Nikon Monarch 16x56 vs, 20x56 (1 Viewer)

Hello
I'm looking for a high power binocular observations permanent position, I've noticed the Nikon Monarch 16x56 and 20x56 models, in your opinion which one might be best for this purpose?
Any other suggestions of other models in this price range and quality?
I would use with monopod or tripod.
I have both.
Thank you, Best Regards
Al

Hi Al,
It depends what you are looking at.
Also whether a scope would be better.
Also how much turbulence in your surrounding air.
And times of observations.

I have both Monarchs and use the 16x usually for day-time observations, the 20x almost exclusively for astro.
During the day, and esp. at wider distances, air turbulence often prevents you from using the full potential of 20x, therefore 16x is frequently the better choice. At night, 20x can reveal slightly more details than the 16x, e.g. on the moon, or Saturn's ring.
The Monarchs are good binoculars for their price, and they are probably the most compact 16x and 20x binos around. You will not make a mistake if you go for one of them (of course, you will try them out before buying or purchase form a shop with a good return policy).
More expensive, but also with better sharpness and contrast and CA is the new Meopta MeoStar 15x56 HD, which in my experience performs almost at the level of the Conquest HD or SLC (which both are even more expensive).
In the same price range as the Monarchs, you would find e.g. the 16x70 and 20x70 APM/Lunt, which both are very good for their price and "outperform" the Monarchs, but are clearly larger and heavier than the Monarchs (which may not be a problem if, as you write, you only observe from a fixed position on a tripod).

Hi Canip,
Does the 20x56 show the gap between Saturn's globe and the ring?
Or is Saturn too low?

Is there false colour on Saturn?

Al:

I own the M5 16x56, and use it mostly for terrestrial use and tripod mounted.

I find it very useful and the quality is good all around. I've compared its performance
to the Docter Nobilem 15x60 and they are both very close in both sharpness and brightness.
The extra power of a 16X is noticeable and nice. In the past I had the Minox 15x58 ED, and
both of these are sharper, and have less CA.

I would think the 16x56 would be better for all around, as mentioned above.

There are 2 reviews of this model, that I have found. Binomania has tested the 20x56,
and Scopeviews.co.uk has a review of the 16x56. They both give these models very good
reviews, and are a good value.

I have pictured both of these, along with 2 binocular mounts, the Berlebach on the Doctor, and the
Bogpod bino mount on the Nikon. Both of these are nice and are more stable than the center stud
models. The nice thing I like about the Berlebach, as it will hold any binocular from wide porro to
a roof type.
The 2 mounts on the other picture, are the Nikon Binocumount, and the
Nikon one provided with the Monarch 5 on the Docter.
So there are many ways to mount these.

Jerry

Binastro said:

Hi Canip,
Does the 20x56 show the gap between Saturn's globe and the ring?
Or is Saturn too low?

Is there false colour on Saturn?

Click to expand...

Yes, the gap is clearly visible, even with the current low position of Saturn. In the 16x it's not that clear, more sort of a guess.
There isn't much false colour in my view (on the moon, there is a bit more, but as with most glasses, it has much to do with how well aligned your eyes are to the exit pupils; it's not bad in the Monarch, but e.g. a MeoStar 15x56 would be a bit more foregiving here)

In the Moon and planets 20X is advantage for the extra magnification, but for DSO like star cluster, Milky Way wide field maybe the extra field of the 16X model can be best ?
And for birding two eyes ouuuh!! 20X maybe up on the 16X, extra magnification...details more pronounced ?
Thanks...
PD.: Then there is much difference between the two Monarch ? or more in the side of "similar" binoculars..
On the other hand, trhe Meopta is the " double price" compared with the Monarch..
Paul

The difference is not huge, but noticeable, but the "character" of the image is similar between the two Monarch models.
Again, if in doubt, I would go for the 16x version, which I find a bit more versatile.

And yes, the Meopta is clearly more expensive, but it is optically at least a class above the Monarchs