Binocular bargains (4 Viewers)

[[email protected]]

I think many enjoy the hunt here.

As far as focusers go, I've found the Tract Toric to be the stiffest among the binoculars I've owned and/or tried, with the Zeiss Conquest the least. We'll see where the Legend lands on that spectrum.

Bill

Have you tried a Swarovski Habicht 8x30?

 

[wdc]

Have you tried a Swarovski Habicht 8x30?

Never bothered to. The eye relief specs rule them out for me. Same with the Nikon porros.

 

[summer-blue]

I bought a Nikon 8x42 Aculon off of Midway for $25.01 , price was $22.47 I had to add something to make it $25 and free shipping, best $25 I ever spent. I would of bought the 10x25 but non left I wonder why.:eek!:

Think I am the one who contribute most to the 10x25's disappearance 8-P. I bought 10! Today I just gifted 3 of them to 3 gentlemen who did a great job of building a solar system to our home.

BTW, I also bought 5 of those 8x42 Aculons.

 

[dries1]

Well I was on the midway site and purchased two 10X25 aculons for gifts. They both are in proper working order and will check out when the sun comes up. In addition I procured a new HG LX 8X20 for less than half price, wonder how the optics are on those.

Andy W.

 

[Nixterdemus]

I'm glad I bought none so youse could enjoy ...

 

[BruceH]

Vortex Diamondback 10X42 $149.99

Optics Planet has the new generation Vortex Daimondback 10X42 on special for $149.99. The notice said limited time but there was no end date shown. Normal street price is around $229.

Use code 2DAYAIR at checkout for free 2 day express shipping or add code WORK7 for an additional 5% off giving a total of $142.49.


https://www.opticsplanet.com/vortex...iday111317&pdata=4435422f635448642f68525a4243

Note: If you get the VIGLINK web page, scroll part way down and then click on the blue rectangular button that links to the Optics Planet web page.

 

[Binastro]

Hi summer-blue.

Seems we think alike.

Any advance on the 30 6x18 yellow waterproof roof binoculars that I bought for £7.50 each.
10 were very good. 10 useful, ten duds but good monoculars if cut in half.

One has been used by a private pilot for ten years or so spotting ground features.
Another my niece uses.
Another my astronomer friend's wife uses for general nature study etc.
Another is now in Australia following cricket matches instead of the Canon 8x25 IS used last year. Very compact and surprisingly good in good daylight.
I also use one.

1000s of these must have been sold with no quality control, but a good one is a very useful pocket binocular.

 

[Nixterdemus]

Deals, gone on the morrow, yet light of morn reveals another; held close to the vest tattered notes folded, bound strain to take flight of fancy for first light of last bin ... :smoke:

 

[RioTuitoBirder]

The Bushnell Legend M 8x42s have arrived! I've not tested them in the field yet but so far around the home they seem to be an improvement on the Nikon Aculon 8x42. Brighter, sharper image, slightly more magnification and the focus dial is not too tight or loose. Looking forward to taking them out on Saturday.

 

[[email protected]]

The Bushnell Legend M 8x42s have arrived! I've not tested them in the field yet but so far around the home they seem to be an improvement on the Nikon Aculon 8x42. Brighter, sharper image, slightly more magnification and the focus dial is not too tight or loose. Looking forward to taking them out on Saturday.

Thanks, for the feedback. My Bushnell Legend M 8x42's should arrive here any minute from UPS. I will let you know what I think.

 

[wdc]

The Bushnell Legend M 8x42s have arrived! I've not tested them in the field yet but so far around the home they seem to be an improvement on the Nikon Aculon 8x42. Brighter, sharper image, slightly more magnification and the focus dial is not too tight or loose. Looking forward to taking them out on Saturday.

More magnification? or perhaps a difference in field of view? Both are specced at 8x power, so if you're seeing a noticeable difference in image size, you might want to ponder that. Glad they seem to be in good working order. I will probably get mine sometime this afternoon.

-Bill

 

[RioTuitoBirder]

I was wondering about that. Objects do appear to be slightly closer when focused. I noticed specs recorded a slightly narrower fov than the Monarch 3. Of course, it was night-time inside the house so everything was already quite close. If there's any light at the end of my workday (iffy in our cloudy/rainy part of the world) I will stop to look at the Swans in the farm-fields or find some raptors to test out.

