This might be a little off topic for the mods but I want to buy some quality new bins. I know that the decision is as individual as Nikon vs Canon etc but does anyone have any thoughts or recommendations? I am thinking Leica or Zeiss 7 or 8 x 32 or 42.
Thanks
Paul
PS - if anyone has any for sale please let me know.
Paul,
Swarovskis are as good as anything these days. A friend of mine uses them when we're birding and I'm constantly asking to 'have a look through yours.!' BTW I own 8x32 Leicas but mainly because I'm a little chap and need the lightest bins possible if I'm also carrying the 500 and a tripod. Optically these top brands are impossble to tell apart but you need to handle any pair to see how you get on with them because a pair of Leicas feels very different to a pair of Zeiss or Swarovskis.
Dave
Depends upon what your main use wll be, if in woodland anything over 7 or 8x mag are considered harder to use to pick up subjects flitting thro' the canopy, 8 to 10x mag are best in open cover situations.
As regards type - roof prisms have become the vogue, but the older style porroprims actually give a better 3D separation to make a subject 'pop', the Nikon range of porros are very good.
For twilight work the Zeiss 7x42 BGAT roof prisms are the considered the brightest available and I find them superb picking out subjects long after the light has faded - they are lighter than the Leica/Swaro's as well.
I have about four pairs of bins depending on what I intend to do, the pair that spends the most time round my neck tho' is a pair of modern Pentax 10x50 roof prisms that are nitrogen sealed with very short near focus ability (cannot recall the exact model I think the designation is 'DCWF' ??) - they have virtually identical light and resolution performance to the Leica and Swaro's but are several hundred pounds cheaper, but as with all 10x50s are heavy, a neoprene replacement neck strap makes their use much more pleasant.
Birders tend to gravitate to the Leica and Swaro' 8x42s brands - its becme a bit cultish, but depending on what you intend to use the bins for there can be better alternatives. For macro insect work the Leica 7/10x20s for example are supreme as they have a very short near focus ability.
Can someone tell me the big difference why leica 10x42's for £899 are better than a cheap set of opticorn 10x42's for £99?
I bumped into a birder on the we, with swaroski bins and me with my opticrons and i saw hardly any difference? His had slightly less flare than mine but that was about it?
I have a pair of Zeiss FL 8 by 42 very bright but quite heavy after a half day wearing them. If I was to do it again I would probably go for 10 by 32 . Try them all out I did and ultimately I found the zeiss bins most comfortable.Swaros, Leica's and Zeiss are all pretty similar at top end of range it really comes down to personal preference.
you could say the same about lenses! why is a Canon L lens worth 10x more than a Chinon - the quality of glass, coatings and build account for a lot - better glass and coatings gives better definition, contrast, less fringing looking into the light (and usually better low light performance)
Its the old addage 95% of performance is easy to achieve, the last 5% is difficult and expensive
Hi my self I have some nikon 10x42 high grades they were very expensive when I got them several years ago nearly £1500 I also have a pair of Bausch and Lomb 7x42 Discoverer which must be eight years old, the thing is that I have owned most of the top manufactures binoculars and ended up with a extremely expensive pair and a cheap pair.
You really need to go and try several pairs and purchase the pair that most suit your eyes and are comfortable to use.
Thanks for all the input, I have tried Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski at various times and they are all superb but to be honest I only used them each for a few minutes as borrowed them off mates. I want good all-rounders basically, from a bit of birding in the UK to spotting on the Mara (not so worried about close focus probably). I am probably biased toward Leica though as I love my M6, not sure whether to go small with 32 or larger with 42.
I bought the Leica Ultravid 8x32 bins a couple of years ago to carry with my photogear. They are excellent; light weight and very good optical quality. I can highly recommend them. For birding I use a Nikon 'scope and a pair of Leica Trinovid 10x50s.
Hi Paul
My best advice, from a long-term birder, would be to go for 8x32's, with all of the top manufacturers it comes down to degrees of excellence. Which you choose is down to you after comparing the handling & what suits you best. They are all bright, razor sharp, close focussing and will satisfy all your needs I'm sure............but the weight saving is significant, so do your neck a favour particularly if planning long days in the field.
One thing to bare in mind is weight and I wouldn't trade my Swarovski 10x42 as the optics are great and they arn't as heavy as the Lieca's I tried. It does make a difference if your toting them about all day with camera gear
SteveHL
I faced the same decision a couple of years ago and after trying Leica, Zeiss, Nikon and Swarokski the final decision was between the Nikon HGL 8 X 42 and the Swarovski 8.5 X 42.
I settled for the Swarovski 8.5 X 42's as I prefered the very slightly cooler colour balance over the Nikon's. I particularly liked the feel and balance of them, with the thumb indentations on the back being very comfortable, even when using them one-handed on the odd occasion . The 30 year warranty was a bonus, as was Swarovski's excellent customer service ( according to others, I've never had to use them). Great close-focusing ability and not heavy to use and carry all day.
Love the green colour too.
I've used them most days for the last two years and would buy exactly the same again if I had to.
