# Need "Monocular" Recomendations



## frisco (Sep 29, 2007)

I'd like to get a nice Monocular. Anyone have any experience or recomendations on them? No specific use in mind. Would like to get a nice one.

Thanks, frisco

Posted with iPhone


----------



## BIGIRON (Sep 29, 2007)

http://www.sierratradingpost.com/p/,83680_Minox-MD-E-Monocular-6x16.html


This is very nice and easy to focus with one hand. Traditionl designs require both hands. Mine is very sharp and bright. 

I have several others but far prefer this one.

About the only upside of only one eye is that I don't have to mess with the bulk and weight of regular binocs.


----------



## Kilovolt (Sep 29, 2007)

I have two old Minox T-8 monoculars and I join Bigiron in recommending this brand. Their size is really small but the performance outstanding.


----------



## fasuto (Sep 29, 2007)

Vortex 8x25


----------



## Freyth (Sep 29, 2007)

You could get a Monocular with image stabilizers... but they'll cost around the $1000++ region, if I'm not wrong. Otherwise, Zeiss/Nikon has the best optics.


----------



## springnr (Sep 29, 2007)

BIGIRON, appreciate the link, been wanting one of these for a while.


----------



## BobVA (Sep 30, 2007)

BIGIRON said:


> http://www.sierratradingpost.com/p/,83680_Minox-MD-E-Monocular-6x16.html
> 
> 
> This is very nice and easy to focus with one hand. Traditionl designs require both hands. Mine is very sharp and bright.
> ...




And you're a danger to my credit card 
Thanks for the link!


----------



## frisco (Oct 2, 2007)

BIGIRON said:


> http://www.sierratradingpost.com/p/,83680_Minox-MD-E-Monocular-6x16.html
> 
> 
> This is very nice and easy to focus with one hand. Traditionl designs require both hands. Mine is very sharp and bright.
> ...



OK....... I pulled the trigger! Placed my order.

Thanks, frisco


----------



## frisco (Oct 6, 2007)

Well, Mine just came in! 1st impression is very good! Very clear and quality is high. Thanks for the recomendation.

frisco





BIGIRON said:


> http://www.sierratradingpost.com/p/,83680_Minox-MD-E-Monocular-6x16.html
> 
> 
> This is very nice and easy to focus with one hand. Traditionl designs require both hands. Mine is very sharp and bright.
> ...


----------



## bubbacatfish (Oct 6, 2007)

BIGIRON said:


> http://www.sierratradingpost.com/p/,83680_Minox-MD-E-Monocular-6x16.html
> 
> 
> This is very nice and easy to focus with one hand. Traditionl designs require both hands. Mine is very sharp and bright.
> ...


 

GEEZ-Louise!! That's an amazing price! Heck I was willing to pay more than that for a used one a few months ago. Nice find BIGIRON.


----------



## LowBat (Oct 6, 2007)

I have this Brunton monocular and it packs well.

https://edcdepot.com/merchantmanage...id=170&mmsid=9f30c761fcb5d6d67380f7e818d024a2


I'm also waiting for a 7~14x25 zoom monocular from DealExtreme for $16. I'd post a link but their website is currently down.


----------



## Sigman (Oct 6, 2007)

What I like about the Brunton is it's 13" near focus!! Check a flower or bug out with that & then use it as a regular monocular as well! NICE for closeups!!


----------



## BIGIRON (Oct 6, 2007)

Not sure, but I think there's a couple of different variations of the Minox monocular. They may well be more expensive.


----------



## BobVA (Oct 6, 2007)

The Minox fits very nicely in an old ARC LS pouch, if you've got one of those laying around somewhere.

