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

PeterPS said:

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.

Click to expand...

Of course the ER is a "fixed parameter" but see your post #111.

I was responding to your allegation that it looked to you that "it looks like it might be a design flaw if too short eye cups are the reason for getting blackouts." (By the way, your statement is hardly an accusation.) I simply pointed out in response that the eye cups on the Monarch HG had longer eye relief than the Monarch 7 did.

Incidentally, how many complaints have there been on BF about getting blackouts while using the new Monarch HG 30mm?

Binocular manufacturers have made mistakes in the past and put eye cups on a binocular that did not fit its stated eye relief. There isn't enough evidence that this is a problem yet with these binoculars.

Bob

Troubador said:

Wise words Bob: well said.

And just like shoes different binos shine when used for different purposes.

Lee

Click to expand...

Lee,

I agree 100%.:t:

Bob

I think there would have to be some acknowledgement that as binoculars reduce in size, the margins in terms of ER, ocular size, eye placement etc. become less forgiving. Personally, i have found that 30mm represents that threshold (with the notable exception of the Nikon EII, so perhaps i should qualify this as 'regarding roof designs').
The M7 gave some problems, and others less so. It's not just glasses/not glasses, but design of those glasses, physical features, depth of eye socket etc.

With smaller bins, it becomes more critical to try before you buy....

ceasar said:

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.

Bob

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the CL Companion, if you read my post I refer to the CL Pocket, they have 17mm eye relief and is still a smaller/shorter bin.

Amount of eye relief is one thing, it might not match everyone, like shoes.
But eye cups that don't match the actual eye relief is still a design flaw.
It's more like making the shoe strings too short or too long....

I'm one of those who has had a devil of a time finding an 8x32 class glass that fits. 99% of the time it's an ER/blackout problem for me. Maybe I have a weird face????? The one's I chose to keep and use for a while required me to modify the ER with gaskets, or winged eyecups, or even using something to make the eyepiece a bigger diameter. A Leupold Mojave is the only one to date that required no modification for me.

The one's I attempted to use were the 8x32 SV (glare was horrendous), SLC wb, Meopta Meostar (Cabelas Euro), Zeiss Conquest. My favorite "package" was the Meopta (actually Cabelas Euro HD).

I'm thinking about getting one of these....thinking about it. Consider I'm saying all this having never actually looked at one. I have a few bridges I have to cross and I haven't done that yet. ONE is 30mm. A 32mm binocular is just overall easier to use. I WISH this one were a 32mm but it's not and not going to be so there's that. Another is price. I agree it SEEMS a little high to me. Even $100 less would help BECAUSE, and my LAST bridge....it's current price makes it DANGEROUSLY close to the new Swarovski CL. Why not throw in a couple more hundred dollars and get the CL if I simply HAVE to have a 30mm binocular? I have neither of these binoculars but I can't help but toss these thoughts around.

Vespobuteo said:

I'm not talking about the CL Companion, if you read my post I refer to the CL Pocket, they have 17mm eye relief and is still a smaller/shorter bin.

Amount of eye relief is one thing, it might not match everyone, like shoes.
But eye cups that don't match the actual eye relief is still a design flaw.
It's more like making the shoe strings too short or too long....

Click to expand...

OK, my error.

I was responding to your 1st sentence about the 30mm Monarch HG having a design flaw with eye cups that were too short for their ER and I misread your 2nd sentence to be about the 30mm CL Companion. I have one and I take it with me in my car when I leave the house. I don't particularly like the small diameter of its eye cups because they make eye placement somewhat difficult for me, but all in all they work OK for me.

So I will still argue that Swarovski made the CL Pocket 25mm binoculars with the correct eye cups to handle its 17mm ER. No one has alleged that they are too short to my knowledge.

Bob

paddy7 said:

I think there would have to be some acknowledgement that as binoculars reduce in size, the margins in terms of ER, ocular size, eye placement etc. become less forgiving. Personally, i have found that 30mm represents that threshold (with the notable exception of the Nikon EII, so perhaps i should qualify this as 'regarding roof designs').
The M7 gave some problems, and others less so. It's not just glasses/not glasses, but design of those glasses, physical features, depth of eye socket etc.

With smaller bins, it becomes more critical to try before you buy....

Click to expand...

