Advice for first (high-end) binoculars : Safari & Birding (1 Viewer)

[MikeBR]

Hello,

New member, but have been reading/lurking for a while. Unfortunately my first topic is another binocular advice topic.

OPTIONAL INTRODUCTION
Usually we go on holidays in the Alps for camping/walking/hiking. Most weekends we are also doing some walks in nature and occasionally do a two/three day hike. We enjoy spotting and observing birds/birds of prey/deer/squirrels/.. I guess we are occassional birders, but no enthousiasts (the walk is still the main focus). A few years ago my girlfriend wanted binoculars. As I knew nothing about them I did some online research, read some reviews and ended up getting her the Nikon Monarch 5 10x42. Unfortunately they are mainly used in our back garden or at the camp site when on holidays. We usually don't bring them along on a walk/hike as they are pretty big and heavy (600grams).

In a few weeks we are going on holiday to Kruger Park (South Africa) for the first time (6 days in the park). Obviously we will bring our binoculars everywhere we go. But I thought this would be a good time to consider buying a second, higher quality set of binoculars. This is not something we are going to be doing often, so safari is not the main applications but would be handy to each have our own set for this trip.

QUESTION
Looking for advice on a high end pair of binoculars in addition to the Nikon Monarch 5 10x42 that we already own. Our main complaint about the Nikon is weight/size as we tend to leave them at home/campsite. I thought it would make most sense to get smaller/lighter binoculars: compact or even pocket type. I would also appreciate a wider field of view while still retaining a similar image brightness as the big 10x42's.

I was considering the Swarovski CL Pocket 8x25 or 10x25. As we already have a 10x , I thought it made sense to go for the 8X and enjoy that wider field of view. I also saw the Curio 7x21 but couldn't quite find the advantage of them over the CL Pocket 8x25 (except slight price difference).

In a local store they have a slightly used Leica Ultravid 8x32 HD for sale. About double the price of the CL 8x25 (instead of 3x listprice) but they are also a lot heavier and a bit bigger than the CL 8X25.

What would you suggest?
Any other models I need to look at?
Will these small 10x25 or 8x25 offer a similar image quality as the cheaper, but much bigger, Nikon Monarch 5 10x42? How about those Leica 8x32's?

NOTE I wear glasses.

BUDGET
I don't mind spending top dollar for a quality product. However, I'm just a humble employee, can only spend my money once and keep in mind we are occassional birders at best. When I was younger I would spend a lot of time researching products and, often succesfully, looking for the best deal. A product that out performs the brand- and price-tag. Now that I'm a bit older, I must admit I also enjoy owning a high-end brand quality product. So for this I have a preference for Swarovski or Leica. Just like I bought a Leica Q instead of the Fuji X100.

I will try these out in a local store, but wanted to get some feedback first as I trust random people on the internet a lot more than a sales person in a shop.

I really want to get something light/compact as else they will just stay at home with the Nikon's and that would be a shame. But I also don't want to regret an expensive purchase if the image quality would dissapoint.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions/tips/recommendations or other constructive feedback.

 

[MiddleRiver]

Zeiss SFL series. Superb optics, lightweight, and arguably alpha quality for significantly less cost.

 

[MikeBR]

Zeiss SFL series. Superb optics, lightweight, and arguably alpha quality for significantly less cost.

Thank you for your feedback. What do you mean with " Alpha Quality " ? Does that just mean very good/excellent, or is it a reference to a certain product/brand?

 

[Maljunulo]

Good glass is useable for much more than “occasional birding”, so I would recommend you buy the best, since it is a once-only thing.

Compromises are exactly that.

 

[MikeBR]

Had a look at those Zeiss SFL 8X30 and they look to be a very good contender. Excellent light transmission, huge field of view, good eye-relief (this was not so good with those Leica's) and still a good size/weight, although obviously quite a bit heavier than the Swarovski 8x25's. Will these SFL offer a remarkably better viewing experience to compensate for the size/weight and cost?