Can someone tell me the big difference why leica 10x42's for £899 are better than a cheap set of opticorn 10x42's for £99?
The £900 binoculars are in a completely different league to a pair costing £99. The view is far superior with better clarity, sharpness, less C.A., better and more accurate colour balance, better edge sharpness, less flare, etc. etc.
The expensive models are also nitrogen filled to prevent fogging up and are waterproof and sealed against the elements.
Most binoculars can give a reasonible view on a bright or sunny day, especially near bright contrasty water. However, the more expensive models will shine through when the light is dull or near the ends of the day when the light levels are greatly reduced.
I have the Swarokski 8x32 EL and find them superb (especially as I can wrap my fingers around them as they have a hole in the central joint), but I wish I had the Zeiss 8x32 as they are every so slightly better at light transmission.
Swaro 8.5x42 EL's would be my recommendation too Paul - possibly the finest pair of bins on the planet, they are a lot less weight than the 10x's, have amazing depth of field, will buy you at least 30mins of daylight and are about as indestructible as they come.
I used to have 10x Nightowls but much prefer these - I don't notice the missing 1.5x and the slightly lower mag gives a rock steady image.
I've been using a pair of Nikon Action 8 x 40 and have found them to be a great all-round pair. They are light enough to carry around all day and yet robust enough to survive the rigors of being in the field.
Discussion
16 repliesThanks
Paul
PS - if anyone has any for sale please let me know.
Swarovskis are as good as anything these days. A friend of mine uses them when we're birding and I'm constantly asking to 'have a look through yours.!' BTW I own 8x32 Leicas but mainly because I'm a little chap and need the lightest bins possible if I'm also carrying the 500 and a tripod. Optically these top brands are impossble to tell apart but you need to handle any pair to see how you get on with them because a pair of Leicas feels very different to a pair of Zeiss or Swarovskis.
Dave
As regards type - roof prisms have become the vogue, but the older style porroprims actually give a better 3D separation to make a subject 'pop', the Nikon range of porros are very good.
For twilight work the Zeiss 7x42 BGAT roof prisms are the considered the brightest available and I find them superb picking out subjects long after the light has faded - they are lighter than the Leica/Swaro's as well.
I have about four pairs of bins depending on what I intend to do, the pair that spends the most time round my neck tho' is a pair of modern Pentax 10x50 roof prisms that are nitrogen sealed with very short near focus ability (cannot recall the exact model I think the designation is 'DCWF' ??) - they have virtually identical light and resolution performance to the Leica and Swaro's but are several hundred pounds cheaper, but as with all 10x50s are heavy, a neoprene replacement neck strap makes their use much more pleasant.
Birders tend to gravitate to the Leica and Swaro' 8x42s brands - its becme a bit cultish, but depending on what you intend to use the bins for there can be better alternatives. For macro insect work the Leica 7/10x20s for example are supreme as they have a very short near focus ability.
Mike
I bumped into a birder on the we, with swaroski bins and me with my opticrons and i saw hardly any difference? His had slightly less flare than mine but that was about it?
you could say the same about lenses! why is a Canon L lens worth 10x more than a Chinon - the quality of glass, coatings and build account for a lot - better glass and coatings gives better definition, contrast, less fringing looking into the light (and usually better low light performance)
Its the old addage 95% of performance is easy to achieve, the last 5% is difficult and expensive
You really need to go and try several pairs and purchase the pair that most suit your eyes and are comfortable to use.
Phil.
Paul
My best advice, from a long-term birder, would be to go for 8x32's, with all of the top manufacturers it comes down to degrees of excellence. Which you choose is down to you after comparing the handling & what suits you best. They are all bright, razor sharp, close focussing and will satisfy all your needs I'm sure............but the weight saving is significant, so do your neck a favour particularly if planning long days in the field.
Colin
SteveHL
I settled for the Swarovski 8.5 X 42's as I prefered the very slightly cooler colour balance over the Nikon's. I particularly liked the feel and balance of them, with the thumb indentations on the back being very comfortable, even when using them one-handed on the odd occasion . The 30 year warranty was a bonus, as was Swarovski's excellent customer service ( according to others, I've never had to use them). Great close-focusing ability and not heavy to use and carry all day.
Love the green colour too.
I've used them most days for the last two years and would buy exactly the same again if I had to.
The £900 binoculars are in a completely different league to a pair costing £99. The view is far superior with better clarity, sharpness, less C.A., better and more accurate colour balance, better edge sharpness, less flare, etc. etc.
The expensive models are also nitrogen filled to prevent fogging up and are waterproof and sealed against the elements.
Most binoculars can give a reasonible view on a bright or sunny day, especially near bright contrasty water. However, the more expensive models will shine through when the light is dull or near the ends of the day when the light levels are greatly reduced.
I used to have 10x Nightowls but much prefer these - I don't notice the missing 1.5x and the slightly lower mag gives a rock steady image.
I've been using a pair of Nikon Action 8 x 40 and have found them to be a great all-round pair. They are light enough to carry around all day and yet robust enough to survive the rigors of being in the field.