I agree with that. I like to try the smaller glass but usually they don't work for me because of those reasons.

chill6x6 said:

I'm thinking about getting one of these....thinking about it. Consider I'm saying all this having never actually looked at one. I have a few bridges I have to cross and I haven't done that yet. ONE is 30mm. A 32mm binocular is just overall easier to use. I WISH this one were a 32mm but it's not and not going to be so there's that. Another is price. I agree it SEEMS a little high to me. Even $100 less would help BECAUSE, and my LAST bridge....it's current price makes it DANGEROUSLY close to the new Swarovski CL. Why not throw in a couple more hundred dollars and get the CL if I simply HAVE to have a 30mm binocular? I have neither of these binoculars but I can't help but toss these thoughts around.

Click to expand...

Try it you might like it. I think the consensus is that the new CL 8x30 is more forgiving for eye placement though. $200 bucks is nothing for you!

ceasar said:

So I will still argue that Swarovski made the CL Pocket 25mm binoculars with the correct eye cups to handle its 17mm ER. No one has alleged that they are too short to my knowledge.

Bob

Click to expand...

Apparently I'm as clear as Donald Trump in my communication.


I actually mentioned the CL pocket as an good example of that it's possible to make eye cups long enough even in a small(er) binocular.

I did some measurement on Nikon HG 8x30 product photos and it seems that eye cups only elongate 6-7 mm.

Luckily for me I always use binoculars with the eye cups slammed.
But I doubt that eye relief is long enough for me anyway.

Vespobuteo said:

Apparently I'm as clear as Donald Trump in my communication.


I actually mentioned the CL pocket as an good example of that it's possible to make eye cups long enough even in a small(er) binocular.

I did some measurement on Nikon HG 8x30 product photos and it seems that eye cups only elongate 6-7 mm.

Luckily for me I always use binoculars with the eye cups slammed.
But I doubt that eye relief is long enough for me anyway.

Click to expand...

I'm also beginning to wonder if I am as clear as Donald Trump in my communications. :eek!:

I never stated or implied that it was not possible "to make eye cups long enough even in a small(er) binocular." Certainly it is possible.

When I wrote about my Swarovski 8x25 Pocket Binocular in Post #127 above I agreed that its eye cups were long enough for its 17mm ER. I also wrote that I didn't particularly like the narrow diameter of its eye cups in finding the proper eye placement when I used it. I will add now that I never get blackouts with it.

I hope this clarification brings this issue to an end.

Bob

ceasar said:

Of course the ER is a "fixed parameter" but see your post #111.

I was responding to your allegation that it looked to you that "it looks like it might be a design flaw if too short eye cups are the reason for getting blackouts." (By the way, your statement is hardly an accusation.) I simply pointed out in response that the eye cups on the Monarch HG had longer eye relief than the Monarch 7 did.

Incidentally, how many complaints have there been on BF about getting blackouts while using the new Monarch HG 30mm?

Binocular manufacturers have made mistakes in the past and put eye cups on a binocular that did not fit its stated eye relief. There isn't enough evidence that this is a problem yet with these binoculars.

Bob

Click to expand...

Bob,

You missed the point in my post #120: you and a few others (including some dealers) use the phrase "ER of the eyecups". According to the current definition, the ER has nothing to do with the eyecups. If you said ER of the eyepieces that would be correct, but if you aren't sure just say the ER of the binos.

You also misread post #111: that post is not mine. So it was not me who made the "allegations" in post #111, in fact I tried to reply to those comments (which I wouldn't call "allegations"...) saying that imo there isn't a flaw but rather a design option.

Peter.

Peter,

Re your post 132 above.

First, I do understand the difference between ER and eye cup length.

2nd, I did misread post 111 when I attributed it to you and I apologize for it.

I responded to the original poster in my post 112. The original poster had surmised that the eye cups were too short for the ER on the Monarch HG which might have been causing blackouts. It goes into more detail than I can summarize here.

Incidentally, how else would one discuss the amount of eye relief that the eye cups have that come with the binocular if one can't use the term ER to note that the eye cups "give" or "have" eye relief that is too short for many, or most, people requiring them to hold the binocular away from their eyes to get the correct ER?

Cordially,

Bob

Interestingly, in the UK, prices seem to be "adjusting" downwards already. Clifton Cameras have the 8x30 for £799 whilst most other sellers still list them at £899. Clifton Cameras are an official Nikon seller too - so it's not a case of grey import stock. And no, I have no financial (or otherwise) connection to them. I wonder if other sellers will also adjust their prices in the near future. I'm interested to try them, but I need to get some lesser-used bins sold first...

