Pocket bino choice, Leica Ultravid 8x20 vs Swarovski CL Pocket 8x25 etc. (1 Viewer)

[chill6x6]

nastara...
I'm enjoying following your compact binocular quest. I like your enthusiasm! You're kinda like me....how can you know unless you LOOK thru it??

I'm looking forward to hearing of your results.... I'm in the market for a compactish binocular myself. Only stipulation from me....I wear glasses....

 

[NDhunter]

They sell normally at about 1/3 the price of the Swarovskis and are a good deal at that price! Here is Camera Land's price: $299.99.

(Somebody should tell Doug at Camera Land that using his new website is a P--n in the A!)

http://cameralandny.com/spec-sheet.html?catalog[name]=Bushnell-Elite-7x-26mm-%23620726-Binoculars-and-Scopes&catalog[product_guids][0]=1115646#category_2

At B&H's price of $195 and change get 2 of them! They are the best compact reverse porro prism binoculars on the market!

Bob

This Bushnell model is not a pocket model, so a moot point, and should
not be included in this comparison.

There are lots of larger sizes better than the pockets, but that
is not the topic at hand.

Jerry

 

[PhilR.]

The Bushnell CC only weighs 1.3 ounces more than a CL-Pocket. The CL-P is a bit taller, the CC a bit thicker. Any pocket that can hold a CL-P will most likely hold a CC too. Optically, the CC is a bit brighter than the CL-P, but the CL-P is sharper in the central area. Unfortunately for a backpacker, the CC is not waterproof, so would not be the best choice if you are a hard-core backpacker.

If you will be glassing a lot, you will most likely come to prefer the CL-P much more than the Leica UV. The CL-P is just much easier to use overall, and gives a wider and brighter view. However, you stated that size is a priority, so if you just need something to have on hand for occasional use, the UV would work just fine. I think you just have to determine whether or not glassing is a great priority. The choice will be quite easy once you do this.

The Alpen Wings is actually a decently competent bino for it's price. It is sharp in the central area, but I don't think you could consider it to have a bright view (for it's size). Quality of construction is good, but the focus wheel leaves a lot to be desired. Ours has "high and low" spots in turn effort, and they are greatly noticeable. Has some backlash too, but not to a great extent. Obviously it doesn't come close to comparing to the Leica UV, as their respective retails would suggest. However, I do think they are a good choice for a low-end 20mm travel bino, as long as you can get one at a good price. I keep mine at my desk at work for occasional use only.

I tried a Zeiss Terra 25mm for the first time at this past weekend's Featherfest in Galveston. I didn't have my CL-P or my 20mm UV on hand to compare against, but my first impression was quite good -- a much better impression than I had with the two larger sizes of Terras. It might prove a very good choice in it's price range. Then again, there's not a lot in it's price range. I have a feeling that you will like it a lot. I hope to compare one against our CL-P in the coming weeks.

You asked about others worth investigation. The Zeiss Victory 8x20 would also be worth looking at (or through). IIRC, it weighs a bit less than the UV, although I think that difference is negligible. It gets very good review too, although I would still prefer the Leica.

 

[stephen b]

I had a Swaro 8x25 CL, and it is a very nice bin. Fantastic in every way. I also still have a 7x26 B&L Custom Compact- which is a nice bin, especially for its design period. Now I have a Leica 8x20 Ultravid in the BL ( leather ) model. I really, really like it. It weighs 50% less than the Swaro CL that I had and is much smaller. And the optics are fantastic. Yes the Swaro 8x25 is a little bit brighter, but not by a bunch. And the Leica is crisp and sharp.

As far as brightness goes, my 8x32 Leupold Mojave was noticeably brighter in low light than the 8x25 Swaro CL; and the Mojave only weighs about 7 oz more. To me the CL is a tweener; as it is not a true compact bino, as its size and weight is not that much different than a small 30 or 32 mm binocular.

