Best alpha binocular for ageing glasses wearer? (1 Viewer)

[Suffolk naturalist]

This is my first post so apologies for a long-winded question. I’m interested to know your thoughts on the best alpha binocular for use with glasses on.

Here’s the context. After over 40+ years of regular birding I’m finally at a point where I need to wear glasses all the time. I’m long sighted, but even my distant vision is noticeably less sharp than it used to be - the curse of ageing and I guess it’ll only get worse... Adapting to birding with my glasses on has been a pleasure and a pain. It’s good that things are sharp again, but it’s clear some binoculars are better suited to use with glasses on than others. I have access to four good binoculars and would rank them as follows for glasses-on use:

Zeiss 7x42 classic BGATP* and Nikon 8x42 HGL = equal 1st.
Nikon 8x32 HG = 2nd
Zeiss 8x32 FL Victory = 3rd.

I mainly use the Zeiss 7x42 and love the wide field view but, while good, none of these binoculars would be today considered ‘state of the art’, so do you think I would gain much if I were to buy one of the current alpha models? A key consideration here is pragmatism. Much as I’d like to buy the best available, I’m conscious that my eyesight will only get worse from here - will I get the benefit from splashing the cash?

 

[Conndomat]

Hello fellow sufferer and welcome to the bird forum!

We long-sighted people usually need a particularly long eye relief to make matters worse, the short-sighted people usually have it better.
Can you see the entire field of vision with both of your number 1 glasses?

It's not that easy to answer your question because you already have very good binoculars, I would still see the FL 8x32 at the top, although it's a bit tricky with glasses.

Ultimately, you can only decide whether you gain a lot optically with modern binoculars if I were concerned with the best viewing with eyeglasses, I could recommend the Swarovski EL 8.5x42, the Leica Noctivid is also very good, but the EL is IMO even more good.
The Swarovski NL should only be used with caution for long-sighted eyeglasses users and cannot be recommended unreservedly, the Zeiss SF 8x42 is also not a problem for me.

As far as the optical advantages are concerned, yes, all in all, modern binoculars are a bit better than your existing ones, but as I said, only you can decide whether it's worth it for you.

Andreas

 

[Maljunulo]

Do you have significant astigmatism, or other than refractive errors?

Have you tried taking your glasses off to use your binoculars, if so, what happened?

 

[Patudo]

Welcome to the club (of which I am a fellow member, having had to wear glasses from a much younger age)! I'm familiar with the Dialyt 7x42 and the 8x32 FL. Like you I love the 7x42 (is yours the P model?) for its great effortless view, the depth of field offered by 7x magnification making up in large part for the slowish focus speed; I find the 8x32 FL a superb modern 8x32 - lightweight, fast-focusing, with a really sharp, bright and clean image. I like it for the kind of close-in birding where most of your targets are found with the unaided eye, but not for long distance scanning where you are constantly looking through your binoculars. They are both great binoculars in their own right, but far be it for me to dissuade you from having a good robust trial of the latest and greatest alphas. There's a worthwhile argument that poorer vision needs all the help it can get, and indeed that if you're only going to have 5, 10 or 15 more years in the field, you might as well spend it with the best you can buy.

One thing worth mentioning is that your glasses themselves can make a big difference. The steadier the better, and if your binocular eye relief is somewhat on the short side (like the 8x32 FL) a frame that places the lenses close to your eyes can help tremendously. Have a gander through this quite useful thread: Eyeglasses - a few unqualified remarks

 

[dries1]

Nothing lost using the Nikon HG/ L and the HG, both of these provide much more useful eye relief than the FL 8X32.

 

[Suffolk naturalist]

Many thanks for all these helpful replies. I’ll try to clarify my situation in relation to the various points made.

Until two years ago, I only used glasses for reading and computer work. My main binocular then was the 8x42 Nikon HGL used with the eyecups out, while my wife used the Nikon 8x32HG. We do quite a bit of walking, so I decided to buy a smaller, lighter instrument, which led me to the Zeiss 8x32FL. With the eyecups out I love everything about them (glasses off my order of preference might even be reversed). However, while critically evaluating them I realised that the view wasn’t quite up to scratch in terms of sharpness - but it dawned on me that the binocular wasn’t the problem, it was my eyes! I also discovered subsequently that I have a mild astigmatism too.

