My first alpha binoculars (1 Viewer)

[Hampus]

Doing a lot of research in advance is definitely the right thing to do, but do not underestimate side by side comparison. When I bought my first alphas I had them shortlisted to 2 pairs. I knew I could not go wrong with either. But when I tested them side by side (along a few other pairs too) there was one that was clearly for me and the other one not so much, both being outstanding instruments.

I suppose it is due to being an object that we handle so much and it spends so much time (literally) in our face, that it has to feel comfortable.

Thank you for being the voice of reason. I'll test several different models and makes before I make my final decision. Although for some reason I can't get the leica out of my mind, but we'll see in the coming weeks when I've made my trip to the store.

 

[Hampus]

I just want to thank everyone of you for your feedback, I'm amazed by your knowledge and willingness to help me. I think I have answered all of your individual posts, nonetheless you've given me great advice and a lot to think about how to approach this.

 

[NatureLover123]

That's correct. I feel this decision will become harder and harder... I understand what you mean. But in terms of light transmission, would there be a big difference between 8x and 10x if both have a 42 mm objective lens?

The higher the magnification the more of the light of the image is “distributed“ on a bigger (magnified) area. But the darker it gets, the eyes have less resolving power. So basically the 10x42 will be a bit (not much) dimmer, but it compensates the lesser resolving power of your eyes better.

Well I am not a physicist or optics scientist nor know the detail math behind it, but it sounds plausible that the 10x is better for detail detection the darker it gets…. Ok until a point where dark is just dark, binoculars are not flashlights or thermal optics.

But you need to choose a high quality bright 10x42 like the SF or NL.

Edit: Some folks swear on the bigger exit pupil of the 8x42 for a bit brighter image, but they forget their own eyes which lose resolving power when the light fades.

 

[Viraj]

The higher the magnification the more of the light of the image is “distributed“ on a bigger (magnified) area. But the darker it gets, the eyes have less resolving power. So basically the 10x42 will be a bit (not much) dimmer, but it compensates the lesser resolving power of your eyes better.

Well I am not a physicist or optics scientist nor know the detail math behind it, but it sounds plausible that the 10x is better for detail detection the darker it gets…. Ok until a point where dark is just dark, binoculars are not flashlights or thermal optics.

But you need to choose a high quality bright 10x42 like the SF or NL.

Edit: Some folks swear on the bigger exit pupil of the 8x42 for a bit brighter image, but they forget their own eyes which lose resolving power when the light fades.

That’s absolutely true—but remember, without light, there's nothing to resolve. That’s where larger objective lenses really prove their worth. For instance, my budget-friendly 8x56 (around €400) outperforms my NL 8x42 when the light drops beyond a certain point.

In my opinion, the low-light difference between high-quality 8x42 and 10x42 binoculars is pretty minimal. Personally, I use my NL 10x32 most of the time without ever worrying about its low-light performance—it handles most situations impressively well.

That said, when I really need brightness—like spotting woodcocks in the dusk—I reach for my humble 8x56, while the 8x42 often stays untouched. Still, if I didn’t have the 8x56, I’d choose an 8x42 over a 10x42 for low-light use.

The bottom line, you’re not losing much in low-light capability whether you go for 8x42 or 10x42. Just try both and pick the magnification that suits you best. For me, it’s x10 all the way.

 

[Rg548]

Don't discount the Swarovski Habicht 10x40, if it works for you, super bright, rugged.
Great optic.

 

[hopster]

Don't discount the Swarovski Habicht 10x40, if it works for you, super bright, rugged.
Great optic.

True, but only if you don't wear glasses or need to change focus quickly.

 

[Yarkho]

Hopefully I can find out more about that when I get the chance to try them side by side. I'll head back here and give you my impressions.

So what did you - if you did already - buy in the end?

Thankfully people here give a lot of advice on various aspects. Partly due to knowledge, which is different from person to person, partly because we like to re-live the moment of choice (I do).

In the end however, a binocular is a very personal instrument. It is literally an extension of one's own eyes and body. And thus what is perfect for someone is not true for another person. YMMV. Thankfully there are still places where one can try many binos.

 

[Hampus]

So what did you - if you did already - buy in the end?

Thankfully people here give a lot of advice on various aspects. Partly due to knowledge, which is different from person to person, partly because we like to re-live the moment of choice (I do).

In the end however, a binocular is a very personal instrument. It is literally an extension of one's own eyes and body. And thus what is perfect for someone is not true for another person. YMMV. Thankfully there are still places where one can try many binos.

I

So what did you - if you did already - buy in the end?

Thankfully people here give a lot of advice on various aspects. Partly due to knowledge, which is different from person to person, partly because we like to re-live the moment of choice (I do).

In the end however, a binocular is a very personal instrument. It is literally an extension of one's own eyes and body. And thus what is perfect for someone is not true for another person. YMMV. Thankfully there are still places where one can try many binos.

