• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

~6.5 power binoculars? (1 Viewer)

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
I.F. has its place IMHO for some users and the places they use their bins. My "Police" Steiners focus at ~2m and are super easy to just pick up and use. Fast focus versus precise slow focus? How about NO FOCUS!

On 6.5 power close focus bins though, I'm not sure I.F. is the best choice for many people as a sharp 2' focus that then changes to ~20' probably isn't an option for I.F. bins.
I never look at stuff at 2' away. I use my eyes when I am that close. I don't WANT to see a bird at 5' away and I don't do bugs. I am more of a long distance birder or wildlife observer. I will use the Fujinon FMTR-SX 7x50 and FMTR-SX 10x50 for glassing for wolves at dawn and dusk in the huge Lamar Valley of Yellowstone National Park.
 
Last edited:

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Was mentioned earlier but wasn't any more....Why not try a Pentax Papilio II 6.5X21 reverse porro? I brushed off this little binocular for years. It is literally THE binocular that should be in every inset-watchers repertoire. It will practically focus to any distance you seem fit! I believe it will focus to like 1.5ft. It is admittedly a pretty amazing little binocular. Mine weights 10.4oz. Optically it's better than you would expect. Ricoh states its FOV is 393ft. ER is stated at 15mm and I can use it with eyeglasses on. You can probably get one for $125. What have you got to lose? View attachment 1366274
Trouble with the Papilio is they are no good at distance or in low light, and they have no 3D because of the closely space reverse Porro objective lenses. They are designed for looking at bugs and I don't do bugs. The optics don't compare to a good compact like the Zeiss Victory 8x25 or Swarovski CL-P 8x25. Of course the alpha compacts are way more expensive but if I am going to carry a compact binocular it is going to be a good one.
 
Last edited:

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
To each their own :) Everyone has their own preferences, and I am not trying to be argumentative, but there are a lot of good reasons why birders don't tend to carry 50mm+ porros, independent focus bins, or very many bins over 10x magnification. Sure, I've seen large porros in the field a few times (mostly in Latin America, among younger birders, where access to and funds for newer bins are limited so they're working with what they can get their hands on). And sure, I've seen 12x and 15x bins on finnsticks in certain areas and in certain circumstances, but not frequently. However, I've never seen an IF bin in a birders hands...
That is because through advertising and marketing people are brainwashed into buying the expensive alpha roofs that the manufacturers want to sell and make the most profit on.
 

Maljunulo

Well-known member
That is because through advertising and marketing people are brainwashed into buying the expensive alpha roofs that the manufacturers want to sell and make the most profit on.
I, for one, am really glad that the Advertising and Marketing people at Zeiss brainwashed me into buying an 8X32 SF, with which I am delighted, thus enabling me to give the EL SV 10X42 which Swarovski duped me into buying 6+ years ago to my #1 granddaughter..

Thank you Zeiss.
 
Last edited:

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Like people who buy NLs?
I realized I was brainwashed when I compared my Swarovski NL 8x42 to my Fujinon FMTR-SX 10x50 head to head. I said to myself why I am spending $3K for these NL's when I prefer the view through the $800 Fujinons. The Fujinons are brighter and have a more natural stereoscopic view than the NL's which is much higher in quality and above all more "real." I sold the NL's that week.
 

Paskman

Registered User
Supporter
I realized I was brainwashed when I compared my Swarovski NL 8x42 to my Fujinon FMTR-SX 10x50 head to head. I said to myself why I am spending $3K for these NL's when I prefer the view through the $800 Fujinons. The Fujinons are brighter and have a more natural stereoscopic view than the NL's which is much higher in quality and above all more "real." I sold the NL's that week.
Does that mean you will not be buying the NL 8x32 as and when it appears? If you do I would suggest that you keep your head down 😂 Anyway, keep up the posts because, although I might not agree with all of them, it's people like you that keep this forum interesting(y)
 

sidpost

Well-known member
United States
I realized I was brainwashed when I compared my Swarovski NL 8x42 to my Fujinon FMTR-SX 10x50 head to head. I said to myself why I am spending $3K for these NL's when I prefer the view through the $800 Fujinons. The Fujinons are brighter and have a more natural stereoscopic view than the NL's which is much higher in quality and above all more "real." I sold the NL's that week.
My brief test of a set of Swarovski NL Pure bins was not under the most favorable conditions but, I believe a fair comparison point.

I found the view to be very easy for me to use with my glasses. Hand holding was effortless and easy. The view itself was a bit ho-hum or average. Not bad but, also not WOW!

Compared to my ~$220 Steiners, are the NL Pure's ~15 times better? Honestly no they are not in general terms. In terms of size and ergonomics, they are better and, the view is better overall. However, is that last 5% or 10% of 'performance' really worth around $3,000 extra in purchase expense?

Compared to my Zeiss Conquest HD 8x33's, which is currently about a third the cost, I'd be seriously interested in demo'ing a set of Zeiss Conquest HD's in a similar format first. While the ergonomics may not be as svelte and the view may only be 99% of the NL Pure's, I'll take the 2/3rds savings and use that ~$2,000 to travel and see more stuff in person.

The "knee" of the cost to benefit curve to me is in the $1,000 to $1,500 range. Going from a good set of ~$1K bins to a similar high performance set at $2K or $3K really is almost like 'bit twiddling in the noise floor' of whatever performance metric is appropriate in the realm of your profession or hobbies.
 

Pinewood

New York correspondent
United States
Hello Si
You are pretty close to the point of diminishing returns with you Zeiss Conquest HD, especially with the Zeiss warranty. A year ago, a bird watcher was proudly showing of his Nikon Monarch 8x42 to a neophyte, but I do not recall which model. I offered the neophyte a look through my 8x32 Zeiss FL and she immediately saw the improvement.

