# Compact Binoculars



## UnknownVT (Mar 23, 2005)

Binoculars are a real case of "seeing is believing".

and until one actually looks through a pair of good binoculars - "optical quality" doesn't mean anything.

I used to buy cheapo binoculars - because afterall the specs say 8x32 or whatever - so they should be as good as other 8x32 - right?

Not only that shouldn't higher magnifications like 10x, 16x and even 20x be better to see more clearly?

NOTHING can be further from the truth - 
Many years ago I happened to be reading "Consumer Reports" - and saw they had a binoculars test - read through it and was convinced enough to buy a slightly more expensive pair - the Nikon Venturer II 8x23 - and boy, was I amazed.... an almost similar/parallel experience that Stephen Ingaham (of Better View Desired) describes in -
A Pocket Full of Birds - Compact Binoculars 
(very worthwhile article even if the binos listed are out of date)

Sometime in the early 1990's I had my friends with 10x, 12x and even 16x binoculars compare theirs with my Nikon 8x23 - they were simply amazed by the Nikon's clarity and brightness/contrast compared to their monsters - not only that we were able to show quite conclusively that one could actually see detail better with the lower magnifcation Nikons (test was to read a newspaper from a distance - the Nikons were able to read much further away when the higher magnifaction binos failed).

Now these Nikon Venturer II 8x23 have long been discontinued - 
but the good news is with technology advances good compact binos have improved.....
however unfortunately cheapos are still cheapos - 
but one can buy very good compact binoculars easily for under $100 or even under $50..... 
so why even think about buying cheapos when good binoculars basically will last a lifetime?

Reading the survey of reviewing the reviewers -
Binoculars Review

The suggested Konica Minolta 8x25 Water Resistant Sport Mini Binocular can be found for under $50.






Even the highly praised Olympus Magellan 8x25 can be found for under $100........ 
QUOTE:
Compact binoculars are much easier to carry for long periods, since they often weigh half that of full-sized or mid-sized models. Since their objective lenses are smaller in diameter (20mm to 25mm), compact models allow less light to enter the barrels, making for a somewhat dimmer view. For outside daytime use, compacts are a good, lightweight choice, but they won't do as well in twilight or other low-light situations. Outside Magazine's editors call the Olympus Magellan 8x25 (*est. $125) "pretty sweet for tiny binos." Sharpness, clarity and the ability to hold their own in low light make these a 2004 "Killer Buy." A focusing ring positioned a bit far forward was the only negative with these compacts. 

The Olympus Magellan weighs just 12 ounces, the lightest of any model in our chart. Although field of view is 315 feet, the Magellan's nearest focal distance is 30 feet, so they are not the best choice for closer observations, such as insects and butterflies.
UNQUOTE

Note the take that the Olympus Magellan 8x25 close focus is 30ft may be wrong - check Olympus's own specs which says 3m (=~10ft) - but please confirm this for yourself before any purchase.





The best way of seeing is compare binoculars of reputed quality side-by-side -
then decide for yourself.


----------



## Sigman (Mar 23, 2005)

I keep some inexpensive compact ones "stashed here and there" for "on the road". If something happens to them - Oh well, at least my better ones didn't get lost, stolen, damaged, etc.

However as far as my "better" ones...I really have enjoyed my Minolta 10x25 Pockets and my Brunton Lite-Techs! It's like my eyes just say "Ahhhhhhh" when looking through them, so crisp & clear as compared to the lower quality ones (especially around the edges).

Total agreement with your post! Thanks for posting and for the links as well!


----------



## bjn70 (Mar 23, 2005)

I did a lot of research on binocs right before Christmas:

Binocs come in 2 different types-
ROOF prism that resemble the photos that UnknownVT posted, i.e. just straight tubes.
PORRO prism that resemble the typical binocular that most people are familiar with, where the tube has a bend in it and normally the eyepieces are closer together than the ends facing the subject.

Note that roof prism binocs are much more difficult to make than porro prism. You can spend $50-$100 for porro prism binocs and get something that is useable, but for roof prism I think you have to go over $200 to get equivalent quality. Of course the roof prism binocs have their own advantages- they are usually smaller and lighter, easier to make waterproof, and they usually focus closer.

Zoom binoculars are usually a complete waste of money.

7x to 10x is the most you want unless you are using them with a tripod. Most people cannot use the extra light gathering power of an 8x to 10x binocular with larger than 42mm objectives.

There are a lot of good manufacturers. After a very large amount of research I narrowed my list down to Pentax, Nikon, Burris, Leupold and Bushnell, and received some Pentax 8x32 roof prism binoculars for my Christmas present. I have an old pair of Nikon 9x25 porro prism binoculars that I have usually used for travel and hiking. They work pretty well but except for when I really need to travel light I'll now be using the new Pentax binocs.


----------



## greenLED (Mar 23, 2005)

I bought a pair of Pentax 8x42 DCFWP a couple of years ago. They had just been released and cost a fortune back when, but it's the best investment in optics that I've done. I've compared them against my birder friends' Swarovski 8x32, and IMO they offer close (if not the same) optical quality. The only difference we did notice was a slight hazing towards the very outer rim of the FOV in my binos. We could never determine if it was really my binos (n=1), or the humid conditions. IMO, the Pentax DCF WP series are better binos than Nikon or Minolta. I'd buy a second pair in a pinch, except that mine are as good as new, even after years of heavy duty use out in the field (which includes a serious "dunk" in the Peruvian Amazon).

Did I mention these focus really well at an outreageously close distance? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif I luv my binos!


----------



## paulr (Mar 23, 2005)

I have a $100-ish Olympus pair which is pretty good (not as good as real high end ones though) and a cheap crap $15 pair from China. The crap pair isn't as crappy as it sounds. It feels ok in your hand, not too junky, the barrels aren't horribly misaligned, etc. The difference is the optics: the Chinese pair is reasonably sharp in the center of the field, worse further away, and fuzzy enough near the edges that you can't see detail at all there. The Olympus are sharp from edge to edge.

If we were talking about a camera lens, completely unsharp edges would mean the lens was garbage. But with binoculars, we tend to just look at the center for detail, and it's enough to be able to see general shapes near the edges. If we want to see more detail of that thing on the left, we just aim the binoculars there. 

So, the Chinese $15 binoculars are actually useable in the field. They're not as good as the Olympus even at the image center, but if you need to see detail in the distance, they do the job, just as long as you point them so what you're looking at is in the center of the view.


----------



## segan (Mar 23, 2005)

I recently purchased a pair of compact Nikon Travelite V 8x25 binoculars after my mate dropped my el cheapo pair onto concrete. You can get them for around $90 - $100. I checked out what BVD and a few other sites had to say. 

The difference is amazing!! My el cheapo pair was a 10x but with the Nikon at 8x I could see far more clearer, wtih well defined colours, details and sense of depth. 

Well worth the investment IMHO, my dad who disapproved of the cost was totally converted after he looked through them for the first time. Now he uses it everyday to check out the wildlife and birds in the park behind our house in the morning. Will get him a pair for this bday.


----------



## cy (Mar 23, 2005)

Lieca BCA series are pretty sweeet


----------



## UnknownVT (Mar 23, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*segan said:*
I recently purchased a pair of compact Nikon Travelite V 8x25 binoculars 
The difference is amazing!! My el cheapo pair was a 10x but with the Nikon at 8x I could see far more clearer, wtih well defined colours, details and sense of depth. 
my dad who disapproved of the cost was totally converted after he looked through them for the first time. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Two real-life cases of "seeing is believing" /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

The Nikon Travelite V 8x25 are my choice - if I had to buy another pair of compact binoculars - but my aging Nikon Venturer II 8x23 are still working fine and I use them as a comparison when desiring another pair - so far the Nikons have held up in comparisons - yes, of course I have seen "better" but not in any mortal affordable price range.....

BTW- I _think_ the Nikon Travelite which is in its 5th (V) series are direct descendents of the Venturer Compacts (of which II was the last). The current Venturers bear no resemblence to the previous Venturer Compacts.

I've just done an ad-hoc comparison "test" using my old Nikon Venturer II 8x23 - which I'll post a bit later in this thread.


----------



## Boomer (Mar 23, 2005)

If you wear glasses and want long eye-relief, economical (under $100) compact binoculars, Eagle Optics Triumph 8x25 are worth consideration.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?dept=1&type=19&purch=1&pid=3360

I’ve been traveling to some remote parts of the planet on SCUBA diving trips and this binocular fits my requirements for some casual birding and shore views from liveaboards. 

I wouldn’t want to see them go overboard but if they do it’s not like I’m losing a $450.00 binocular.

They are also are good for the theater.


----------



## UnknownVT (Mar 23, 2005)

just for fun I decided to compare "test" the compact binoculars I have -









"quality"
Nikon Venturer II 8x23 compact 
Minolta UCII 6x16 ultra compact

"cheapo"
Sakar "Ruby lens" 8x21
Simmons "8-Point" 10x25

I used a Patterson optical test target - illuminated with a standard 60watt "soft-white" in a desk lamp shade (flared-cone white internal like a reflector) set 3feet away.





I noted the distance when I could just make out the finest lines clearly on the black/white target panel (that usually meant the red and green panels were also resolved - I had difficulties resolving the blue panel as well).

