Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Minox 6.5X32 vs. the Leupold 6X30 Yosemite, and some 8's.

E thanks for the very informative and well written rewiew. I know I like mine and my boys like theirs.

Again Thanks

Rob

Yes, excellent information, E. I hope to try a pair of Yosemite's within a week, depends on if I get time when within range of a store that has a pair.

I just did a quick test with 8x36 Monarchs and they focus to within about 7 or 8 feet. At that distance, the depth of field looks to be less than 2 feet, maybe only 8 inches closer and farther from the object of focus, though I did not measure it with a ruler.

I like the shallow depth of field at close range because as you focus closer and farther, it shows details in isolation from foreground and background. Ten feet is extreme, but 20-40 feet is not uncommon, say 6 to 12 yards. I also look at tracks with bins. OK, I'm feeling like the odd man out, and getting defensive about my use of binoculars, good for a chuckle.

Years ago somebody made a special binocular for bow hunters in thick cover that was five power. Obviously it didn't last long but I understand the logic.

Yes indeed E did a great job with this review. Kudo's

Now if he will do the same with rifle scopes, now that would be Great.

Yep,

That is how I like to do it,closing one eye,forces the other into a bit of a squint and can change visual acuity in that eye.

Britt

Sounds like a good idea. I'll give it a try. Thanks guys.
One thing I didn't like about the little Minox is the attached objective covers. My Pentax SP came with them too. I did what I did with the SP. I cut the tether lines. With them attached, you have to constantly make sure they are in the image distorting it. I don't use them in the field. Too much trouble to remove every time I want to look at something. But I haven't thrown them away either. Will come in handy when adjusting the focus I'm sure. E

For a long time, I used that short depth of field trick to use my binoculars in heavy cover. If I want to do that, my Nikon 8X32 LX would be the one to use. In general, I've found it is hard on the eyes, so I don't use that trick. But if I were following a blood trail of something like a bear, I could put that consideration aside in a hot second, and use them like that.
It does work and it does help. But I'm now of the opinion that such qualities aren't worth the effort or the strain. I might find with more expereince that that isn't the case. Or perhaps it is valuable under certain conditions. Only time and experience will tell.
This means, of course, that this testing isn't the last word on all of this. I still have to hunt them. I didn't really realize what a great scope the Leupold 6X42 was, or the heavier than normal reticles that I now prefer, until I'd hunted them a few seasons. So, we'll see how all of this works where it counts. E

What got me interested in trying these bins were the comments about set and forget with their depth of focus coupled with my own needs in close cover.
When it comes to rifle scopes, if you think there is something I'm missing in some other brand of scope, something that I can use in my hunting/shooting, by all means lets hear it. So far, I've seen nothing by anyone that gives me this feeling.
You guys that like 50mm military style tactical scope for your style of hunting don't have anything to offer me. I've got a heavy rifle with a tactical style scope on it. It is of very little use to me in the hunting fields. The only hunting I do where it might be useful would be Pronghorn hunting. I do very little actual Pronghorn hunting and feel confident that I have that covered.
You hunt with bipods on your rifles from what I can tell. I gave up on those things a long time ago. Makes the rifle much heavier, makes it way too muzzle heavy and almost impossible to use quickly when I have only seconds to shoot. Not for me.
Don't get me wrong. The day may come. I just haven't seen anything yet that makes me think there might be something there that I can use. E

No problem, Eremicus. I just thought I would give you that little tip because I didn't think you had much experience with IF bino's and I have quite a bit. Can't promise you will actually see a difference, but I've been told by the folks that make IF bino's that you can loose as much as 20% of your visual acuity by closing one eye while focusing a bino. Hope it helps you.

Roy

Great review. I must say that I really like mine, set them and forget them. In heavy cover they are my favorite. I do find I need to re focus when looking long range but most of my hunting is in cover where 100 yards is forever. I like the Yosomites as well best I have seen for that price range. The Minox's are to me in a different catagory they can come very close to much more expensive glass. Like you I like the heavy feel, easier to avoid the shakes.

E,

Does the same hold true for the others. As I understand your test, all the bins had practically the same dof?

The two 6X bins are virtually the same. The 8's are not. The Nikon LX 8X32 is quite different than the Leica 8X42.
It also depends on just what you consider OK, or need. At the really close ranges, like OK looking for blood on the ground at 10-20 feet, this wouldn't be the same. You might also find it benefical to be able to focus out some of the near or further stuff. While I like the effect of that, i.e. a short depth of focus, I find that doing it causes eye strain, that wears me down as the day goes on. So, I'm now of the opinion that I'm better off with a minimum of refocusing. Maybe experience with this new idea won't work out when I actually hunt them much. I'll see.
I'd also point out that these differences are all aproximations done by me, and based on what I call "sharp enough" to say it's basically in focus. You might not agree with me.
Minox's literature says their 6.5X32 IF, when set at 75 yds. is good to infinity. I don't agree. That's close in my book, but not quite what I want/like.
I've tried to describe what I found and what I find desirable and why I do. You might not have the same needs or ideas. It is always best to try them out for yourself. Doug, and I suspect other dealers, allow you to return them in original condition if you aren't happy. This, I'm convinced, is the way to select binoculars. E

All bino's have different depths of focus and to compare one manufacturer's 8x32, for example, to another and expect them to have equal depth's of focus would not be true. In general, porro prism bino's have much deeper depths of focus or what they are more accurately called, are focus windows. Also, lower power bino's have greater focus windows than higher power bino's do. One of the first good bino's I ever owned was a 7x50 Steiner Whitetail series porro prism IF design. You set them for approximately 50-60 yrds and everything from approximately 20 yrds out to infinity was in focus. This was a great asset for scanning thick wooded type area's where I typically hunted whitetails. Another big advantage was you did not have to try to focus these when the light was very poor. Anybody who has tried to focus a binocular when very little light was present will know exactly what I'm speaking about. The only drawback, to these particular bino's was they lacked the ability to resolve very tiny details that are possible with a center focus design. I will say that for the situations that I was using them for at that time, they were more than adequate.