My most used binoculars are my 8x42 Swaro SLC, or the 8x20 Leica Ultravid, which is the one I grab for a lot of on the go activities. So light and small, you hardly know it is there. And it is surprisingly good in good light. But for challenging times I grab the SLC and put it on a small ultralight harness.

Good luck with your search.

 

[ceasar]

This Bushnell model is not a pocket model, so a moot point, and should
not be included in this comparison.

There are lots of larger sizes better than the pockets, but that
is not the topic at hand.

Jerry

Jerry,

Bushnell calls it a Custom Compact binocular. Its objectives are 26mm wide and it fits easily into either of the front pockets of my Filson flannel shirt.

Bob

 

[ceasar]

I appreciate the comments, everyone. Those of you with Swaro CL Pockets, have you noticed the globe effect I described in the original post? It's readily evident when panning the binoculars across a distant and detailed background (such as scanning a treeline etc.). I did not observe this with the Ultravid for some reason - I am guessing this is somehow compensated for in its design.

Thanks for the suggestions so far.

I have never noticed the globe effect when using mine.

My peeve with it is I can't find a decent case for it other than the case for my Nikon 10x25 LX L and that won't work for you because there is no way to carry it on a belt.

They don't have a rainguard so the oculars tend to get dirty very quickly if the eye cups are not kept extended while I am carrying them around my neck or in my shirt/jac pocket.

Bob

 

[CliveP]

I ordered an Alpen Wings ED 8x20 and a Zeiss Terra 8x25 just to see where they stand in comparison to the more expensive models.

Just out of interest. How many binoculars have you now ordered?

How will this work? Eventually stop ordering more and ........?

Is this a wind up perhaps

Maybe you will be giving away all those you don't need afterwards.

Are you that boxer or rapper -what's his face- who lies on a bed covered in dollars?

What was the question again? Ah yes, I need a bin to take with me hiking in my back pack. Man that's a tough one. Maybe just get on with it and bite your bullet. There isn't going to be anything greatly better than the Leica if you like that one.

 

[PhilR.]

My peeve with it is I can't find a decent case for it other than the case for my Nikon 10x25 LX L and that won't work for you because there is no way to carry it on a belt.

They don't have a rainguard so the oculars tend to get dirty very quickly if the eye cups are not kept extended while I am carrying them around my neck or in my shirt/jac pocket.

Bob

We keep our CL-P's in a camera case made by Lowe. These cases have a less bulky profile than the Swaro case. Also, Opticron makes a small one-piece ocular cover that fits the CL-P perfectly. IIRC, they run about $15.

 

[Kammerdiner]

I assume we're talking about real backpacks here. The OP wants a bino that fits in a hip belt pocket, not in the pack, where it would be nearly useless. Takes too long to get it out. I keep a compact point-and-shoot camera in that hip belt pocket so the bino goes elsewhere.

Bino cases can't be threaded onto hip belts either. The buckles are huge and the belts are wide. I wouldn't want a bino there anyway, even if I could. Hip belts are crucial and often require tweaking throughout the day.

I think the OP knows all this so no problem.

Bob, Opticron makes a rainguard that works well on the CL. There's a thread about it. (Oops, Phil beat me to it).

The Leica is more like 30% less weight than the Swaro, not 50%, just to be particular.

Mark

 

[CliveP]

I assume we're talking about real backpacks here. The OP wants a bino that fits in a hip belt pocket, not in the pack, where it would be nearly useless. Takes too long to get it out. I keep a compact point-and-shoot camera in that hip belt pocket so the bino goes elsewhere.


Mark

I normally get them out of my pocket/backpack and hang them around my neck using a neck strap. Brilliant invention, works great, even while cycling along as long as I keep the strap pretty short but for a pocket bin and no neck strap something like the Leica would be good I expect.

I think the op basically asked is it worth searching on and on to see if there is something better for him than the Leica as it's the one he currently prefers but does find difficult with eye placement and he's tried the Swaros and they are bulkier heavier than he would like.

So is it worth searching on and on? Is there anything more to discover?
will he order hundreds more bins?

