Sightron "Blue Sky" II 8x32 (1 Viewer)

[DadraFromFrance]

UPDATE: I'd like to reiterate my initial findings and add my new thoughts. Brightness is decent but nothing exceptional - probably about as bright as you are going to get for this price point. Color fidelity is great. Control of CA is a mixed-bag; the edges produce fairly strong CA to my eyes, but the center-field performance is quite good. Eye-relief is just barely acceptable for my glasses and was at times inconvenient. Overall a very good buy for the price and perfectly functional as either a secondary or primary bin, depending upon one's preferences. If you can't afford more than >$400 and want a waterproof, roof prism bino, I don't think you'll find much (anything?) better.

Justin, I agree. My impressions are the same but not for the brightness. I found these bino are very very bright for a 32mm at this range of price. All my friends (astro-amateur) were also very impressed by the brightness of the little BSII.

 

[jremmons]

Dadra: I did not mean to imply they were not relatively bright binos, as I mentioned they were likely top of their price-range in this regard. However, unlike some of their aspects (e.g. color fidelity, size of central 'sweet spot'), they were not particularly strong compared to the ~$400 binos.

Justin

 

[brocknroller]

One of my coworkers just bought a pair of these as a secondary binocular, so I finally have gotten a chance to peer through them. Initial impressions are a solid build quality, good focus-knob, terrible accessories, good center-field sharpness, decent sweet-spot, and mild amounts of CA, particularly noticeable along the periphery of the field.
I'll be using these as my field binoculars for the day to get a better impression, but from these initial views I can definitely say I'm not surprised about their positive reception here.

Justin

UPDATE: I'd like to reiterate my initial findings and add my new thoughts. Brightness is decent but nothing exceptional - probably about as bright as you are going to get for this price point. Color fidelity is great. Control of CA is a mixed-bag; the edges produce fairly strong CA to my eyes, but the center-field performance is quite good. Eye-relief is just barely acceptable for my glasses and was at times inconvenient. Overall a very good buy for the price and perfectly functional as either a secondary or primary bin, depending upon one's preferences. If you can't afford more than >$400 and want a waterproof, roof prism bino, I don't think you'll find much (anything?) better.

Except perhaps the Nikon 8x30 M7.... Not sure if it's better, not having tried the Frank-made-famous BSII but it sure looked good to me, felt good in the hand, and the eyecups fit my face (which is a rarity). CA was also very good and not just in the center. Very WF @8.2* for this configuration.

I'd like to see a shoot-out between the Sightron BSII and M7. Fair comparison, Frank?

Brock

 

[DadraFromFrance]

I tried the M7 and own the BSII. The M7 were very attractive bino for the compactness, the correction and the wide field but I didn't compare them directly with the BSII. Not in the same range of price but a fair fae to face would be great.
Frank made a review with the Mojave and the Sightron are evocated : http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2963907&postcount=16

 

[bh46118]

Hi Brock

The BP is a 10X44.

bh46118 paid $180 for his 10x42 Minox BP. I think we need a shoot-out between the Minox and the Sightron. 10x vs. 8x, so you'd have to adjust the chart distance, but which is "the best" in the $180 discounted price category?

To answer the burning question: Are we there yet? Can China now make bins as good as Japan?

Brock

 

[jremmons]

Brock: To be honest, I couldn't recommend the 8x30 M7 over the Sightrons. Although I believe it was brighter and controlled CA better, I recall it having a relatively small sweet-spot, being impossible to use with glasses, and not having the most important trait to me - excellent centerfield sharpness. The model I saw also had a wonky 'haze' cast over the image, but that may have been due to the poor blackening of the initial production run; I can't say as I wasn't aware of this problem and due to the relatively poor centerfield sharpness, I didn't spend too much time with them.

 

[FrankD]

I haven't been on this forum in a bit. Sorry I missed the revival of this thread. I did make a promise to myself though to chime back in today in particular. Today marks the 3 year anniversary of my owning these bins. Zero problems, zero complaints and almost daily use. I think this should go a long way in addressing some of the initial concerns with regard to their durability over time.

They have become my primary bin during this time frame. Other than wanting a 7x version at times I can honestly say that I never felt lacking when using them. Since I initially posted this review there have been several new models introduced that better the Sightron in one way or another but they all cost notably more. I still haven't found another roof prism binocular at or under the $200 price point that betters these.

Haven't tried the SI 8x32 yet. Was a bit put off by the poor performance of the 8x25.

