting them).

I can't tell you where your threshold of too big to be EDC optics, but here is a side-by-side photo, with a AAA battery included for scale at the bottom. Left to right: Nikon 5x15 HG, 7x15 HG, 7x15M CF, Leica Trinovid 8x20BL. Monovid with close-focus lens, Ultravid 8x20BL, Zeiss Victory Pocket 8x25.

https://majid.info/images/minioptics.jpg
 
Last edited:
Oh, and I bit the bullet and ordered a Noblex/Docter/Carl Zeiss Jena 8x21 porro prism monocular (Zeiss Turmon design). I've always been curious about these. I bought the Steiner knock-off, big mistake, it was a piece of plastic junk. I'll let you know how it compares.
 
Last edited:
For some visual reference as to relative sizes/ convenience, see the 3 attached images:
- A) and B) when in use *
- C) when folded for carry

* with B) only the Nikon binocular; the monoculars fold into a right angle when in use to correctly orientate the 2 Porro prisms
- but you can get an idea of the relative sizes/ shapes when in use


A) From Dennis (I took the liberty of cropping and lightening to emphasise the essentials) at: https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3845907&postcount=28

B) From bruno28 (again cropped) at: https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3913158&postcount=21

C) From Super Dave (rotated top to bottom) at: https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3864623&postcount=29


John


p.s. for ease of comparison to some more monoculars, I've added a copy of Fazal's 2nd image in post #5
it shows Nikon and Leica monoculars in comparison to Nikon, Leica and Zeiss binoculars (see the specifics in Fazal's post)
- a person could go crazy trying to decide the optimum balance of optical performance and handling vs bulk and weight!
 

Attachments

  • Swarovki x25 vs Leica x20 vs Nikon x15.jpg
    Swarovki x25 vs Leica x20 vs Nikon x15.jpg
    148.3 KB · Views: 222
  • Docter & Zeiss Monoc x21 vs Nikon Bino x15.jpg
    Docter & Zeiss Monoc x21 vs Nikon Bino x15.jpg
    130.9 KB · Views: 192
  • Folded for carry.jpg
    Folded for carry.jpg
    330.3 KB · Views: 220
  • Monoculars.jpg
    Monoculars.jpg
    181.9 KB · Views: 240
Last edited:
Nice pictures, John. Very helpful! Your quite a resource for Bird Forum. The Mikron is almost as small as some of the monoculars.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Dennis!

As for the Docter/Noblex 8x21, it feels solid, despite having a glass-filled polycarbonate body rather than metal. Size-wise it is about the same as the Nikon HG monoculars: slimmer, but wider. Optically it is good, I didn't see any CA, but the AFOV is definitely less than the Monovid. Eye relief is insufficient for spectacle wearers, focusing from close to infinity takes too many turns.

I would opt for the Nikon 7x15 HG monocular over the Docter: no setup time, usable with glasses, easier to hold and focus, lanyard to hang around your neck, shorter close-focus.
 
As for the Docter/Noblex 8x21, it feels solid, despite having a glass-filled polycarbonate body rather than metal. Size-wise it is about the same as the Nikon HG monoculars: slimmer, but wider. Optically it is good, I didn't see any CA, but the AFOV is definitely less than the Monovid. Eye relief is insufficient for spectacle wearers, focusing from close to infinity takes too many turns.

I've got the orginal version, made bei Carl Zeiss Jena, including a full set of close-up lenses and a stand to use it as a magnifying glas. Good optics, small, very solid build quality. Optically I prefer the Monovid simply because it has more modern coatings.

I would opt for the Nikon 7x15 HG monocular over the Docter: no setup time, usable with glasses, easier to hold and focus, lanyard to hang around your neck, shorter close-focus.

I'd still prefer the Monovid.

Hermann
 
I've got the orginal version, made bei Carl Zeiss Jena, including a full set of close-up lenses and a stand to use it as a magnifying glas.

How well do the accessory lenses and stand work? The Monovid works very well as a stand-off loupe with the close-up lens. I also have an Emoskop, which in theory does everything, just very badly with a ridiculously narrow field of view.

Good optics, small, very solid build quality. Optically I prefer the Monovid simply because it has more modern coatings.

Certainly it is better, and water-proof (I don't think the Nikon monoculars are nitrogen or argon-purged). It is also larger, and screwing/unscrewing the close-up lens is annoying, so it depends on just how small an instrument the OP wants.
 
Hello All,

I bought a Leica Monovid after several members on this forum recomended it.

I am completely satisfied with my example.

I do not use the close-up lens at all.

But I suggest that you test one first if possible , it may not be for everyone.

Cheers.
 
