Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics compact binoculars 8x25?

I think I want a pair of Zeiss Terra 8x25’s. Looking for a used pair or other offers under my $200 budget. I have a pair of Yosemite 6x30’s but want something a little more compact. I am very pleased with clarity on the Leupolds so there may be something less than $100 that will work. Primary use is hunting hardwoods of GA and outdoor sporting events.Thanks for the feedback in advance.

Just a bit bigger than compacts but much better - take a look a Nikon Monarch 7 8x30's.

I'd second that recommendation on the 8x30's. I've got the 10x25 Swarovski minis and while clarity is pretty good, the narrow fov takes a lot of getting use to. I'll often carry them with my 8x32 Leicas, but for finding stuff by glassing, you can't beat a wider fov. We do a lot of birding in these parts and I was using my binoculars all wrong. I'd see stuff with my regular eyesight and then magnify it with the tiny tens. Now I glass with the 8x32's and pick out stuff way ahead of most of the other birders in the club.

As to the sporting events fov is probably even more important. I've been known to watch the Packer people back home and with the 10x25's I'd see the center of the team out to maybe the guards.. With the 8x32's I get to see the entire team from where we sit.

I've not checked into used binos, but offhand I'd say that your $200. budget is a bit low. I've got a junk pair of DU door prize mini 10's in the glove compartment and they are better than nothing, but not by much. It is pretty hard to wear out a good pair of binos just by looking through them, so I think if your budget is limited, good used beats low end new.

I will recommend the Zeiss Terra 8x25, made in Japan, it is very good, and I own some other high end pocket binoculars.

The small pocket binoculars include 20 and 25mm objectives. The next step is the compact sizes, and 30 mm, they offer
some advantages. The Nikon M7 is very good also, small in size and the larger sizes offer an easier view.

For $200, take a look at the Nikon Prostaff 7 8x30, a small binocular with a very nice view, good value.

I have lots of binocular experience, and a quality pocket binocular under $200. is hard to find, as it is not out there,
as the cheaper ones are either dim or not sharp.

For the woods you need to see at dark thirty, so think 30mm as a minimum size.
Good luck with your search.

I really appreciate the feedback. I realize the budget is pretty low based on today's offerings when it comes to optics. I usually research and look for the "best value" to help make my money go a little further. Just to put that in perspective I hunt with Leupold VX3's and Zeiss Conquest scopes. Obviously, some folks might disagree on the value of these but that is my view.

I have a pair of older Japan made Nikon Monarchs in 8x42. They definitely are an upgrade to the Yosemite 6x30"s that I have. The Yosemite's serve me pretty well but are a little bulkier than I prefer based on the design (not sure the technical term for that design vs a typical 8x30 layout). I really need to get my hands on some 8x30's just to get an idea of the size. I had considered the Vortex Diamondback 8x28 that I found some pretty good reviews on. They seem to be closer to the 8x30's in size compared to the Zeiss 8x25.

I guess I am just interested in seeing if I can live with some 8x25's for what I need. I realize they probably fill a smaller niche. I found a used pair of Zeiss Terra 8x25's for $229 a week or so ago. I saw someone recommended a Bushnell Legend 10x25 on another thread. I have seen those closer to the $100 mark. However, I think 10x would have even more limitations as mentioned above. That is where I came up with the $100-$200 range. Thanks guys!

The Bushnell Legend 10x25 would be very poor compared to any Nikon Monarch. The Monarch has been for 20 years a
very solid and popular binocular, well deserved.
If you can buy the Zeiss for that go ahead.

I was referring to Zeiss Terra 8x25 compared to Legend 10x25, not the Monarchs.

IME the difference between x25 and x32/30 is the largest practical step in bino sizes.

I have bushnell excursion 8x28 and use them or all of my woods birding and hunting. I will admit I am always on the lookout for something better, but they are excellent value and are very small.

I carry Swaro 8x20's in my shirt pocket .They are very well made.

I just ordered a pair of Monarch 7 8x30’s from LL Bean for $285 with their 25% off sale. They are on backorder, but only for a couple of weeks. I wanted something compact and light for turkey hunting.

Does anyone know where the Monarch 7 8x30's are made?

China

I don’t remember the pricing at the moment, but you might check into the Kowa line of compacts. As I recall they have a line of compacts that are close to your budget. Check on Optics Planet or Euro Optics.
I know people who swear by Kowa (not at Kowa).

