Hawke Frontier Phase Corrected (1 Viewer)

Hobbes2 · Aug 29, 2011

These are the cheaper Hawke binoculars (non-ED) version. I just wondered if anyone had any experience of them? I'm particularly looking at the 10x32 option (http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/hawke_sport_optics/hawke_binoculars_fs.htm). The problem with the 10x36 ED bins is they are 700g rather than those mentioned above at just 535g (and £110).

Basically, if I had the money I'd like a pair of Zeiss FLs 8x32 or 10x32 @ just 560g but I don't have that kind of money. However, I need something light...

any advice/help would be much appreciated
thanks
Hobbes

FrankD · Aug 29, 2011

I cannot help you with that particular model. I only have experience with the ED version of the Frontiers. However, maybe you could consider the 10x36 Bushnell Legend Ultra. It is 588 grams and very respectably priced.

Hobbes2 · Aug 29, 2011

FrankD said:
I cannot help you with that particular model. I only have experience with the ED version of the Frontiers. However, maybe you could consider the 10x36 Bushnell Legend Ultra. It is 588 grams and very respectably priced.

Hi Frank
Thank you very much for the recommendation. That weight is certainly spot on. Anything up to about 600g will be managable for me. I shall have to save a few more pennies if I go in that direction. I presume they are pretty decent optics for that price? Better than, say, the 10x36 or 10x42 Nikon Monarchs (http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/nikon_bino/nikon_binoculars_fs.htm)?
Thanks again
Hobbes

CliveP · Aug 29, 2011

Legend Ultra

Hi Hobbes

I had the Legend Ultra ED 10x42 and was really impressed for the money.

Just bought some 10x32 Leica HD and in some ways they remind me of the Legend.
I read that some-one said the 10x36 is also good. I think it was Tero.

The only thing negative I found about the Legend was that the colour was maybe to saturated at perhaps the expense of some brightness but you have to get some of these Leica to get that small problem remedied.

The Legend 10x42 is actually very light and compact also. Its definitely a very good binocular.

CliveP · Aug 29, 2011

Just remembered. I used to own some 8x32 FL and the Bushnell Legend Ultra actually reminded me a lot of them. That same as if there is no glass there look. Actually thought it a bit unnatural but a neat trick nontheless.

Think Microglobe do the best prices on the Legends. Think about £250 or so for the 8 or 10x 36.

typo · Aug 30, 2011

The Pentax 9x28LV has a lot of recommendations on the forum. My wife has a pair. Lightweight and suit her small hands. If I'm being picky the FOV is a little narrow and the field curvature fairly pronounced, but when we checked out a few light weight 10x, it was the sharpest, best colour and aesthetically most pleasing.
http://www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog...e=pentax-lv-9x28mm-dcf-multicoated-binoculars

Tom, (Lilcrazy2) has posted a very positive review and bench test on the, now discontinued, Bushnell Excursion 8x28. Both the 8 and 10x are still available at attractive prices.
http://www.microglobe.co.uk/catalog...nell-binoculars-bushnell-excursion-binoculars

Personally I would be reluctant to go below 3.2 exit pupil.

David

ceasar · Aug 30, 2011

Hobbes2 said:
These are the cheaper Hawke binoculars (non-ED) version. I just wondered if anyone had any experience of them? I'm particularly looking at the 10x32 option (http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/hawke_sport_optics/hawke_binoculars_fs.htm). The problem with the 10x36 ED bins is they are 700g rather than those mentioned above at just 535g (and £110).

Basically, if I had the money I'd like a pair of Zeiss FLs 8x32 or 10x32 @ just 560g but I don't have that kind of money. However, I need something light...

any advice/help would be much appreciated
thanks
Hobbes

Have you considered compromising on a 9 x 32? Here is a Pentax that costs $270.00 US funds, and they are light. http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/pentax/pentax-dcf-bc-9x32-binocular

Bob

Hobbes2 · Aug 30, 2011

CliveP: many thanks for letting me know your experience of the Ultra ED 10x42 and the comparisons with the Zeiss FL 8x32. Even better that you pointed me in the direction of microglobe - I might just be able to scrape together £250 - it seems like it might be worth the extra to get a really decent pair.

David: thank you for the alternative recommendations. I will certainly put them into the melting pot although I'd probably like at least a 32mm objective lens

Bob: thank you too for the alternative Pentax recommendation. I shall have to see where these are available in the UK.

Thanks again,
Hobbes

FrankD · Aug 30, 2011

Hobbes,

The 8x42 Legend Ultras that I owned were definitely better optically than the Nikon Monarchs. As mentioned by the previous poster, the addition of ED glass in the objectives gives the image that "clean", sharp look over the entire sweetspot. Considering that you can get the Ultra HD for less than the Monarch (at least on my side of the pond) then it seems like a pretty simple decision.

Hobbes2 · Aug 30, 2011

FrankD said:
Hobbes,

The 8x42 Legend Ultras that I owned were definitely better optically than the Nikon Monarchs. As mentioned by the previous poster, the addition of ED glass in the objectives gives the image that "clean", sharp look over the entire sweetspot. Considering that you can get the Ultra HD for less than the Monarch (at least on my side of the pond) then it seems like a pretty simple decision.

