Nikon 10x25 Image Stabilized Binocular Review (1 Viewer)

pm42 · Oct 10, 2020

After a few days using it, I think that you really need to know what you will using the Nikon 10x25 before buying them instead of say, the Zeiss 8x25 I also own.
In my case, it will be for archery, to better see where my arrows are and they will replace an old and relatively inefficient Minox monocular.

But for general use and unless you need x10 and IS to see the finest detail, the Zeiss are lighter, nicer to use, rubber covered, focuser is better, optics are a class above, FOV is much wider and they are much more "eyeglasses compatible".
And in low light, the Nikon are not really up to the task, I find them quite dark.

The Nikon are still a nice piece of technology and I like them more than the Canon IS I tried: compact, instant IS, better design.

PeterPS · Oct 10, 2020

pm42 said:
After a few days using it, I think that you really need to know what you will using the Nikon 10x25 before buying them instead of say, the Zeiss 8x25 I also own.
In my case, it will be for archery, to better see where my arrows are and they will replace an old and relatively inefficient Minox monocular.

But for general use and unless you need x10 and IS to see the finest detail, the Zeiss are lighter, nicer to use, rubber covered, focuser is better, optics are a class above, FOV is much wider and they are much more "eyeglasses compatible".
And in low light, the Nikon are not really up to the task, I find them quite dark.

The Nikon are still a nice piece of technology and I like them more than the Canon IS I tried: compact, instant IS, better design.

Thanks for your useful comments. Imo the main problems of the Nikon 10x25 IS are that they can be used as a binocular only with the IS engaged, and that the battery will then be depleted rather quickly (in about 3h)----these two problems are likely to be deal breakers for many people.

pm42 · Oct 10, 2020

PeterPS said:
Imo the main problems of the Nikon 10x25 IS are that they can be used as a binocular only with the IS engaged, and that the battery will then be depleted rather quickly (in about 3h)----these two problems are likely to be deal breakers for many people.

Yes but my Canon 12x36 were also pretty much unusable without IS because my body has arms and hands instead of a tripod

I'm under the impression that if you want to use your binocular several hours a day, the Nikon are not what you would choose anyway.
Anyhow, using rechargeable batteries and having at least one spare is no biggie for me: I do that with my digital cameras anyhow.

PeterPS · Oct 10, 2020

pm42 said:
Yes but my Canon 12x36 were also pretty much unusable without IS because my body has arms and hands instead of a tripod

As far as I know the Canon 12x36 IS III can be used about 10h on a battery charge, that's a big difference. For birding they can also be used without the IS, but probably not for your application.

denco@comcast.n · Oct 10, 2020

PeterPS said:
Thanks for your useful comments. Imo the main problems of the Nikon 10x25 IS are that they can be used as a binocular only with the IS engaged, and that the battery will then be depleted rather quickly (in about 3h)----these two problems are likely to be deal breakers for many people.

I don't see why that would be a deal breaker. Carry and extra battery in your pocket or on the strap! They can also be used as a 10x25 monocular if you don't have any batteries, and they work well as a monocular.

denco@comcast.n · Oct 12, 2020

pm42 said:
After a few days using it, I think that you really need to know what you will using the Nikon 10x25 before buying them instead of say, the Zeiss 8x25 I also own.
In my case, it will be for archery, to better see where my arrows are and they will replace an old and relatively inefficient Minox monocular.

But for general use and unless you need x10 and IS to see the finest detail, the Zeiss are lighter, nicer to use, rubber covered, focuser is better, optics are a class above, FOV is much wider and they are much more "eyeglasses compatible".
And in low light, the Nikon are not really up to the task, I find them quite dark.

The Nikon are still a nice piece of technology and I like them more than the Canon IS I tried: compact, instant IS, better design.

The Zeiss do have their advantages but it is hard to make an IS binocular as light as a normal one. I think Nikon did a pretty good job keeping them at 14 oz. which is pretty good for a 10x25 IS binocular. It is nice to see somebody making a smaller lighter IS binocular now let's see if Swarovski or Zeiss will follow.

etudiant · Oct 13, 2020

PeterPS said:
Thanks for your useful comments. Imo the main problems of the Nikon 10x25 IS are that they can be used as a binocular only with the IS engaged, and that the battery will then be depleted rather quickly (in about 3h)----these two problems are likely to be deal breakers for many people.