Can we tell him what he likes and should therefore get?

No.

Does it all really matter much?

I don't think so. There are plenty of bins that would do the job fine. He has one or several at the moment and more on the way.

So I'm a bit baffled as to why this is so seemingly a difficult problem?

Ok, if you just want to order loads of bins to try them all then fine. It seems it's just more about that than actually going on a hike with a small binocular but my question is why?

We're on the imaginary perfection trail and this is my turn off before my head melts.

If you've found a bin that you like and he has then that's a pretty good situation.
If there is anything about them that annoys considerably and consistently then best avoid such as very particular eye placement.

My bet he keeps the Leica......eventually but it would be interesting if he discovered something else better. I shouldn't encourage.

 

[Kammerdiner]

CliveP, no it's not a difficult problem at all. But backpackers like to fuss around getting the equipment just right. It pays off if you've got two weeks in a wilderness area ahead of you. I've seen some unfortunate equipment failures over the years.

Besides it's kinda fun tweaking your gear. I've been known to weigh pocket knives on a gram scale before deciding which one goes. You think about stuff like that as you're nearing a 13k mountain pass. Does the Swaro weigh more than the Leica? Sure, so it better be more better enough to make it worthwhile. To me it is, but it all gets weighed on different "scales," according to one's priorities.

It sounds to me like this is mostly a one-time purchase, anyway, so why not spend a little time on it? As Chuck mentioned, how do you know what you like until you've looked through them?

And it seems to me you have ordered "loads of bins" yourself, right? Probably many of us have.

Mark

 

[stephen b]

The Leica is more like 30% less weight than the Swaro, not 50%, just to be particular.

Mark

Mark,

That is correct if going from the Swaro direction to the Leica ( which is the way I worded it). But, if comparing the other way; which is how I should have stated it- the Swaro 8x25 CL weighs 50% more than the Leica Ultravid. My Leica weighs 8 oz and the Swaro CL is right about 12 oz.

Just to give another particular

 

[Alexis Powell]

My bin for dedicated birding is the Swarovski 8.5x42 because I much prefer the size, weight, and viewing comfort of full-sized bins, but when I need something small I use the Leica 8x20 Ultravid BL (i.e. not rubber armored--it's the smallest and lightest!) without reservation. By that, I mean that for me its optical and handling qualities are such that I don't feel that it compromises my ability to identify birds while birding to any great degree under most conditions. I don't feel the same about other pocket or compact models, including the Zeiss 8x20 Victory (great optics but focus operation not as nice) and the B&L/Bushnell 7x26 Custom (nice optics but bulky, poor hang, and sometimes doesn't seem to perform well against the light. Also enforces a hand position closer to the face which causes me glasses fogging problems under cold or humid conditions, especially when I'm hot from cycling or hiking).

For me, comfortable use of the bin involves unfolding it asymmetrically to properly position its uniquely accessible focus knob under my fingers (see link below), wearing glasses so the small eyecups aren't an issue, and wearing a hat to block peripheral light. I haven't tried the Swarovski 8x25 because when I go for a compact I want it to be compact. Otherwise, if pack size but not weight were a concern, I'd choose a small 8x32 like the Leica 8x32 Ultravid or the Zeiss 8x32 FL for their better handling than the 8x25.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=2439175&highlight=solidarity+clasp#post2439175

--AP

 

[Kammerdiner]

Mark,

That is correct if going from the Swaro direction to the Leica ( which is the way I worded it). But, if comparing the other way; which is how I should have stated it- the Swaro 8x25 CL weighs 50% more than the Leica Ultravid. My Leica weighs 8 oz and the Swaro CL is right about 12 oz.

Just to give another particular

I figured you'd catch that. :-O

 

[CliveP]

CliveP, no it's not a difficult problem at all. But backpackers like to fuss around getting the equipment just right. It pays off if you've got two weeks in a wilderness area ahead of you. I've seen some unfortunate equipment failures over the years.