Hi Frank
I definitely like the idea of the ED/HD glass of the Bushnell Ultras. They are probably the ones I'll go for. However, as I understand it, the Nikon Monarch MkIII glass is potentially better than the Bushnell Legend Ultra HD glass? The 10x36 in either model will work for me in terms of weight/size and at microglobe they are £240 (Bushnells) and £190 (Nikons) (both prices I am happy to pay).

Thanks,
Hobbes

typo · Aug 30, 2011

Hi Hobbes,

There have been some pretty favourable comments on the new dielectric coated MkIIIs Monarch x42s. Unfortunately the coatings don't seem to have found their way onto the x36s yet. The old MkIIs are probably a step below the Bushnell. Not sure how the new ones fare by comparison

David

Hobbes2 · Aug 30, 2011

typo said:
Hi Hobbes,

There have been some pretty favourable comments on the new dielectric coated MkIIIs Monarch x42s. Unfortunately the coatings don't seem to have found their way onto the x36s yet. The old MkIIs are probably a step below the Bushnell. Not sure how the new ones fare by comparison

David

Ah-ha, I see. Thank you, David. I would never have noticed that subtle difference unless you'd mentioned it - you would have thought that the coatings etc of a particular brand would be consistent throughout the magnification range. I shall have to be careful!

Right, looks like I'm saving up for the Bushnell Ultra HDs 10x36s... (unless I suddenly decide to go for the 12x magnification in the Mk3 42mm Monarchs, lol!)
Thank you for your time and help
Hobbes

FrankD · Aug 30, 2011

....and I don't believe the glass itself changed from the previous to the current version of the Monarchs...it was just a switch from their previous roof prism coating (aluminum I am guessing) to dielectric. That is a jump right over silver-coated. Don't quote me but I believe the Ultra HDs have dielectric coating as well. I would have to check on that though.

typo · Aug 30, 2011

The Bushnell website isn't explicit on the subject. The XTR technology used on the Elite makes reference to prism coatings but not specifically the mirrored surfaces. Nothing is mentioned for the Legend Ultra HD. I guess we presume not.

David

lilcrazy2 · Sep 2, 2011

Hobbes2 said:
Hi Frank
I definitely like the idea of the ED/HD glass of the Bushnell Ultras. They are probably the ones I'll go for. However, as I understand it, the Nikon Monarch MkIII glass is potentially better than the Bushnell Legend Ultra HD glass? The 10x36 in either model will work for me in terms of weight/size and at microglobe they are £240 (Bushnells) and £190 (Nikons) (both prices I am happy to pay).

Thanks,
Hobbes

You can't go wrong with the 10x36 Legend Ultra HD's, as there really isn't much better for the $$ IMO. I currently have the 8x36 & 10x42 models, and the only reason I got rid of my 10x36's was that they were to similar to the 10x42's which I kept for hunting. Having had the 10x36 Monarchs as well, I prefer the Bushnells much, much better for their optical performance.

Binos always seem so expensive across the pond. In the US, the 10x36 Legend Ultra HD's can be had for $205 shipped and there is a $50 rebate from Bushnell thru the end of the year, making them only $155 net. Can't beat that with a stick.

David is right in that I like the little 8x28 Bushnell Excursions A LOT! All these people gushing about the ho-hum Swaro 8x30 CL ought to do a comparison and save the additional $800 for something better.

Tom

Hobbes2 · Sep 2, 2011

lilcrazy2 said:
You can't go wrong with the 10x36 Legend Ultra HD's, as there really isn't much better for the $$ IMO. I currently have the 8x36 & 10x42 models, and the only reason I got rid of my 10x36's was that they were to similar to the 10x42's which I kept for hunting. Having had the 10x36 Monarchs as well, I prefer the Bushnells much, much better for their optical performance.

Binos always seem so expensive across the pond. In the US, the 10x36 Legend Ultra HD's can be had for $205 shipped and there is a $50 rebate from Bushnell thru the end of the year, making them only $155 net. Can't beat that with a stick.

David is right in that I like the little 8x28 Bushnell Excursions A LOT! All these people gushing about the ho-hum Swaro 8x30 CL ought to do a comparison and save the additional $800 for something better.

Tom

Hi Tom
Thank you for your glowing recommendation and for letting me know how the Bushnells compare to the Monarchs. I definitely like the idea of getting a good binocular for as little money as possible. Unless something drastic changes, I am set on ordering the Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 10x36s. Unfortunately, I had a plumbing emergency this week which wiped out the binocular fund (such is life, lol) but hopefully within the next couple of months I'll be able to get them
Thanks again,
Hobbes

Hawke Frontier Phase Corrected (1 Viewer)

More options

Hobbes2

Well-known member

FrankD

Well-known member

Hobbes2

Well-known member

CliveP

Well-known member

CliveP

Well-known member

typo

Well-known member

ceasar

Well-known member

Hobbes2

Well-known member

FrankD

Well-known member

Hobbes2

Well-known member

typo

Well-known member

Hobbes2

Well-known member

FrankD

Well-known member

typo

Well-known member

lilcrazy2

Well-known member

Hobbes2

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread