Picking first Bino. Vortex or Monarch or any other? (1 Viewer)

[dsham]

Hi.

I am looking for one binocular, I never owned one, but I think I am growing my interest in wildlife and travel. In past days I gone through many many posts and then saw this forum, so thought of posting my narrow down choices and get some expert opinion.
I don't want to go with heavy set and as this is starting, I don't want to go over $500. Mostly I will use it, but my 10 years old boy also will share it.

Here are two, which I found with nice reviews. They share almost similar specs and weight, though one price is more than double than other.

Vortex Diamondback HD 8x32 [Weight is 464g, FOV 8.1, exit pupil 4 mm, price around $200]
Nikon Monarch M7 8x30 [Weight is 464g, FOV 8.3, exit pupil 3.8 mm, price around $400]

I was checking one website rating and it rated Monarch M7 as top pick and kept Vortex lower than Nikon. But reviews looks solid.

Please share, what would you suggest or if there is some consideration I should think about.

Thanks

 

[Cest]

If a 10 yo is going to share it you might want a 6x or 7x, it will reduce the shakes from holding it. I suggest the Maven. B.3 6x30. Or if you get the Monarch you could get him the Vortex Bantam 6.5x32 for about $70.

 

[dsham]

If a 10 yo is going to share it you might want a 6x or 7x, it will reduce the shakes from holding it. I suggest the Maven. B.3 6x30. Or if you get the Monarch you could get him the Vortex Bantam 6.5x32 for about $70.

I read same suggestions, just thinking if 6x will be a big compromise, especially for far wildlife. I started searching with 10x in mind, but keeping same consideration, I came down to 8x

 

[Maljunulo]

There is no substitute for looking through them.

Do you live near a place which sells binoculars you could try?

 

[dsham]

There is no substitute for looking through them.

Do you live near a place which sells binoculars you could try?

Yes, I do.
But they don't have Vortex. They only have Nikon. Considering physically they should feel and look same, I am trying to understand if optically they are much different, keeping the price difference in mind.

 

[Montereyman]

In my own experience the Vortex Diamondback are not something I would recommend. The Monarch 5 and Monarch 7 are better binoculars. You should be aware that BH Photo Video provides significant discounts on Vortex binoculars if you ask them to email you their best price. The Vortex Viper 10x42 for example show on the website with a price of $499 but the email request provided a price of $399.00.

 

[Cest]

If you are a veteran Vortex offers a 40% discount.

 

[dsham]

In my own experience the Vortex Diamondback are not something I would recommend. The Monarch 5 and Monarch 7 are better binoculars. You should be aware that BH Photo Video provides significant discounts on Vortex binoculars if you ask them to email you their best price. The Vortex Viper 10x42 for example show on the website with a price of $499 but the email request provided a price of $399.00.

Is it optical difference, which makes Monarch superior than Vortex ?
I am newbie, so definitely there should be more factors than I was considering (weight, FoV and exit pupil)

 

[yarrellii]

@dsham I am sure you are familiar with the law of diminishing returns in any area of your domain, be it at work or in any hobby. In optics that law hits quite hard the higher you go in the price ladder (with a few exceptions, you get what you pay for, and if there are exceptions, there's usually a reason, like lack of warranty or service down the line).

Said that, having used both the Diamondback HD and the Monarch 7 (previous version) extensively, I have nothing but wood words for the Diamondback HD 8x32. I have top of the range binoculars that cost many many times more, but for the price I think it hits a sweet spot between performance and price. The Diamondback has basically all the most important features on a contemporary roof: phase coated, dielectric coatings, wide field of view, waterproof... and the 8x32 comes in a really small and light package (it's actually shorter than some 8x25 models!). And the icing on the cake is the amazing Vortex warranty: money back if you're not satisfied and lifetime warranty (and they seem to honour it). I've had the Diamondback in 8x32 and 10x50, and I really liked the 8x32. There was only a flaw, some internal reflections (there has to be some optical compromises, of course). But if I was to recomend a first binocular (especially to someone in the US) the Diamondback would probably be on top of my list. You could get similar performance for less money, with something like a SvBony SV202 8x32, but there the warranty is not as good, and given that sample variation and quality control are concerns regardless of the price, I would play a safe card and go for Vortex.

The Nikon M7 is better, obviously, it has to be given the price. I would say that the M7 line aims to compete against the Vortex Viper, and the Razor against the Monarch HG, so to speak. In short, if money is no problem, go for it, you will be satisfied... however, don't think that the Nikon is not without its flaws. My impressions are limited to its predecessor, the Monarch 7, which I know extremely well and I think shares a lot with the M7. Probably eye position is a tad more compromised than in the Diamondback, and veiling against strong light has always been a known flaw. Mind you, the Monarch 7 8x30 is one of my all time favourites, and for years I've had it (two units in fact) or a very close relative, the Opticron Traveller, which has a lot in common with the Nikon.