Besides it's kinda fun tweaking your gear. I've been known to weigh pocket knives on a gram scale before deciding which one goes. You think about stuff like that as you're nearing a 13k mountain pass. Does the Swaro weigh more than the Leica? Sure, so it better be more better enough to make it worthwhile. To me it is, but it all gets weighed on different "scales," according to one's priorities.

It sounds to me like this is mostly a one-time purchase, anyway, so why not spend a little time on it? As Chuck mentioned, how do you know what you like until you've looked through them?

And it seems to me you have ordered "loads of bins" yourself, right? Probably many of us have.

Mark

Must remember never to buy scales.

Ok I get what you are saying. Actually does explain what I was missing about this as it's something I don't do, I mean weigh everything and go on serious expeditions but I am reading about Griffith Pugh and his physiological influence on the first ascent of Everest and it's a good read while lying in bed.

I cycled about 20 miles around the countryside to lough Neagh yesterday in the sun and got a banging migraine today so so much for the healthy outdoors and exercise but I just chucked my stuff in the pack (drinks being the heaviest item by far) and went for my Kowa SV 8x32 to take along and they were great as always. The difference between taking my Endurance 10x25 and the Kowa probably worked out at one less expresso which might explain the migraine?

I really was wrecked though today. I'm definitely getting worse at cycling any distance it seems when I should actually be getting better with growing experience and practice. I quit smoking, hardly drink alchohol any more, eat pretty healthy and cycle pretty regularly. Not the result I was hoping for.

Just heard about your fellow countryman Prince. R.I.P. Purple rain, purple rain.....

 

[gulf1263]

The Leica Ultravid 8x20, Zeiss Victory 8x20 and Nikon 8x20 ( what ever they are calling them this week) are great optically bur IMHO the Leica has the best ergonomics which are really important for these little bino's.
The 8x20's (especially the Leica's) can fit in all kinds of easily accessed pockets and are not a lumpy burden.
Optically they work really well in any kind of reasonable light and they provide a great image.
Mine go a lot of places I wouldn't even think of carry anything larger and are now my most used glass next to the my Leica 7x42's.
They can go just about anywhere and be available when the larger bino's aren't.
After a few weeks of taking them everywhere you will begin to wonder how you ever got along without them....I don't know of anything else even close.
Just a warning (and an excuse), the smaller the glass, the better their quality should be.
Good luck on whatever you choose.
Art

 

[CliveP]

My 10x25 Endurance actually is about the same size and weight as my RSPB 8x20 HD. The 8x20 is slightly smaller and packs away slightly smaller in the pouch it came with and it's a great binocular which surprised me how useful it was over distance with really excellent resolution and a nice big view for it's size. Both can be a bit tricky with eyeplacement. It comes with the territory of small bins. The slightly larger eyecups on the Endurance help some.

I find them sort of similar due to their size and weight but I find I use the Endurance more maybe because of the 10x mag as a change from my normal 8x usage and it is very good in how it snaps into focus and I do think I prefer the focus wheel at the eyepiece end. Then I have the 7x18's if I want to jump down to true pocketable or the monocular. I'd love a good 7x18 folding roof. The Sunagor would be that if it had waterproofing and better glass/coatings/prisms mostly the prisms. Almost like a mini 7x18 ultravid with 8 deg fov. Both of the 7x18 would fit in an average shirt pocket without folding. I wouldn't recommend the Sunagor as it's not up to scratch clarity wise but it is easy to use and get eyeplacement so I really do want to get a better one of those someday if somebody ever bothers to produce one. I think I saw an old Zeiss model in that size so they have existed and could really be done well with the current glass and coating technologies.

I think it is good to have several options to choose from and currently I have about 10 bins of all different sizes but it took me about a year to collect most of them. I tried the one good alpha route in the past but I definitely prefer the bunch I have now as I do get tired of using the same bin regularly and the performance you get for much less alpha money is still excellent. My Kowa SV 8x32 for example. Sometimes or perhaps in fact often I actually feel that I enjoy it more than I did the alphas I owned. I showed it to another guy at the lake the other day and that's another person that it made sit up and do the wow thing. "what magnification is that?", "who makes that?", "how much is that?", where'd you get that?", "I can use that so easily", "it's not that heavy", etc etc are some of the various responses I recall from people who try it.

