Choosing pocket binoculars (1 Viewer)

[ReinierB]

Maybe the people with experience with pocket binoculars can help my deciding which one to buy.
I recently bought the Terra 8x25, just to test if pocket binoculars are for me. Now I think: yes! I like the format. Sometimes the NL 10x32 is a bit too heavy/bulky, especially in cases when bird watching isn't the main purpose.

I figured I do not put them too often in a pocket, maybe because it is/was summer and I did not have pockets. Besides, the Terra 8x25 is a bit heavy for a pocket and it is not really comfortable having a heavy pocket on one site of the jacket. With a thick winter jacket it wasn't too bad. I am not really impressed with the quality of the Terra 8x25 and want to buy one with better optics too, spoiled as I am with good optics. The terra feels a bit cheap in the hands. The hinge is a bit loose. The eyecups are so so and the optics aren't that good. It will become my "beach binoculars" and the one my children can use.

Pocket binoculars are all about compromises. To sum up what I like:
-as lightweight as possible
-as bright as possible
-as compact as possible
-exit pupil as large as possible
-highest power as possible
-the hold as comfortable as possible
-the eyecups as comfortable as possible
-goodlooking

I know, it is not possible to get this in one package. So it is all about compromises! I am thinking about the following options:

-CL 8x25/10x25 (goodlooking, nice eyecups, comfortable in the hands)
-Curio 7x21 (exit pupil of 3mm, really pocketable, transmission of 90%, but only 7 power)
-Ultravid 8x20/10x25 (pocketable and lightweight, even the 10x25 is quite compact and light)
-VP 8x25/10x25 (really good specs, but not comfortable for me. I can not press them against my eye sockets, otherwise I will get blackouts.)

The specs are really good on the VP, but I already tried them and I didn't really like them. I don't like the looks of them as well. So they are actually off my list already.

I tried the CL 8x25 and the CL 10x25 already and I really like them. They fit my eye sockets. The 10x25 supposes to have a bit larger AFOV, but it only has 2.5mm exit pupil. The transmission is "just" 88%, although I have seen tests which state that it is actually 90% or even more (Hous of Outdoors).

The Curio 7x21 is also a real contender, but has just 7 power. And I am a bit concerned about how tiny it is. How comfortable are the eyecups? The weight? The size?

Ultravid 8x20/10x25. Both just 2.5mm exit pupil, but both very small and beautiful. But maybe a bit finicky?


If I go for 10 power. Which one will be better? The CL 10x25 or the Ultravid 10x25? The latter is smaller and lighter...

If I go for 8 power. Will I go for 3.125 mm exit pupil (CL 8x25) or for 2.5 mm and compactness (UHD 8x20)?

If I go for Curio 7x21, will the view be superior to the CL 25 (transmission is 90% vs. 88%), or will that be even? Is it just it's compactness, FOV and DOV that are the main features of the Curio?

I still don't know which one to choose. Quality and comfort are the most important features for me. Opticwise (is that a word?): which one is the best? Comfortwise: which one is the best? (Although the latter is more personal).

I am thinking about adding a 8x30 (Habicht) as well in the future. Otherwise I would go for a 8x25 I think. Now I think a smaller one or a 10 power would add more, considering the bins I already have.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Reinier, post 1,
On the basis of my investigations of a number of 20 and 25 mm compacts, see the test reports on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor I would go for:
-1- the Swarovski Curio 7x21: weight 255 g, eyerelief 16 mm, FOV 135 m/1000m, light transmission over a broad wavelength range 93,2-93,9%, price 770 eoros
-2- the Bynolyt SeagullED 8x25HD, weight 302g, eyerelief 14mm, FOV 113m/1000m, light transmission over a broad wavelenght range 93,9-92,6%. , price 300 euros.
Both binoculars have excellent handling comfort, the Seagull even slightly beter than the Curio.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[ReinierB]