Roy

Roy,

I've been trying to understand how the IF works. I've never used one, all I've used are the ones with the focus wheel. I go from one layer to the next to the next in the vegetation via the focus wheel. How does the IF accomplish that without refocusing for different distances?

The IF can't accomplish that without refocusing. With that bit of functional difference we come to the crux of the IF vs CF debate. You may have very good image over whatever field you have set the focus to with your IF, but that's it. If you need to go nearer or further from your distance, then you have to adjust each eye for whatever distance you see the need. By then, whatever you have seen the need to refocus for may well be gone. That is why you will likely never see a birder with IF. An IF has no greater inherent greater depth of field than a center focus binocular. My understanding of depth of field is that it is largely magnification dependent.

What binocular users need to keep in mind that just because your binocular is equipped with a center focus wheel doesn't mean mean you can't use it just like an IF. The CF glass has to be set for each eye, just like the IF. The best set it and forget it binocular I have are Vortex Vipers. They simply do not change focus unless the user makes a deliberate and concious movement of the focus wheel. As such, every time I have had to grab mine for a quick ID they retain whatever focus adjustment I have set them with. The clear advantage here is the immediate ability to quickly change focus to sort through layers of foliage or whatever. I do have IF binoculars, an 8x30 Steiner Predator and a Leupold Gold Ring porro 9x35.

Because of it's large depth of field. With the 7x50 I was talking about, it is in focus from 20 yards to infinity. That is it's major design feature. I currently own Steiner 8x30 Hunting series, 6x30 Whitetail series (discontinued, replaced by the Nighthunter) and a 8x56 Nighthunter XP. All have the same feature. The only Steiner porro's that don't have this are the ones in 12X and up. They are in focus from approx. 50 yrds on out. As I said before porro's generally have greater focus windows than roof's. The slight drawack you have is the lack of very fine tuning. They are, however, very effective, especially in very low light where CF designs fail because you can't see well enough to focus anyway.

Based on what I've seen, depth of focus is very much a function of magnification. The more magnification, the less the depth of focus. However, I've also seen what I suspect are examples of less depth of focus to achieve more image clarity. The Nikon LX 8X32's appear to be an example of this.
I've played with the older Zeiss IF, 8X30's. In no way were they comparable to the image quality I got with the other Zeiss binoculars of 7-8X in the same classic line. Their depth of focus was very good. But their image quality was nothing like the bigger binoculars. Was this a trade off or as a result of the smaller 30mm objective ? I really don't know. But there does appear to be a relationship there.
The only binoculars that have anything like a depth of focus and the image quality that I'd want for short range woods hunting, are the 6X30 Yosemite and the 6.5X32 Minox IF. I'm not absolutely certain the IF Minox will work as I suspect. In theory, and my limited testing, I won't need to focus out near and far brush/cover to see what I want. This may well not make any game stand out, but it will make for less eye strain simply becasue I'm not constantly changing the magnification as I look through them. E

True, but the depth of focus is, or can be, a function of the quality of the bino as well. An equal magnification, in say, an 8x42 Pentax DCP SP will have far less depth than will say, an Ultravid or Swaro EL in 8x42. Fact..... Seen it, myself.

If Minox ever rolls the 6.5x32 or a 7x32 out with a central focus, IMHO, it will be the catsazz. Until then, the IF is VERY close.

They have. Vortex Fury 6.5x32mm, and from what I have read... they are indeed the catsazz.

As soon as Doug reports he has the Fury's in stock with the redesigned diopter mechanism, I'll be purchasing a set.

Eremicus, I'm a slow typer so I'll just highlight my previous post. Depends on what the manufacturer is placing emphasis on. As far as IF bino's go, I should state that I am referring to the Steiner's I own and I am not making sweeping generalizations for all others.

I found very little difference in the DOF between the Yosemite, a porro and the IF Minox, a roof.
Nor did I find any real difference in DOF between my Pentax DCF SP 8X43 and my Leica 8X42 BA.
I can't even say that a CF 6.5X32 Minox would be much of an improvement. I presume that would raise the cost of it for one. If it works any where near as easily as I think it will, i.e. memorizing a couple of settings for general glassing, that ought to work fine. Maybe not the best for really short range work like OK's blood trail ? Haven't looked into that possibility yet.
It isn't a long range glass. Nor is it a true all around glass. But for a really practical, user friendly glass for anything within 400- 600 yds., I don't see anything save the Yosemite that can offer much over it. The Yosemite is lighter, cheaper, and more comfortable to carry. The Minox 6.5 IF offers a touch better optics, less image shake and is a bit more compact. Both give me the impression that they will give a hunter all he needs for this type of binocular use. E