• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

I am thinking the new 32 mm alphas from Swarovski and Zeiss are the best birding binoculars you can buy right now. (2 Viewers)

HenRun

Well-known member
Sweden
Olivon is a lower tier brand of binoculars. They do have the odd ED glass variant. The Olivon tube I looked through was really awful with excessive ca, moderate sharpness and low contrast with smeary edges. I have looked through a few cheap tubes and the Olivon is probably the worst so far.
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Olivon is a lower tier brand of binoculars. They do have the odd ED glass variant. The Olivon tube I looked through was really awful with excessive ca, moderate sharpness and low contrast with smeary edges. I have looked through a few cheap tubes and the Olivon is probably the worst so far.
Never heard of Olivon. They must not be sold in the US. Some brands seem to be more localized like Opticron which are mainly UK based and then some brands like Swarovski are international. It is interesting to hear about other brands and how they perform.
 

Thotmosis

Well-known member
Netherlands
Thotmosis; not to give too much of false hope but my former pair of Zeiss 10x32 FL might be up for sale. I need to ask my friend who has them if he is still considering selling them. Right ocular is a bit stiff on them I haven't looked into if it is just a case of some minor love and attention to fix them up. Other than that they are in good condition.
I have spend all of my binocular budget for 2022 :( Next binocular (in 2023) will be an 8 x56 and then i think im all set for the coming 10 years....might change my mind though.
 

aCuria

Well-known member
Sure because the 8x32 will be brighter, but you will see as much detail through the 10x25. The thing is, you can get a much smaller 10x25 than you can an 8x32. We're talking 10 oz. or less! You can get a pocket Zeiss Victory 10x25, and it is surprisingly good in low light. Try a 10x25 in low light sometime. No too many people buy them because they usually go for the 8x25 for the bigger exit pupil, but the 10x25 is a better low light performer although because of the small exit pupil they can be quite finicky for eye placement.

I tried the 8x42 SF against the 10x25 Victory in a somewhat dimly lit shop, and the 8x42 had the better image, and not by a small margin
 

aCuria

Well-known member
You would be sacrificing a much larger FOV, more transparency, sharper edges and a much lighter and smaller binocular for a few extra minutes of observing time at sunset. 98% of the time when you are birding during the day the 32 mm alpha will give you a better view with a much wider FOV and superior transparency, and it will be much lighter and more compact to carry ALL day, except for the maybe fifteen minutes when the sun is going down the bigger 42 mm Conquest HD or Razor would be slightly brighter because of the bigger exit pupil. You have to decide, is that 15 minutes worth it to you?

Just because its in the day, doesnt mean its not kinda dark in the rainforest... cant really agree with the 15min thing. (im in SEA)

I have both 8x32 and 8x42, theres a right time to use each imo.
 

Trinovid

mountain and glacier watcher
United States
I have a mate who was unlucky and ended up with overly dry eyes that persisted years after his lasik operation... he uses eyedrops multiple times a day. That really put me off going for it
Most important thing choosing who gets to work on your eyes, ideally a lasik specialist and not a general optometrist who "also does surgeries ".
 

HenRun

Well-known member
Sweden
I had Lasik back in 2000, on one eye. I had glare issues at night, not to be trifled with. Eventually it settled some, and I had lasik on the other eye done. Didn't need glasses until a couple of years back when I started to use progressive lenses. I complain about glare too at times.
My eyesight varies a little now, going from Eagle, to Hawk and then down to Crow.
 

Paultricounty

Well-known member
United States
I had Lasik back in 2000, on one eye. I had glare issues at night, not to be trifled with. Eventually it settled some, and I had lasik on the other eye done. Didn't need glasses until a couple of years back when I started to use progressive lenses. I complain about glare too at times.
My eyesight varies a little now, going from Eagle, to Hawk and then down to Crow.
Now we know, whenever Dennis does a review or an opinion of an optic , we know to ignore any comment of the optic when it comes to glare .
 

ReinierBos

Active member
Netherlands
I had the 10x56, I don’t remember them being that large. Amazing when you look at the Nocs and NL’s how large they are , then compare to the 56SLC seem small. I sold my 1056 SLC for the 12x50EL. If I had the 8’s I probably wouldn’t have sold them.

Paul
Maybe a too old message, but I am curious why you did swap the 1056 for the 12x50EL. What was the reason? Did you ever regret it?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top