I think it depends on how people use their glass.
I use my Canon 10x42s as normal binoculars until something demands closer focus. Then I click in the IS, which magically smooths the jitter and allows me to focus on the bird. If I let the binoculars down, the IS turns off and I have to turn it on again for the next viewing. On that regime, a pair of lithium AAs easily lasts for a month.
My guess is that the new Nikon would behave similarly. I doubt that the monocular view it imposes when not in IS mode is a big issue, although I do think it another example of the Nikon marketing tin ear syndrome.

denco@comcast.n · Oct 14, 2020

etudiant said:
I think it depends on how people use their glass.
I use my Canon 10x42s as normal binoculars until something demands closer focus. Then I click in the IS, which magically smooths the jitter and allows me to focus on the bird. If I let the binoculars down, the IS turns off and I have to turn it on again for the next viewing. On that regime, a pair of lithium AAs easily lasts for a month.
My guess is that the new Nikon would behave similarly. I doubt that the monocular view it imposes when not in IS mode is a big issue, although I do think it another example of the Nikon marketing tin ear syndrome.

I am sure Nikon figured the majority of the people that use these small Nikon 10x25 IS binoculars are not going to worry about battery life. They will just carry an extra battery. I find the IS a huge advantage on these small compact 10x binoculars. I personally would never go back to a regular compact binocular. I could never tolerate a regular compact because of the shaking, difficult eye placement and how finicky they were to use. The IS solves a lot of those problems. I can see more detail with these than I can with my NL 8x42.

pm42 · Oct 14, 2020

[email protected] said:
I could never tolerate a regular compact because of the shaking, difficult eye placement and how finicky they were to use.

I see at least as much details and with greater comfort in my Zeiss 8x25.

[email protected] said:
I can see more detail with these than I can with my NL 8x42.

See above. The Nikon IS is very convenient but the CA, small FOV, need to focus very precisely with a small focuser are the price to pay.

Super Dave · Oct 14, 2020

Hi everyone,

My Nikon's arrived and I am very pleased with them.

The optical quality is very good, the image stabilization is excellent. Nikon did a great job.

The overall package isn't up to alpha quality. But it's really good. I would buy them again even at the high price I paid. I'd like to get another pair for the family but will wait for prices to come down...

The only thing I disagree on is that my sample would not make a very good monocular. When the IS is off the image is very, very shaky with any movement. It's not like the IS mechanism is locked in place when its off...it moves around and jiggles which amplifies the movement when looking through it.

This will be a great travel bin for me and will be excellent for my car. This is a very positive step forward in the IS market and hope it motivates the alphas to enter the market.

Nice find Dennis!

denco@comcast.n · Oct 15, 2020

pm42 said:
I see at least as much details and with greater comfort in my Zeiss 8x25.

See above. The Nikon IS is very convenient but the CA, small FOV, need to focus very precisely with a small focuser are the price to pay.

No way does a normal handheld 8x binocular show as much as detail as a 10x IS one does. Comfort is subjective. I find the Nikon 10x25 IS more comfortable than the Zeiss 8x25 because the eye cups on the Zeiss are too short for my shallow eye sockets. The Nikon 10x25 IS has excellent CA control even at the edge, the FOV is as big as the Swarovski CL-P 10x25 so it is very comparable to the alpha compacts and the focuser is not small at all. In fact, it is one of the bigger focus wheels on compact binoculars. Look at the pictures.

denco@comcast.n · Oct 15, 2020

Super Dave said:
Hi everyone,

My Nikon's arrived and I am very pleased with them.

The optical quality is very good, the image stabilization is excellent. Nikon did a great job.

The overall package isn't up to alpha quality. But it's really good. I would buy them again even at the high price I paid. I'd like to get another pair for the family but will wait for prices to come down...

The only thing I disagree on is that my sample would not make a very good monocular. When the IS is off the image is very, very shaky with any movement. It's not like the IS mechanism is locked in place when its off...it moves around and jiggles which amplifies the movement when looking through it.

