BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zzzzzz" data-source="post: 3487832" data-attributes="member: 133864">OK ... Almost as good as the EDG, better than the Trinovid HD! How about the SLC ?  on your cale from 1 thru 9 8-P1. EL SV2. SF3. Noctivid4. HT5. Ultravid6. EDG7.8.9. Trinovid HDHere is my first mini-impression (very temporary). Other reviewers have compared the HG with other vitamins, I try to give an impression how I see the Monarch HG in comparison with his "direct brothers" of Nikon: Monarch 7, HG-L, EDG. The only goal is to encourage those who do not know the glass to look at it. The HG is therefore like a young of the EDG - slimmer, lighter, somewhat less "baroque", looks good, feels good, is well in the hand. Mechanically correct: Focusing (without the "EDG_Knack" in the center), center bridge, points of observation of the ocular shells, everything Nikon has made the effort to indicate the mechanism of the diopter compensation on the right eyepiece on the glass with signs: lift, then rotate. Works soft and round; Zero point not completely at zero. Compared to Monarch 7: The HG is about the same size and the same weight (715g with straps and eyepiece). The haptics of the HG are more pleasant. The picture is still slightly wider than the Monarch 7 (8.3 degrees to 8 degrees). The visual acuity of the HG is significantly better than in the 7, already the middle sharpness and then very clearly the edge sharpness. The image is "more homogeneous" when the HG is pivoted. In a direct comparison, the monarch 7 falls noticeably. Compared to the HG-L: The Monarch HG is clearly lighter and more compact (and more pleasant reinforced). The central focus seemed to me rather better in the first observations in the HG than in the HG-L, and the image field of the HG-L is so much narrower that here also worlds lie between the two glasses: tunnel vision against wide field of view. Compared to the EDG: Monarch HG is significantly smaller and lighter. The mid-range seemed almost as good as in the EDG, the edge sharpness not quite as good, but the HG also has significantly more field of view (8.3 degrees against 7.7 degrees). Also in the "5 seconds comparison" with other good mid-class glasses makes the Monarch HG good figure. For example Trinovid HD: worlds between the narrow visual field of the Trinovid and the monarch HG. In the sharpness the HG holds loose with, CA seems to me in the HG much better corrected than in the Trinovid HD (why it is actually HD?). My "Steckenpferd" Streulicht: the EDG is exemplary for me in this category. The Monarch HG also shows a good performance here: direct sunlight on the front lenses does not cause any fog or slight reflections, the view over a sparkling water surface is also digested easily, the picture remains clear and disturbing - a good performance for a compact glass ! After what I said, I am personally quite impressed by the monarch HG for now.</blockquote>

Verification