Binocular recommendations for wet conditions (3 Viewers)

[Cavendish]

Re the recommendations of a Habicht, just be aware that the design means they have very stiff focussers as standard. I really wouldn't fancy using one on a sub-zero Highlands day as it won't improve matters.

 

[crinklystarfish]

As above, I've spent a good deal of time watching nature in the area that the OP describes.

Of course, in some circumstances 8x has some intrinsic advantages over a sibling 10x, but in the OP's environment wide open country is dominant and 8x is absolutely going to be found wanting for many of the typical vistas and species encountered: particularly the raptors and deer specified. If the OP had described the most expected use would be wandering through closed forests or watching dragonflies, I'd agree with an 8x recommendation in an instant.

I've personally never found eye placement an issue with good quality binoculars in the 10 x 30/32 format and the suggestion that something like an HG 10x30 may be too dim is - in my view - something of an academic binocular-aficionado argument. Only in the very last few minutes of daylight if looking at a sterile resolution chart might this be anything of a factor.

The field of view of something like an HG 10x30 or SFL 10x30 is also usefully wide and more than adequate for successfully following crossbills and crested tits in the more closed woodlands that will also undoubtedly be occasionally encountered. The apparent field of view afforded by such 10xs is also very pleasantly immersive and engaging.

I presume because of size of weight...

Deak, 8x and 10x siblings are almost always the same physical size and so close in weight that it makes no real-world difference.

Though it's useful to consider opinions, final choice is a very personal thing. It's no bad thing you're heading to a dealer to compare stuff. Keep in mind, though, that the view from the dealer's shop is unlikely to replicate the habitats you'll be wild-camping in.

I hope you quickly find something that just 'clicks' for you.

 

[Deak]

The main reason why I recommended 8x32s is the size of the exit pupil. 3.2mm or even 3mm exit pupils may be just a tad too dim. To my liking anyway. The Scottish Highlands are not California, are they?

Thanks for this, I've now gone down a rabbit hole looking exit pupil sizes. The concept was new to me.

I've got a short list (below) which I'm reading up on. With Black Friday coming up, I'll be keeping an eye open any nice discounts. That said, I'm not against buying used.

I also wanted to respond to a few recommendations people had kindly made, which I've made next to the models. I'm not sure on magnification yet, so that will be a decision I make after a bit more exploration and hopefully some hands-on comparisons this weekend.

I did want to respond to the suggestions about the Swarovski Habicht. I guess the wonderful thing about binoculars is that there's a pair for everyone, no matter your budget, needs, preferences, or aesthetics. These binos are not for me! This is based 90% on their vintage looks, which I can well believe many people love. Thanks for the suggestion, they definitely fall into the category of interesting and if I see a fellow birder with a pair I will give them a little nod of appreciation.

Short list:

• Zeiss Conquest HD/X 8x32 - these tick all the main boxes and forum members seem to regularly recommend them, which is surely a good sign among well-informed people who often disagree.
• Zeiss SFL 8x30 or 8x40 - out of my budget, but if there's a used pair going they really would take some beating.
• Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 or 10x30 - I own a Nikon camera and I have similar thoughts about these binoculars: boring but really capable and a fair price. My only concern is that I've seen used pairs advertised which say there is moisture in the optics but that it doesn't affect performance. That seems like a red flag.
• Nikon Monarch M7/M7+ 8x30 or 10x30 - these are obviously much cheaper than the MHGs, but I've read here that several people regard the step up is not something everyone necessarily appreciates. I'd like to try the M7s and MHGs side-by-side.
• Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 - to me these seem like the philosophical opposite of the MHGs. They look beautiful. As I said, I'm big on feel and build quality.
• Leica Trinovid 8x32 - build quality and reputation are hard to ignore, but I do understand some folks' gripes about the FOV and price point relative to other arguably more capable binoculars. I hope to try them side-by-side vs. something like the Nikons to see how sensitive I am to this. The CA point seems to also come up.
• Leica Ultravid 8x32 - I'd be looking for a used pair, but these tick so many boxes for me.