How well do the accessory lenses and stand work? The Monovid works very well as a stand-off loupe with the close-up lens. I also have an Emoskop, which in theory does everything, just very badly with a ridiculously narrow field of view.

The Turmon works very well with the accessory lenses. There's a fairly comprehensive set, so you get different magnifications. Quite amazing, really.

Hermann
 
a person could go crazy trying to decide the optimum balance of optical performance and handling vs bulk and weight!
I agree completely, having done so more than once (with cameras as well). I finally tired of playing games around the idea of what I was "willing to carry", and decided to stick with what I had and genuinely liked to use, and just carry it more often. Problem solved.
 
Great pictures John!

I'm one of these people who really enjoys experimenting with various sub-25mm optics of all kinds, even if I can't afford to keep them all. One of my favorite activities is hiking and do quite a bit of Western US, "peak bagging" as they say. On most trips, I like to take an enjoyable optic with me even on those high elevation gain challenges. It's great to be able to see a trail marker, spot others on the trail and of course enjoy the wildlife and scenery when possible.

Like most that get into compact binoculars, I started this quest with the 25mm class instruments, with optics like the Nikon Trailblazer and Pentax 8x25 WP. This accelerated to increasingly pricier binoculars, eventually progressing to some of the best compact optics we've ever seen. Examples like the Victory, CL, LX, Ultravid, & a couple others, really do offer an amazing view for their size. I think the Victory might do the best job of mimicking the view from a larger optic, while I feel that the CL is the most well rounded at doing everything, when all the attributes are considered.

When it comes to the sub-25mm class, it becomes so difficult to find models that offer a reasonably good image without breaking the bank but I'm always trying to find hidden "gems." Most of us who follow this stuff know how good the 8x20 Ultravid is and I've even spent some time with the Nikon 8x20 LX and Kowa Genesis 8x22, which was expensive and heavy for its size.

My hope was that we'd have a small choice of 20-24mm optics in the $200-$350 range that would provide good... even, quite good images, while weighing a few ounces less than the 25mm class. A good example would be a theoretical 20mm version of the Zeiss 8x25 Terra but so far, no luck finding anything that resembles something like that. Some of my most recent attempts to find something acceptable, have been the Steiner Safari 8x22 Ultrasharp, Steiner 8x22 Blue Horizon and Eschenbach 8x20 Club. All three of them possessed various optical aspects that were so bad, that I couldn't keep them, even if I did like the size, weight and overall aesthetics of some of them.

Finally, I decided to go way smaller and try the modern version of the 7x15 Mikron. To make a long story short, it was immediately apparent that the Nikon punched far above its weight. The sharpness on axis is very close to best compact binoculars available. There is some blurring as the edge of FOV is approached but it's something that was easy for me to overlook when I considered the center sharpness, close to neutral color, very decent contrast, size and $275 price I paid. They are available from Japan if you don't mind the wait. I think the most surprising part of the Mikron experience, is that there were no terrible or glaring optical issues, like there are with so many in the 20-22mm, roof prism class.

Recently I picked up the 6x15 version to compare and guess which version I still have in my hand? My 7x15 is being testing by my Uncle, this weekend, and he's probably going to take it off my hands for me. The 8° FOV in the 6x really feels quite wide when compared to the 7° FOV in the 7x. It's hard to tell which one shows the most blurring near the edge but the 6x view just feels a bit more full, while providing a less limiting 2.5mm exit pupil. I feel like the 6x is very well suited to the tiny objectives and the reduction in image shake is one of the first things that I noticed, compared to the 7x. I think this is due to this little optic having so little mass at 128 grams. In any case, if my Uncle doesn't purchase the 7x15 from me and I get it back, I'll do some more specific comparisons.

Whether one were to purchase the 7x or the 6x version, I can't imagine anyone being dissatisfied with the overall image quality of this nano-sized binocular. Yes, there are other 20-22mm class, roof prisms out there that provide an even better image with less edge blurring but they're usually double or triple the street price.

My next planned mountain peak is close to 13,000ft elevation and the little 6x15 Mikron is definitely coming along for the climb!

eroXE3Z.jpg


x6tghMh.jpg


D1Wocb9.jpg


jcQUyQK.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nice Picture's! Did you feel the 6x15 Mikron has enough magnification after having the 7x15? The Mikron's are impressive for their diminutive size aren't they. I think the Mikron 7x15 is really close to the Ultravid 8x20. The smaller optic's are sure nice when you are hiking a lot especially with those kind of elevation gains. Would that be Humphrey's Peak you are headed to?
 