These were the distances for resolving the test target -

Nikon 19ft 4"
Minolta 13ft 9"
Simmons 18ft 6"
Sakar 17ft 4"

The Nikon Venturer II are 8x - so corrections have to be made for different magnifications 
Minolta 6x correction factor = 8/6x
Simmons 10x correction factor = 8/10x

So "normalized" corrected distances as if they were all equivalent 8x magnification -
Nikon 8x23 = 19ft 4"
Minolta 6x16 = normalized 18ft 4"
Simmons 10x25 = normalized 14ft 10"
Sakar 8x21 = 17ft 4"

If we use the Nikon as 100% resolution then
Minolta 6x16 = 95%
Simmons = 77%
Sakar = 90%

Th Sakar (makers of Sakar camera lenses) "Ruby lens" 8x21 seems to fair very well for a pair of $20 binoculars - until one looks through them - the image is very blue-green tinted - horribly so in fact - this due I think mainly to the fancy-shamsy "Ruby coated" lenses -
Objectives:




since the "Ruby lenses" reflect red/orange part of the spectrum - the complementary (opposite) color left is cyan - which is blue-green hence the strong UNacceptable color cast.

In isolation one may be able to tolerate the cast as the brain compensates for it - but it is immediately noticable on first viewing through the binoculars - and absolutely UNacceptable when compared side-by-side with more quality binoculars.

The Simmons has a very dim looking image which lacks real crispness. In comparison the Nikon's image almost jump at you looking really 3-D.

The Minolta does really well for such ultra compacts - nomally smaller objectives mean less resolution - in theory the Minoltas should resolve in the order of 16/23x = 70% that of the Nikon - the fact it managed 95% is a good indication. Compared to the Nikon the Minolta's image has less snap and there is a slight yellow cast/tint - but it is amazingly small - and for its size does really surprisingly well........


----------



## sotyakr (Mar 24, 2005)

I've got a pair of Bushnell Custom Compact 7x26's that have served me well for almost 20 years. They weren't and aren't the cheapest (around $260) of the compact porroprism type binocs, but optically they're terrific - very crisp, contrasty and bright. Excellent eye relief for eyeglass wearers, too. Better View Desired rated a recent (and optically identical to my old pair) version as the best of the moderately priced compacts. 

My only real gripe about them are the relatively shallow eyecups which do little to reduce stray side light when you aren't wearing, or don't need glasses. The Custom Compacts aren't water-resistant, but that hasn't been of major concern as I've got others that are. I'll proabably be using them for at least another 20 years.


----------



## bwaites (Mar 24, 2005)

Has anyone done any real life comparisons of the image stabilized binoculars?

Bill


----------



## slick228 (Mar 24, 2005)

Fellow forumites,

In your opinion, what is the best all around compact binocular? If you could only have one, which one would it be? Who has the best prices? 

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thanks.gif


----------



## UnknownVT (Mar 24, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*slick228 said:*In your opinion, what is the best all around compact binocular? If you could only have one, which one would it be? Who has the best prices?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would suggest definitely looking through the binoculars before purchase - don't just take any advice - and that includes mine.

If I were buying another pair - I would consider the Nikon Travelite V 8x25 on my short list -





Why? Nikons are consistently tested with the highest resolution in any class (read the link above from BVD on Pocket Full of Birds to see for the original Travelites - also the Venturer compacts - that the author and I both have - was tested with the highest definition of all the binoculars by Consumer Reports over much higher priced binos like Leica and Zeiss) - also continue reading that article about the Nikon Diplomats - see what he says about the Aspheric lenses? 
The newer Travelite V 8x25 has Aspheric lenses..... that's my reasoning.

Nikon Travelite V 8x25 Binocular @ $64.95 +$8.95 shipping 

I would compare these directly side by side with other highly regarded compact binos like the Olympus Magellan 8x25 and the lower priced Konica Minolta Sports mini 8x25 - and see if they are better or worse - 
and whether any increase in price is worth it........

Olympus 8x25 Magellan WP I @ $93.50 shipped 

Konica-Minolta 8x25 WR Sport Mini @ $48.95 +$6.95 shipping

BUT compare them yourself - 
PLEASE don't just take my word for it....


----------



## CroMAGnet (Mar 24, 2005)

When was the last time you said to yourself. "Boy, I'm sure glad I have these 'nocs"

This is a really great thread and being into gadgets, it really peaks my curiosity. However are they useful/used? I mean, for us urbanites, it's hard to find a reason for them without using your imagination. I would have liked to have them to watch a live sporting even or live outdoor concert, if I didn't have great seats. Night-time or indoor concerts, they would probably work as well. Boating might be usefull if you are far away from shore on a really big lake or in the ocean. Hiking or climbing they might come it handy but seems like just more weight and something else to pack.