Reinier, post 1,
On the basis of my investigations of a number of 20 and 25 mm compacts, see the test reports on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor I would go for:
-1- the Swarovski Curio 7x21: weight 255 g, eyerelief 16 mm, FOV 135 m/1000m, light transmission over a broad wavelength range 93,2-93,9%, price 770 eoros
-2- the Bynolyt SeagullED 8x25HD, weight 302g, eyerelief 14mm, FOV 113m/1000m, light transmission over a broad wavelenght range 93,9-92,6%. , price 300 euros.
Both binoculars have excellent handling comfort, the Seagull even slightly beter than the Curio.
Gijs van Ginkel

Thanks! I didn't know about this Bynolyt Seagull 8x25HD that it is so good and that it has light transmission of more than 92-93%!
When I look to your tests, I notice that the smaller binoculars tend to have higher transmission than stated and larger binoculars lower that stated. The CL 8x25 for instance should have about 88% according to Swarovski and you measured 93/94%. The EL 10x50 should have 90% transmission and you measured 87/89%. There are more examples like this. What is exactly the reason for it? The longer the barrels, the more light is lost? Why does this difference between the stated transmission and the measured transmission actually exist? Or is just this sample and could the other sample have 2% more or less?

 

[mwhogue]

Reinier,

From one of our prior exchanges in a related thread:

Reinier,

The Terra 8x25 is a very good all arounder. If you eventually want to consider a smaller and lighter 10x25, you might consider either an UV or Trinovid BL 10x25. The Terra weighs @ 315g and the UV only 265g and it is quite a bit smaller in all dimensions except for length which is the same. The Trinovid models are even smaller and lighter but the leatherette versions are now discontinued I believe.

Mike

Based on your experience since then and what you say in post # 1 above, I would go with either the Curio or an UV or Trinovid 10x25. The SW 25 mm is heavier than the Terra. I agree with GvG post # 2 -- my personal preference for a "shirt pocket" would be the Curio. Glad to answer any further questions.

Mike

 

[[email protected]]

Curio 7x21. The UV 8x21 or Trinovid 8x21 are nice, but they are considerably more finicky. Any 10x25 will be just as finicky because the EP is smaller than the Curio 7x21. 7x is easier to hold steady with a small pocket binocular, and you have better DOF and a wider FOV.

 

[ReinierB]

Reinier,

From one of our prior exchanges in a related thread:



Based on your experience since then and what you say in post # 1 above, I would go with either the Curio or an UV or Trinovid 10x25. The SW 25 mm is heavier than the Terra. I agree with GvG post # 2 -- my personal preference for a "shirt pocket" would be the Curio. Glad to answer any further questions.

Mike

Thank you Mike! I am still (after a couple of months) a bit unsure what I want... I will consider the Trinovid too. Although The Ultravid supposes to be better. I want the optics as good as possible, otherwise I will regret it.
I think the weight isn't really a big issue, because I will mostly carry it with the strap and bandolier style when possible.

 

[dorubird]

The binoculars are a mechanical/optical instrument as a whole. It's not just optical. Mechanics is often underestimated in relation to optics. Good mechanics always can help optics, but good optics cannot help mechanics. So my choice is Ultravid 8x20, an exceptional optical and mechanical assembly!

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

ReinierB, post 3,
I have described our spectroscope in detail in this forum (including the reference to the scientific paper in which the spectroscope is described) , its construction and accuracy is published in international scientific journals. We were asked by a company to compare our data from two specific instruments, which were measured by this company and by a german calibration institute and our data were spot on the same (within experimental error) as the ones from the binocular company and the German calibration institute.
I hope that this answered your questions.
May be I can add that I was a senior scientist in the Molecular Biophysics group (founded in 1935 as the Spectroscopic Biology group at Utrecht University), its name was later changed in the Molecular Biophysics group as one of the research groups of the Debye Research institute at Utrecht University.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Elkhornsun]

My wife uses the CL 8x25 and I use the CL 10x25 and these are excellent. Folded up and inside the carry case they can go on a belt or in a jacket pocket or even inside the water bottle pocket of a backpack. I like the light weight so I can have them hanging off my neck while I am using a camera.

I tried several 8x20 binos including the Ultravids but did not like them for regular use. The 25mm objectives provide 56% more light transmission than 20mm ones, a lot more than one might expect. The Swarvoski 10x25 are my most used binocular. I prefer the added light and detail with the 10x magnification, especially in low light conditions.