Regards,
Bob


----------



## frisco (Oct 8, 2007)

Took my BigIron Minox Monocular to the Golden Gate Bridge today to watch the Blue Angels. Pretty nice! I adapted to it pretty fast. Looked at a few planes.......... Than found the Minox Monocular likes to be used to look at cute woman! Not my fault..... I think they have a babe sensor in them!

frisco


----------



## bxstylez (Oct 9, 2007)

dammit...... ya just made me order:

Brunton Echo 7x18 Pocket Scope - *$19.50*
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000FKMTBS/?tag=cpf0b6-20


----------



## Lit Up (Dec 24, 2007)

I have this one.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000BY66I0/?tag=cpf0b6-20

I prefer a monocular over binos; they just really pack handily.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Dec 24, 2007)

Good clear optics are important for my older eyes to reduce eye strain. Does the Minox fall into this catagory? Also, will these work well wearing glasses?

Bill


----------



## BobbyRS (Jan 17, 2008)

I like the one from Countycomm (less then $10):
http://www.countycomm.com/optics.htm

I alo like the Minox MD-E Monocular at that price. Too bad it is sold out.

I may get that Barska from Amazon for that price....

Thanks!


----------



## LowBat (Jan 26, 2009)

Hmmm.... I noticed this model from Brunton that I've never seen before. Looks like it appeared sometime in 2008. It boasts a variable 10x to 30x zoom magnification while being only 4 1/4 inches long and just 3.3 ounces in weight (per Amazon website). This may just replace my Mystery brand 7x-14x, 5.51 inch long, 6.28 ounce monocular I currently carry in my pack.


----------



## BobbyRS (Jan 26, 2009)

That does look good. Let me know how you like it. I may get one myself. Thanks for posting.


----------



## LowBat (Jan 26, 2009)

I went ahead and placed an order on Amazon.com ($30.05 w/free shipping). I also found the On Target acticle on it too.

I did like the basic Brunton Echo although it just didn't magnify enough for me. This new zoom version maybe the small and lightweight monocular I've been looking for. Guess I'll know when it arrives around February 2nd.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Jan 27, 2009)

Yes, please let us know your impressions of the Brunton, LowBatt. A monocular is always in my pocket or pouch when I go hiking. And I'm always wishing for a little more magnification. I'd be especially interested in the brightness at 10-15x. Thanks

Geoff


----------



## LowBat (Jan 28, 2009)

I'll definately post my impressions after it arrives and I get a chance to use it a little. It seems to have also been mentioned in "best desert gear for 2008" in National Geographic Adventurer

If this little thing only worked up to 15x I'd still be impressed. Since it has a tripod attachment I went ahead an ordered a cheapie gorilla pod clone off eBay to help keep it steady at higher magnifications. I'm looking forward to seeing how this thing performs.


----------



## Archie Cruz (Jan 30, 2009)

Vixen 8X20. 1/3 the price of the Zeiss and 90% of the quality. Made in Japan vs Made in Mexico ( Zeiss ). I love mine because it's very slim and NON RUBBERIZED, so it slips onto the case mounted on my Pygmy Falcon:twothumbs
Here it is with some other contenders
http://gearninja.com/Images/3Monos.jpg


----------



## Flying Turtle (Feb 2, 2009)

Couldn't wait for your review, LowBat, on the Brunton Echo zoom monocular. I went ahead and got one from Lighthound when I noticed them on sale there for $26.99. Can't really say much yet, since I opened it after dark, but everything looks good. No rattles, smooth operation, and a surprisingly short close focus at all focal lengths- about 5.5 feet. It's a bit longer and fatter than my old 8x Simmons, but should be almost as pocketable. Not quite as bright, but that's comparing 8x to 10x, so I wouldn't really expect it to be. It did come with a typical pouch and wrist lanyard. I'm looking forward to seeing it's daylight performance tomorrow. Seems like a good buy.