 

[perterra]

Brock: To be honest, I couldn't recommend the 8x30 M7 over the Sightrons. Although I believe it was brighter and controlled CA better, I recall it having a relatively small sweet-spot, being impossible to use with glasses, and not having the most important trait to me - excellent centerfield sharpness. The model I saw also had a wonky 'haze' cast over the image, but that may have been due to the poor blackening of the initial production run; I can't say as I wasn't aware of this problem and due to the relatively poor centerfield sharpness, I didn't spend too much time with them.

Oh come on now, theres no reason to torture Brock. LOL

 

[brocknroller]

Brock: To be honest, I couldn't recommend the 8x30 M7 over the Sightrons. Although I believe it was brighter and controlled CA better, I recall it having a relatively small sweet-spot, being impossible to use with glasses, and not having the most important trait to me - excellent centerfield sharpness. The model I saw also had a wonky 'haze' cast over the image, but that may have been due to the poor blackening of the initial production run; I can't say as I wasn't aware of this problem and due to the relatively poor centerfield sharpness, I didn't spend too much time with them.

remmons, it sounds like you had a "lemons."

The sample I tried had a large sweet spot (though it did have some field curvature at the edges), it was sharp in the centerfield, and it had no "wonky haze," however, the metal rings inside the objectives were all painted, which probably wasn't the case with the sample you tried. It was bright for its size and controlled CA well like your sample.

But if the Sightron II works for you, you saved yourself at least a $100 if not more. I also prefer an "open hinge" design over an "open bridge" one in a mid-sized roof.

Brock

 

[brocknroller]

I haven't been on this forum in a bit. Sorry I missed the revival of this thread. I did make a promise to myself though to chime back in today in particular. Today marks the 3 year anniversary of my owning these bins. Zero problems, zero complaints and almost daily use. I think this should go a long way in addressing some of the initial concerns with regard to their durability over time.

They have become my primary bin during this time frame. Other than wanting a 7x version at times I can honestly say that I never felt lacking when using them. Since I initially posted this review there have been several new models introduced that better the Sightron in one way or another but they all cost notably more. I still haven't found another roof prism binocular at or under the $200 price point that betters these.

Haven't tried the SI 8x32 yet. Was a bit put off by the poor performance of the 8x25.

Congratulations! on your three-year anniversary with the Sightron II thread and many more to come. And also on it passing your three-year endurance test.

Despite all the hubbub, I still have not been persuaded to buy one. The M7 is the only mid-sized roof (30-32mm) I've tried that I've liked, and that was an exception to the rule, I think mainly because of its "open hinge" design, which allowed ample room for my fingers, its comfortable eyecups, and wide field of view. I also liked the 15 oz. weight. In general, I find mid-sized roofs hard to keep steady and uncomfortable to hold.

Even sight(ron) unseen, I'd rather spend the extra $100 on a Nikon M7 (if I could find a good sample), because I have a long and happy history with the brand (for the most part), and like my Nikon porros, it has a color balance that I prefer.

But who knows, in another three years, you might finally convince me! :smoke:

30 more posts until the 1,000 post mark!

Brock

 

[FrankD]

Brock,

The little Nikon is certainly something to be admired. I became instantly enamored with it the first time I tried it last spring and ended up ordering one....and then another in a relatively short time frame. It is a bit of a different animal in my opinion and in comparison to the Sightron.

I tend to look at the Sightron as a "bridge bin" in the sense that it has the handling of a full-sized model because of its length and yet has the benefit of a 32 mm in terms of its weight and (generally speaking) field of view.

To cut to the chase a good sample of the Nikon will better the Sightron optically overall. The 40 foot wider field of view of the Nikon would do it even if everything else were equal. Plus I do like the feel of the Nikon's rubber armor and the focusing tension was "to die for".

As I am sure you know though it isn't really that "cut and dry". The Nikon internal component issue made the two samples of the Nikon 8x30 I owned lacking in contrast. That bit of a haze took away from the beautiful overall impression I remember being left with when I originally tried it out.

Two, though you mentioned rather paying an extra $100 more for the Nikon, we aren't talking about the 2nd-tier price bracket here or even the mid-price bracket. We are talking about budget-roof prism models. With the average price of the Sightron being $180 (a price that hasn't changed in the last three years mind you) then a $100 price increase is substantial. Also, unless Nikon has another rebate-thing going on the last time I checked the Nikon was around $350. That is almost twice the cost of the Sightron.