 

[Bentley03]

Maybe the people with experience with pocket binoculars can help my deciding which one to buy.
I recently bought the Terra 8x25, just to test if pocket binoculars are for me. Now I think: yes! I like the format. Sometimes the NL 10x32 is a bit too heavy/bulky, especially in cases when bird watching isn't the main purpose.

I figured I do not put them too often in a pocket, maybe because it is/was summer and I did not have pockets. Besides, the Terra 8x25 is a bit heavy for a pocket and it is not really comfortable having a heavy pocket on one site of the jacket. With a thick winter jacket it wasn't too bad. I am not really impressed with the quality of the Terra 8x25 and want to buy one with better optics too, spoiled as I am with good optics. The terra feels a bit cheap in the hands. The hinge is a bit loose. The eyecups are so so and the optics aren't that good. It will become my "beach binoculars" and the one my children can use.

Pocket binoculars are all about compromises. To sum up what I like:
-as lightweight as possible
-as bright as possible
-as compact as possible
-exit pupil as large as possible
-highest power as possible
-the hold as comfortable as possible
-the eyecups as comfortable as possible
-goodlooking

I know, it is not possible to get this in one package. So it is all about compromises! I am thinking about the following options:

-CL 8x25/10x25 (goodlooking, nice eyecups, comfortable in the hands)
-Curio 7x21 (exit pupil of 3mm, really pocketable, transmission of 90%, but only 7 power)
-Ultravid 8x20/10x25 (pocketable and lightweight, even the 10x25 is quite compact and light)
-VP 8x25/10x25 (really good specs, but not comfortable for me. I can not press them against my eye sockets, otherwise I will get blackouts.)

The specs are really good on the VP, but I already tried them and I didn't really like them. I don't like the looks of them as well. So they are actually off my list already.

I tried the CL 8x25 and the CL 10x25 already and I really like them. They fit my eye sockets. The 10x25 supposes to have a bit larger AFOV, but it only has 2.5mm exit pupil. The transmission is "just" 88%, although I have seen tests which state that it is actually 90% or even more (Hous of Outdoors).

The Curio 7x21 is also a real contender, but has just 7 power. And I am a bit concerned about how tiny it is. How comfortable are the eyecups? The weight? The size?

Ultravid 8x20/10x25. Both just 2.5mm exit pupil, but both very small and beautiful. But maybe a bit finicky?


If I go for 10 power. Which one will be better? The CL 10x25 or the Ultravid 10x25? The latter is smaller and lighter...

If I go for 8 power. Will I go for 3.125 mm exit pupil (CL 8x25) or for 2.5 mm and compactness (UHD 8x20)?

If I go for Curio 7x21, will the view be superior to the CL 25 (transmission is 90% vs. 88%), or will that be even? Is it just it's compactness, FOV and DOV that are the main features of the Curio?

I still don't know which one to choose. Quality and comfort are the most important features for me. Opticwise (is that a word?): which one is the best? Comfortwise: which one is the best? (Although the latter is more personal).

I am thinking about adding a 8x30 (Habicht) as well in the future. Otherwise I would go for a 8x25 I think. Now I think a smaller one or a 10 power would add more, considering the bins I already have.

My 2p...

I either own (or have owned) all of the contenders you have listed, apart from the UV 10x25 which doesn't have enough eye relief for me (I wear glasses).

In terms of 8x, I see little point in 'upgrading' to a more premium 8x25, your Terra ED gives away so little mechanically and optically to the CL, it's pointless (in my opinion).

The 10x25 CL Pocket is the only 10x pocket binocular I really enjoy, so gets my vote if you decide on a 10x.

But in terms of a truly pocketable binocular, my favourite by far is my Ultravid 8x20 BR which I carry everywhere in an 8x20 BL leather case.

That said, the Curio is the easiest and most relaxing of the sub x25's to use, and would pair perfectly with a 10x25 CL Pocket if you wanted a higher/lower mag combo.

For me, my 8x20 Ultravid ticks all my pocket binocular boxes, pocketable perfection.

