• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Please recommend me binoculars with front lenses larger than 25mm but smaller than 30mm (1 Viewer)

Try the Nikon M7 8x30 for $300 on eBay. Best value I have ever seen, and they can become your full-time birding binoculars.

 
Try the Nikon M7 8x30 for $300 on eBay. Best value I have ever seen, and they can become your full-time birding binoculars.

I purchased a NIB pair from the online retailer named after the largest river in the world for just under $400.00. I’ve noticed that Nikon binoculars go on sale fairly often, so I’d recommend spending a little more in order to get a lifetime warranty and the option of returning them if you don’t like them. I really liked the view of the M7 8x30’s, but there was too much glare for me, so I returned them. I’m interested to see if glare is a nonissue for the in the M7 and MHG 8x42’s.
 
I purchased a NIB pair from the online retailer named after the largest river in the world for just under $400.00. I’ve noticed that Nikon binoculars go on sale fairly often, so I’d recommend spending a little more in order to get a lifetime warranty and the option of returning them if you don’t like them. I really liked the view of the M7 8x30’s, but there was too much glare for me, so I returned them. I’m interested to see if glare is a nonissue for the in the M7 and MHG 8x42’s.
The bigger aperture M7 and MHG 8x42's will be better for glare. They are usually if they have the same FOV, except for the NL's. The NL 8x42 has more glare than the NL 8x32 because of the wider FOV. If you think the M7 8x30 has glare, try an NL 8x32! Haha!
 
The bigger aperture M7 and MHG 8x42's will be better for glare. They are usually if they have the same FOV, except for the NL's. The NL 8x42 has more glare than the NL 8x32 because of the wider FOV. If you think the M7 8x30 has glare, try an NL 8x32! Haha!
The Swaros are much more than I’m willing to spend for a pair of binoculars but for the price of these binoculars, glare should be a nonissue. Thanks for the information regarding the 8x42’s.
 
What happened with this guy? The 7x28 Minox almost as small as a pocket Swarovski. And with IF.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0822.jpeg
    IMG_0822.jpeg
    72.8 KB · Views: 16
These bino's are easy on the eyes, I tried them and had no issues. Normally I have to dial in +1. Not with these ones.

Their price is tempting for this Swarovski 7x28.
What do you mean "are easy on eyes"?
Despite needing +1 adjustment, do the brain easily compensates because of their low magnification (7x)?

AFAIK even a little mis-collimated binoculars, when dealing with lower magnifications (6x or 7x), are easily compensated. But I don’t know how healthy would be for long time watching through them.
 
Last edited:
At 7x maybe there is no such need to focus all the time, especially when watching things at distance.
There can be a lot of birds at less than 50 yards, though, where you would have to focus both optical tubes. Not real convenient.

"Most IF binoculars are 7x magnification and have a large depth of focus, which usually eliminates the need for focusing adjustment at distances over 50 yards."
 
Their price is tempting for this Swarovski 7x28.
What do you mean "are easy on eyes"?
Despite needing +1 adjustment, do the brain easily compensates because of their low magnification (7x)?

AFAIK even a little mis-collimated binoculars, when dealing with lower magnifications (6x or 7x), are easily compensated. But I don’t know how healthy would be for long time watching through them.
Why not just pay a couple of hundred more dollars and get the Swarovski Curio 7x21, and then you have the diopter adjustment plus you have a 7.7 degree FOV instead of the 7.2 degree FOV on the Swarovski 7x28. The Swarovski 7x28 with it's bigger aperture would be brighter than the Curio 7x21, even though the Curio would probably have higher transmission.
 
Their price is tempting for this Swarovski 7x28.
What do you mean "are easy on eyes"?
Despite needing +1 adjustment, do the brain easily compensates because of their low magnification (7x)?

AFAIK even a little mis-collimated binoculars, when dealing with lower magnifications (6x or 7x), are easily compensated. But I don’t know how healthy would be for long time watching through them.
Easy on the eyes: my eyes relaxed when I looked through them, and I did not feel the need to set a diopter. Both tubes looked sharp. Jan van Galen mentioned this too. And as for sharpnes correction: it's not your brain that does this, nor for collimation. It's your eyes that adapt. As for miscollimation: a diopter setting does not cure this.
 
Why not just pay a couple of hundred more dollars and get the Swarovski Curio 7x21, and then you have the diopter adjustment plus you have a 7.7 degree FOV instead of the 7.2 degree FOV on the Swarovski 7x28. The Swarovski 7x28 with it's bigger aperture would be brighter than the Curio 7x21, even though the Curio would probably have higher transmission.
I strongly suggest testing the curio first head to head with a Junior before you buy a curio. I tried it (the Curio) out and put it down almost immediately. To me it had a very cramped tunnellike look. It is just an expensive toy to me. With admittedly very good image quality and mechanically very well executed. But it is a pain to use for prolonged (and for me even for short) periods of time. Whilst the junior on the other hand is just a joy to use: you put it to your eyes, et volià: you are presented with a lovely view with no strain on your eyes whatsoever. And what is the point of having a wider FOV when that wider field of view is presented as a small picture at the end of a small tube ? And again: if you don't need a diopter setting why are you fretting about it ? Because everyone else does ? Of course: if you do need it, then yes, you need it to be on your binoculars.
 