Thanks

 

[William Lewis]

Try some pockets out for a bit to make sure they're comfortable, not sure from the question if everyone (not just yourself) using them wears glasses? I only ask as i find most pockets don't fit my eyes very well due to the small eye cups.

The leica 32's you mention are quite compact for there size but have room for your hands between the focus wheel and the end of the objectives - I find the Zeiss sfl's a bit lacking in this regard meaning your fingers are left floating near the objectives - that's just me though, many like them a lot. The leica's however are a little tight on eye relief for glasses.

I personally find objectives less than 30mm quite constrictive in terms on light gathering especially when it gets dark (safari stars...) and they also tend to have a more constrained field of view which was mentioned as a priority.

Models to try from my experience would be the sfl 8x30, Swarovski nl 8x or 10x32 as the 10 still had a very good field of view at the expense of a smaller exit pupil (bit dim). Maybe the Zeiss sf 32's although they are like the NL quite large for a 32.

At the more affordable end of the spectrum the nikon monarch hg 8x30 or if your a uk buyer Nikon m7 + 8x30 may be worth a go, sometimes when you get to thr £500 or so range the improvements become so small by spending more many wont notice them or consider them worth the money.

Will

 

[Binocollector]

Thank you for your feedback. What do you mean with " Alpha Quality " ? Does that just mean very good/excellent, or is it a reference to a certain product/brand?

Psst -- don't telly anyone, but "alpha" is just a made up term. Strictly speaking it just applies to the one single best binocular there is. Since 3 companies are considered the best, Leica, Zeiss and Swaro, the "alpha" of each company is:
Leica Noctivid
Zeiss Victory SF
and Swaro NL Pure. (the former alpha was the EL -- probably the only thing the NL Pure adds is a larger field of view)
There can only be one alpha but in general it refers to top optics, mostly above the 2,000€/$ price range. Many list the Meopta Meostar B1 as "as good as an alpha" or the already mentioned Zeiss SFL which however, as the internet has it, is made by the Japanese company Kamakura (with probably some "in-house" coatings only used by Zeiss, as well as the typical Zeiss body and focuser).

 

[Ratal]

Zeiss Victory 8x25.

Ultra light, ultra comfortable, pin sharp images and you will take them everywhere. I do. They fold down tiny and yet the view is impeccable.

 

[Maljunulo]

Before you do anything, you have to make a fundamental decision.

Do you want the best, or do you want to save money by compromising?

 

[Ratal]

Zeiss Victory 8x25 is not a compromise. It is an impeccable weight/performance choice that gives you all the image you can handle inside a truly minuscule form factor.

I take mine everywhere. They never leave my side, just yet tucked away.

 

[dorubird]

The best way to help you is to make a list of priorities. Here is an example of a list based on elimination criteria:
1 If you wear glasses you must remove the superb Leica Ulltravid 8x32 from the list, because it has very small eye relief. Your Nikon Monarch 5 10x42 is extremely comfortable and you can see the entire FOV (small is true) with glasses on. So you need binoculars with at least 16mm eye relief, that your change to a smaller binocular to not felt in comfort.
2 You have to decide what aperture the binoculars should have. I say don't go smaller than 25mm because you are already used a 4.2mm pupil binocular with very comfortable eyepieces, and a bino smaller than 25mm would seem uncomfortable for you. Again, it's just a personal opinion, but it helps you simplify your choice process. So, for 25mm I would recommend Zeiss VP 8x25 as well as the other colleagues. It has a large eye relief, the field of view is large, it has great clarity and it is quite compact.
3 If you want a bit bigger, I would choose Zeiss SFL 8x30 or Nikon HG 8x30 or a used Zeiss FL 8x32. These are small enough to feel the difference compared to your Nikon M5 10x42 in terms of volume and weight, but large enough not to scarify much of the brightness. Larger models like Zeiss SF 8x32 or Swarovski NL Pure 8x32 will be as long as your Nikon 10x42, so not as portable, and no differences with what you already have in terms of volume. Swarovski EL 8x32 model is smaller than these but still longer than SFL , HG or FL. In addition, for your safari requirements EL armor has problems with heat and sweat, becoming brittle.
These are just some subjective thoughts meant to simplify your choice a little.