Stay safe,
Arthur
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Does that mean you will not be buying the NL 8x32 as and when it appears? If you do I would suggest that you keep your head down 😂 Anyway, keep up the posts because, although I might not agree with all of them, it's people like you that keep this forum interesting(y)
Not unless the NL 8x32 is a Porro and I highly doubt it will be! If I can get a Porro with a view I like better for $800 why spend $2500 for a NL 8x32. My Steiner Shadowquest 8x56 will eat a little NL 8x32 for lunch and still have room for a Zeiss Victory 8x25 for dessert. No matter what type of glass or how good the optics are on the NL 8x32 a big 8x56 will kill it 98% of the time. It is a matter of physics.
 
Last edited:

chill6x6

Well-known member
OK, I'll bite... what's the Fujinon to the right of it, and how does it compare? Doesn't seem to be made anymore.
Fujinon KF 8X25. I think it's still being made. I was kinda expecting the two to be very similar optically. Really it wasn't close. Overall I thought the Papilio was a MUCH better binocular in practically all areas. I'd probably say the Papilio is one of the best $125 binoculars I've ever bought. In fact I used it for that entire day of birding and never missed an ID. I've used it a few others times just for fun. It actually functioned quite well from as close as desired to infinity. Just a nice inexpensive, compact little binocular. I sure wouldn't recommend the Fujinon to anyone other than maybe a childs first binocular.
 

Kevin Conville

yardbirder
Overall I thought the Papilio was a MUCH better binocular in practically all areas. I'd probably say the Papilio is one of the best $125 binoculars I've ever bought. In fact I used it for that entire day of birding and never missed an ID. I've used it a few others times just for fun. It actually functioned quite well from as close as desired to infinity. Just a nice inexpensive, compact little binocular.
You've got me intrigued Chuck. I've thought to add a pair of these before, just for fun but...I looked around and nowhere does Pentax even give lip service to the notion of water resistance, let alone the coveted water proof moniker. No splash proof, no rain resistant. They're making it tough for me.
 

mwhogue

Well Known Member
Supporter
As a big fan of 6/6.5x:

Agreed the 6.5x Papilio is a top all around choice at the price. My only problem with it is I'm not able to keep faster moving insects within the FOV, e.g. the Monarchs and larger dragons almost always elude me. For those, either Zeiss 7x42 FL or Kowa 6.5x32 work like a charm. But, the Papilios are best - and better in some ways than either - with the slower moving species like damsels and sweat bees. Good news is the Papilios are small and light enough to carry as a second pair. A "brace" of binoculars made possible by the Papilio.

Mike
 

chill6x6

Well-known member
You've got me intrigued Chuck. I've thought to add a pair of these before, just for fun but...I looked around and nowhere does Pentax even give lip service to the notion of water resistance, let alone the coveted water proof moniker. No splash proof, no rain resistant. They're making it tough for me.
It's not waterproof whatsoever and Ricoh makes no pretense it is. I crossed that bridge before purchase knowing I would use it only when the weather is nice or would have to accept the consequences. I just use it for trips around the house. Notice there is no central hinge on the Papilio. The eyecup mechanism moves and adjust concurrently. Maybe that's the reason they aren't waterproof. $119 on Amazon or eBay. I bet you'd enjoy them!
 

LucaPCP

Registered User
Supporter
Trouble with the Papilio is they are no good at distance or in low light, and they have no 3D because of the closely space reverse Porro objective lenses. They are designed for looking at bugs and I don't do bugs. The optics don't compare to a good compact like the Zeiss Victory 8x25 or Swarovski CL-P 8x25. Of course the alpha compacts are way more expensive but if I am going to carry a compact binocular it is going to be a good one.
Actually I find my Papilio to be really quite sharp. Not at the level of the Victory but not very far behind.
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Actually I find my Papilio to be really quite sharp. Not at the level of the Victory but not very far behind.
I find the Papilio 6.5x21 sharp out to about 100 yards, and then it falls off in resolution. It is a big reason I never liked them for general birding. For closeup birding and bugs they are fine. I think it is because the optics are optimized for close up viewing that it is not as sharp at long range. i find almost any small compact better at longer distances than the Papilio. Here is a review from Amazon.com just to show I am not alone.

"3.0 out of 5 stars Poor distance viewing
Reviewed in the United States on April 7, 2016
Verified Purchase
I must have read the description wrong; I thought it would work for long distance viewing as well; but I could not see detail of a bird flying or in a tree in my neighbor's yard. I had to return the product because it wasn't quite what I wanted; poor distance viewing on the Pentax Papilio ll."
 

sidpost

Well-known member
United States
https://luntsolarsystems.com/shop/binoculars/apm-ms-series/apm-6x30-ms-magnesium-series-binoculars/

Lunt has the 6x30'd on pre-order but, I don't think they have the close focus I want. That also leaves Kowa and Maven options under consideration.

Any new updates to 6x~30 close focus bins these days? Depth of Field matters to me as well.

If my Steiner 8x30's close focused and were 6 power, I'd gladly cough up another ~$200 for a pair right now! And yes, the more I use I.F. the more I like it though the close focus distances tend to be a bit long unless I'm using them on my farm. For farm use, they rule IMHO! In fact, my Zeiss and Leica NV haven't left the house when staying close to home on the farm as they are simply so easy to use and durable they are a far superior fit in that role.

I like the Porro's but, older narrow F.O.V. options with short eye relief just aren't an option for me at this time with past and current experiences. So, good DOF and FOV in a Porro at ~6 power? Does it exist and if so, at a tolerable price point?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top