I ended up buying some vari-focal glasses but made the error of not taking account of the frame design for optimal binocular use, so this year I bought a pair optimised just for medium/longer distance work that kept the eyepiece nearer my eyes. These made a big difference, but the shorter eye relief of the FLs is still a problem. I can almost see the whole field if I press them against my glasses firmly, but then blackouts are more frequent and eye placement critical - basically I’m having to think about using them too much, and it’s taking away from just enjoying the view.

The Nikon 8x32HG are better in this respect - but belong to my wife - and personally I’d like something a little brighter. The two 42mm binoculars come out best for easy relaxed viewing but I can’t quite see to the field stop with any of them with my glasses on. I come closest with the 7x42 Zeiss which came into my life recently almost by accident (sadly, I bought them off a friend following a bereavement, so they have a sentimental value too). I should have been clearer that they’re the later phase-corrected version, P*. I really like their wide relaxed view and depth of field. They also appear a little more 3D than the Nikons, but as was also mentioned, the slower focussing is really noticeable, particularly versus the FLs at closer ranges (the FLs are fantastic in this respect, and so too are the little Nikons).

This matters because I have an all-round interest in nature so, while birding is the biggest priority, I’ll also watch insects too. The Zeiss 7x42s just don’t focus quickly or closely enough for that. Here in Suffolk the birding takes in the open coast and wetlands, wide estuaries, heaths and woodlands, so I need something suited to all round work, although I also use a scope sometimes.

This discussion has already been useful in evaluating my needs. It seems like the next step is to field test some of the models suggested. I’d welcome any further thoughts and will update once I’ve done that. I’ll also check out the linked thread.

 

[MiddleRiver]

I wear specs. I'm getting older and appreciate lightening the load. I want quality build and view.
This past year I purchased first the 8x40SFL and subsequently the 8x30's. The 40's are easy, no fuss, great, no-real-compromises bins. The 30's currently my everyday-carry tho they are a little more demanding of eye-placement, eyecup and IPD adjustment. Nuff said...

One thing I've done - and highly recommend - is to purchase prescription specs that are NOT varifocal. I have a pair that has the reading panel RX, intentionally set lower than typical, and the rest of the lens is distance vision. I found that focus issues I was sometimes blaming on diff binos, was actually the result of slight mis-alignment of my specs to the eyepieces ;-)

 

[Suffolk naturalist]

I wear specs. I'm getting older and appreciate lightening the load. I want quality build and view.
This past year I purchased first the 8x40SFL and subsequently the 8x30's. The 40's are easy, no fuss, great, no-real-compromises bins. The 30's currently my everyday-carry tho they are a little more demanding of eye-placement, eyecup and IPD adjustment. Nuff said...

One thing I've done - and highly recommend - is to purchase prescription specs that are NOT varifocal. I have a pair that has the reading panel RX, intentionally set lower than typical, and the rest of the lens is distance vision. I found that focus issues I was sometimes blaming on diff binos, was actually the result of slight mis-alignment of my specs to the eyepieces ;-)

Yes, I’ve been reading the reviews of the SFLs with interest, so they’ll certainly be on my shortlist. They clearly tick quite a few of my boxes and are a bit lighter than the other full size Alphas, which is no bad thing. However, I’d be willing to accept the additional weight of something like the SF 8x42 or a Swarovski if it delivered a noticeable benefit in optical performance or usability - will be interesting to see!

 

[Will K]

The Swarovski NL Pure has, in my experience, the best ergonomics for glasses (I should say: for MY current glasses, at least).

One thing to bear in mind is whether the lenses of the binoculars touch the glasses when you use them. This can lead to harmful lens scratching.

In this test pictured here, I used a protective piece of paper to make sure that there was no point of contact between the lenses in any position that might be reasonably adopted when using them. Fortunately, there is always a gap.

 

[Conndomat]

Hello,

I have exactly the same problem with the FL 8x32, I have to noticeably press the glass against my glasses to see the entire field of view and this is unsatisfactory in the long run.

