|
|
Post by Coolkat on Jan 6, 2022 12:39:58 GMT -8
I'm not especially a Vortex fan I'm sure there are better brands out there but they seem to be "ok" for their price range. But I'm open to being corrected on that. |
|
|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Jan 6, 2022 12:57:12 GMT -8
I'm sure there are better brands out there but they seem to be "ok" for their price range. But I'm open to being corrected on that. I'm surprised you zeroed in on that rather than the fact they DO offer an 8x25... hmmm. Regardless, while we all have different standards, for $50 I doubt you could go wrong with the Vortex. |
|
|
|
Post by trinity on Jan 6, 2022 15:25:16 GMT -8
I found myself a couple of times wishing I had some kind binocular/monocular. For what reason? Wildlife viewing? Route finding? I imagine a monocular would be fine for finding landmarks, or getting a better look at larger animals or stationary objects. I don't feel they would work as well for birding. I haven't looked through a monocular in a very long time, but I remember not liking them. A lot of this may just be what I'm accustomed to, after looking through binoculars daily for so many years. I'm also wondering at this price range (entry level) if I'd do just as good at buying a cheap pair of chinese knock-offs on amazon. I think you'd be better off with the Vortex. Not the best, but a reputable company. Seems like I've also heard that Opticron makes a decent entry-level monocular. I would much rather carry the extra weight and have binoculars, but I'm a life-long birder, which colors my priorities. If you decide to go with a monocular, I would probably go with the 8x25 at REI suggested by bradmacmt , good price, and you can return them if you decide you don't like them. Though my experience is with binoculars rather than monoculars, I also share Brad's dislike for 10 power compact binoculars. In fact, I don't like 10x binoculars, period. 8x, imho, is the perfect balance between power, weight, field of view, image brightness, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Jan 6, 2022 16:23:29 GMT -8
trinity yes for wildlife/birding I absolutely prefer a binocular, but I think a monocular has its place for casual observation and route finding. At 4oz’s the little 8x20 Leica monocular I’ve been contemplating is less than 1/2 the weight of the 8x20’s I carry backpacking. I never thought I’d consider a monocular, but I’d rather have one than carry nothing, and lately the weight penalty has me contemplating this - yeah, silly I know! My day to day bin’s are a Leica 8x32 Ultravid… the only thing I don’t like about them is I wish they were 7x32’s! Indeed, 10x has no advantages to me in any size. If I need more than 8x I’ll skip right over 10x and pull out the spotting scope.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coolkat on Jan 6, 2022 18:10:55 GMT -8
For what reason? Wildlife viewing? Route finding? I imagine a monocular would be fine for finding landmarks, or getting a better look at larger animals or stationary objects. This is something I didn't consider when I asked the question. My intention is not birding but more like... "what the in the world is that over there?" But you know what I just had a "duh" moment that has made me rethink this whole thing. I'm already carrying a weight penalty with my dslr. I might just simply change what lens/es I take. I almost pulled the trigger on this tonight. I'm gonna think about it a bit more. |
|
|
|
Post by trinity on Jan 6, 2022 18:17:45 GMT -8
bradmacmt , as a birder, I have seen attitudes towards binocular magnification change quite a bit. In the 70s, it was almost assumed that the best binocular for birding was 7x35. These were in the days before mid-range binoculars, so most people were either buying cheap porro prism binoculars, which were inevitably heavy, or roof prism binoculars, which were out of most people's price range (I just remember Zeiss and Leitz, each of which were in the $1,000 range). Eventually, more and more birders began investing in more expensive binoculars, and 10x became the norm. A good pair of Zeiss 10x40s were probably a comparable weight to cheap 7x35s, with far superior image quality, so it just seemed like a no-brainer to get the additional magnification, if you were going to spend this kind of money. It was a few decades before folks began to recognize that 7 or 8 power binoculars were more forgiving for those of us who have trouble holding binoculars steady, and that the wider field of view and brighter image more than made up for the lower magnification. Slowly, 7s came back into vogue, and now I believe that most birders carry 8s. I carried 10x40s for close to 30 years, but now I'll never go back. My wife, on the other hand, has a pair of 10x42 Swarovskis that I bought her about 20 years ago, that you'll have to pry from her cold dead fingers. So, as always, YMMV.  If you wind up pulling the trigger on the monocular, I'll be interested to hear how you like it.
|
|
driftwoody
Trail Wise!
Take the path closer to the edge, especially if less traveled
Posts: 14,219 
|
Post by driftwoody on Jan 6, 2022 19:06:23 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jan 6, 2022 21:25:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Jan 7, 2022 5:55:18 GMT -8
bradmacmt , as a birder, I have seen attitudes towards binocular magnification change quite a bit. In the 70s, it was almost assumed that the best binocular for birding was 7x35. These were in the days before mid-range binoculars, so most people were either buying cheap porro prism binoculars, which were inevitably heavy, or roof prism binoculars, which were out of most people's price range (I just remember Zeiss and Leitz, each of which were in the $1,000 range). Eventually, more and more birders began investing in more expensive binoculars, and 10x became the norm. A good pair of Zeiss 10x40s were probably a comparable weight to cheap 7x35s, with far superior image quality, so it just seemed like a no-brainer to get the additional magnification, if you were going to spend this kind of money. It was a few decades before folks began to recognize that 7 or 8 power binoculars were more forgiving for those of us who have trouble holding binoculars steady, and that the wider field of view and brighter image more than made up for the lower magnification. Slowly, 7s came back into vogue, and now I believe that most birders carry 8s. I carried 10x40s for close to 30 years, but now I'll never go back. My wife, on the other hand, has a pair of 10x42 Swarovskis that I bought her about 20 years ago, that you'll have to pry from her cold dead fingers. So, as always, YMMV. If you wind up pulling the trigger on the monocular, I'll be interested to hear how you like it. Yes, I'm aware of the evolution. I started with a 7x35 porro in 1972 or 73. I lusted after the 7x35 Trinovid, but it was out of my reach. I guess I'm the odd man out as I've never fallen into the "power trap," and I've always said most are overly persuaded (brainwashed?) in favor of higher magnification without understanding the very real trade-offs (more is always better, right?).