Geoff


----------



## LowBat (Feb 2, 2009)

Hi Geoff,

Glad to hear it passed your quality control evaluation. I'm still waiting for mine which I think is arriving tomorrow. I will be comparing it to a regular Brunton Echo I have with me.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Feb 3, 2009)

Did some daylight testing and everything still looks good. Nice sharp focus. Tough to hand hold beyond about 15x, of course, so having a tripod socket may prove useful. I forgot to mention before that the instructions were only in Japanese (I think) and had Kenko at the top plus a url of www.kenko-tokina.co.jp. I've seen the Kenko name before associated with digicam conversion lenses. 

Geoff


----------



## LowBat (Feb 4, 2009)

Well my Brunton Echo Zoom Monocular arrived after sunset too so I'll have to wait until tomorrow to really test it. This monocular really looks and feels solid. No rattles or blemishes and the focus and zoom rings rotate smoothly with about the right amount of resistance. No sign of poor quality control. The case is a typical cheapie that you'd expect to get, however the monocular fits snugly inside and gets decently protected. Also included is a little lens cleaning cloth and a lanyard that cleverly fits through the zoom tab that protrudes out a little from the tube. Also protruding from the center of the tube is a round dial looking cap that unscrews to reveal a threaded attachment for a tripod. No instructions were included, but something this simple to operate doesn't need any. You get a cap that covers the eyepiece but not the objective lens. Unlike the fixed power Brunton Echo, this zoom model has a raised eye relief that can be folded down for eyeglass wearers. I plan on going out tomorrow to compare the performance of the three monoculars pictured below. I'm also waiting for a mini tripod I ordered off eBay to arrive so I can test the 30x magnification.

Here is a group shot showing a Mystery 7-14x25 on the left, the Brunton Echo Zoom 10-30x21 in the middle (facing skyward by mistake), and the Brunton Echo 7x18 on the right. Picture quality is as good as it gets with my camera phone.









Looking at the objective lens (monoculars in same order):








Looking at the eyepieces (monoculars in same order):







So far so good! I'll post again after I get a chance to go outside.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Feb 4, 2009)

Glad you got a good Echo, too, LowBat. Thanks for your mini-review. I'm looking for something to use as a cap for the objective lens. That'll make me feel better about tossing it in a pocket or my belt pack. Just dug out an old mini-tripod and took a quick pic.






Hope yours passes its daylight test.

Geoff


----------



## Minjin (Feb 7, 2009)

I believe the standard is the Zeiss MiniQuick...


----------



## LowBat (Feb 7, 2009)

Minjin said:


> I believe the standard is the Zeiss MiniQuick...


Doing a quick search I only see a 5x10 model. Do they make one with more magnification?


----------



## Coop (Feb 9, 2009)

I still very much want a Minox Macroscope... 

http://www.optical-systems.com/minox-macroscope-ms-8x25s-monocular-p-2950.html?language=gb


----------



## BVH (Feb 9, 2009)

I wonder why Patriot36 hasn't been here - the optics connoisseur that he is.


----------



## LowBat (Feb 11, 2009)

I've finally had a chance to go out in the daylight and see how the Brunton Echo 10-30x21 Zoom performs. First off I'd say the 30x claim is probably accurate. I'm really impressed such a short monocular can magnify so much. As with most anything there is a trade off. The price of higher magnification comes with a narrower field of view. Not just narrower at 30x, but also narrow down to 10x. I fully expected this and for me this isn't really a problem. If I'm trying to see something far away I really don't need to see everything around it. However the advantage of a wider field of view is being able to quickly find your subject without having to scan back and forth so much.

The image on the Brunton Echo Zoom darkens very slightly as you increase the magnification. Again not really a problem unless you're trying to look at something unlit in low light conditions. The daylight image is sharp and at 10x decently stable. As you increase past 15x it becomes fairly difficult to hold a steady image. That's why there's a tripod adapter mount and I went ahead and purchased a mini flexible tripod to try with this monocular. With the mini flexible tripod I can either place the monocular on a level surface of wrap the flexible tripod legs around a fence post or tree limb and get a platform that holds the monocular nice and steady. I was able to see distance objects clear and stable at 30x with the tripod. As the mini tripod packs small and is also light weight I'd say taking it along with the zoom monocular gives you a powerful and versatile combination.

