Top choices in 8x20 or 8x25-ish ? (1 Viewer)

[ZDHart]

I have two pair of Zeiss Conquest HD: 10x42 and 8x32. I absolutely love their performance! And I like the large, deep eyecups that they feature. (I don't wear glasses when using the bins.) But I need something smaller and lighter for those occasions where even the 8x32 are larger and heavier than I would like to carry.

What are your thoughts and recommendations on 8x20 vs. 8x25 (or 8x28?) Is the brightness significantly better with the larger objective of 25 vs. 20? Better enough to make the increase in size and weight worth it? Or are there some 8x20 models which by virtue of their design and optics are nearly as bright as the typical 8x25?

Any particular models that you recommend? (My budget would allow up to $800 or so.) Thank you, in advance.

 

[fugl]

I'd stay away from 8 x 20. In my experience, the minute exit pupil of glasses of this specification make eye placement unacceptably fiddly

 

[PhilR.]

What are your thoughts and recommendations on 8x20 vs. 8x25 (or 8x28?) Is the brightness significantly better with the larger objective of 25 vs. 20? Better enough to make the increase in size and weight worth it? Or are there some 8x20 models which by virtue of their design and optics are nearly as bright as the typical 8x25?

Any particular models that you recommend? (My budget would allow up to $800 or so.)

Yes, there is a great difference in brightness between 20mm and 25mm. This is not to say that a 20mm is dim. A 20mm functions just fine in bright daylight. I often use an Alpen Wings ED 8x20, and find it works very well during the middle of the day. I use the Wings ED as a travel bino, and carry it outdoors as a more or less "just in case" measure. I do not find a 7x or 8x20 to be difficult to use at all.

That being said, I will say that an 8x25 will provide a noticeably brighter and wider view. When I am hiking and anticipate using a binocular a lot, I carry either a Swaro 8x25 or a Leica 10x25 Ultravid, the choice is which determined by where I am hiking. The 8x25 Swarovski is very nice, so much so that I could get rid of my 8x30/32's and still be happy. I could not say that about the Alpen, and most likely would not say that even if my 8x20 was made by one of the big four. Of course only you can say if the ~50% increase in weight is worth it. I think it is, especially since 12oz. isn't that great to begin with. I guess I might say different if my 8x20 was made by Leica or Zeiss or Nikon, but I doubt it.

I guess that if pressed, I would say that if you are going to have just one smaller 8x bino, then make it a 25mm. If not the Swarovski CL Pocket, then perhaps the Hawke Sapphire, which I've read good things about.

BTW, the Bushnell Elite Custom Compact 7x26 is pretty good too, but is slightly heavier than the CL Pocket, is not waterproof, and has less ER. It does however provide a view that is brighter than the CL Pocket, and for much less money. Also, there are a few 8x30/32's that weigh less than 15 oz. that you might look at as well. Burris, Vixen, Opticron (these all seem to be clones of each other) make them. Be aware that they seem to have very small FOV's.

 

[ZDHart]

I have a pair of Leitz Trinovid 8x20 that I bought perhaps 30 years ago. Unless the new Leica 8x20s are substantially better than my old Trinis, I will avoid the new Leica 8x20 model.

Sounds like I should step up to 8x25 or 8x28 or similar. Perhaps even an 8x30. However, I need something that will be substantially smaller and lighter weight than my (wonderful) Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32's.

 

[PhilR.]

Based on what I've read, and my experience with the 10x Ultravid HD, I would estimate that the new Leica 8x20 Ultravid HD is indeed substantially better than your old Trinis.

But yes, I would bet that you will be happier with a 25mm or 28mm bino. I have the Conquest HD 8x32 as well, and can say that the Swaro CL Pocket is substantially smaller and lighter. Even a Nikon 8x30 Monarch 7 is noticeably smaller and lighter. Actually, you might try to look through a 30mm M7. I love mine, but I didn't mention it because that model seems to have great problems with glare. It might work wonderfully well for you.

Other small 8x32's are the Celestron Trailseeker and Zen-Ray ZRS HD clones. These weigh about 50% more than the Swaro CL Pocket, but that is still about 6 oz. less than your Ziess. These provide a very good level of performance for the dollar spent.