I haven't had the chance to go to the store yet. It's a bit of a trip and I've had a lot of other things to do. I hope I will go there in the upcoming weeks, and when I have I'll let you all know in the thread.

I absolutely agree with you, all feedback I've gotten has been very helpful and it's very interesting to hear that one persons experiences can be so diametrically different from anothers. Even tough most of the top tier optics can be considered "good enough".

To stifle my desire for a new binocular, I accidently bought a spotting scope instead. I Managed to find a mint condition Swarovski ATM80 20-60 with the original tripod that I really liked. Getting a top of the line spooting scope is also on my bucket list, but at the moment its not within my budget. But I think I will get along for a couple of years with this scope.

 

[Yarkho]

FWIW, i think that was a wise move. Deals are the best.

 

[Hampus]

FWIW, i think that was a wise move. Deals are the best.

Definitely, but the plan is still to buy the binoculars soon. But I meant that a nicer spotting scope will have to wait for a couple of years

 

[Montereyman]

I have migrated from 8x to 10x for all my binoculars. I have no difficulty using 10x binos hand held and they provide a 25% greater image magnification for my eyes. I would try some 10x binos either is a store of by going with out birders on outings.

I have two Swarovski binoculars but overall prefer the $1100 Sig Sauer 16x42 with two levels of image stabilization. With 16x I have no need for a scope. I have 10x30 and 10x25 Swarvos and use the 10x25 Pocket Mountain the most as they are compact and weigh only 12 ounces and I can hike for hours with them hanging from my neck.

 

[lesjumelles]

Hi,

I’m about to take a big leap and invest in my first pair of alpha bins. I’m not going to ask what model or make is the best, this versus that or the like. I know it’s subjective and the best thing to do is try them out in reality; which I will do in the near future.

I’ve narrowed my choices down to the Leica NV 8x42 or the Swarovski NL pure 8x42. From reading the forum manically the last couple of weeks, 8x seems to be the most favoured starting point. I’ll be using them mainly for birding, general nature observation and hunting.

The only experience I have with premium optics comes from hunting, where I use Swarovski scopes. Since I’m inexperienced with binoculars, I’d appreciate some tips on what to look out for when comparing them.

It’s a substantial amount of money, thus it feels a bit scary if I end up with a sub-par example.
How do I identify a good example of the model? How can I tell if it’s a bad example? Any general tips you can offer an amateur looking to buy his first “real” bins will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

I strongly urge you to try them out in person before you buy. My wife and I both thought we'd want 8X32 but when we looked through them and compared to 10X42, we felt the difference was substantial. She bought 10X42 Zeiss Conquest and they are wonderful. I assume the new ones now not-made-in-Germany are also nice. A few years later, I bought NL Pure 12X42. Many birders like 8X because of the wide field of view, but the NL 10X has about the same field of view as good 8X ones. My 12X NL has almost exactly the same field of view as my wife's 10X. Other things to realize. A) Pupil diameter. As you get older, your maximum pupil diameter gets smaller, so an older person and a younger person could see things differently in the same bino. B) Feel. I love my NL 12 X42, but there's something about my wife's Conquest binos that I love too, maybe even more. I do love the strap system on the Zeiss better. If I was buying all over, like if mine were stolen, I'd want to try the new Zeiss 12X50 (not sure whether 50 or 52 or what). They look like the same shape as the Conquest. Price is $2000 USD rather than $3000 for the NL. But bottom line, that's a "big chunk of money." Try before you buy, so you'll make sure it fits your hands and your eyes and your preferences. C) I have rather steady hands and can hold my 12X with no problem. For my tastes, going to an 8X would be a huge downgrade. My wife's sweet spot is 10X. D) Weight. My NL 12X42 weighs (29.5 ounces) compared to my wife's at around 24 or 25 oz. Yes, I do ounces, even though I'm a scientist. I tell people I don't trust a measuring system unless it's based on the King's tootsie. (satire intended). The new Zeiss 12X50 is only a smidgen heavier at (as I recall) 30.5 or so. But my wife (who has a bit of arthritis) says mine is too heavy for her preferences.
I hope some of that is useful for pondering.
Happy birding.

 

[Maljunulo]

“Which model or make is the best?” is an unanswerable question.

In alphabetical order, Leica, Swarovski, and Zeiss are the top three.

From there on, it’s up to you, to consider size, weight, magnification, balance, focuser, and all the other factors which enter into a choice.

No one can guess, or tell you, what you will like.

 

[NatureLover123]

I really hope that Zeiss brings a 52 SF in multiple magnifications, next. Or maybe a new 42 SF with more impressive specs. Price is not an issue.

 

[lesjumelles]

Hi,

I’m about to take a big leap and invest in my first pair of alpha bins. I’m not going to ask what model or make is the best, this versus that or the like. I know it’s subjective and the best thing to do is try them out in reality; which I will do in the near future.