 

[Tringa45]

Have you considered the Swarovski 8x30 CL Companion?
They are less than 500 g and viewing comfort is cosiderably better than the compacts.
Eye relief is adequate for glasses wearers and optical quality is not that far off the heavier and bulkier 32 mm "alphas", which are almost twice the price.

John

 

[Jeffbennett12]

Given the incredible views you can get on safari as well as the need to move quickly at times to get the view (from the truck/Jeep), my recommendation would be away from the 8X25 VPs, as good as those are. While they are great to carry everywhere, I do not consider the smaller exit pupil to be as comfortable or as quick in acquiring the view.

Assuming you don’t want to go all in with a Swaro NL or Zeiss SF, I would recommend the Zeiss 8X40 SFL or at a somewhat lower price point the Nikon 8X42 Monarch HG. Both are lightweight for their 40-42mm objective size and are excellent optically.

In a somewhat smaller and lighter weight model, the 8X30 Monarch HG is pretty nice. I suspect that the 8X30 SFL or the 8X30 Swaro CL would also work well and possibly be a bit better optically than the HGs, but I have not owned the latter two so cannot comment from direct experience.

 

[MikeBR]

The best way to help you is to make a list of priorities. Here is an example of a list based on elimination criteria:
1 If you wear glasses you must remove the superb Leica Ulltravid 8x32 from the list, because it has very small eye relief. Your Nikon Monarch 5 10x42 is extremely comfortable and you can see the entire FOV (small is true) with glasses on. So you need binoculars with at least 16mm eye relief, that your change to a smaller binocular to not felt in comfort.
2 You have to decide what aperture the binoculars should have. I say don't go smaller than 25mm because you are already used a 4.2mm pupil binocular with very comfortable eyepieces, and a bino smaller than 25mm would seem uncomfortable for you. Again, it's just a personal opinion, but it helps you simplify your choice process. So, for 25mm I would recommend Zeiss VP 8x25 as well as the other colleagues. It has a large eye relief, the field of view is large, it has great clarity and it is quite compact.
3 If you want a bit bigger, I would choose Zeiss SFL 8x30 or Nikon HG 8x30 or a used Zeiss FL 8x32. These are small enough to feel the difference compared to your Nikon M5 10x42 in terms of volume and weight, but large enough not to scarify much of the brightness. Larger models like Zeiss SF 8x32 or Swarovski NL Pure 8x32 will be as long as your Nikon 10x42, so not as portable, and no differences with what you already have in terms of volume. Swarovski EL 8x32 model is smaller than these but still longer than SFL , HG or FL. In addition, for your safari requirements EL armor has problems with heat and sweat, becoming brittle.
These are just some subjective thoughts meant to simplify your choice a little.

Thank you for your detailed response and arguments. It is very valuable input, specifically the comparison with the Nikon's I already own as this is my only reference point. I indeed noticed the Leica Ultravid has a limited eye relief, so I have scrapped those. I had a look at the Zeiss Victory 8x25 as it was recommended a few times already, but not yet convinced on them although they are attractively priced. Right now I'm considering going fo the Zeiss SFL 8X30, they are more recent model and seem to offer a great image quality while still being quite compact. With the 30mm they should also be considerably brighter than the 25's mentioned and most likely be very similar to my Nikon 42's with lower quality lenses.

The 30mm SFL's come in both 8x and 10x, so that is still a choice to be made. They are the same size/weight according to Zeiss, the 10x are bit more expensive. But I feel that for my use 8x should be sufficient, and on this trip we could still swap if something is really small and the extra 2x has a big impact. So I'm leaning towards the 8x30's. Now to convince myself to spend that kind of money on binoculars...

