General use binocular in the 600 euros/$ range (1 Viewer)

[kkokkolis]

I have 600 euros or so to spend in cash. My telescopes/ eyepieces/ equipment are more than adequate for what I do, so I'm thinking about a new pair of binoculars. Since I bought my latest I use about 90% binocular/10% telescope and binoculars are around 90% terrestrial/10% astronomy, so you get the point. Terrestrial isn't strictly birding, I like marine/avian life and human activity also (boats and aircraft of any kind) and geology.

Now I have the Pentax Papilio 6.5x21, Zeiss Terra ED 8x42, Canon 18x50 IS UD, some older Asashi Pentax 8x30 (my solar), cheap Bresser 10x50 and a Soviet 8x30 monocular.

I mainly use the first three. I am happy with them, so my mind goes to a lighter Zeiss or Canon for general use. They are both available locally (that's rare and a very good thing). Later I might get a bigger porro for astronomy, like a Fuji or BA8 as sugested, but not now. I light pair will be used more, either in rotation with the Papilio (for travel, biking etc) or paired with the Canons for lower magnification/better FOV.

Binoculars are more expensive here, we don't have most US brands and finding a good pair used is not easy.

So the options are:

1. Zeiss Conquest 8x32 HD. The best binocular in its class. FOV of 8 degrees.
2. Zeiss Conquest 10x32 HD. Equal to 1, less FOV but higher magnification. I already have 8x42, should I avoid doubling? But what about 3mm exit pupil?
3. Zeiss Conquest 8x42 HD. I mean selling the Terra and buy this instead. Better color correction and wider AFOV the main advantages.
4. Zeiss Terra 8x32 ED. Not available here yet. If I am happy with Terra why not saving some money? But if I have the money why not spending it for the Conquest and help the economy? FOV 7.7, not bad.
5. Zeiss Terra 10x32 ED. the same dilemma. I have 8x, should I go for 10x? What about the exit pupil?
6. Canon 12x36 II. Here the exit pupil is no problem, there's the IS! And it will be steadier. But FOV is only 5 degrees.
7. Canon 10x30. Smaller, cheaper, FOV 6 degrees, still smaller than Terra's 7 degrees.
8. Canon 10x42 L. Why not stretch it? Because it costs over 1400 euros here. Could I live with the remorse?

There are also two Kowa models, 8x32 and 10x32, the second is Prominar BD but the 8x32 seems to be an older model.

That's it I guess. I narrowed it to just two brands and still there are 7-8 options. I ruled out the ultra compacts like 8x20 and 10x25, the Pentax is king in that region with it's short focus.

Rounding it up.
A. Canon IS or Zeiss tradition?
B. Double the 8x magnification for more FOV or get 10x?
C. Is there a justifiable advantage of Conquest over Terra (which I already like)?
D. If I get the 10-12x Canons, will I still want a 8x32 afterwards?
E. Is there another option I forgot?

If I get the Terra then I might buy a Canon 10x30 used for the same amount of money. 2 are better than one, isn't that so?

Thank you very much for your patience.

 

[Robert Wallace]

When I moved from 10x to 7x, I did not miss the loss of magnification, and am now very happy using 8x32.
My recommendation would be for a pair of 8x32s which is never a wrong choice, I understand the Zeiss 8x32 HD Conquest has a good reputation on Bird Forum.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Zeiss Conquest 8x32 HD. For an interesting older alpha alternative try a Leica Trinovid 8x32 BA often times on Ebay for around $650.00. A little less expensive than the Zeiss Conquest 8x32 HD but more compact, better build quality,bigger FOV , sharper edges and IMO very close optically. When you are looking at mid-price a lot of times the older alphas beat the newer models.

 

[PhilR.]

When I think of "general purpose" binos, I think of 8x30 or 32. However, you already have an 8x binocular. What you don't have, and what might prove desireable, are a 10x bino. Therefore, I would say go one of two ways -- either get a nice 10x bino such as the Conquest HD you mentioned (objective size determined by the light levels where you live), or trade the 8x42 Terra for a 10x42, and buy a nice 8x32. Something like the Conquest HD you mentioned, or the Meopta Meostar. Or the new Meopro HD, which I have yet to use. I like our 8x32 Conquest HD, but this past weekend I had the opportunity to use the 8x32 Meostar HD, and I really liked it *a lot*. I almost purchased it, despite having absolutely no need for it.

The 2nd option is the way I would go, as I don't get much advantage in a 42mm bino at 8x, but do find advantage in that size objectives in 10x. I do have a couple of nice 8x42's, but I hardly ever use them. BTW - there *is* a justifiable advantage of the Conquest HD over the Terra, and this is in overall excellence of view. The Conquest HD is just plain better in pretty much all aspects, as one could reasonably expect given it's higher price. And the 8x32 Conquest HD is really good.......

 

[stephen b]

.... this past weekend I had the opportunity to use the 8x32 Meostar HD, and I really liked it *a lot*. I almost purchased it, despite having absolutely no need for it....

Phil-

Quick ? Did you mean the Meopro 8x32 HD, or the regular Meostar 8x32? I did not think Meopta made the 8x32 in HD yet ( except for Cabelas Euro HD).

Thanks

 

[kkokkolis]

Thank you for your answers. I feel that the Conquest is calling me. Not that I find the Terra bad, since I never used better binoculars than the ones I have. The thing I would change in the Terra is the color which is obvious under certain conditions. I hope the Conquest is better in that regard.
There are two reasons I bought the 8x42 instead of the 10x42. First: My hands are not very steady. Second: Since they aren't I rely on IS for higher magnifications. So I got the 18x50. Since this has narrow field of view, small exit pupil and great magnification I wanted the opposite, the exit pupil of 5mm, a low magnification and field of view over 7 degrees. The 8x32 gives most of those, except of the exit pupil, which I want since I use them also for astronomy. The Terra and Canon are always paired and balance each other. The 8x32 will be a stand alone and I will probably add another Canon, 10-12x when I get the chance. A reasonable quality 10x50 Porro is much easier to be added at any time and it doesn't have to be from Germany, there are good Nikons, Pentaxes and other brands also.

 

[kabsetz]

Sell the Terra you have now, and buy either the Canon 10x42 now and a Conquest 8x32 later, or vice versa. Or if your really need the 8x42 for astronomy, keep it, only buy the Canon, and once you realize you no longer use the 8x42, sell it and don't buy anything instead.

Kimmo

 

[PhilR.]

Phil-

Quick ? Did you mean the Meopro 8x32 HD, or the regular Meostar 8x32? I did not think Meopta made the 8x32 in HD yet ( except for Cabelas Euro HD).

Thanks

Hi Stephen,

It was the Cabela's-branded Meostar HD. I didn't mention the Cabela's portion as it will not mean anything to someone outside the US. I really liked the HD version, and I have a feeling that the non-HD version is pretty good too, and is probably available to the OP.

 

[stephen b]

Hi Stephen,

It was the Cabela's-branded Meostar HD. I didn't mention the Cabela's portion as it will not mean anything to someone outside the US. I really liked the HD version, and I have a feeling that the non-HD version is pretty good too, and is probably available to the OP.

Thanks Phil,

I agree with you on the Cabelas 8x32 Euro HD- it really is a nice 8x32. In this price range I would look at that model, or the regular 8x32 Meopta Meostar, or the Conquest 8x32. All are quite good at this price. Would have to jump quite a bit in price to beat them.