Last edited:
It must be because my main binocular is the 8x20 Ultravid, but when I first pulled the Curio out of the packaging I felt I was seeing a broad panorama! They're my one of my easiest binoculars to use.
I tried the Ultravid too. I put them down even faster than the Curio :) But I'm coming from big binoculars so my reference point is different. For me the joy of a binocular is the wonderful and easy view where it is like sticking your head out of a window instead of standing in a room and looking through the window whilst seeing part of the wall at the edges of the view. If a binoculair doesn't have that I'm not interested, because I know how it can be.
 
I tried the Ultravid too. I put them down even faster than the Curio :) But I'm coming from big binoculars so my reference point is different. For me the joy of a binocular is the wonderful and easy view where it is like sticking your head out of a window instead of standing in a room and looking through the window whilst seeing part of the wall at the edges of the view. If a binoculair doesn't have that I'm not interested, because I know how it can be.
That reminds me of the first time I remember really enjoying a binocular. It was on the boat we were bring to Alaska and just an old 7x35 porro, but the relaxed view and steadiness on the sea were really intoxicating! Many people aren't willing to forego the beauty of looking through large binoculars, but I'm one of the ones who isn't willing to carry one! It's an interesting relationship I have with the tiny Ultravids, and the 8x20 is the only binocular that I have in multiples. Still, I know that it's not the easiest binocular for some to use and typically I'll hand the Curio or a full sized binocular to others rather than the Ultravid.
 
Whilst the junior on the other hand is just a joy to use: you put it to your eyes, et volià: you are presented with a lovely view with no strain on your eyes whatsoever.

The problem I might have with Swarovski Junior is they have a large shell around more like a Vortex (to make them drop proof), not like a Swaro. That large shell makes to have 56mm height according to specs. So it might have eyecups close to 50mm which means I might not be able to keep them close to the eyes, but to float them in front of the face reducing a lot of the fov and stability. Kids have small ipd but also small nose, at my small ipd would not be enough nose room.

Also in has 480grams, so almost 0,5 kg for a small 28mm compact binoculars, other 28mm bins have 350 grams.
 
The problem I might have with Swarovski Junior is they have a large shell around more like a Vortex (to make them drop proof), not like a Swaro. That large shell makes to have 56mm height according to specs. So it might have eyecups close to 50mm which means I might not be able to keep them close to the eyes, but to float them in front of the face reducing a lot of the fov and stability. Kids have small ipd but also small nose, at my small ipd would not be enough nose room.

Also in has 480grams, so almost 0,5 kg for a small 28mm compact binoculars, other 28mm bins have 350 grams.
Only one solution here: try them out. As far as the weight concerns: the difference is 130 grams. Try to hold 130 grams and decide wether this is a dealbreaker. Don't get hung up by tech specs and minor details. Every person is different, and so is every binocular. You can't select a binocular by looking at the specs. Only to make a selection. You have to try them out. The other way is to or order them and then test them one after another, which can become very costly very quickly.
 
I strongly suggest testing the curio first head to head with a Junior before you buy a curio. I tried it (the Curio) out and put it down almost immediately. To me it had a very cramped tunnellike look. It is just an expensive toy to me. With admittedly very good image quality and mechanically very well executed. But it is a pain to use for prolonged (and for me even for short) periods of time. Whilst the junior on the other hand is just a joy to use: you put it to your eyes, et volià: you are presented with a lovely view with no strain on your eyes whatsoever. And what is the point of having a wider FOV when that wider field of view is presented as a small picture at the end of a small tube ? And again: if you don't need a diopter setting why are you fretting about it ? Because everyone else does ? Of course: if you do need it, then yes, you need it to be on your binoculars.
The cramped tunnelike look of the Curio must be from the smaller 3mm EP versus the 4mm EP of the Junior making eye placement easier on the Junior. Actually, the FOV of the Curio at 7.7 degrees is bigger than the Junior at 7.2 degrees. I don't like the almost 17 oz. weight of the Junior either. That is almost twice the weight of the Curio and of course the Junior is not really pocketable like the Curio being much bigger. The Junior is as heavy as my Nikon M7 8x30, which is 17oz and almost as big. The Junior is in a different class than the Curio, and it would compete more with the Nikon M7 8x30, although the M7 would beat it on AFOV, and it does have a diopter.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top