 

[PhilR.]

Oh, BTW -- the newish Eschenbach Sector 8x32 weighs just under 14 oz.. You should get that one, and then come back here and let everyone know how well it does or does not perform.....

 

[14Goudvink]

You could try the Opticron 8x24 BGA T PC Oasis. As small and light as most 8x20's and a lot easier to use because of the 3 mm exit pupil.

Sharp with good contrast and natural colour rendition, build quality is also good. I preferred it to the Bushnell Elite 7x26.

Only drawback is veiling glare when looking in the direction of the sun, which can for a large part be avoided by careful eye placement.

 

[GyrPer1]

Anybody try the Bresser Montana, 8x25?

 

[ZDHart]

These three look like they would be good options... any thoughts on them?

Swaro CL Pocket 8x25 $800
12.2 oz. 4.2 x 3.5”
FOV 357’ @ 1k yds.

Premium brand, obviously, and price... but are they THAT great? I would pay the price if they are. A bit heavier, but wide FOV.

======================


Vortex Viper 8x28 $320
11.8 oz. 4.7” x 4.5”
FOV 319’ @ 1k yds.

Less costly than the Swaro, but still, priced to cover the industry's most generous warranty. A bit lighter weight. FOV pretty good.*Probably an excellent choice?

======================


Kowa 8x25 BD25-8 $240
10.6 oz. 4.1 x 4.5”
FOV 331’ @ 1k yds.

I know nothing about these, but I'm interested. Weight is excellent. FOV very good.

 

[Kammerdiner]

These three look like they would be good options... any thoughts on them?

Swaro CL Pocket 8x25 $800
12.2 oz. 4.2 x 3.5”
FOV 357’ @ 1k yds.

Premium brand, obviously, and price... but are they THAT great? I would pay the price if they are. A bit heavier, but wide FOV.

======================


Vortex Viper 8x28 $320
11.8 oz. 4.7” x 4.5”
FOV 319’ @ 1k yds.

Less costly than the Swaro, but still, priced to cover the industry's most generous warranty. A bit lighter weight. FOV pretty good.*Probably an excellent choice?

======================


Kowa 8x25 BD25-8 $240
10.6 oz. 4.1 x 4.5”
FOV 331’ @ 1k yds.

I know nothing about these, but I'm interested. Weight is excellent. FOV very good.

I've got the Swaro and seen the Vortex. Haven't seen the Kowa. The Vortex is really nice, especially if you wear glasses. Eye relief is just great but FOV gets sacrificed. Very nice, very sharp.

Swaro is all that plus FOV and smaller size with double hinges. It is, however, silly expensive. If money were an issue, I'm not sure I'd go for it. Try the Vortex in that case.

Mark

 

[brocknroller]

I don't have money growing out my ears (though I do have some hair starting to sprout in them) so I would never spend $800 on a compact since I don't use compacts that often. If I were a frequent theater goer or attended lots of sporting events and could make use of the compact year round, I might step up from the reverse porros I have now (7x21s), but given that my main use for them would be birding, I would go for a smallish, lightweight 8x30 such as the 15 oz. Nikon 8x30 Monarch 7. Only three ounces heavier than the CL Pocket, but you get a roof that is less fiddly with eye placement and easier to hold than a double hinge compact. Plus it has ED glass and costs less than the Viper 8x28.

My two cents.

Brock

 

[FrankD]

In a sense I have to agree with Brock. The Nikon Monarch 7 8x30 is almost in a class of its own when it comes to size and weight in an 8x30-class binocular...at least at its respective price point. I don't ever remember owning or handling an 8x30 model that was as small, light and compact with such a wide field of view.

The question is whether or not it is enough of a difference from your Conquest HD 8x32. I can't answer that one. Plus you still have to make sure you get one of the specimens without the internal blackening issues.

Edit:

Another to consider is the Opticron Discovery 8x32. It is the smallest/lightest 8x32 I have ever tried. I have placed it next to their 8x20-ish models several times and it practically takes up the exact same amount of space. The barrels are just a little bit wider at the objective end. Priced around $230-$250 from what I remember plus you would have all the benefits of the 4 mm exit pupil.