Last edited:
Nice Picture's! Did you feel the 6x15 Mikron has enough magnification after having the 7x15? The Mikron's are impressive for their diminutive size aren't they. I think the Mikron 7x15 is really close to the Ultravid 8x20. The smaller optic's are sure nice when you are hiking a lot especially with those kind of elevation gains. Would that be Humphrey's Peak you are headed to?


Thanks!

The magnification question should be simple to answer but I struggle. I only had both versions together for 2 days but had them around my neck at the same time, alternating between them. Here's how I would best sum up my preference; Sitting on chair with my arms braced on a table, the 7x made viewing the details on the Peach faced love birds, Gamble quail, and Spiny Lizard a bit more.... detailed and 'vivid. Standing in the yard and watching the same scene with the 7x caused me to no longer benefit from the extra magnification. The Spiny Lizard's little eyes and rainbow scales weren't as prominent because now, they were dancing around far more. Switching between the two only made the smaller FOV more noticeable in the 7x but there wasn't really the expected, accompanying, lose of detail from the 6x, because I couldn't take advantage of that extra detail from the 7x. The brain only interpreted it as smaller/larger FOV. If I sat down again and rested my arms on a soft back pack, on top of a table, while sitting in a chair or kneeling, I tended to focus on smaller detail again and the 7x came back to life.

I do believe the center sharpness is very close to the Ultravid, which is saying a lot! Since I no longer own the 8x20, I'm relying on memory perception compared to how it did with optics that I do still own. The main difference that I remember about the Leica is that its "sweet spot" was quite large and blurring nearing the edge of FOV was controlled very well in all but the last 15% or so. The Mikron's don't enjoy the same latitude however, with the 2.1 EP of the 7x, it's not like the eye can do a lot of swimming around the image, anyhow. The 6x do have a bit more relaxed view, especially through dusk when it becomes more challenging to get perfect EP alignment. In any case, it wasn't too difficult for me relinquish the 7x, all things considered. The 6x just had a greater number of things going for it, generally speaking. If I get them back, it will be interesting to verify or nullify my previous thoughts.

You're correct! It's become a training hike for more difficult trails like Mt. Whitney.
 
Last edited:
Thanks!

The magnification question should be simple to answer but I struggle. I only had both versions together for 2 days but had them around my neck at the same time, alternating between them. Here's how I would best sum up my preference; Sitting on chair with my arms braced on a table, the 7x made viewing the details on the Peach faced love birds, Gamble quail, and Spiny Lizard a bit more.... detailed and 'vivid. Standing in the yard and watching the same scene with the 7x caused me to no longer benefit from the extra magnification. The Spiny Lizard's little eyes and rainbow scales weren't as prominent because now, they were dancing around far more. Switching between the two only made the smaller FOV more noticeable in the 7x but there wasn't really the expected, accompanying, lose of detail from the 6x, because I couldn't take advantage of that extra detail from the 7x. The brain only interpreted it as smaller/larger FOV. If I sat down again and rested my arms on a soft back pack, on top of a table, while sitting in a chair or kneeling, I tended to focus on smaller detail again and the 7x came back to life.

I do believe the center sharpness is very close to the Ultravid, which is saying a lot! Since I no longer own the 8x20, I'm relying on memory perception compared to how it did with optics that I do still own. The main difference that I remember about the Leica is that its "sweet spot" was quite large and blurring nearing the edge of FOV was controlled very well in all but the last 15% or so. The Mikron's don't enjoy the same latitude however, with the 2.1 EP of the 7x, it's not like the eye can do a lot of swimming around the image, anyhow. The 6x do have a bit more relaxed view, especially through dusk when it becomes more challenging to get perfect EP alignment. In any case, it wasn't too difficult for me relinquish the 7x, all things considered. The 6x just had a greater number of things going for it, generally speaking. If I get them back, it will be interesting to verify or nullify my previous thoughts.

You're correct! It's become a training hike for more difficult trails like Mt. Whitney.

Patriot that's a very good explanation. Both are very nice for the size but overall I prefer the 6 for the combination of wider FoV, greater DoF and steadier image. I have the same experience as you, without something to steady the 7, the benefit of the extra mag is cancelled out by shake for me.

Mike
 
Patriot that's a very good explanation. Both are very nice for the size but overall I prefer the 6 for the combination of wider FoV, greater DoF and steadier image. I have the same experience as you, without something to steady the 7, the benefit of the extra mag is cancelled out by shake for me.

Mike
The little Nikon Mikron's are kind of hard to hold steady. Try wrapping your finger's completely around them and bracing your hand against your forehead. They are surprisingly good for as small as they are! I wouldn't want to lug an 8x56 binocular up Mt. Whitney!
 
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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top