Nikon Monarch or Audubon Equinox HP? (1 Viewer)

I am searching for a new pair of binoculars and I have narrowed it down to two(I think).

Audubon Equinox HP 10x42
Nikon Monarch ATB 10x42

What are the differences between these two? Which one is considered to be better? I do like the looks of the eyecups on the Equinox, but, of course, this is not the most important thing.
Are there any other good, waterproof, 10x, roof prism binoculars for $300 dollars or less?
I will not be able to try them out before I buy them, so I need to do a lot of Don't try to persuade me to go for the 8x instead of the 10x. I can't afford a scope, so I want all the practical magnification possible.
Thanks.

Ok, I won't try to convince you to go to an 8x....however, of the three pair of Nikon Monarch 10x42s that I owned only one pair had what I consider acceptable image quality. Two of the three, camo models if that makes any difference, had a much smaller clear section of the image in comparison to both the original, non-camo 10x42 and the 8x42 I have had the privelege to own. Unacceptable enough for me to return them.

Though your given criteria does not allow for either of my two suggestions I will say them none the less....either go with the 8x42 Monarch or actually try the 10x42 you are going to buy before you walk out the store with them. Quality control at this price point can be poor at times.

I have no experience with the Audobons. Sorry I could not help more.

Frank - Do you have the older Nikon Monarchs?

As I recall, the optics on the older versions were not phase coated. The new ones, that came out a year or two ago, are phase coated. Phase coating is a must have for good image quality on roof prism binoculars.

Andy,

Yes. All of the 3 models I owned were the more recent version of the Monarch ATB with phase coating. As I stated, the original 10x42 pair I owned were excellent in just about every regard. The two camo models I purchased later were lacking in the area I previously mentioned.