This will be a great travel bin for me and will be excellent for my car. This is a very positive step forward in the IS market and hope it motivates the alphas to enter the market.

Nice find Dennis!

I just noticed the jiggling when the IS is off and you are right it would not make a good monocular because of that but why would you use it without the IS anyway? I agree it is not quite alpha quality BUT it will still show way more detail than any of the alpha compacts because of the IS. I can see more detail in my Canon 12x36 IS III than I can with my Swarovski NL 8x42 any day of the week. Nice pictures. They show how similar in size the Nikon 10x25 IS to the other compacts. I am glad you like them!

pppppvvvv · Oct 15, 2020

[email protected] said:
I just noticed the jiggling when the IS is off and you are right it would not make a good monocular because of that but why would you use it without the IS anyway?

According to your post 65, when you have run out of battery.
Binoculars with a 3 hour battery life aren't for any birders I'm afraid.

etudiant · Oct 16, 2020

peter.jones said:
According to your post 65, when you have run out of battery.
Binoculars with a 3 hour battery life aren't for any birders I'm afraid.

Peter, I think that is a straw man argument at best.
In a days birding, one would need to be exceptionally lucky or diligent to be observing for three hours. Perhaps your circumstances are different, but most of my time is always spent looking for indications that a bird might be present.
Then a first look, if rewarded, gets the IS engaged.
So a three hour IS life is plenty imho.

denco@comcast.n · Oct 16, 2020

etudiant said:
Peter, I think that is a straw man argument at best.
In a days birding, one would need to be exceptionally lucky or diligent to be observing for three hours. Perhaps your circumstances are different, but most of my time is always spent looking for indications that a bird might be present.
Then a first look, if rewarded, gets the IS engaged.
So a three hour IS life is plenty imho.

I agree. If you used the IS for 3 hours continually you would have to see a LOT of birds, and they would have to be sitting a long time for you to view them. I think 3 hours is plenty of time the way I bird. You have to really think about how much time you are actually viewing the bird.

Alexis Powell · Oct 16, 2020

I feel sorry for you folks who don't regularly have days that allow for 3+ hours of cumulative birding, whether that is defined as 3+ hours of time looking through optics at a bird or whether it is defined as 3+ hours looking through optics to check for possible birds in the course of searching (during which time I assume any birder would want the bins to be functional with IS on and no shutter closed). I regularly log 3+ hours birding in both ways.

That said, rechargeable CR2 batteries are small, inexpensive, and convenient, so except when traveling in rugged conditions, I don't see carrying them and switching them out as a problem.

All of the above said, I don't think 10x25 bins are the tool of choice for long bouts of birding in any case. These and any 10x25 are best suited to snatching views of birds opportunistically, especially in the course of other activities where a small bin might be the only practical choice and where image stabilizing might be especially helpful for counteracting elevated levels of muscle shake (e.g. hiking, trail running, bicycling).

--AP

denco@comcast.n · Oct 16, 2020

Alexis Powell said:
I feel sorry for you folks who don't regularly have days that allow for 3+ hours of cumulative birding, whether that is defined as 3+ hours of time looking through optics at a bird or whether it is defined as 3+ hours looking through optics to check for possible birds in the course of searching (during which time I assume any birder would want the bins to be functional with IS on and no shutter closed). I regularly log 3+ hours birding in both ways.

That said, rechargeable CR2 batteries are small, inexpensive, and convenient, so except when traveling in rugged conditions, I don't see carrying them and switching them out as a problem.

All of the above said, I don't think 10x25 bins are the tool of choice for long bouts of birding in any case. These and any 10x25 are best suited to snatching views of birds opportunistically, especially in the course of other activities where a small bin might be the only practical choice and where image stabilizing might be especially helpful for counteracting elevated levels of muscle shake (e.g. hiking, trail running, bicycling).