As an alternative you could try a Zeiss Conquest 8x32, the eye relief is longer, I can see the field of view well and the focuser is one of the fastest, optically it is almost on par with the FL, IMO it is a very good pair of binoculars.

One thing to bear in mind is whether the lenses of the binoculars touch the glasses when you use them. This can lead to harmful lens scratching.

And that's exactly crap with the NL, long-sighted glasses are bent forward in the middle and therefore almost inevitably come into contact with the sleeve or the eyepiece glass, I have to turn the caps up slightly and then it works, but the field of view is reduced.

Andreas

 

[MiddleRiver]

Yes, I’ve been reading the reviews of the SFLs with interest, so they’ll certainly be on my shortlist. They clearly tick quite a few of my boxes and are a bit lighter than the other full size Alphas, which is no bad thing. However, I’d be willing to accept the additional weight of something like the SF 8x42 or a Swarovski if it delivered a noticeable benefit in optical performance or usability - will be interesting to see!

I love my Noctivids (8x and 10x) but they are a boat anchor - compared to the SFL - on a long hike. We frequently bird 3-5mi and often on hilly terrain. Add a daypack with water, food, shell, emergency stuff, and I start county ounces! When travelling, my carry-on (camera) pack will have camera gear, compact spotting scope, and all the same essential stuff. So then, the form-factor comes into play and the 8x30's have become my favs. Enough so that I'm pondering selling the 40's!

On a 1mi walk I'll take the NV's...

 

[GrampaTom]

This is my first post so apologies for a long-winded question. I’m interested to know your thoughts on the best alpha binocular for use with glasses on.

Here’s the context. After over 40+ years of regular birding I’m finally at a point where I need to wear glasses all the time. I’m long sighted, but even my distant vision is noticeably less sharp than it used to be - the curse of ageing and I guess it’ll only get worse... Adapting to birding with my glasses on has been a pleasure and a pain. It’s good that things are sharp again, but it’s clear some binoculars are better suited to use with glasses on than others. I have access to four good binoculars and would rank them as follows for glasses-on use:

Zeiss 7x42 classic BGATP* and Nikon 8x42 HGL = equal 1st.
Nikon 8x32 HG = 2nd
Zeiss 8x32 FL Victory = 3rd.

I mainly use the Zeiss 7x42 and love the wide field view but, while good, none of these binoculars would be today considered ‘state of the art’, so do you think I would gain much if I were to buy one of the current alpha models? A key consideration here is pragmatism. Much as I’d like to buy the best available, I’m conscious that my eyesight will only get worse from here - will I get the benefit from splashing the cash?

SN, I read #s 6 and 8 as well, but your first raised some questions, I thought I could add some "mud" (at least ) to the conversation, that might be of interest. To be up front, I have zero experience with the 4 binoculars you list so am unable to help with comparisons of those to more modern glass. I do own and use a VP825, short focus EL 1042, and NL 832. Either of these latter may be on your list, (they should be). I thoroughly enjoy using both, just cant compare to what you have.

Context helps in these conversations. I'm wondering how old you might be? Im 79. Ive worn glasses since I was in high school and have had classic flat top bifocal lenses for at least 3 decades. I "had" a serious astigmatism problem +3.75 and +4.5 till recently. I can say recently, as this past winter I got Cataract lens replacement surgery, that used Toric lenses. Near as we can tell, that eliminated any astigmatism. So when you write, "the curse of aging and I guess it'll only get worse." that may not be the case. Cataracts occurring with age, makes things inevitably worse but is fixable, with minimal fuss and risk and brings on a whole new world of vision. So no need to despair... There's at least two things that can be fixed when needed with the surgery.

Back to binos, I still own and had used Zeiss 1040BGT for 35 years till I got the ELs. Having had to wear glasses for all of that, there was no other option than to find a binocular that would enable the eye relief required for those eyeglasses. The ELs with eyecups all the way down were fine, easy to find target, glare free, comfortable, optical quality with Cataracts impeded vision exquisite. Of course what did I know? It has been an interesting several months. There was a month between the 2 surgeries, while I birded with my old eye glasses with lens removed from the first corrected eye. That was a little weird, especially as depth perception was effected. After the 2nd eye, almost immediately things fell into place. I went birding 3 days after that surgery. After an hour or so I had to sit and chill as I was whooped and so blasted excited at what I was seeing! Now sans eyeglasses with binoculars, things are glorious. AND I now know I was not getting all the available FOV!