Is the Nikon twice as good? I would say the Diamondback is good enough for many people, I wish my first binocular would have been as good as the Diamondback (and don't forget the warranty), yes, on a side by side test you could pick things, like probably a tad more sharpness (not night and day) and probably a better corrected optics, overall, but I'm not sure you would go "Hey, yes, this is twice as good!".

I really like the Cest's idea to get yourself an 8x30/32 and your kid the Bantam, which I'm sure will make him really happy and proud (and probably teach him to take care of "very important equipment" ).
Just my thoughts. As they say, you have to try them both to really get your personal answer.

 

[dsham]

@dsham I am sure you are familiar with the law of diminishing returns in any area of your domain, be it at work or in any hobby. In optics that law hits quite hard the higher you go in the price ladder (with a few exceptions, you get what you pay for, and if there are exceptions, there's usually a reason, like lack of warranty or service down the line).

Said that, having used both the Diamondback HD and the Monarch 7 (previous version) extensively, I have nothing but wood words for the Diamondback HD 8x32. I have top of the range binoculars that cost many many times more, but for the price I think it hits a sweet spot between performance and price. The Diamondback has basically all the most important features on a contemporary roof: phase coated, dielectric coatings, wide field of view, waterproof... and the 8x32 comes in a really small and light package (it's actually shorter than some 8x25 models!). And the icing on the cake is the amazing Vortex warranty: money back if you're not satisfied and lifetime warranty (and they seem to honour it). I've had the Diamondback in 8x32 and 10x50, and I really liked the 8x32. There was only a flaw, some internal reflections (there has to be some optical compromises, of course). But if I was to recomend a first binocular (especially to someone in the US) the Diamondback would probably be on top of my list. You could get similar performance for less money, with something like a SvBony SV202 8x32, but there the warranty is not as good, and given that sample variation and quality control are concerns regardless of the price, I would play a safe card and go for Vortex.

The Nikon M7 is better, obviously, it has to be given the price. I would say that the M7 line aims to compete against the Vortex Viper, and the Razor against the Monarch HG, so to speak. In short, if money is no problem, go for it, you will be satisfied... however, don't think that the Nikon is not without its flaws. My impressions are limited to its predecessor, the Monarch 7, which I know extremely well and I think shares a lot with the M7. Probably eye position is a tad more compromised than in the Diamondback, and veiling against strong light has always been a known flaw. Mind you, the Monarch 7 8x30 is one of my all time favourites, and for years I've had it (two units in fact) or a very close relative, the Opticron Traveller, which has a lot in common with the Nikon.

Is the Nikon twice as good? I would say the Diamondback is good enough for many people, I wish my first binocular would have been as good as the Diamondback (and don't forget the warranty), yes, on a side by side test you could pick things, like probably a tad more sharpness (not night and day) and probably a better corrected optics, overall, but I'm not sure you would go "Hey, yes, this is twice as good!".

I really like the Cest's idea to get yourself an 8x30/32 and your kid the Bantam, which I'm sure will make him really happy and proud (and probably teach him to take care of "very important equipment" ).
Just my thoughts. As they say, you have to try them both to really get your personal answer.

Thanks for detailed reply and it is really helpful. Appreciate your efforts.

 

[Maljunulo]

It is not, never has been, and never will be a linear relationship.

A $2000 binocular will not be “twice as good as” a $1000 binocular. (whatever on earth that means)

Similarly, a $3000 glass is not “three times as good” as a $1000 one. (an even more obscure term)

They are simply “better” and more money will get a superior instrument, and the more you spend, the more superior it will be.

 

[Montereyman]

Is it optical difference, which makes Monarch superior than Vortex ?
I am newbie, so definitely there should be more factors than I was considering (weight, FoV and exit pupil)

I have used the binoculars in my yard where I have bird feeders that regularly attract dozens of birds along with many plants in bloom. Looking through the binoculars I quickly get a good idea as to any issues and also relative sharpness and contrast provided with different ones.

Not always are the more expensive ones better. I tried the Vortex Razor HD along with their Razor UHD that costs considerably more. To me the HD were as good as the UHD in image quality in real world use. I presently own 9 binoculars from Pentax, Swarovski, Vortex, Nikon, and Sig Sauer. I have sold binoculars that at first seemed great but that the more I used them the less inclinded I was to do so (as with the Nikon Monarch 5 12x42 ones that I replaced with Vortex Razor HD 12x50 ones).