Thanks all for your insights.

Deak

 

[PatR]

Thanks for this, I've now gone down a rabbit hole looking exit pupil sizes. The concept was new to me.

I've got a short list (below) which I'm reading up on. With Black Friday coming up, I'll be keeping an eye open any nice discounts. That said, I'm not against buying used.

I also wanted to respond to a few recommendations people had kindly made, which I've made next to the models. I'm not sure on magnification yet, so that will be a decision I make after a bit more exploration and hopefully some hands-on comparisons this weekend.

I did want to respond to the suggestions about the Swarovski Habicht. I guess the wonderful thing about binoculars is that there's a pair for everyone, no matter your budget, needs, preferences, or aesthetics. These binos are not for me! This is based 90% on their vintage looks, which I can well believe many people love. Thanks for the suggestion, they definitely fall into the category of interesting and if I see a fellow birder with a pair I will give them a little nod of appreciation.

Short list:

• Zeiss Conquest HD/X 8x32 - these tick all the main boxes and forum members seem to regularly recommend them, which is surely a good sign among well-informed people who often disagree.
• Zeiss SFL 8x30 or 8x40 - out of my budget, but if there's a used pair going they really would take some beating.
• Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 or 10x30 - I own a Nikon camera and I have similar thoughts about these binoculars: boring but really capable and a fair price. My only concern is that I've seen used pairs advertised which say there is moisture in the optics but that it doesn't affect performance. That seems like a red flag.
• Nikon Monarch M7/M7+ 8x30 or 10x30 - these are obviously much cheaper than the MHGs, but I've read here that several people regard the step up is not something everyone necessarily appreciates. I'd like to try the M7s and MHGs side-by-side.
• Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 - to me these seem like the philosophical opposite of the MHGs. They look beautiful. As I said, I'm big on feel and build quality.
• Leica Trinovid 8x32 - build quality and reputation are hard to ignore, but I do understand some folks' gripes about the FOV and price point relative to other arguably more capable binoculars. I hope to try them side-by-side vs. something like the Nikons to see how sensitive I am to this. The CA point seems to also come up.
• Leica Ultravid 8x32 - I'd be looking for a used pair, but these tick so many boxes for me.

Thanks all for your insights.

Deak

Deak,

a cracking list and everyone has their favourite(s) but if you can get a pair of Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32's at the (current) give away prices then you would be getting a fantastic pair of bino's.

Plus, if the eyecups are not to your taste (and mine were not), then Zeiss UK will send you out a pair of the extended ones FOC.

Tried both the HD and the HDX 8x32's side by side last month as well as the 8x42's as I own a pair. Save some money, the HD's are cracking bino's and I preferred the 'feel' of the HD's more.

As for your comment on the Habicht's, spot on! They are marmite to many, but I love 'em.

 

[Hermann]

Deak,

a cracking list and everyone has their favourite(s) but if you can get a pair of Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32's at the (current) give away prices then you would be getting a fantastic pair of bino's.

Strongly seconded. One word of caution though: The Conquest HD has got a fast focuser. Fast focusers work for many people, for others they don't. If you have the chance, try before you buy.

Hermann

 

[4 The Birds1]

Thanks for this, I've now gone down a rabbit hole looking exit pupil sizes. The concept was new to me

Deak

Not sure if you have considered this already - if not, then may I add another rabbit hole to your research activity:

You have mentioned wearing glasses.
Sufficient eye relief is then required, else you will not be able to see the full field of view.

How much ER you need will depend on whether you are short-sighted or long-sighted (the latter requires more than the former) and on the characteristics / position of your spectacles.

Lack of ER will very likely be a problem with the Ultravids on your shortlist.

Note that the different manufacturer's stated ERs don't necessarily compare, depending on eye cup design and on how they measure ER (from glass surface vs from eye cup).

A great resource in this regard is fellow BF member Canip's website, where he lists useable ER alongside manufacturer's specs:

The PINACOLLECTION – Binoculars Today

Another reason to try before you buy, especially if you are considering purchasing second hand with no return option.