Good advise as Kowa does make nice compacts, however, maybe he could check with Camera Land this sites optics sponsor??

OOOOOOOPs!
Truly sorry Doug!!!!!!!!
I honestly didn’t realize that you guys carry Kowa and I was honestly trying to make a good suggestion on brand of binos for the OP.
Sorry again, didn’t mean to step on your toes!!!!!
FYI, I still have you, your dad and your brother’s picture on a “thank you for the business” card on my refrigerator!
(My wife gives me crap about it.....in jest of course)

Doug, I sent you a PM. Thanks.

kzceh,

I compared the 8x25 Terra to my 8x25 Swaro, and Swaro 8x30, about 2-1/2 years ago for some friends. My notes from my subjective review are below in blue. I know you are not considering the Swaro, but maybe you will find something useful in those notes.

I have since sold the Swaros, and use the 10x25 Legend. I have no desire to replace the Legends and don't miss the Swaros one bit. I take them with me more than any bino I have owned. I have had Zen Ray 7x36, Swaro 8x30, Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42, Swaro 8x25, Yosemite 6x30, and a few others (mostly lower end).

Although I don't have notes comparing the Swaro 8x25 to the Legend 10x25, there was nothing I could see with the Swaro that I couldn't see with the Legends. It really surprised me. For me, the compactness, image quality, Rainguard, and cost is a great combo. If I need more binocular, I want 12x50. Obviously the build quality is not up to par with Zeiss or Swaro, and I had to glue an eye guard back in place, but overall I am amazed how well they work for me.

Jason

"I was able to try the 8x25 CL by Swarovski and the 8x25 Terra by Zeiss today.

They are basically the same physical size with the same FOV and similar weight. The Terra has a plastic body but feels good to hold for such a small bino, with grippy exterior. The eye cups lock in the outer position. The CL exterior is harder and slicker and the eye cups don't lock in any position (but stay where you put them and won't collapse). They do come off without much trouble (threaded alloy), which is really nice. Overall, for feel, I think the Terra is my favorite.

The image in the CL is clear nearly to the edge. In the Terra it drops off but very gradually and you really have to try hard to find it. In normal use, it would never be noticed. Color fringing is the same with both... just a freckle and you really need to look for it. Depth of field seems the same.

Now compared to the 8x30 SLC...

The SLC is definitely easier to use. Bigger eye cups, bigger FOV. More stable, due to mass, but still jitttery. Not that much more stable as I would have guessed though. I thought the biggest advantage was the cups, which do sit against the brow better.

I think the CL has the best resolution, followed very, very closely by the SLC, then the Terra. This is tricky to test though, as the SLC appears to have slightly more magnification than the other two. The image is bigger. Perhaps due to the larger oculars? I don't know the physics behind it. At any rate, there was little if anything that could be seen by one bino that couldn't be seen by another.

Still, very fine detail could be seen with the CL that couldn't with the SLC and Terra but it is really, really hard to find a difference. In one case, the CL and SLC showed twigs in front of an orange cone that was hard to see with the Terra at several hundred yeards. I 'think' the better resolution of the CL showed them, while the bigger image of the SLC also showed them. So, they both got to the same place, but in different ways. The Terra didn't quite get there. But this is really, really nitpicking to the nth degree. At closer ranges, looking for detail, the CL is just ever so slightly sharper than the SLC. Again, very hard to detect.

In terms of brightness or light transmission, they seem the same in good or normal overcast ambient light. In the Ops with low light, the SLC was obviously brighter than the other two. If I had to guess, the CL had 95% of the light transmission of the SLC. The Terra would be 92%. In other words, the jump from the CL to the SLC was bigger than the Terra to the CL. New lenses and coatings don't make up for the extra 5mm objective.

Overall, during 'typical use' I had to really work hard to find a difference between the three other than the FOV. I think most people would call it a wash in terms of image. The main difference would be ease of use vs. compactness. Based on cost, the Terra seems like the winner unless that last little bit of resolution or brightness are needed."

Very nice write up. I really appreciate you posting this comparison. Interesting comments on the Legends. Thank you.

get the Zeiss 8x25 Terra and be done with it...good optics....good build....good warranty....good long lived and respected brand.....no need to look any further....

I wonder how the Maven 7x28s would be. Very small, bigger exit pupil than 8x30s (I have Ziess l like alot), and about $200. I haven't tried. Have heard some decent things about their optics...