With binoculars and with camera lenses the better ones provide a view that makes one feel that you are in the scene. That is the result of higher clarity with some optics.

 

[dsham]

It is not, never has been, and never will be a linear relationship.

A $2000 binocular will not be “twice as good as” a $1000 binocular. (whatever on earth that means)

Similarly, a $3000 glass is not “three times as good” as a $1000 one. (an even more obscure term)

They are simply “better” and more money will get a superior instrument, and the more you spend, the more superior it will be.

Absolutely correct.
And I agree, both should be super nice and being one price higher meaning, that must be superior in some factors. I just wanted to see, why not cheaper one and why to pick Monarch.

 

[Viraj]

Hi.

I am looking for one binocular, I never owned one, but I think I am growing my interest in wildlife and travel. In past days I gone through many many posts and then saw this forum, so thought of posting my narrow down choices and get some expert opinion.
I don't want to go with heavy set and as this is starting, I don't want to go over $500. Mostly I will use it, but my 10 years old boy also will share it.

Here are two, which I found with nice reviews. They share almost similar specs and weight, though one price is more than double than other.

Vortex Diamondback HD 8x32 [Weight is 464g, FOV 8.1, exit pupil 4 mm, price around $200]
Nikon Monarch M7 8x30 [Weight is 464g, FOV 8.3, exit pupil 3.8 mm, price around $400]

I was checking one website rating and it rated Monarch M7 as top pick and kept Vortex lower than Nikon. But reviews looks solid.

Please share, what would you suggest or if there is some consideration I should think about.

Thanks

I had binoculars before but the Diamondback 8x32 was the first pair of binoculars I bought for birding. However, they had some issues such as there was a bright ring of light appearing around the FOV and seeing reflections on the eyepiece. Probably my pair had collimating issue as well. Then I returned it and bought a Monarch 7 8x30. It didn’t have any problems that other had but the eye placement was not as easy as the former. Monarch had a bigger sweet spot. However I felt Diamondback was sharper (may be the difference of the field curvature) and had more vivid colors.

The best thing is trying them by yourself. In my case I really liked Diamondbacks but I had to take the Monarch instead. Those problems I had probably due to my face shape or getting a bad sample.

Still I use Monarch even having NLs. I don’t think the IQ of it is not much inferior even to the much higher priced binoculars especially considering the price point of them.

Other thing to consider is the life time warranty of the Vortex binoculars. If you are going to share it with your 10 year old kid the lifetime warranty would come handy.

 

[Trinovid]

Is it optical difference, which makes Monarch superior than Vortex ?

The Monarch isn't better than Vortex so much, but the Viper lineup would be a much better place to start, and as posted above, there are some good pricing options available there.
I have the Viper in 8x28, 10x42 and 12x50 in addition to several Leica Ultravids, feeling them to be very compatible with each other.

 

[Trinovid]

Other thing to consider is the life time warranty of the Vortex binoculars. If you are going to share it with your 10 year old kid the lifetime warranty would come handy.

Case in point, I bought both my 8x28 and 10x42 Vipers used and with issues. A quick phone call to Vortex got me a prepaid shipping label with no questions asked. Customer service second to none.

 

[mwhogue]

Absolutely correct.
And I agree, both should be super nice and being one price higher meaning, that must be superior in some factors. I just wanted to see, why not cheaper one and why to pick Monarch.

@dsham,

A suggested approach to finish up getting started. Since you can actually try Nikons, take you son with you and see whether both of you get along with the Monarch 7. If so, then you are one and done. If the Monarch is too much for your son to comfortably handle, Nikon also makes various pocket models which might be worth trying if available at the shop. If pockets don't work for him, then extrapolating as best you can from his issues with the Monarch 7 order either the Diamondback 8x32 or the 6.5x32 Bantam as suggested by others here. Don't underestimate the 6.5 mag, it is perfectly useful IMO, especially if it will not be the only bin in the family

Good luck with the Quest.

Mike

 

[dsham]

@dsham,

A suggested approach to finish up getting started. Since you can actually try Nikons, take you son with you and see whether both of you get along with the Monarch 7. If so, then you are one and done. If the Monarch is too much for your son to comfortably handle, Nikon also makes various pocket models which might be worth trying if available at the shop. If pockets don't work for him, then extrapolating as best you can from his issues with the Monarch 7 order either the Diamondback 8x32 or the 6.5x32 Bantam as suggested by others here. Don't underestimate the 6.5 mag, it is perfectly useful IMO, especially if it will not be the only bin in the family

Good luck with the Quest.

Mike

Thank you