Monocular - 8x20 or 5x15? (1 Viewer)

The focuser of the Nikon 7x15 binocular is much easier than a Swarovski Habicht 8x30 W even in the beginning. To me the tension is about like a Nikon EII. The reason it is relatively tight is it moves the objective lens to focus. I believe a Nikon EII focuses in the same way. These tiny Nikon 7x15's are a lot like the Nikon EII's in many ways. They almost look like a baby version of them.

[email protected] said:

It is all in your facial structure and how deep your eye sockets are and how big of a diameter they are which will determine how deeply the eye cups can be inserted into your eye sockets. My eye sockets are shallow and big in diameter so I have problems with binoculars like the Zeiss 8x25 which have excessive eye relief for me. If Binastro has problems he probably has shallow eye sockets also. If you have shallow eye sockets the Swarovski 8x25 CL-P will work better for you than the Zeiss Victory 8x25 because you can hold it closer to your face without getting blackouts.

Click to expand...

Valid points but I would also add how you position the eye cups on your brow.
I also find excessive eye relief can be an issue as a non spectacle wearer so with the majority of my binoculars I adopt suitable positioning rather than just pressing the eye cups directly into my eye sockets.
Regarding the Victory I don't have to even think about it, I just place them as you do and view away. I don't think my particular facial structure is more suitable than another, I just make them work and that they do extremely well.

F88 said:

Valid points but I would also add how you position the eye cups on your brow.
I also find excessive eye relief can be an issue as a non spectacle wearer so with the majority of my binoculars I adopt suitable positioning rather than just pressing the eye cups directly into my eye sockets.
Regarding the Victory I don't have to even think about it, I just place them as you do and view away. I don't think my particular facial structure is more suitable than another, I just make them work and that they do extremely well.

Click to expand...

I don't use the brow method because it puts the binocular at an angle which I don't like especially with binoculars like the Zeiss 8x25 that have way too much eye relief. I cup my hands around the oculars of the binoculars and then use my hands against my forehead to adjust the eye relief distance to my eyes so I don't get any blackouts. I COULD use the Zeiss 8x25's in this way but I find the Swarovski's still to be more comfortable because I don't need to keep them as FAR away from my face as the Zeiss. The Zeiss have some of the most excessive eye relief in relation to the eye cup length of any binoculars I have tried even the Leica Ultravid 8x20 BCR is quite a bit better. Most compacts are this way because their eye cups are small in diameter also which causes them to have a tendency to go too far into your eye sockets. I also prefer the sharper edges of the Swarovski and flatter field even though the FOV is smaller. I don't care for a lot of field curvature but that is iust personal preference.

I have the Nikon HG 5x15 and use it about as much as all my binoculars combined. It is around my neck almost all the time, tucked into a shirt pocket.

Love it but would never use it for birding. This is the only optic I use with my glasses on. This thing has great eye relief no problem seeing the entire fov and then some. Sharp, bright, easy to use and hold steady. And 9°.

Dereck

[email protected] said:

I don't use the brow method because it puts the binocular at an angle which I don't like especially with binoculars like the Zeiss 8x25 that have way too much eye relief. I cup my hands around the oculars of the binoculars and then use my hands against my forehead to adjust the eye relief distance to my eyes so I don't get any blackouts. I COULD use the Zeiss 8x25's in this way but I find the Swarovski's still to be more comfortable because I don't need to keep them as FAR away from my face as the Zeiss. The Zeiss have some of the most excessive eye relief in relation to the eye cup length of any binoculars I have tried even the Leica Ultravid 8x20 BCR is quite a bit better. Most compacts are this way because their eye cups are small in diameter also which causes them to have a tendency to go too far into your eye sockets. I also prefer the sharper edges of the Swarovski and flatter field even though the FOV is smaller. I don't care for a lot of field curvature but that is iust personal preference.

Click to expand...