Does anybody have a side by side picture of the same distance with 8x and 10x?
For camera lenses you have lots of comparison pictures, but for binoculars the available information seems to be a bit limited.

 

[MikeBR]

Before you do anything, you have to make a fundamental decision.

Do you want the best, or do you want to save money by compromising?

I won't say budget is not important, it is, but it makes no sense to buy 3000Euro NL Pure 10x42's if I never bring them on walks. Then 8x25's for 700 euro are a much better purchase. Perhaps the 1350\s SLR 8X30 are the perfect binoculars for me.

 

[Scott98]

My choice for what you describe would be a pair of Nikon 8x30 Monarch HG. I agree 42mm is too big & heavy for serious hikes. I find 25mm binoculars too small, and most 32mm too expensive for the size and bulky.

The Swarovski 8x30 and Zeiss SFL 8x30 are similar, I would prefer the Nikons. The optics are higher quality than the Monarch 5 and Monarch 7 series and the price is lower than the Swaro or Zeiss. The 8x30 MHG body is very small light, and yet it's designed so that there's plenty of room for my hands on the barrels.

 

[MikeBR]

My choice for what you describe would be a pair of Nikon 8x30 Monarch HG. I agree 42mm is too big & heavy for serious hikes. I find 25mm binoculars too small, and most 32mm too expensive for the size and bulky.

The Swarovski 8x30 and Zeiss SFL 8x30 are similar, I would prefer the Nikons. The optics are higher quality than the Monarch 5 and Monarch 7 series and the price is lower than the Swaro or Zeiss. The 8x30 MHG body is very small light, and yet it's designed so that there's plenty of room for my hands on the barrels.

Thank you for that suggestion, I had not considered other Nikon models. I will have a more detailed look at the suggested model. Although the price difference does not seem to be that big (I'm finding these for 1000euro).

 

[kabsetz]

Either the 8x30 or the 8x40 SFL is your best bet. The 40 is a bit better, but since you already found the Monarch you have heavier than you would wish, the 8x30 might be your best bet. That way, if you only take one binocular with sometimes, you would have the option of a smaller model.

I have reviewed (in Finnish) all of the SFL's and had them on trial, and my favourite was the 8x40. The 8x30 is very good also. Both work well with eyeglasses, unlike most of the other alternatives mentioned here. Personally, I like the Swarovski 8x32 NL Pure even better, but it is much more expensive, bigger, and quite a bit heavier than the 8x30 SFL

 

[MikeBR]

Either the 8x30 or the 8x40 SFL is your best bet. The 40 is a bit better, but since you already found the Monarch you have heavier than you would wish, the 8x30 might be your best bet. That way, if you only take one binocular with sometimes, you would have the option of a smaller model.

I have reviewed (in Finnish) all of the SFL's and had them on trial, and my favourite was the 8x40. The 8x30 is very good also. Both work well with eyeglasses, unlike most of the other alternatives mentioned here. Personally, I like the Swarovski 8x32 NL Pure even better, but it is much more expensive, bigger, and quite a bit heavier than the 8x30 SFL

Thank you for your valuable input. I do agree that some suggested models are not a good fit due to limited eye relief. And yes, I understand the 8x40 will have better quality image but they come at the price of size/weight. So I agree that perhaps the 8x30 is the best fit for me.

 

[MikeBR]

Thank you for that suggestion, I had not considered other Nikon models. I will have a more detailed look at the suggested model. Although the price difference does not seem to be that big (I'm finding these for 1000euro).

I have looked at this Nikon model a bit, but it seems to be hard to find in stock. Some even say the model is discontinued? I found the same thing when looking for specs on my current Monarch 5 10x42's. The eye-relief is also smaller than the SFL 8X30's and some reviews mentioned the eye box being not so forgiving so it can be difficult to find the right spot. I'm experiencing similar things with our current 10x42.