--AP

I agree. The Nikon 10x25 IS are my compact binoculars for the activities you mention. My main birding binoculars are my NL 8x42. I have a couple other IS binoculars for long distance birding or wildlife viewing when I want to see a lot of detail, and they seem to work well on the night sky also. A Canon 12x36 IS III and a Canon 8x20 IS. It is hard to beat the NL 8x42 for an all around birding binocular but the Canon IS will show more detail.

etudiant · Oct 17, 2020

Alexis Powell said:
I feel sorry for you folks who don't regularly have days that allow for 3+ hours of cumulative birding, whether that is defined as 3+ hours of time looking through optics at a bird or whether it is defined as 3+ hours looking through optics to check for possible birds in the course of searching (during which time I assume any birder would want the bins to be functional with IS on and no shutter closed). I regularly log 3+ hours birding in both ways.

That said, rechargeable CR2 batteries are small, inexpensive, and convenient, so except when traveling in rugged conditions, I don't see carrying them and switching them out as a problem.

All of the above said, I don't think 10x25 bins are the tool of choice for long bouts of birding in any case. These and any 10x25 are best suited to snatching views of birds opportunistically, especially in the course of other activities where a small bin might be the only practical choice and where image stabilizing might be especially helpful for counteracting elevated levels of muscle shake (e.g. hiking, trail running, bicycling).

--AP

Even in these Covid-19 days, us Manhattan birders spend most of our birding day looking for birds rather than looking at birds.
For the rest of our time, the binocular is just another dead weight. Seen from that perspective, the new Nikon appears a less ponderous alternative to my Canon 10x42. I've ordered one and will post my impressions once it gets here sometime next month.

denco@comcast.n · Oct 18, 2020

etudiant said:
Even in these Covid-19 days, us Manhattan birders spend most of our birding day looking for birds rather than looking at birds.
For the rest of our time, the binocular is just another dead weight. Seen from that perspective, the new Nikon appears a less ponderous alternative to my Canon 10x42. I've ordered one and will post my impressions once it gets here sometime next month.

Let us know how you like them. They won't replace those big Canons 10x42 IS-L, but they only weigh about a 1/3 as much. Compare them to different compacts if you have any. They will outperform most compacts when it comes to seeing detail just like your Canon 10x42IS-L will outperform most regular sized binoculars.

etudiant · Oct 21, 2020

[email protected] said:
Let us know how you like them. They won't replace those big Canons 10x42 IS-L, but they only weigh about a 1/3 as much. Compare them to different compacts if you have any. They will outperform most compacts when it comes to seeing detail just like your Canon 10x42IS-L will outperform most regular sized binoculars.

Well, the Nikons arrived early, kudos to the Ebay seller (https://www.ebay.com/usr/skmt01?_trksid=p2047675.l2559)
and DHL!

Just a couple of walks with them, am pleased by their light weight and solid performance.
Some initial impressions:
Decent packaging, agree the carrying pouch is useless, maybe good for a pint of gin but not for a binocular. Against that, the very petite carrying strap actually works well, because the glass is light enough that suspending it from the neck is OK, unlike the situation with my Canon 10x42.
The package includes a cute little battery holder to clip on the strap, along with the rainguard. Clearly Nikon is aware that this glass really works only with the IS powered up.
The IS is very effective and is easily engaged by a button conveniently located under the middle finger, with the focus wheel under the index.
I think the IS should be engaged when lifting the glass and then turned off when dropping it back. That maximizes battery life with no impact on the user experience, as the IS kicks in immediately.
The dual hinge design is much like that of other 8x20s, with a center body and two moving tubes for the objectives. It may take some getting used to for those accustomed to single hinge binoculars, particularly as this is a 10x25, where exact eye placement is really critical for the best view.
FoV is a smidge less than my big Canon, while close focus is perhaps a foot better, under two meters by my estimate.
Optically, the glass is very good, beautifully sharp and easily focused exactly.
The focus is nice and smooth, much faster than on the Canon, less than one full turn lock to lock versus almost three.
Overall, I think this is a very successful new design. It looks good and performs well. I think it resets the bar for everyday binoculars. A more mainstream waterproof 8x or 10x30 version is surely in the pipeline.

Nikon 10x25 Image Stabilized Binocular Review (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-Known Member

Well-known member

Well-Known Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Guest

Registered User

Well-known member

Natural history enthusiast

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Registered User

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread