Let's do it again, 8x32 for EDC (1 Viewer)

[kkokkolis]

Those who are sick of it, please ignore.
Those who like optics smalltalk, please join.

This is my 3rd thread regarding my need for a lightweigh 8x32 for every day carry. The former two resulted in a Canon IS 12x32 and a Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42. Both are great and I don't regret them, but I still have a hole in my every day carry little helpers (or toys). I also own Pentax Papilio 6.5x21, Zeiss Terra 8x42 ED (guest and wife binocular), Canon 18x50 IS, a Pentax 8x30 T561 (which is a porro of older technology) and two Soviet monoculars, 8x30 and Zenica 8-24x40.

The Conquest 8x42 HD is perfect for me, I would only give it a bit more AFOV. So the Conquest 8x32 HD (which has wider AFOV) will be my top option. I won't buy a more expensive binocular, like all alphas, or one that costs about 850 euros, since I could buy that.
Then why search more and don't buy the Conquest? Two reasons. First, it is not that small and light. And second, I would like to try something different.

I tried the Nikon Monarch 8x32 ED and I find it great for my needs, small and light and with good optics. I find it very cost effective, so I won't buy anything worse than that, since it costs something less than 400 euros.

So my Price Envelope is 400-840 euros and my expectations bottom on Nikon Monarch 7 8x30 ED and top on Zeiss Conquest 8x32 HD. But there are lots of options between them and I need all your help.

I'm only looking for Roofs, since I'm not going to carry a Nikon SE or EII or Swarovski Habicht, however good they are. And apparent field of view should bottom at 60 degrees. Here are some of the options.

1. Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32: GOOD: Great optics, familiarity with the brand, adaptability of my eyes between two models of the same line (42 and 32), available locally for cash, great reviews, legendary brand, likeable covers, perfect focuser, perfect glare control, good field of view, ignorable residual color, adorable Doric aesthetics. BUT: not that small and light, expensive

2. Zeiss Terra ED 8x32: GOOD: Good optics, familiarity with the brand, adaptability of my eyes between two models of the same line (42 and 32), great eye friendliness, perfect glare control, available locally for cash, good reviews, legendary brand, likeable covers, perfect focuser, adorable Doric aesthetics, cheap for a Zeiss BUT: I now tried the Conquest line and Terra can't match it sometimes (in bright light they are almost identical though, and Greek Light is BRIGHT!)

3. Nikon HG 8x32 L: I don't know it and I need your help. It goes for 800 euros, so I would choose that over Conquest if it's smaller and/or better.

4. Nikon Monarch 7 ED 8x30: GOOD. I tried it already, in fact I still have one but it isn't mine. Good optics, great field of view, reasonable price BUT: The glare problem (not that bad).

5. Kite Lynx 8x30: GOOD: BF recommendations. Good reviews, great field of view, nice form factor, nothing else I know really. BUT: Not that cheap, don't know from where I could buy one.

6. Maven 8x30: GOOD: Good reviews (but not from Europeans), good field of view, nice form factor, customization, nothing else I know really about it. BUT: Shipping and tolls might make them expensive and I will have to wait for 1-2 months.

7. Kowa BD 8x32 XD: GOOD: Great reviews. I really thought about it a lot of times. Available locally for a nice prize. BUT: Field of view is less than what I would like (equals the Terra 8x42).

8. Celestron Granite ED 7x33: GOOD: Great field of view (9.1), big exit pupil, magnification is different than the 8x my optics replicate a lot of times. I am curious about these but might I dare to test them? My last Celestron was a Skymaster 15x70 which was good for the money but now I need quality. A 7x33 (or 7x35) would pair better with what I have now.

Others I am curious about:

9. Meopta Meostar 8x32: GOOD: Strong brand name BUT: at Conquest's price I'd choose Zeiss blindly

10. Meopta Meopro SD 8x32: GOOD: Strong brand name BUT: Never heard of it

11. Pentax SP 8x32: GOOD: I really don't know, please help BUT: at Conquest's price I'd choose Zeiss blindly

12. Vixen Atrek II 8x32: GOOD: They say it has a field flattener BUT: The local store still has the I version

13. Minox HG 8x33 BR: BUT: at Conquest's price I'd choose Zeiss most surely

14. Minox BL 8x33 HD: BUT: I know really nothing about them, double hinge isn't what I want at this size (I'd make an exception for Granite)

15. Steiner, Omegon, Eschenbach, Carson, Bar and Stroud, Bushnell, Tasco, Bresser, Sightron, Vortex, Vanguard etc: GOOD: They exist BUT: Forget about them, they have no appeal to me. Unless you prove them greater options than the above.