I guess Im just saying that it's been pretty rare that I've ever really said I wish I had a pair of 'nocs. (kinda said that about flashlights before I started hanging out on CPF LOL) 

But anyway, the question is when have you really appreciated having your nocs or wish you had a pair? Hope I'm not hiJacking here /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif


----------



## bjn70 (Mar 24, 2005)

I take my binocs camping/hiking/backpacking and use them to look at various things. I also take them to concerts on the rare occasions that I go to concerts.


----------



## greenLED (Mar 24, 2005)

Absolutely, CromagNet! I used mine constantly while out in the field to ID tall trees (by looking at the leaves) -part of the job. I also picked up some birding skills from friends -kinda of a hobby. For serious tasks like these, I use my Pentax. For "casual" use (city birding or while driving around the country) I have a small pair of 8x25 (they don't have a brand). That said, I also carry my Pentax when we go on serious trips (camping, and expedition, etc.). I'd also bring the Pentax along when whale-watching!


----------



## slick228 (Mar 24, 2005)

UnknownVT,

Thank you for the extensive response. When time permits, I’ll go handle the Nikon Travelite V 8x25, Olympus 8x25 Magellan WP I, and Konica-Minolta 8x25 WR Sport Mini. When you compared the three (3), did you like the Nikon Travelite V 8x25 more than the other two (2)? Thank you for your recommendations.


----------



## UnknownVT (Mar 24, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*slick228 said:* I’ll go handle the Nikon Travelite V 8x25, Olympus 8x25 Magellan WP I, and Konica-Minolta 8x25 WR Sport Mini. When you compared the three (3), did you like the Nikon Travelite V 8x25 more than the other two (2)? 

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't had a chance of comparing all three side-by-side - my local stores don't stock all of them.

Over a couple of years ago when the most recommended pair by the review the reviewers survey was the Nikon Naturalist IV (Action) 7x35 (mid-sized, not compact) which by rights should have been superior to the Nikon Venturer II compacts - I tried them out as well as the generally recommended Eagle Voyager 8x25 compacts - but made sure I took along my Nikon Venturer compact. 

I didn't like the Naturalist/Action 7x35 at all - they had unacceptable distortion at the edges of the field of view - they were especially disturbing when panning following action - or when one keeps the binos still and scan with the eyes across the field of view. They obviously had good definition - but they just did not suit me.

The Eagle Voyager which were the budget compacts of choice back then - were pretty good, but failed to show any advantage over the years old Nikons I had - so why would I want to buy another pair - even if they were good value for money and highly rated?

So the short answer is that YOU and only you can look through the binoculars and decide which you prefer - all I did was to do a survey and find the ones which had the most recommendations that made sense to me......

Like I said please don't just take my word.......
Look for YOURSELF. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


----------



## Raybo (Mar 24, 2005)

This is to CroMagnet,

Trust me, if you have a "nice" small pair of binoculars you will use them. Once you use them and see the advantage of having a small high quality pair you will always carry them with you.


----------



## leadfoot (Mar 24, 2005)

Compact.....Zeiss 10x25B

Full size....Swarovski 8x56

Might cost more but the best way to buy is to hand select your pair. Go to a shop with a decent inventory and look at 3 or 4 pair of the same model. You'll usually find that 1 pair is better that the other 3. Doesn't matter high, medium or low end on the price range. Then compare pin cushion effect, cromatic abrasion, color shift, etc.

I am very susceptible to bino's that are out of alignment. Pulls my eyes right out of my head and an instant headache. One way to test for alignment in the store is to look at a horizontal line across the store and pull the bino's away from your face while still looking through the lenses. If they are out of alignment you will see a difference in heights of the line between the right and left lens. Even better get the store to let you do your testing outside.

Good bino's are a lifetime purchase and looking to save the last penny is not conducive to getting the best pair you can afford.

I'd rather buy a used pair that is known than a new pair mail order. Hand selection is the only way to go.

Leadfoot


----------



## UnknownVT (Mar 31, 2005)

Anyone still looking for a pair of Compact Binoculars might want to check out the (Konica) Minolta 8x25 Compact II - at *Wolf/Ritz Cameras*.







I checked out a pair against my old Nikon Venturer II compact 8x23 - and these Minolta Compact II were as good - they might even be a shade crisper - which is amazing -

Especially considering the price at the local Wolf Camera was about $32 
(I think it may be on clearance - as the lowest price using Froogle.com was closer to $41)

Go check out the actual individual pair you intend to purchase - 
prefereably against a known quality standard, 
don't just rely on hearsay - like this post - 
I may have been lucky in the one single sample I tried.


----------