Keep in mind with higher magnifications it'll take more time to find your target and adjust the focus. I've found that it works best if you hold the monocular in the center with two fingers of one hand while using the other hand to adjust the focus wheel up front and the zoom wheel in the rear. Once you get the settings adjusted you can then use all your fingers on one hand to grasp the tube firmly and help stabilize the image.

When comparing the Brunton Echo 10-30x21 Zoom to the regular Brunton Echo 7x18 (see picture in previous post #29) I found the regular Echo was superior in having a wider field of view and being easier to hold a steady image, but at a fixed 7x I'm just not able to get the level of magnification that I usually want. When looking through the Mystery 7-14x25 I find the field of view on par with the Brunton Echo Zoom, but with only half the overall magnification power and using a longer tube. The longer tube does however make the Mystery easier to hold and adjust. Image brightness on the Mystery is about the same as the Brunton Echo Zoom.

All things considered I'm very happy with the Brunton Echo Zoom and it'll be the monocular I carry in my backpack from now on.




Brunton Echo Zoom with case and flexible tripod.









Mounted to flexible tripod.









Hanging from pole to show the versatility of the flexible tripod.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Feb 11, 2009)

Nice review, LowBat. I've carried my Echo out on a few hikes and appreciate the extra magnification. The narrower field of view has made aiming a little tougher.

That's a slick tripod. Hadn't seen one of those before.

Geoff


----------



## LowBat (Feb 11, 2009)

Flying Turtle said:


> That's a slick tripod. Hadn't seen one of those before.
> 
> Geoff


It's basically a copy of a Joby Gorillapod. I got it off eBay for $5. If you're interested search eBay for "flexible mini tripod". Mine is the one advertised as 16.5cm and has a quick release.


----------



## Patriot (Feb 11, 2009)

BVH said:


> I wonder why Patriot36 hasn't been here - the optics connoisseur that he is.





Ah thanks BVH and I hadn't seen this thread yet until you pointed me to it. 

It's true that I'm an optics nut and probably a lot more critical about optics that the casual user. I owned a couple of compact monoculars at one time, one of them was an 8x21 Zeiss which was the best one of a dozen or so that I ever viewed through up until that time. The problem that I have with them is that binoculars are so superior for all types of viewing that I ended up selling or giving away my monoculars. Yes, binoculars are double the size of a comparable mono but I've never run into a situation where a quality 8x21 or 10x25 bin was too large for me to carry. 

The main advantage to the compact mono is that it doesn't require a complex focusing mechanism which is needed for a central focus binocular. The main advantage to this is that a mono is able to focus at a much closer distance. In some cases it even allows a mono to operate as a loupe or field microscope. Since loupes work better at very close distances and binoculars work much better at resolving detail at every other distance, they're what I use the most often. Of course the full size telescope allows even more resolution to be extracted and has its application too. Yes, we're back to one eye with the telescope but the reason they offer more resolution is because of their size, magnification, and it's accepted that it will always be used from a rigid mount. Telescopes are used because binoculars of the same optical geometry would be more than twice the size, weight, and expense. 