Bob,

Good question in the last para of your post above. The binos have a given ER. You can say that, given your facial features or your use of the binos w/ glasses, the ER is too much or too little, but I do not think you can say that the eyecups have a given ER.
IMO what you can say is that the eyecups, optimally adjusted for you, match/don't match the ER of the binos.

All the best,
Peter

MandoBear said:

Interestingly, in the UK, prices seem to be "adjusting" downwards already. Clifton Cameras have the 8x30 for £799 whilst most other sellers still list them at £899. Clifton Cameras are an official Nikon seller too - so it's not a case of grey import stock. And no, I have no financial (or otherwise) connection to them. I wonder if other sellers will also adjust their prices in the near future. I'm interested to try them, but I need to get some lesser-used bins sold first...

Click to expand...

Initial prices are probably very close to the RSP.
And Nikon's RSP:s seem to be rather high quite often, I would say 20% above the reasonable, initially.

Don't know if you have Nikon's "proprietary" web store in the UK but the prices they state there are hefty. The 8x42 EDG is 2800€ for example. In store it's 500-1000€ less.

Deciding on a new lightweight compact binocular I found myself narrowed down to Nikon 8x30 Monarch HG vs Swarovski 8X30 Companion CL (latest FP model).

The published specs (of most importance to me) on the Nikon 8X30 Monarch HG are slightly better than the 8X30 Companion FP. They are here, Nikon vs Swaro:

Weight = 450g vs 490g
Eye relief = 16.2mm vs 16mm
FOV = 145m vs 132m
Length = 126mm vs 127mm

Hmm, almost looks like Nikon had a crystal ball and just barely out spec’d the lovely and appealing Austrian binocular that just came out a few months prior to the 8X30 Monarch HG! Someone needs to side by side test these two little gems to wring out the differences.

Despite the specs, I had almost decided on the Swaro just because I need it very soon for an upcoming hike and I have had a couple of chances to try out the Companion CL in person while the newer Nikon is nowhere to be found round these parts not to mention has been in seeming short supply by online dealers. The new Swaro 8X30 CL is a compelling compact with an impressive image quality for such a small lightweight binocular. Just barely sufficient eye relief for me but ok given the size/weight advantage.

Testing the 8X30 CL again at a local bird fair here in Tucson this weekend I was again positively impressed by the performance vs the size and weight. Except for the very poorly designed diopter offset adjuster on the CL (which even the Swarovski rep admitted is not great).

But then, when testing the CL at the Swarovski display, I realized the close focus limit was entirely inadequate for a modern high end compact. Published spec is 3 meters and that’s about as close as I could get from the demo unit. For my use that is just not acceptable as I often spend time in riparian areas sitting on a log watching insects on nearby plants or dragonflies skimming a pond or hummers doing their business often close by.

Obsessing over weight, size, ER, and FOV, I had completely overlooked the close focus specs on my two finalist glasses until I tested the Swaro a second time. The Nikon 8x30 MHG has a respectable 2.0m spec for close focus. The 8x30 Swaro CL at 3.0m seems unusually stingy for a modern compact.

Decision then came easy then to order the Nikon 8X30 MHG if I could find one in stock somewhere and get it delivered soon to evaluate (and have time to send it back if necessary). Fortunately, the Nikon suddenly became an in-stock item on Amazon (while still listed on backorder at most other dealers) so order was placed and it should arrive mid-week.

I will post my impression and evaluation on the 8X30 Monarch HG after it arrives. As a new member in this forum I am compelled to mention that I have no particular brand loyalty and I have and use binoculars from various manufacturers (Nikon, Leica, Swarovski, Zeiss and others).

Cheers,
Stephanie S

Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 arrived today - it appears well designed and very well finished and cannot hide who its parents are (seen here between the HG 8x42 and 10x42 models), looks kind of neat

Very first tentative impression: lightweight and comfortable to hold and use; bright clean image, little CA (there is just a tiny bit in the outer parts of the fov), almost distortion free, edge sharpness maybe a tad less impressive than in the 8x42 HG (caveat: not a firm observation yet, I need to further confirm this).

Overall very nice addition to the 8x30 market - looking forward to putting it into practice.

Time allowing during the next few weeks, I plan to review it against a number of similarly priced 8x30s, e.g. Conquest HD, Pentax DCF ED, Swaro CL (new) and MeoStar.

Canip said:

Time allowing during the next few weeks, I plan to review it against a number of similarly priced 8x30s, e.g. Conquest HD, Pentax DCF ED, Swaro CL (new) and MeoStar.

Click to expand...

I'll be looking forward to reading that. Thanks.