My preferred magnification is, and always has been, 7x. All the binoculars I've owned have had 30-35mm objectives in either 7 or 8x. I don't like the size/weight of 40/42mm glass, though the Leica 7x42 Ultravid is tempting me (It's like looking through a huge, crystalline, picture window with light bathing one's eyes via its massive exit pupil).
The only reason I've owned a variety of 30/32mm glass in 8x is they're not available in 7x (chalk that up to the power-brainwashing)! I did have a Swarovski 7x30 SLC for a long run, but its optics just didn't hold up to the Leica 8x32 Trinovid I replaced it with. Leica currently has re-released it's old Trinovid line, but with upgraded mechanics and glass. In spite of its lack of waterproofing, I'm fairly certain I'll end up owning a "Retrovid" in 7x35. leicacamerausa.com/leica-trinovid-7x35.htmlWhen I lived on a rural ranch here in Montana for a couple years, my work mate had a pair of 10x40 Swaro's, and I had my 8x32 Leica Ultravid's. We would often trade when looking at birds and animals, and I never found enough difference to want the extra weight and bulk of the 10x40, not to mention handshake. Of course a 10X40 has an exit pupil of 4mm, and an 8x32 has an exit pupil of 4mm, so no difference in low light (except mine had better glass so were a bit better at dusk/dawn). Regardless, I've used 8x30ish glass from Maine to Alaska, and never felt I was giving anything up. All binoculars are a compromise weighted in one direction or another, the trick is being aware of those compromises and what you can live with and without. At the end of the day, great binoculars are a combination of a lot of elements that add up differently to different people, but I put the ability to resolve detail squarely at the top of "must haves." |
|
BigLoad
Trail Wise!
Pancakes!
Posts: 11,741
|
Post by BigLoad on Jan 7, 2022 8:03:47 GMT -8
I guess I'm the odd man out as I've never fallen into the "power trap," I with you on that. Field of view really matters to me, especially when I'm looking for things and trying to understand where they are in the landscape. |
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jan 7, 2022 8:27:33 GMT -8
Larger details is surely why people decide to use binoculars at all isn’t it? Otherwise why “power trap” from your 1x eyeballs to that 7, 8 or more magnification?
Similar in my view to why everyone doesn’t simply have a 50mm lens on their camera. Details can be interesting and getting closer is often either impractical or in the case of some wildlife downright dangerous. With a 1.4 adapter (also on backorder…) my 500mm just about matches the 10x.
Obviously mileage varies, so there’s 7x21, 8x25 and 10x25 from one manufacturer alone. My Bushnells at 7 always had me desiring more magnification….
|
|
rebeccad
Trail Wise!
Writing like a maniac
Posts: 12,242 
|
Post by rebeccad on Jan 7, 2022 8:55:35 GMT -8
For what reason? Wildlife viewing? Route finding? I imagine a monocular would be fine for finding landmarks, or getting a better look at larger animals or stationary objects. This is something I didn't consider when I asked the question. My intention is not birding but more like... "what the in the world is that over there?" But you know what I just had a "duh" moment that has made me rethink this whole thing. I'm already carrying a weight penalty with my dslr. I might just simply change what lens/es I take. I almost pulled the trigger on this tonight. I'm gonna think about it a bit more. I have solved a lot of those “what is that?” Questions even with my compact camera. Zoom in full, then review the image and zoom some more. Almost always settles it. “Nope, not mountain goat. Rock.” |
|
|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Jan 7, 2022 9:02:37 GMT -8
Larger details is surely why people decide to use binoculars at all isn’t it? Otherwise why “power trap” from your 1x eyeballs to that 7, 8 or more magnification? Similar in my view to why everyone doesn’t simply have a 50mm lens on their camera. Details can be interesting and getting closer is often either impractical or in the case of some wildlife downright dangerous. With a 1.4 adapter (also on backorder…) my 500mm just about matches the 10x. Obviously mileage varies, so there’s 7x21, 8x25 and 10x25 from one manufacturer alone. My Bushnells at 7 always had me desiring more magnification…. It's just not as simple as you imply, and a binocular isn't really comparable to a camera lens. A binocular has two optical barrels stuck to ones eyes and brain, a camera lens is a mono optical instrument capturing an image, with little visual interaction between the instrument and the eye/brain relative to that of a binocular. A binocular is a balancing act of the "Optical Triangle" (Magnification, Eye Relief, Field Of View). One always affects the other, and influences the viewing experience. It ISN'T just all about magnification. Your Bushnell 7x's more than likely were leaving you with more desire for magnification because their resolution is poor. I can tell you many times I've had guys with middle of the road 10X binoculars use my Leica 8X's and remark what a different - better - experience they give over their own 10X's. |
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jan 7, 2022 9:11:07 GMT -8
Well from my test drives so far my middle of the road Swarovskis are up to the jobs I’ve got for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by trinity on Jan 7, 2022 9:31:37 GMT -8
I went with a Swarovski Optik CL Pocket 10x25 (after a seemingly endless backorder at B&H) and I’ve hiked a bit with them now and love them. Glad you like them. After a fair amount of use now, I'm still very happy with my 8s. |
|
Image Credit / Coolkat