I’ve narrowed my choices down to the Leica NV 8x42 or the Swarovski NL pure 8x42. From reading the forum manically the last couple of weeks, 8x seems to be the most favoured starting point. I’ll be using them mainly for birding, general nature observation and hunting.

The only experience I have with premium optics comes from hunting, where I use Swarovski scopes. Since I’m inexperienced with binoculars, I’d appreciate some tips on what to look out for when comparing them.

It’s a substantial amount of money, thus it feels a bit scary if I end up with a sub-par example.
How do I identify a good example of the model? How can I tell if it’s a bad example? Any general tips you can offer an amateur looking to buy his first “real” bins will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Hi Hampus. I'll add more comments and recommend that you read the Wikipedia page on exit pupil. One commenter mentioned that a higher power binocular has the image "spread out" more and thus is dimmer. True to an extent, but not the whole answer. It depends on you individually and especially on your age. Realize the following:
Exit Pupil = objective lens diameter divided by magnification. Thus a 12X50 bino has a 4.17mm exit pupil. 10X50 is 5mm. And 8X50 is 6.25mm. However, according to the Wiki page, a 20-year-old person has an average eye pupil diameter of 4.7mm in the daytime and an 80-year-old person has an average eye pupil size of 2.3mm. Huge difference. No wonder that some old folks don't like driving at night! By my loose understanding of this, if you are 80, much of that 6.25mm exit pupil from an 8X50 would fall outside the edge of your eye pupil. Perhaps someone well-versed in physics/optics can objectively clarify this, but it seems that age is a big factor. Perhaps much of the brightness of an 8X50 (compared to 10X50 or 12X50) would be lost on me now at age 75. That Wiki page has a table showing that even at age 40 the pupil diameter is lower than at age 20 (3.9 vs 4.7mm) and both smaller than that 6.25mm exit pupil of an 8X50 bino. Bottom line. Try before you buy. And if you're already 50 or 60, keep in mind that your eyes will change as you get older. Frankly, I don't see much brightness difference at dusk between our 12X42 and 10X42 binos. I have one other reason for the try-before-buy advice. Many people rave about some binos having great edge sharpness. When I compare my 12X42 NL to our 10X42 Zeiss Conquest (besides the $3000 vs $1000 difference), yes, the NLs are razor sharp clear to the edge. But I rarely spend time looking at the very edge of the field of view. I simply turn my head a little. The center part of the human retina (fovea) with the highest visual acuity is very small. (Wiki has a page on that too.) The center of the fovea with the best visual acuity is only 0.35mm diameter. For a dramatic demonstration of this, focus on one letter in the middle of a word and then see how many words you can read on either side of that word without moving your gaze. Even one inch on either side is a challenge. (and NO cheating; keep your gaze steady) If you're some mutant who can, then try focusing on a word and seeing how far away you can recognize words without even slightly moving your gaze. Looking at binos
in person will tell you how important edge sharpness is. Best wishes.

 

[NatureLover123]

Hi Hampus. I'll add more comments and recommend that you read the Wikipedia page on exit pupil. One commenter mentioned that a higher power binocular has the image "spread out" more and thus is dimmer. True to an extent, but not the whole answer. It depends on you individually and especially on your age. Realize the following:
Exit Pupil = objective lens diameter divided by magnification. Thus a 12X50 bino has a 4.17mm exit pupil. 10X50 is 5mm. And 8X50 is 6.25mm. However, according to the Wiki page, a 20-year-old person has an average eye pupil diameter of 4.7mm in the daytime and an 80-year-old person has an average eye pupil size of 2.3mm. Huge difference. No wonder that some old folks don't like driving at night! By my loose understanding of this, if you are 80, much of that 6.25mm exit pupil from an 8X50 would fall outside the edge of your eye pupil. Perhaps someone well-versed in physics/optics can objectively clarify this, but it seems that age is a big factor. Perhaps much of the brightness of an 8X50 (compared to 10X50 or 12X50) would be lost on me now at age 75. That Wiki page has a table showing that even at age 40 the pupil diameter is lower than at age 20 (3.9 vs 4.7mm) and both smaller than that 6.25mm exit pupil of an 8X50 bino. Bottom line. Try before you buy. And if you're already 50 or 60, keep in mind that your eyes will change as you get older. Frankly, I don't see much brightness difference at dusk between our 12X42 and 10X42 binos. I have one other reason for the try-before-buy advice. Many people rave about some binos having great edge sharpness. When I compare my 12X42 NL to our 10X42 Zeiss Conquest (besides the $3000 vs $1000 difference), yes, the NLs are razor sharp clear to the edge. But I rarely spend time looking at the very edge of the field of view. I simply turn my head a little. The center part of the human retina (fovea) with the highest visual acuity is very small. (Wiki has a page on that too.) The center of the fovea with the best visual acuity is only 0.35mm diameter. For a dramatic demonstration of this, focus on one letter in the middle of a word and then see how many words you can read on either side of that word without moving your gaze. Even one inch on either side is a challenge. (and NO cheating; keep your gaze steady) If you're some mutant who can, then try focusing on a word and seeing how far away you can recognize words without even slightly moving your gaze. Looking at binos
in person will tell you how important edge sharpness is. Best wishes.