 

[Swedpat]

A compact glass is harder to hold steady and should be slightly lower power, in my opinion. 7x means you get wider FOV and brighter image. 7x21 is significantly brighter than 8x20 and 10x25. I think Curio is very close to the perfect compact binocular. And the eye relief is superior to any 8x20 and 10x25 and allows me to have a fully open and clear view of the entire FOV.
Only drawback I can see is the slippery finger side. Why Swarovski??? It's easy that it slips out of your hand and no one want such an expensive instrument to fall to the ground.
This problem is easily solved by attaching som friction tape. But it may damage the good look of a well designed binocular.

 

[ReinierB]

The binoculars are a mechanical/optical instrument as a whole. It's not just optical. Mechanics is often underestimated in relation to optics. Good mechanics always can help optics, but good optics cannot help mechanics. So my choice is Ultravid 8x20, an exceptional optical and mechanical assembly!

You are right about that! I want the best optics in the best package. Especially with pocket binoculars, because they are more finicky. I definitely have to try them all before I pull the trigger.
The Ultravid 8x20 or 10x25 are good contenders!

 

[ReinierB]

My wife uses the CL 8x25 and I use the CL 10x25 and these are excellent. Folded up and inside the carry case they can go on a belt or in a jacket pocket or even inside the water bottle pocket of a backpack. I like the light weight so I can have them hanging off my neck while I am using a camera.

I tried several 8x20 binos including the Ultravids but did not like them for regular use. The 25mm objectives provide 56% more light transmission than 20mm ones, a lot more than one might expect. The Swarvoski 10x25 are my most used binocular. I prefer the added light and detail with the 10x magnification, especially in low light conditions.

I have tried the CL 10x25 before and liked it! So I will like the CL 8x25 as well. I am sure. They are only a bit large and heavy for a pocket, but hanging on the neck or bandolier style, that is no problem at all! A bit of a heavier/bigger pair of pocket binos are more comfortable too hold as well.
The CL 8x25 and 10x25 are good contenders!

 

[ReinierB]

I either own (or have owned) all of the contenders you have listed, apart from the UV 10x25 which doesn't have enough eye relief for me (I wear glasses).

Thanks for you input.
According to te specs the eye relief of the UV 8x20 and the UV 10x25 should be the same? It should be 15 mm for both bins.

In terms of 8x, I see little point in 'upgrading' to a more premium 8x25, your Terra ED gives away so little mechanically and optically to the CL, it's pointless (in my opinion).

Well, the first weeks I was wuite happy with it. But it has got a cheap feeling. The hinges are a bit loose for my liking. But not loose enough to sent them back. The armor already let loose a bit on one place at the bottem where the wrapped armor joines. I see an opening of about 1mm now. I might take a photo of it and share it. I just have the feeling the binoculars will not last very long . Optically the view is a bit "tame" compared with the CL 10x25 I once tried and the CL 10x30 I had for a couple of months. Not really nice colours and not as sharp as I am used to. And I experienced a 8x25 is a nice format. Sufficient exit pupil, not too finicky and 8 power is nice for pocket binoculars.

That said, the Curio is the easiest and most relaxing of the sub x25's to use, and would pair perfectly with a 10x25 CL Pocket if you wanted a higher/lower mag combo.

I like that idea!

For me, my 8x20 Ultravid ticks all my pocket binocular boxes, pocketable perfection.

I understand. You have experience with both 2.5mm exit pupil and 3.125mm exit pupil. Going back to 2.5mm is not a real sacrifice?

 

[ReinierB]

A compact glass is harder to hold steady and should be slightly lower power, in my opinion. 7x means you get wider FOV and brighter image. 7x21 is significantly brighter than 8x20 and 10x25. I think Curio is very close to the perfect compact binocular.

That's why a lean towards 8 power instead of 10 power, although I am a 10 power fan. The curio ticks almost all the boxes, expect that is it 7x instead of 8x.
The Curio is still a very nice contender: 3mm exit pupil and it is really pocketable.

And the eye relief is superior to any 8x20 and 10x25 and allows me to have a fully open and clear view of the entire FOV.

The eye relief of the CL 8x25 and 10x25 is 17mm compared with 16mm of the Curio according to the specs?