From one perspective though I guess I should look at that as a compliment...comparing a $180 binocular to a $350 one.

 

[bluespiderweb]

Finally...a Blue Sky guy...!

Congrats, Frank, and thank you for your very helpful evaluations and reporting on these excellent binoculars over the years here! I can say that I am finally a proud and happy member of the Sightron BSII fan club; as of today, I put the strap on mine (seldom done by me it seems), and registered them officially with Sightron.

I believe they will serve me well on as many field adventures that I am able to make from here on in. They suit me very well-no thinking about eye placement or focusing-just use and reap the rewards of a well designed bit of kit. Also a great thanks to Sightron for keeping these in their lineup, no doubt from Frank's excellent input and widespread influence on and about them for so long in the binocular world has helped keep them alive for this extended period of time.

Well, done, and a hearty thank you to all who made it so! B :t:

 

[FrankD]

Glad you are happy with them Barry. I am still quite happy with mine.

If Sightron ever does discontinue them and they start being discounted heavily then I am certainly going to grab another.

 

[justabirdwatcher]

First post

Hello Bird Forum!

My experience with this particular binocular was what prompted me to join the forum, and say "thank you" to all those who have reviewed it, and sung it's praises.

After receiving my Sightron Blue Sky 8x32's, I sold every other pair of binoculars I owned (Nikon Monarchs, Leupold Yosemite's, Bushnell Elite's). I simply cannot believe the quality image these produce for under $200.

I bought them primarily for bowhunting, as I needed a good lightweight and relatively compact pair to take up in the tree with me. However, I figured I'd also use them for casual "car" birding.

Well I could not be more pleased, and I've shown them now to nearly everyone who will listen. The reactions I get when I tell them how much I paid for mine ($164 with the $15 OpticsPlanet discount coupon) are priceless.

I had plans to buy a second pair of more expensive full sized binoculars for "serious" bird watching, but no longer. I'm now going to use that extra $ for a pair of alpha compacts (Leica Ultravids) - something I've always wanted to own.

The money I saved on these Sightrons is the only reason I can afford those Ultravids now. I think they will make the perfect 1-2 punch for my optic needs.

Thanks Frank and others for all the great information. You all provide a valuable service to lurkers like myself whether you realize it or not.

Justa

 

[FrankD]

Glad you enjoy them. I still use mine daily. I was actually using them just before I read this. Best value out there in my opinion.

How about a nice digiscoped shot of them?

 

[justabirdwatcher]

Pretty easy to see why these have achieved cult-status. Everyone I have shown mine to asked "What's Sightron?" LOL.

 

[PeterPS]

Sightron vs Kenko question

I have ordered the Sightron sii 8x32, but have not received them yet. What I have already got is a pair of Kenko Ultraview EX 8x32 DH2---please note the 2 after DH, this set replaces the older DH which is the one usually compared with the Sightron (and Vixen's Foresta etc). The Kenko will go back to the dealer: too much plastic-like feeling, rubber armor with unnecessary protuberances that dig into your hands, optics OK but nothing impressive, a diopter correction that it is somewhat hard to set (it seems to depend on the distance of the object in focus), the FoV is listed at 7.5* (for DH it was incorrectly listed as 8* but it was found to be smaller, about 7.5*) but it might possibly be smaller. They are similarly prices as the Sightron, and they might be OK at that price level; however the fact that only a few dealers carry them, like the Sightron, suggests that they have never caught on. My question is what should I expect: will the Sightron, which will arrive next week, be (much) better and a keeper? From the pictures that I have seen these 2 sets look like clones, and they do have the same specs. Btw, another similar set is Pentax DCF 9x32---imo the Pentax is visibly better than Kenko (my brief review of the Pentax can be found at: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=282730)---is the Sightron considered to be better than the Pentax by those who compared them?
Peter.

 

[PeterPS]

Forgot to mention: the Sightron is known to be manufactured by Kenko; with this fact in mind it looks curious to me that Kenko would produce, under their own brand name, a set that appears to be a clone of the Sightron and has identical specs, but is worse than the latter.

 

[SteveTS]

Sightron appears to be wholly owned by Kenko.

Kenko binoculars are widely available outside of the USA, volume and QC standards in production may be a factor in comparison with the Sightron.

Best wishes,

 

[bh46118]

If there is ever worldwide nuclear holocaust that completely removes mankind from the face of the earth:gn:, the only other thing to survive besides scorched earth, rats and mice, cockroaches, and coyotes will be this thread. 3