I would not rely on wikipedia, an ophthalmologist can measure your personal pupils with high accuracy. And “average“ is not the „median“.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Hi Hampus. I'll add more comments and recommend that you read the Wikipedia page on exit pupil. One commenter mentioned that a higher power binocular has the image "spread out" more and thus is dimmer. True to an extent, but not the whole answer. It depends on you individually and especially on your age. Realize the following:
Exit Pupil = objective lens diameter divided by magnification. Thus a 12X50 bino has a 4.17mm exit pupil. 10X50 is 5mm. And 8X50 is 6.25mm. However, according to the Wiki page, a 20-year-old person has an average eye pupil diameter of 4.7mm in the daytime and an 80-year-old person has an average eye pupil size of 2.3mm. Huge difference. No wonder that some old folks don't like driving at night! By my loose understanding of this, if you are 80, much of that 6.25mm exit pupil from an 8X50 would fall outside the edge of your eye pupil. Perhaps someone well-versed in physics/optics can objectively clarify this, but it seems that age is a big factor. Perhaps much of the brightness of an 8X50 (compared to 10X50 or 12X50) would be lost on me now at age 75. That Wiki page has a table showing that even at age 40 the pupil diameter is lower than at age 20 (3.9 vs 4.7mm) and both smaller than that 6.25mm exit pupil of an 8X50 bino. Bottom line. Try before you buy. And if you're already 50 or 60, keep in mind that your eyes will change as you get older. Frankly, I don't see much brightness difference at dusk between our 12X42 and 10X42 binos. I have one other reason for the try-before-buy advice. Many people rave about some binos having great edge sharpness. When I compare my 12X42 NL to our 10X42 Zeiss Conquest (besides the $3000 vs $1000 difference), yes, the NLs are razor sharp clear to the edge. But I rarely spend time looking at the very edge of the field of view. I simply turn my head a little. The center part of the human retina (fovea) with the highest visual acuity is very small. (Wiki has a page on that too.) The center of the fovea with the best visual acuity is only 0.35mm diameter. For a dramatic demonstration of this, focus on one letter in the middle of a word and then see how many words you can read on either side of that word without moving your gaze. Even one inch on either side is a challenge. (and NO cheating; keep your gaze steady) If you're some mutant who can, then try focusing on a word and seeing how far away you can recognize words without even slightly moving your gaze. Looking at binos
in person will tell you how important edge sharpness is. Best wishes.

Interesting about the center of the fovea having the best visual acuity. Good research!

 

[SanderBird82]

For me the Swarovski NL Pure 8x42 is the best.
Nothing can beat the 159 m FOV and very sharp image.

Sure 10x42 NL is more FOV than a average 8x42 of a different brand. But a little bit bigger mag. for me is not more advantage than that huge FOV, 5.2 ER, and very stable and quit view of the 8x42 NL Pure in i.m.o.

I can hardly see the difference in 8x42 or 10x42 mag. but i see the difference in FOV and less shaking very good.

 

[Isthatascratch?]

For me the Swarovski NL Pure 8x42 is the best.
Nothing can beat the 159 m FOV and very sharp image.

Sure 10x42 NL is more FOV than a average 8x42 of a different brand. But a little bit bigger mag. for me is not more advantage than that huge FOV, 5.2 ER, and very stable and quit view of the 8x42 NL Pure in i.m.o.

I can hardly see the difference in 8x42 or 10x42 mag. but i see the difference in FOV and less shaking very good.

Have to agree with you!

 

[Viraj]

For me the Swarovski NL Pure 8x42 is the best.
Nothing can beat the 159 m FOV and very sharp image.

Sure 10x42 NL is more FOV than a average 8x42 of a different brand. But a little bit bigger mag. for me is not more advantage than that huge FOV, 5.2 ER, and very stable and quit view of the 8x42 NL Pure in i.m.o.

I can hardly see the difference in 8x42 or 10x42 mag. but i see the difference in FOV and less shaking very good.

This is exactly the reason that I went for NL 8x42 after comparing with NL 10x42, EL 8.5x42, and NV 10x42. However, later I missed the extra mag and added NL 10x32 for more reach and lighter weight. Now I can see the difference of x8 and x10 clearly, in terms of the size of the image. Anyway to my surprise, the difference between detail recognition by both mag is not significant.