Your thoughts please? And thank you for your patience.

 

[Theo98]

Optic for Thought

Konstantinos,

I've no where near the expansive exposure or experience of the plethora of 8x32's you've listed. You seemed to have hit on a good "bottom end" optic in the Monarch7 ED. However, even in my limited comparisons, there is a model I found that was brighter, has really good flare control and has sharp FOV focus out to 90%+ from its huge sweet spot compared to the M7. CA is well controlled and colors are nicely saturated with a very natural and neutral balance. Low light capability was well beyond my expectations for a 32mm and their ergonomics are classic and solid. I even picked and purchased these over the Swaro CL compacts and 8x32 SV's! Not sure, but bet they would stand up well to the Conquest. They do carry a lifetime warranty and can come in a little less than the M7.

What are they you ask, well if you could consider them a viable option, you can find their info HERE ! :t:

Ted

 

[kkokkolis]

The link doesn't work Theo. Can you name it please?

 

[Theo98]

The link doesn't work Theo. Can you name it please?

Sure...Leupold BX-3 Mojave 8x32 (#117985) at Leupold.com! Very Nice Review Here by Steve C. !

Ted

 

[CliveP]

Bresser Everest 8x28 of course.

 

[kkokkolis]

Bresser Everest 8x28 of course.

Do you hate me?:C

 

[kkokkolis]

Sure...Leupold BX-3 Mojave 8x32 (#117985) at Leupold.com! Very Nice Review Here by Steve C. !

Ted

It reminds me of the Nikon Monarch 7. It costs about as much but I prefer to buy from Europe. is it available in the EU?

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=279586 They are close but Nikon is smaller and with a wider ocular. I would prefer Nikon.

http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=489473&d=1395942449

 

[Theo98]

It reminds me of the Nikon Monarch 7. It costs about as much but I prefer to buy from Europe. is it available in the EU?

Not sure...On Line, Amazon UK only has the larger 42mm objective selections. Leupold has a UK distributor HERE , or Bear House, Concorde Way in FAREHAM, HAMPSHIRE. PO15 5RL GB (+44 1489-587500)!

Ted

 

[kkokkolis]

They have only the 8x42 in GMK unfortunately. Alright, I'll keep searching for that. What about the other options?

 

[jremmons]

The Meostar HD was better, optically and ergonomically, than the 8x32 Conquest HD. If I were to buy an 8x32, though, I'd probably go with the Kowa Genesis if you can find one (a demo, for instance) at the Conquest's price point.

 

[kkokkolis]

You mean the Meopta B1 Meostar 8x32? At 880 euros plus shipping (and waiting) it tops my Conquest HD roof (I mean price roof, not roof prism). Plus, I'm sceptical about the brick design, reminiscent of older Leicas.

 

[kkokkolis]

What about Pentax DCF ED 8x32 for 450 euros (from 999 euros)? It's Japan made, right?

 

[jremmons]

You mean the Meopta B1 Meostar 8x32? At 880 euros plus shipping (and waiting) it tops my Conquest HD roof (I mean price roof, not roof prism). Plus, I'm sceptical about the brick design, reminiscent of older Leicas.

Uh, the Cabela's Euro HD 8x32. I'm not sure Meopta produces a self-branded 8x32 HD yet. I tried them side by side and the Meopta was noticeably sharper and felt smaller.

Not sure what you mean by "brick design" as it is one of the most ergonomically pleasing binos I've handled.

 

[perseid28]

I was considering the Nikon HG L instead of the 8x32 Conquest HD, but I bought the Zeiss without even feeling the need to perform my own head-to-head testing of the two models. The Conquest is lighter, and it's already a rather heavy binocular for 8x32, as you have pointed out. The Zeiss has durable Lotu Tec coatings that are hydrophobic and (presumably) more abrasion resistant than the Nikon's, which helps with peace of mind. Most user reports that I read concluded that the optical performance of the models was roughly equal, and the HG L had a reputation for a bit of rolling ball distortion. I'm sure I would've been perfectly happy with the Nikon, since there's nothing wrong with it, but it was an easy decision for me to pick the Zeiss.