For the casual user who wants to view across the beach and people watch or look up in the sky to see if an airplane has stripes or polka dots then a fun little mono is handy just as a snapshot camera suits a great number of people just fine. The problem with tiny optics is that our eyes are made to work with a certain amount of light entering them and most of the time tiny optics don't let us use the retina anywhere near it's full capability. The main factor has to do with the size of the exit pupil at the ocular lens or (eye-piece). The exit pupil measurement can be determined be dividing the objective size by the magnification. A 10X50 optic will have a 5mm exit pupil. An 8x42 optic will have a 5.25 exit pupil. Anything smaller than about a 2.5mm exit pupil from an ocular limits the ability of the eye to work as designed. Below 2.0mm it's severely limiting. What does this mean for small monoculars and binoculars? Well, it's puts them right on the edge and sometimes over the edge when it comes to visual improvement. For example, a 8x21 bin or mono will have a 2.63mm exit pupil and a 10x25 optic will have a 2.5mm exit pupil. A 30x21 as described above would have a .7mm exit pupil and even at 20x magnification with a 21mm objective the exit pupil would be 1.05mm...more than twice as small as the suggested minumum! These minimums are based on the ideal conditions with a test image and plenty of light. When it's not high noon, or when you're not looking through the finest, most technologically advance glass, or through optics with the best optical lens coatings, performance only diminishes from the ideal. Additionally, complex optics and zoom mechanisms reduce light transmission further as well as reduce the field of view (FOV) compared to non-variable optics. Where as with Swarovski, Leica and Zeiss optics a person might be able to get away with a 1.8-2.0mm exit pupil, most other optics will be poor performers with exit pupils that size. Thus the 2.5mm rule is a good standard and a 8x21mm optic keeps a person just above that. 

Although any magnification (if held still and not wiggling) will allow more resolution to be seen, resolution is only one aspect of image quality. So while a person may be able to read a newspaper with a mini-optic further than he can with the naked eye, this usually comes at the at the expense of other image properties that the viewer may or may not be aware of. The most noticable effect that tiny optics will cause to the average person is eye-strain, the second being viewing comfort. The smaller the ocular lens, the more restricting and less adaptive it is for viewing. In other words, when you look at something near the edge of the FOV, the eye moves off of the tiny exit pupil and can cause the image to disappear or black-out. The shape of the ocular lens also has an effect on black-outs but it's mainly the size of the exit pupil. For some purposes a mini-optic is all that's needed or wanted and that's fine just so as they understand that their is a significant trade of with size. "High end" compact optics minimize the inherent deficiencies associated with them while "run of the mill" mini-optics have readily apparent shortcomings to a seasoned viewer. It really all just depends on what the user is trying to accomplish. 

As one who has struggled at times to make out enough image detail during difficult conditions, mini-monos just aren't for me and tiny bins are rarely for me. Even while using the best optics available, trying to ascertain whether or not a deer had antlers during low light and against a background of thickets can be difficult. In general I really don't use anything smaller than a 8x32 binocular these days. I'll occasionally use a Nikon 8x20 Premier LX during bright daylight hours or if it's going to be around my neck all day but that's the exception. 

Regarding which mini-monoculars provide the very best image quality, these are my picks in order. 

*Best:*
Zeiss 8x20 
Zeiss 10x25 
8x25 Minox Macroscope (poro prism) (best value) 
Zeiss 6x18

*Honorable mention:*
Minox 6x16
Nikon 5x15 High Grade
Vixen 8x20 Multi mono
Vortex 8x25 Solo (best value)

*Decent Quality and performance at reduced price:
*ANT 8x20 Silvereye (porro prism) (best value)
ANT Golden Eye (porro prism)
Carson 8x25 Bandit (porro prism)

Generally (porro prisms) can be made to have a sharper image at a reduction in cost to (roof prisms). The only disadvantage is that they have a slight Z shape and are not straight tubes.


----------



## LowBat (Feb 11, 2009)

Thanks Patriot36 for an enhancing my understanding of optics. Like you I prefer binoculars and probably would pack them if I frequently used them. The trouble is weight and size become significant factors when your lugging a pack and I end up not taking any optics at all. For occasional use I find a little mono does the trick. I can keep it in my pack without thinking about it and grab it whenever I want to get a closer look. It's kind of like carrying a mini pocket knife; there are bigger and better knifes out there, but when you need to use a blade it's better to have a mini that's always in your pocket than an expensive high quality beast slayer that stays behind at home. I guess it comes down to how much we are willing to carry.