 

[Trinovid]

Leica Trinovid 8x32 - build quality and reputation are hard to ignore
Leica Ultravid 8x32 - I'd be looking for a used pair, but these tick so many boxes for me

I sure like both of these.

 

[PatR]

@Deak

The Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32's are reduced to £574 on EBay UK. There is a code FIRSTLOOK20 which reduces the price from £649 and the seller, Camera Centre UK, is one I have bought off without any problems.

That is a cracking price for a cracking pair of bino's.

 

[mwhogue]

Zeiss Conquest HD/X 8x32 - these tick all the main boxes and forum members seem to regularly recommend them, which is surely a good sign among well-informed people who often disagree.

If either Conquest winds up as a leading contender based on your testing an added bonus is the outstanding close focus performance. Not everyone cares but I enjoy looking at moss, lichens and wild flowers at close range. Good CF performance makes any given bin more versatile for all around use IMO.

Mike

 

[Deak]

I was in London for work on Thursday and Friday and managed to actually get my hands on some binoculars. Sadly, I did not have a lot of time and not all of them were available to test. However, maybe I learned enough to share some thoughts which may be useful to folks with similar needs. Please note, I am new to binoculars and so these are subjective and non-technical observations.

After testing a few pairs I really liked the 10x32/30 spec. Reading around, this is a less popular specification vs. 8x32/30 and I understand why. 8x seems to serve a very important role for many birders and photographers. However, 10x does seem a good fit for me. The Cairngorms has some beautiful Caledonian forests; if you haven't visited Uath Lochans and Glen Feshie, you'll love it. However, it is mostly an expansive mountain range and I think the extra magnification will be useful for observing raptors and deer. Thanks @crinklystarfish for giving me a steer on this.

Sometimes, I don't know what I think until I write it down. I think this is a safe space, so I've shared my rankings below. These were written before I got my hands on any binoculars and I'm sure most people will have different opinions. I'll also say that this exercise proved to be both useful and useless! (The brand ranking refers to my perception or experience of their build quality and customer care.)



One of the first tests I did was to put the very low scoring Monarch M7 against the highest ranked Swarovski CLs. I immediately loved the feel of the Swarovskis in my hand and disliked the Nikons. However, when I looked through them, honestly, I could not see where the ~4x price difference was. The Swarovskis image was crisper, brighter, better colours, etc. To my non-expert eyes, that performance was perhaps 20% (30% being generous) better than the Nikons. On build quality, the Swarovskis were in a different league. A different binocular for a different budget. I then tried the MHGs and the difference vs. the M7 was rather small. Arbitrarily, I'd say 10%-15% better across most parameters. The MHG build quality is a bit better than the M7s, but when you look at the price difference I couldn't make sense of it at all. Nikon has absolutely knocked it out the park with their M7s.

I tried the Zeiss Conquest HDs and these were on a par with the Swarovskis optically. If I was being fussy, I would say the colours overall in the Swarovski were more to my liking. The Conquest HDs felt not as nice in my hands, but controls were great and a step up from the Nikon's feel. I then tried the Zeiss Victory SFLs and this was a mistake. They were out of my price range and it was immediately obvious that they were the best binoculars I had tried. Everything looked better in them and they felt as good in the hand as the Swarovskis. Almost as pretty too!

I also tried a pair of Leica Trinovids, but I liked these least of all. They felt nice it the hand, the image was very good but not great. The colours were very nice and crisp. I'd just tried the SFLs, which was probably a factor in my reaction. The Trinovids FOV immediately threw me. It is so noticeable vs. the binoculars that I think it killed off the Trinovids as an option for me despite my affection for the red dot. Price-wise, I think they could be better for the money Leica is asking.

I walked away without a decision and a bit shocked. I know some of you will appreciate the differences in image quality in a way that I can't, but I felt the M7s were insanely good value. The Zeiss Conquests HDs did nothing wrong and for their current price are incredible. My heart says the Swarovskis, my brain says the Conquest HDs, and my wallet says to buy the M7s and put the change toward a new Hilleberg tent.