So there's hope.

 

[Hermann]

One thing worth mentioning is that your glasses themselves can make a big difference. The steadier the better, and if your binocular eye relief is somewhat on the short side (like the 8x32 FL) a frame that places the lenses close to your eyes can help tremendously. Have a gander through this quite useful thread: Eyeglasses - a few unqualified remarks

Strongly seconded. I think reading that thread might be a very useful first step, looksharp's postings in particular. I think quite a few people underestimate how important the choice of the right glasses for use with binoculars and scopes is, and that thread contains plenty of useful information.

Hermann

 

[GrampaTom]

Hello,
.........
And that's exactly crap with the NL, long-sighted glasses are bent forward in the middle and therefore almost inevitably come into contact with the sleeve or the eyepiece glass, I have to turn the caps up slightly and then it works, but the field of view is reduced.

Andreas

Hi Andreas, I wasn't following what you wrote in #2, "The Swarovski NL should only be used with caution for long-sighted eyeglasses users and cannot be recommended unreservedly,..." I'd forgotten that earlier exchange where we discovered how close the NL eye cup aluminum rim was to the edge of the rubber rim and therefore its proximity to an eyeglass lens. And as well the idea the eyeglass lens if correction caused the lens to bow/curve towards the binocular lens there could be rubbing between those 2 as well. If I've got you now, I'd agree with (...cannot be recommended unreservedly.) To keep this short, and after some of the teething described above in #12, indeed this one needs to be tried as mileage may vary... a lot, though.

 

[Mikbul]

Nothing lost using the Nikon HG/ L and the HG, both of these provide much more useful eye relief than the FL 8X32.

8X42 HG, I'm @ three stops out with no glasses.

 

[Scott98]

I upgraded my 8x42 Nikon HG's to new 7x42 EDG and I couldn't be happier. Nice upgrade in sharpness, contrast, and color correction, and all the advantages of 7x. Even sharper to the edge of field than the HG....Plenty of eye relief....I use them with the eyecups fully extended, looks like there's lots of room to dial them down for glasses, as I will probably have to do eventually......there's no reason to move on from 7x42 size if that's what you enjoy using. I believe they can be had in the UK from Uttings for a good price

 

[dorubird]

For me Zeiss Victory SF 10x42 are extremely comfortable with glasses on

 

[dries1]

8X42 HG, I'm @ three stops out with no glasses.

Yours is the Monarch HG 8X42, I think the OP was referring to the original Nikon HG/LX 8X42, unless I am mistaken.

 

[MiddleRiver]

For me Zeiss Victory SF 10x42 are extremely comfortable with glasses on

Bonzai out your window?

 

[Patudo]

to the OP: if you find the eye relief on both the 8x32 FL and the 7x42 Dialyt too short, you'll need either glasses that fit even closer to your face, or binoculars with longer eye relief. Fortunately there are quite a few of the latter these days. Different manufacturers measure eye relief differently (more than slightly confusing!!!). Fortunately, Birdforum member Pinac has kindly written up figures for eye relief for his substantial collection of classic and modern binoculars arrived at via the same method: The PINACOLLECTION – Binoculars Today - this should be a very useful reference. But ideally you'll want to try the binoculars you're considering in person.

In terms of specific recommendations - my brother uses an 8.5x42 Swarovski for all his birding, which is excellent - the sole negative being that the rubber armour, after seven years, has started to flake. It's an outstanding all-rounder birding wise (though I personally prefer a 10x at longer distances), but I'm not sure about insects. There are plenty of outstanding binoculars out there though, and you should tyre-kick as many as possible, ideally in comparison to each other, before committing.

I actually think that if looked at by sheer image quality alone, the P model Dialyt is still hard to beat, but it's a very old design now and there are better binoculars in terms of functionality and utility, especially if insects at short range are important.