----------



## GryphonQ (Feb 13, 2009)

I really like the two Minoxes I got from TAD Gear. The slightly larger one had onboard electronics (clock and such, pretty basic); I preferred the smaller one which didn't.


----------



## Patriot (Feb 13, 2009)

LowBat said:


> Thanks Patriot36 for an enhancing my understanding of optics. Like you I prefer binoculars and probably would pack them if I frequently used them. The trouble is weight and size become significant factors when your lugging a pack and I end up not taking any optics at all. For occasional use I find a little mono does the trick. I can keep it in my pack without thinking about it and grab it whenever I want to get a closer look. It's kind of like carrying a mini pocket knife; there are bigger and better knifes out there, but when you need to use a blade it's better to have a mini that's always in your pocket than an expensive high quality beast slayer that stays behind at home. I guess it comes down to how much we are willing to carry.




Makes sense to me LowBat and I like the small pocket knife analogy. 

Regarding the variable magnification Brunton that you own, I've actually never looked through that one. I have looked through the 7-18 Brunton and thought it was pretty good and probably on par with the other value units that I mentioned. I think that because of the fact the others are porro prisms, they're just ever so slightly sharper. Roof prism optics require very expensive and precisely manufactured specifications because small optical imperfections are magnified disproportionately in arrays that small. 

I've been fortunate to be able to view through a large selection of lesser known optics when I attend the local gun shows. This includes all the ATN products, some Japanese and almost every other Asian optic. It's been a great way to take a free look.


----------



## Archie Cruz (Feb 17, 2009)

Being something of an optics nut myself, I do concur with this except that Patriot36 has seen way more optics than I have.:thumbsup:
8x25 Minox Macroscope (poro prism) (best value) is definitely on my list to check out.
I'll piggy back a quick note:
Monoculars are never used in lieu of binos. Monos have a different role.
I use my Vixen (best value IMHO) carried on my Maxpedition Pygmy falcon -which is my 36Hr Go-Pack. When traveling, it's gets me a closer look at art and architecture. In the field, it's a fair birding optic. That's about it. The key thing is speed and weight. My 36 Hr pack now weighs in at 25lbs! each and every component is nearly the lightest in it's class.
If I'm just birding on a local preserve with fellow birders, then out come the big and heavier optics.
I also love my old Minolta 8X22 rubberized compact. But it's old school by now :twothumbs
----




Patriot36 said:


> Ah thanks BVH and I hadn't seen this thread yet until you pointed me to it.
> 
> It's true that I'm an optics nut and probably a lot more critical about optics that the casual user. I owned a couple of compact monoculars at one time, one of them was an 8x21 Zeiss which was the best one of a dozen or so that I ever viewed through up until that time. The problem that I have with them is that binoculars are so superior for all types of viewing that I ended up selling or giving away my monoculars. Yes, binoculars are double the size of a comparable mono but I've never run into a situation where a quality 8x21 or 10x25 bin was too large for me to carry.
> 
> ...


----------



## Flying Turtle (Feb 17, 2009)

I'm much like you, Archie. When I go out hiking I like the small size of a monocular. My new Brunton Echo is nice, though the extra magnification at it's lowest level (10x) makes it a bit harder to find that bird in the tree than my old Simmons 8x. I haven't used the zoom too much, but it's nice to have. Serious birding definitely deserves brighter binocs, which get first use around the house.

Geoff


----------



## Patriot (Feb 20, 2009)

Archie Cruz said:


> Being something of an optics nut myself, I do concur with this except that Patriot36 has seen way more optics than I have.:thumbsup:
> 8x25 Minox Macroscope (poro prism) (best value) is definitely on my list to check out.
> I'll piggy back a quick note:
> Monoculars are never used in lieu of binos. Monos have a different role.
> ...




That's a good sized 36 hour pack and I'm sure that you put a lot of thought into it.  I love the Vixen and it's optically and mechanically better than the Vortex. It will last you a lifetime and beyond.


----------