 

[perseid28]

Konstantinos,

I've no where near the expansive exposure or experience of the plethora of 8x32's you've listed. You seemed to have hit on a good "bottom end" optic in the Monarch7 ED. However, even in my limited comparisons, there is a model I found that was brighter, has really good flare control and has sharp FOV focus out to 90%+ from its huge sweet spot compared to the M7. CA is well controlled and colors are nicely saturated with a very natural and neutral balance. Low light capability was well beyond my expectations for a 32mm and their ergonomics are classic and solid. I even picked and purchased these over the Swaro CL compacts and 8x32 SV's! Not sure, but bet they would stand up well to the Conquest. They do carry a lifetime warranty and can come in a little less than the M7.

What are they you ask, well if you could consider them a viable option, you can find their info HERE ! :t:

Ted

I've looked through a pair of 10x42 Mojaves, and really liked what I saw. The focuser was extremely smooth and even, as good as anything else I've used. The optics were quite good as well, even though the owner didn't clean them and allowed the bins to be subjected to a bit of abuse. The main reason I don't consider Leupolds when I'm optics shopping is that they don't come to mind! Leopold caters almost exclusively to hunters and I don't know any birders who use them, and they are almost never mentioned on these forums (presumably because everyone else is in the same situation). It goes to show that a bit of marketing can go a long way (the massive interest at the introduction of the Zeiss SF is a good example).

 

[Torview]

I have actually taken a different route so I would ditch the two 42mm Zeiss and the Canon and put the whole budget into an 8x32SV, it outperforms your two Zeiss even in low light IMO and can easily fulfil any task asked of it.

More than tough enough to carry everywhere every day.

Holy ?@+& I sound like Dennis !

 

[Steve C]

Konstantinos,

I fear you are on the edge of driving yourself into obsession. I guess there is nothing wrong with that as probably a lot (if not most) posters here have either gotten there are will be shortly .

I have had a lot of the glass on your short list and have at least looked through practically everything else, one exception is the Celestron Granite. Your list includes binoculars, all of which, will give you pretty much what you are looking for in an 8x 30-32 mm glass.

Early on in my hobby development (short for optics obsession) I figured the answer to which is the best binocular was out there and it was probably pretty much cut and dried. I just had to frame the proper question and ask it in the right way and I'd get the answer. I have long since disabused myself of that notion. There is a saying here that says one man's trash is anothers treasure. That is certainly true of optics selection. What you may like, I may not like and vice versa.

We will all eventually evolve into some rather distinct personal preferences. I have pretty much settled on the Maven B2 and B3 as my go to combination for handheld binoculars. However the differences in your list are subtle and certainly are not major. If I had any one of them, I'd be happy enough with it. Do I prefer the Maven B3, yes I do. However in your case I would look at what it was I could obtain with the least hassle. The Maven for you it seems is in the opposite direction.

Most of the small binoculars on your list will in fact remind anyone of the Monarch 7. That is because the all use the same generic housing and thus share similar size, shape, and weight. They all share similar price points and will share similar optics. If I were you, I'd go with the Zeiss Conquest HD. You already seem satisfied with the Zeiss Terra 8x42. If you want to save the money, I'd go the Zeiss Terra ED in 8x 30 flavor, also since you are satisfied with the Terra 8x42. If it isn't broke don't fix it.

Get one, use it and do not worry about what practical differences may or may not exist with some other similar configuration. The simple fact is that the differences you wonder about are likely too insignificant to make any difference in the field.

 

[Troubador]

Kostas

The Conquest 8x32 might be hefty for a 32 but it is still 20% lighter than the 8x42. When I carry the Conquest after my HT / SF it immediately feels lighter.

I don't remember how fast the Conquest 8x42 focuser is but the 8x32 is really good at getting onto close butterflies and dragonflies etc then quickly out to a distant bird and back close again. Its my bin of choice for this purpose.

I know from previous years that the Kite Lynx can be a fine performer but I was disappointed by the one I tried at Bird Fair this year.

Lee

 

[Vespobuteo]

32mm bins are always a compromise,
when I think of it, all bins are..

personally I wouldn't buy anything that can't
be sent back (easily, free of charge) or tested before buying,
in your selected price range,
sample variation will be a factor to
consider,

 

[FrankD]

I would take the Celestron Granite 7x33 off your list. I had the opportunity to try one extensively a year or two ago and I was not impressed with it. Big field of view but the sweet spot was small and the edges were distracting.

As for the rest...you know my vote goes to the Maven (and it is better than the Leupold Mojave as I have compared them side by side).

Since you are worried about the length of time and potential additional costs then I would suggest choosing either the Nikon or the Kite. They are all more alike than not. I have had the Nikon and the Maven side by side and, optically, there is very little difference. Even mechanically there isn't much difference. Based on others' comments here on the forums the Kite and the Nikon are very similar as well.