Binocular ramblings (1 Viewer)

[Tero]

Ok, the Zeiss are going in for a trade. I only get half the price I paid. I did not list them here, since nobody has ever responded to my ads here. Astromart got one reply, but the guy was too lazy to go buy a postal money order. I do not do PayPAl.

 

[Tero]

OK, the Zeiss are gone. The good part of trading in this over $500 category is that you can hardly tell a difference in optics. And YOU CAN'T COMPARE cause the old pair is gone, so everybody is happy.

 

[FrankD]

So what is next Tero?

 

[Tero]

I get the Pentax 10x43 and use it about 20% of my birding. The rest of the time I use a Bushnell Legend 8x32. Still need that ideal comact. Maybe the 8x28 Pentax. Maybe I will sell all that are not Pentax and go totally Pentax. I have the 65mm scope.

 

[FrankD]

That is funny. I thought much the same thing about Zeiss at one point and Pentax too...and for the same reasons. I would have to pop for one of those new ED models if I eventually wanted to go through with it though.

 

[Tero]

I went and burned up about two gallons of gas to look at 2 stilts. They were very pretty, never seen them before. But I think I would have seen less at 8x. In fact I would have walked back to get the scope if I only had 8x. Now I was satisfied.

 

[Tero]

Now I have two pocket 8x25s, one is showing some wear.

Have my eye on Nikon 8x20 L series. Mainly because it may disappear with the LX series and then all we have in the 300-400 range is the fine Zeiss 8x20 which however has rubber eye cups.

 

[Jim M.]

I get the Pentax 10x43 and use it about 20% of my birding. The rest of the time I use a Bushnell Legend 8x32. Still need that ideal comact. Maybe the 8x28 Pentax. Maybe I will sell all that are not Pentax and go totally Pentax. I have the 65mm scope.

I went and burned up about two gallons of gas to look at 2 stilts. They were very pretty, never seen them before. But I think I would have seen less at 8x. In fact I would have walked back to get the scope if I only had 8x. Now I was satisfied.

Have you considered the Leupold switch ring binoculars? They have a 7-12 x 32 model that is lightweight and has good eye relief. Like having two binoculars in one.

Best,
Jim

 

[FrankD]

then all we have in the 300-400 range is the fine Zeiss 8x20 which however has rubber eye cups.

Tero,

The Conquest compact might have the rubber eyecups but the Victory compact does not...and it usually sells around $400.

..ppsssstt..psssstt....those little Nikons are flippin' awesome!

 

[Tero]

Yes, it has somehow become urgent now that it may disappear. Earlier I was toying with a 10x25, now I do not want a 10x pocket size anymore.

 

[Tero]

Frank, what was the deal with the Furys? If I want to throw 300 or 400 at something, the 8x32...I have many of those, it would be a family...seems worth waiting for.
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4837

 

[ceasar]

Frank, what was the deal with the Furys? If I want to throw 300 or 400 at something, the 8x32...I have many of those, it would be a family...seems worth waiting for.
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?pid=4837

They had problems with their new diopter mechanism which is integrated with the focusing wheel (much like the Leica diopter adjustment) rather than being the more traditional separate adjustment ring off the right eye ocular. It appears to have been a QC issue which they are now working to correct.

Bob

 

[FrankD]

Bob nailed it. From what I have read from SteveC it appears the issue has been addressed and modified Furys are on the way out in limited supply.

I might find the 8x32 appealing if it has much the same characteristics as the 6.5x.

 

[Steve C]

Tero,

The diopter ring of the original Fury was integral to the focus knob. To use it you pulled the focus knob toward you and then you could adjust the diopter. When that was done you pushed the dial back into place. Their problem, at least on the two I had, wsd that these two operations required some serious effort on the part of the user. I would venture to guess that kids and others with weakened hands/fingers would perhaps have found diopter adjustment beyond their physical capability. I think that the gist of the problem was, as has been suggested a QC problem. When the force necessary to adjust the diopter was applied, something was bound to give. The mechanism is probably OK on the original Fury if you can adjust it easily. It is very easy for me to see why both the diopter and focus would have problems. The new ones have a seperate diopter on the outer end of the focus knob which is pulled out for diopter adjustment. Just like is typical of that common sort of adjustment. I liked the original setup better, but this one now seems just fine. Image quality still right up there. The diopter/focus is the only visible change. The center hinge is tight, won't move unless you make concerted effort to move it. The focus wheel moves pretty easily when you decide to make the effort to move it, but does not seem to be inclined to wander on its own.

 

[vkalia]

Slightly related but as we are rambling anyway... I've been birding for the past few weeks with the Vortex Fury 8x28 and I really have to say - it is a mighty fine compact bino for $200... exactly what I was looking for.

Spending $600 for Leica/Zeiss on a compact was not something I was willing to do, but I did want something better than the $50-100 roofs. The Furies are superb, and surprisingly easy on the eyes as well.

Vandit

 

[Tero]

I have a sort of wish to get some pair 0f 8x28s as well, I really do not enjoy 8x25s that much, I have three pairs ro try. Ignoring th optics, they are just more work than an 8x32 or 8x26 single hinge model.

Had my 10x43 Pentax DCF SPs out for a weekend. Well, they are just binoculars. I am not willing to carry 29 oz around, so this 23oz is my best compromise. But looking objectively, I do not see a great difference in optics to the 10x42 Monarchs. Both are fine. The Monarchs will not last quite as long, but I expect to get 5 more years out of them, and if the eye cups go, they have warranty.

My 10x use is more limited these days. I am working towards using the small scope more and more. There the game is tripod arrangements and weight. The scope weighs nothing in a back pack. But the tripod is bulky.

 

[ceasar]

The new Pentax 9 x 28 DCF LV is a very nice small (not compact) binocular. It's better than I expected it to be when I got it back in March or so. FOV is 294' but it is OK for me. It's sharp enough and bright enough to be quite useful as a back up and "carry along" binocular.
Bob

 

[Tero]

This is the thing. Though that looks really good to me, I still have a 9x25 reverse porro witht the same fov. So the 8x28mm with a wider fov is starting to look attractive.

The Nikon 8x20 LX is 356 ft./1000 yds. But, I really would prefer a single hinge 8x28.

In reverse porros, the Vortex Vanquish 8x26 best fits the bill for my pocket bino
Field of View 352 ft./1000 yds.
Eye Relief 15mm
Close Focus 7.6 ft.
Weight 12.7 oz.

 

[vkalia]

Tero, interesting comments about the 10x43 Pentax SPs and the Monarchs. I compared the SPs to the Vortex Razor 10x42s and ended up selling the Razors (couldnt tell a difference under normal viewing, and the Pentax had a better focus knob).

That makes the Monarchs really good value. I've only looked through a pair of 8x42s, and didnt find them to be as bright or detailed as the SPs or the Minox BDs.

Vandit

 

[Tero]

Vkalia, you are aboslutely right, there is clearly some improvement in the Pentax over the Monach. At early morning poor light they were similar, but in good light you can tell. I would always pick the Pentax in a blind test. But the difference, over 300 in price, is not a quantum leap. If you cannot ID the bird with one, you can't ID it with the other one.

Happy birding, forget the binoculars, send me some birds. Twitched a Scissortailed Flycatcher this morning. So, one lifer for the new Pentax, 100 or so for the Monarch.

PS, I did compare a Bushnell Legend 8x32...why did they discontinue?...and the pentax, and I liked the 8x better. Same clarity but of course the 8x was all around smoother and forgiving of any faults I might see. As is typical of 8x.

Bottom line> I do not really need another pair.