 

[Kammerdiner]

I'd probably get more use out the 8x25 CL-P than the Nikon 8x30. The Swaro folds, fits in my jacket pocket and goes with me surprisingly often. It disappears when not in use and comes in handy all the time.

The 8x30, on the other hand, would be more like carrying a "regular" binocular, and if I'm carrying a regular binocular anyway, I'd probably just go with my 8x32. I tried the 8x30 Companion but that didn't do it for me either. Halfway between true compact and mid-size is kind of no-man's land for me.

Still, I'm gonna try that Nikon some time.

 

[ceasar]

Too bad Columbia Sportswear dropped their great little 8x25 Back Country binocular made by Kreuger. And too bad Kreuger doesn't make it any more either! It was a dandy. I bought 2 at close out prices and I wish I had purchased a couple more. My son has one of them with him in Chile now and I have the other one. It's almost as good as the Bushnell 7x26 IMO and almost as good as the Swarovski 8x25 CL P.

http://www.opticsplanet.com/kruger-columbia-sportswear-backcountry-53001-binocular-8x25.html

If you run across one grab it!

Bob

 

[Kammerdiner]

...

http://www.opticsplanet.com/kruger-columbia-sportswear-backcountry-53001-binocular-8x25.html

If you run across one grab it!

Bob

I did...but I gave it away to a deserving soul. The way I remember the Backcountry, I'd bet it's nearly as big and heavy as the Nikon 8x30, yes?

 

[ceasar]

I did...but I gave it away to a deserving soul. The way I remember the Backcountry, I'd bet it's nearly as big and heavy as the Nikon 8x30, yes?

I don't have a Nikon 8x30 M7. Yet. But it weighs 2 ounces more than the Swarovski 8x25 CL P and Bushnell 7 x 26 at 14.1 ounces. That's not a big deal, and it's about an inch shorter than the 8x30 Companion. It has the same FOV and longer ER by 3mm than the Companion. It's ER is 18mm compared to the 17mm of the 8x25 CL P and it is shorter than the CL P but wider and has thicker barrels. (I have all of these binoculars.) They are all excellent.

Why Kreuger got rid of this 8x25 is a mystery to me. They cost me $80.00 each. Columbia was selling them for about $250.00 which is what the Bushnell costs.

Bob

 

[ZDHart]

Four good possibilities to make the decision more difficult! ;-)

Nikon 8x30 M7
Kowa BD25-8 8x25
Swaro 8x25 CL P
Vortex Viper 8x25

I'm giving a lot of importance to keeping the bins small and lightweight (as a significant contrast to my Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32), but don't want to push that criteria so far as to sacrifice excellent sharpness, brightness, and minimizing "blackouts" when viewing with them.

I do like larger eyecups, as well.

These bins will be used mostly as convenient (always have in the bag) bins and in daylight.

I need to try to determine which choice minimizes the sacrifices overall. Cost differences among these choices is not a restricting factor... leads me to think that the Swaro 8x25 might be the top choice.

 

[WiscTJK]

I love my Zeiss Victory 8x20 (mine is and older model with out the hydrophobic coatings). I use it when weight and size are an issue. I use it for multiple sporting events and concerts. With the stiff single hinge, once you have set it, eye positioning is less of an issue. I recommend it.

In fact, since it is most compact, I am more likely to have it in me. Therefore, of all my models it is the most used. It is not the most compact due to the single hinge, but is about the size of a point and shoot camera when folded. The double hinged compacts will be slightly more compact.

I do have a Vixen Atrek 8x25 that my daughter uses and that is nice size to fit in a coat.

They are not the best for dim lighting conditions due to the exit pupil size.

 

[OPTIC_NUT]

8x needs feeding. For more brightness, there's always the Bushnell Elite/Custom 7x26s as well.

 

[DLevy]

Went out this morning birding with a friend. He had a new Ultravid 8x20 which I used for a good few hours. I found them very very nice and the small exit pupil was not a problem at all. They where very nice to handle despite their size and the image was excellent as far as I could tell- I'm not that experienced with binoculars but my reference was the conquest 10x42 he had with him too. I kept comparing them and couldn't really see much difference in sharpness, resolution or aberrations.
Bottom line- worth while looking at if you don't mind the price.