I'll wait and see what Black Friday brings.

Cheers,

Ian

 

[mwhogue]

Ian (post #30)

Sounds like you do have the hang of it actually. A couple of thoughts.

While no $1000 binocular will be 2 times better than a $500 model for example, based on my experience you may come to appreciate the 10 to 20 % superiority in real world use more over time enough to make the disproportionate increase in price well worthwhile.

Your Good Friday plan is sound. In a quick check of the US market this morning, the SFL 10x30 is available from at least one seller at @ $1150. So maybe you can find an acceptable price on the SFL in the European market either on sale or used if you are inclined.

Mike

 

[Maljunulo]

I have not seen anyone define what “two times better” or “n times” better actually means.

I personally, have never wished I had bought a cheaper binocular than the ones I did buy.

 

[Deak]

I have not seen anyone define what “two times better” or “n times” better actually means.

It may be possible to quantify some properties objectively with scientific instrumentation, no?

Joking aside, it's no different to a review of a movie or a video game, which non-scientifically scores certain parameters to give a sense of the quality of a thing. When I add up all the parameters I'm considering about the image quality I'm seeing, it's not unreasonable to say I perceive it as better or worse. It is a little or a lot? To my beginner's eyes, mostly I saw the differences as small. Those small differences may matter to you and be the difference between your objectives being met (or not).

I personally, have never wished I had bought a cheaper binocular than the ones I did buy.

Exactly right! Once you've made a purchase -- and if it fulfils your needs -- feeling that you could have bought something a bit worse for less money would be very strange. The psychology after making a purchase is quite different to before where you more seriously consider things like diminishing returns and value.

While no $1000 binocular will be 2 times better than a $500 model for example, based on my experience you may come to appreciate the 10 to 20 % superiority in real world use more over time enough to make the disproportionate increase in price well worthwhile.

Cheers Mike, you may be right on those small gains in image quality. Right now, I feel like I can't make that judgement. If this was a pair of running shoes and something offered even a 5% improvement in my 10k time, I would pay for it. I feel like caveman with binoculars though.

 

[Maljunulo]

I just think it is illogical to say "I won't buy this $3000 binocular because it isn't three times better than that $1000 binocular." (whatever that really means)

I don't know where the presumption that it is a linear thing comes from.

 

[Deak]

I don't know where the presumption that it is a linear thing comes from.

That was not at all my presumption, but I get how you arrived at your presumption. Apologies if I wasn't clear in my post or subsequent replies on diminishing returns. I could go back add some clarifications, but please take this post as me agreeing with you.

 

[Maljunulo]

That was not at all my presumption, but I get how you arrived at your presumption. Apologies if I wasn't clear in my post or subsequent replies on diminishing returns. I could go back add some clarifications, but please take this post as me agreeing with you.

It’s a deal!

Cheers.

 

[coppo]

You have to be really thorough and experienced to tell the difference between quality pairs of binoculars, I certainly can’t, any good pair will do the job and suffice for me.

 

[Maljunulo]

You have to be really thorough and experienced to tell the difference between quality pairs of binoculars, I certainly can’t, any good pair will do the job and suffice for me.

“If you can’t tell the difference, it’s probably irrelevant.”
-Me-

I didn’t need to be either of those to see the difference between my 10X42 EL SV and my 8x32 SF. The SF made the EL look “muddy” to my eyes.

I never touched the EL after, and ended up giving it to my #1 granddaughter.

 

[coppo]

“If you can’t tell the difference, it’s probably irrelevant.”
-Me-

I didn’t need to be either of those to see the difference between my 10X42 EL SV and my 8x32 SF. The SF made the EL look “muddy” to my eyes.

I never touched ehe EL after, and ended up giving it to my #1 granddaughter.

Then there’s the other end of the scale, I had a cheap pair from a charity shop for almost 30 years, cost a fiver, they did the job.

 

[Maljunulo]

Then there’s the other end of the scale, I had a cheap pair from a charity shop for almost 30 years, cost a fiver, they did the job.

Good for you!

It all depends on your goals, I guess.