 

[ReinierB]

En résumé:

• UV 8x20: a very good compromise: very good optics, although the FOV is restrictive, 8 power, really pocketable
• Curio 7x21: a very good compromise as well, although I would prefer 8 power. 3mm exit pupil is nice though!
• UV 10x25: still compact and light, considering it has 25mm lenses. Quite small FOV.
• CL 8x25: I know it is comfortable and the view is good. A bit heavy and large though. It doesn't get many recommendations either. I am concerned the optics are a bit behind those of the Curio because the latter is newer and has 90% transmission according to the specs of Swarovski.
• CL 10x25: just 2.5mm exit pupil.

So, what are my priorities... That's the most important question I have to ask myself I am afraid...

 

[Swedpat]

That's why a lean towards 8 power instead of 10 power, although I am a 10 power fan. The curio ticks almost all the boxes, expect that is it 7x instead of 8x.
The Curio is still a very nice contender: 3mm exit pupil and it is really pocketable.

The eye relief of the CL 8x25 and 10x25 is 17mm compared with 16mm of the Curio according to the specs?

I cannot comment about 10x25. But the specs are often to be taken with a pinch of salt. Manufacturers often state numbers who are inaccurate in practise. And the common case is that higher magnification results in shorter ER, when the increased magnification is due to shorter focal length of the eyepiece.
It would surprise me if 10x25 really has same ER as 8x25.

 

[PatR]

The Curio is a fantastic bino and just so easy to put in a pocket or hang around your neck. Optically they are superb and the 7x matters not a jot to me. I love them especially when I have a long telephoto lens and body to carry on hikes.

I bought the Terra 8x25's when they were on a Zeiss trade-in promotion, more out of idle curiosity than need, and paid £149. I think they are excellent binoculars, mine are very well made and optically they are not far behind the SW 8x25's. Not as solid, not as satisfying to use but as a pair that gets chucked in a rucksack they are perfect....for me.

But of all the pocket binoculars I own or have owned, the Nikon HGL 10x25's have been outstanding. Optically they are superb, they are built like the proverbial outhouse and they have suffered the sort of abuse that would have seen my Curio's back to Absam for major re-construction work.

They are indestructable and if any one needs a pair of compact bino's that can truly handle extreme use, then the diminutive Nikon's, which I have owned for over 20 years, are worth a look. Japanese quality, beautifully made, optically excellent and proven to exceed all my needs on operations from the Arctic to Antartica with a few sandy and very hot places in between.

Amazon UK have the HGL 8x20's on sale for £455. I think I might try and smuggle a pair past the Long Haired General.

 

[ReinierB]

So if size and weight matters, I should take a 7x21 or 8x20.
However, when that doesn't matter that much and comfort and the optics are more important, shouldn't I take a 8x25 instead?

If have kind of dismissed 10 power, so 7 and 8 power are still in te the run. >3mm exit pupil has my preferation. So Curio 7x21 or SW 8x25 (I will try VP 8x25 again, just to be sure) are the most preferable contenders. (Leica UV and TV aren't ruled out yet).

Curio gets a lot of praise. SW 8x25 doesn't get that much praise. However, the AFOV and the EP are slightly bigger. A big plus is, that it is a 8 power as well. If size and weight aren't that important, wouldn't the SW 8x25 be the better option? Or are the optics of the Curio better because it has the newest technology/coatings? That's a question I still have. Are the optics better or equal? The same with the UV 8x20. I can imagine the optics are quite equal, but the biggest difference is the exit pupil 2.5mm <> 3mm. So wouldn't the SW 8x25 be a bit more comfortable.

Size and weight aren't really bad things for comfort. Probably less shake too.

 

[John M Robinson]

Regarding your seven power are not enough concerns, I once tried 7x42 Ultravids against my 8x42 Ultravids for two weeks. A kind forum member sent his binocs out to me to try. Anyway, the difference in power was so subtle, that I hardly noticed it. My two biggest concerns in binoculars are, 1) image quality, and 2) ease of view. The 7x21 Curios pass those two test in spades. I’m a big Curio fan.