 

[dries1]

I am curious about the new 8X42 M Bushnell, perhaps it will satisfy the 8X42 I am looking for. However, as with all mail order instruments mid to low cost, I wonder about the eye cups and central focusing not just out of the box but through long term use. I am still hoping I can try a Monarch HG8X42 in the store and if they have the model in surplus boxed I can check the ones I am actually purchasing.
I wonder what type of materials are used for bushings, spacers, etc. in this Bushnell model. Nikon seems to put together a good central focus meant for long term use and to last.

In a way, all my binos which date back to the 60s, (I actually have a kern 6X24 model from 54) have been proven over time so I have kept them. Today, to make some of these would cost well over what they are worth today. In the end you get what you pay for, well most of the time.

Andy W.

 

[bluespiderweb]

Porro vs roof percieved object size

More magnification? or perhaps a difference in field of view? Both are specced at 8x power, so if you're seeing a noticeable difference in image size, you might want to ponder that. Glad they seem to be in good working order. I will probably get mine sometime this afternoon.

-Bill

If you are comparing Porro Aculons vs roof binoculars of the same magnification, then you might want to read about this percieved difference in object size comparing one to the other here:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=28391

 

[RioTuitoBirder]

Interesting discussion. Thanks!

 

[BruceH]

The Bushnell Legend M 8x42s have arrived! I've not tested them in the field yet but so far around the home they seem to be an improvement on the Nikon Aculon 8x42. Brighter, sharper image, slightly more magnification and the focus dial is not too tight or loose. ..........

I take it the focus mechanism does not have any noticeable free play when changing rotation direction?

So far it looks like we are all on a roll! Dennis, don't let us down.

I think Barry is right on about what you are seeing in regards to magnification. Porros have a smaller image scale with the wider spread between the objectives as compared to the same power in a roof. The image appears smaller and the depth of field looks more spread out. I like a roof when interested in an up close detailed look and the Porro for what I think is a more natural look. It is interesting how that works out even though I do not truly understand how that works.

I am curious about the new 8X42 M Bushnell, perhaps it will satisfy the 8X42 I am looking for. However, as with all mail order instruments mid to low cost, I wonder about the eye cups and central focusing not just out of the box but through long term use. I.......I wonder what type of materials are used for bushings, spacers, etc. in this Bushnell model. ............Andy W.

I have done a flashlight exam of both the Legend M and what looks to me to be a near clone Zen Ray ED3. The construction looks to be the same. C J has been using her ED3 for some years now in the outback and as far as I know she has not reported any issues. I suspect the Legend M should hold up reasonably well.

 

[RioTuitoBirder]

There is no free play in the focusing mechanism of the Legend M I received.
For some reason I am not being allowed the option to include a quote from the previous message which I am answering. I'm sorry if that confuses anyone.

 

[wdc]

Just unpacked my 8x42 Bushnell Legend M's..

Unfortunately the eye relief doesn't work for me with glasses on. In a direct comparison, the Nikon MHG's accommodate me better, even if they aren't as accommodating as I wish they were. Focuser is ok, just a bit stiff. IPD also seems marginally too wide, even if the spec suggests otherwise. ( I get a slight oval with the Bushnell, and a circle with the Nikon at the inner limit.)

Optics seem fine, and even the extra weight may actually improve stability a bit. Just because they don't fit me, doesn't mean they won't work well for others.

With some of these these ongoing purchases, I've been looking for a larger FOV that works for my eyes. I may have to aim upstream a bit.

Bill

 

[RioTuitoBirder]

WDC: Sorry to hear those don't work out for you. I've heard a lot of mention of eye relief here but I wear glasses and so far I have not encountered a binocular that doesn't work with them. I am extremely far-sighted if that makes a difference.

 

[Jack Speer]

WDC: Sorry to hear those don't work out for you. I've heard a lot of mention of eye relief here but I wear glasses and so far I have not encountered a binocular that doesn't work with them. I am extremely far-sighted if that makes a difference.

Yes, eye relief is a big issue. It has to do with your facial features and the frame of the glasses. Unfortunately there's no way to tell if a binocular will work you until you try them. This goes for both glasses and non glasses wearers. You can get an idea from the eye relief spec and anecdotes from others, but these only get you so far.