I will add though that it did seem odd having the big Kowa neoprene strap around my neck after having used mostly compacts of late but definitely more towards full size comfortable viewing than any compact and on that occasion definitely worth bringing along but I could have survived with any of the compacts also. I have a few different places that I will visit regularly and I can choose which bin I think will work best for each location or just choose a different one for an interesting change and of course I've always got plenty of spares.

Just took a shot of some of the compacts. Seems that the Carson wins on size and it's the lightest. Both 7x18's have a wider view than the RSPB 8x20 which has the standard 119m fov. I like the Sunagor even though it's the least clear of the three and I would use it on a day out to the zoo or parade or something maybe but I'd be better off with the Carson in reality.

 

[SivaL]

My bin for dedicated birding is the Swarovski 8.5x42 because I much prefer the size, weight, and viewing comfort of full-sized bins, but when I need something small I use the Leica 8x20 Ultravid BL (i.e. not rubber armored--it's the smallest and lightest!) without reservation. By that, I mean that for me its optical and handling qualities are such that I don't feel that it compromises my ability to identify birds while birding to any great degree under most conditions. I don't feel the same about other pocket or compact models, including the Zeiss 8x20 Victory (great optics but focus operation not as nice) and the B&L/Bushnell 7x26 Custom (nice optics but bulky, poor hang, and sometimes doesn't seem to perform well against the light. Also enforces a hand position closer to the face which causes me glasses fogging problems under cold or humid conditions, especially when I'm hot from cycling or hiking).

For me, comfortable use of the bin involves unfolding it asymmetrically to properly position its uniquely accessible focus knob under my fingers (see link below), wearing glasses so the small eyecups aren't an issue, and wearing a hat to block peripheral light. I haven't tried the Swarovski 8x25 because when I go for a compact I want it to be compact. Otherwise, if pack size but not weight were a concern, I'd choose a small 8x32 like the Leica 8x32 Ultravid or the Zeiss 8x32 FL for their better handling than the 8x25.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=2439175&highlight=solidarity+clasp#post2439175

--AP

AP,

At first using Leica UV BCL 8x20 was cumbersome and I read your method a couple of months back and I now use them exactly how you described. Extend the right barrel all the way out to the right, extend the left barrel a bit to the left and the IPD is perfect for me. This position also moves the focus knob to the left of center and is perfect for the right index finger. Left handers can do so the same in the opposite direction. Thanks for the tip.

The 8x20 format is tiny and causes lot of shakes and glare/flare, but for the purpose they were built, the Leica UV is wonderful. The image is sharp and even works with my sun glasses. It's the only bin that goes into my Shorts pocket when out walking. It also attracts less attention when being used. The other day I was sitting in a bus stop with people standing all around me and I pulled out the UV 8x20 to look at buildings and traffic and no one even noticed that I was looking through them. I thought these people were not curious, but really, no one even noticed the bins.

 

[Dialyt]

Mark,

That is correct if going from the Swaro direction to the Leica ( which is the way I worded it). But, if comparing the other way; which is how I should have stated it- the Swaro 8x25 CL weighs 50% more than the Leica Ultravid. My Leica weighs 8 oz and the Swaro CL is right about 12 oz.

Just to give another particular

This makes no sense! If it's a 30% OR a 50% difference then it works both ways. It can't be one value up and the other down when comparing the 2 models.

 

[Binastro]

Of course it makes sense.

If A has £1.50 and B £1.00
A has 50% more than B.
B has 33 1/3% less than A.

If B had 50% less than A, he would have 75p.

P.S.
If it takes 3 men 4 days to dig a hole.
How long does it take 2 men to dig half a hole?