Just to clarify, I don't need to make compromises to use the Zeiss like looking through at an angle or cupping my hands to extend the eye cups etc. I also don't have deep set eye's and from your description perhaps mine are similar to yours? Well my eyes feel pretty level with my eyebrows anyway.
What I'm trying to say is that I get an easy, comfortable view with no fuss or black outs.
I owned the Ultravid 8x20 briefly, didn't like them.
Just goes to show how differently we all operate.
I can agree on the narrow eye sockets but they're compact binoculars which goes with the territory. One can always pad them out or use winged eye cups etc.
I don't tend to peer into the edges or look into a binocular at angles so the Zeiss are perfectly fine in that regard also, I would say they're quite sharp.
In my search for the perfect compact, which I believe I've found, I wanted to go as compact as possible and had even contemplated a Nikon or Leica monocular (both would be great within their limitations).
Starting small with the UV 8x20 I realised there was too much of a trade off for having such a compact size. With the Victory 8x25 I gained a bit of size and weight but importantly gained far superior handling, ease of view and have something I'm happy to take anywhere without feeling compromised as I can happily bird watch all day with these things.
When looking to go compact whether monocular or binocular it's important to acknowledge what trade offs you're willing to make, with the Zeiss' quality view and handling I feel I'm making little to no compromises however if you are restricted to or simply don't want to carry anything larger than a monocular then its compromises are better than having an empty pocket.

That is good that the Zeiss 8x25 work for you. Everybody is a little different. My point is for those people with shallow eye sockets that have problems with too much eye relief like me the Swarovski CL-P 8x25 will work better for them than the Zeiss Victory 8x25. The Ultravids 8x20 with their smaller exit pupils are definitely more fussy than either the Zeiss 8x25 or the Swarovski 8x25 but much smaller. What I am finding is the Nikon 7x15 binocular is really as good as the Ultravid 8x20 and it is easily half the size and half the price. I am starting to think I can hold it better also and with 7x you hardly ever have to focus especially at longer distances. When I go from it to the Swarovski 8x25 the bigger Swarovski feels like a pig.

In post 2 Dennis described the Nikon reversed porro 7x15 and at first sight I thought : that looks like an excellent compact binocular for different purposes and it costs "only" 379 dollars.
And as it sometimes goes I woke up and looked in our cupboards and what did I find? a compact Beck Kobold porro 7x20, ideal instrument for quite a few purposes, excellent quality no need to spend 379 dollars for a binocular nobody seems to sell in The Netherlands.
Gijs van Ginkel

Those little porro's are surprisingly good. Even in compacts porro's represent more value than roofs. I think the baby Nikon 7x15 porro is as good as the Ultravid 8x20 and 1/2 the price. It is even easier to hold. It is beyond me how 15mm of aperture can do so much. Here is a picture with the Nikon 7x15 Reverse Porro's next to a Swarovski CL-P 8x20(left), Leica Ultravid 8x20(middle) and the Nikon 7x15(right). The Nikon makes even the compacts look HUGE!

Back to the topic of small monoculars, and to the OP's questions.

I took the Nikon 5x15 HG out this morning and was pleasantly surprised. It had been awhile since I used it and the reasons I bought it and used it for my dog walks all came back to me.

This little optic is very easy to use. Plenty of eye relief, a decent 3mm exit pupil, nice wide field, and beaucoup field depth. Add to that a nice sharp view and it's tiny size and for any purpose I would have for a monocular this fits the bill. At 5x it's no optical powerhouse, but something's got to give.

Turn it around and it is useful for reading micro print on labels or some such and close up looks at leaves or bugs, etc.

Kind of cool actually.

I have the Monovid and I love it. I use it "straight" to look at far away things; "inverted" to quickly glimpse at details of rocks, flowers, and insects, and straight with the adapter to look in great detail at things one foot away with 8x. I love that it is waterproof: it means in winter, when cross country skiing or ski touring, I can slip it in a front jacket pocket, and use even in humid or inclement weather. I often use it to scope my route and see details of nearby mountains. For this reason alone, for me, the Monovid is highly preferable to non-waterproof versions.

I can actually hold the Monovid steadier than binoculars. The trick is that I clasp it tightly in my right hand, with the thumb and index finger towards my face, and the little finger on the "far" side of the monocular. Then, I press the hand against my face, with the index and thumb resting on my brow and cheekbone, more or less. The eyecup of the monovid does not touch my face; the Monovid is clasped by my hand, and the hand is pressed on my face. In this way, the Monovid is perfectly solidal with my face, and is actually much steadier than binoculars, which in spite of their eyecups, I can never brace so well against my face.

The Monovid is also very easy to lend to others, as it does not require diopter adjustements.

The more I have it, the more I like it.