This is a new configuration from Leupold of their Mojave line. It is a new design, and is a forerunner of the facelift the entire Mojave line will get in 2015. This is a collaboration with Leupold and a Japanese OEM firm. The basic design is Leupold�s, the final product as mentioned, is a joint effort.

I won�t bother with such information as can be obtained from the Mojave�s page on Leupold�s website.
http://www.leupold.com/hunting-shooting/binoculars/bx-3-mojave-series/bx-3-mojave-8x32mm/

There are a couple of minor differences with the site description and the binocular I have. As a general matter, the site shows what appears to be a gray binocular with violet tinged lens coatings. The binocular is black, with gold trimmings and the lens coatings are dark green. The site lists the weight as 17.0 oz., these weigh in on my scale at 19.0, without lens covers or the strap. It weighs 23 oz. with covers and strap. The minimum IPD is listed as 58.0 mm, this one measures 56.0.

Leupold�s MSRP is $429, I see where CameralandNY has them for $349.

I will start off with a couple of objections. I pretty much have to start there, as they are the first two thing you notice unpacking the binocular. The first, and the less noticeable of the two is that the case is too short, something pretty typical in a lot of binocular accessories, and trends across multiple makers. The big thing is the rain guard. It is a stiff, very slick, plastic affair, and it gets pushed down as far as it can go when the Velcro fastener on the case flap is fastened. The slick surface of the rain guard makes a very tight friction seal with the softer textured rubber of the eye cup cover on the eye piece of the binocular. It does not come off easily. I use a case from a Yosemite, put the binocular in sideways, and there is room for the strap to be folded in the case. Any other standard style rain guard that is the right diameter and not made of stiff, very slick plastic will replace the one supplied.

Once the thing is unpacked and freed from the rain guard, you are very likely in for a surprise. While the accessories guys flubbed a little, the optics guys got it right. There are four things that were immediately obvious from first view. First is that for a binocular that does not employ field flattener technology, the field is apparently flatter than any other non-flat field glass. Second, is that the edge performance is as good as the apparent flatness of the field. The third thing is how bright the image is in light limited situations. It will stand in far better, far longer than I was prepared to see it do. Now, 32 mm objectives can�t catch as much light as a 42 mm, but it does pretty well. The other side is how well the image detail and brightness stands up in any condition to various 42 mm binoculars. The fourth thing is how well the binocular presents color and controls Chromatic aberration for a design that does not use ED glass.

To get this one set up, the user will note the right eye diopter is located on the front of the focus knob. It is easy to grasp and pulls outward. The focus is counterclockwise to infinity and moves through one and one half turns. There are three approximately equal in movement, �usage zones� in the travel. This one focuses to the advertised close focus distance maintaining a unified image. It will come about 18� closer if you use a single eye. It focuses from close to 30 meters (100�) or so in one third of travel, using up the first usage zone. The second usage zone takes you to infinity, with the third usage zone leaving ample room past infinity if needed. This will leave most use of the focus in the first whole rotation of the wheel. The focus seems well done, soft without being too soft, and is quite precise. There was some unevenness out of the box but that worked out pretty quickly. Several hours in the freezer do stiffen the focus travel a little, but it remains very usable.

L-Coat

This coating plays a reasonably visible part in the packaging and in general information about this glass. L-Coat is Leupold�s proprietary, new generation, cold fusion, multi-layer prism mirror coating. This is part of the tweaking that went on with this glass. While they certainly will not tell anyone what the secret sauce is, I was told that it is unique in that it uses a silver based compound in the formula at some point in the process. They make this point in their literature as well.

Optical performance

As mentioned above this is a bright glass. Not blindingly bright or standard setting bright, but more than amply bright to give a bright, sharp view. This binocular carries that sharp view very well at the outer limits of 8x usability. It stands up amazingly well in light limited situations and will not be embarrassed by its smaller objective by even a top quality 42 mm binocular. That is probably worth mentioning again, because the difference is less than what we have come to expect. The color balance looks pretty neutral when viewing brightly lit white surfaces through the objectives. In field use, I�d judge it to be ever so slightly warm. There is a suggestion of an adaptive color balance going on here that is worth a mention. The brighter the conditions get, the warmer the balance gets. Personally when the conditions are really bright I think that is a good deal. Be that as it may, the colors are bright, vivid, and appear completely natural. Contrast levels are good enough to snap the colors right out, and varying shades of color appear sharply defined. Stray light issues and glare is very well controlled, practically non-existent. So are reflections from the ocular lens.

The sweet spot appears at right around 90%, and in and reasonably wide 8* degree filed the view is nice and wide. There is little eye strain and it is pretty easy to use for long periods of time.

I've been working this one pretty hard trying to come up with some cons to report, but there really are none. At least with optics and construction, particularly at the sub $500 price level. The optics are good enough they will show it to you if you can expect to get the detail with an 8x instrument. With any of today�s better sub $500 binoculars, the difference with more expensive stuff is more with construction than image detail. Brand panache and recognition play here as well. The technical resolution specs are at least on the level of the high end stuff of very few years ago, and come so close to as precise as the eye can use. The image may well be seen as not as bright as some of the more expensive stuff, but I�m sort of tired about discussing the optics equivalents of��if a binocular is lost in the wilderness, does it still work?� Kind of like arguing over the benefit of 50 fps in your favorite handload.

The new Mojave is of apparently good build construction, certainly on par with anything else in the mid-level range. There is nothing in the build quality I would worry about much. If needed Leupold service and warranty is still top notch.

The stuff I have immediately on hand to compare are in, 8x 32 mm; Theron Wapiti LT, Leupold Acadia, ZRS, Opticron Traveler, and a bunch of older porros, the best of which is the B&L Zephyr 8x30. The Mojave is the best of that lot, with the Theron being closest. The chief difference is the width of the field, and edge performance. I�d say the Mojave is worth the difference.

My personal 8x42 stuff is the Leupold Gold Ring HD, the McKinley, the ZEN Prime HD, the Kruger Caldera, and the Promaster Infiniti Elite ELX ED. I had chances to compare it to the new Zeiss Terra HD, and the Nikon Monarch 7. For me I�d take the 8x32 Mojave over either of the 42 mm versions of the Terra or the Monarch 7.

If you need a really good, sharp, compact binocular with ample resolution ability that performs at a high level in light limited situations for its class size, like dealing with good warranty and service and don�t want to spend a lot, I advise anybody to put this on their short list. At the price it is hard to find something not to like about this binocular.

You always do very nice reviews SteveC. Thanks again or this one.

Wonder how they compare to a Pentax?

Which Pentax, there's lots of them. If you are talking about the first two good Pentax models, the DCF WP, and the DCF SP, those were about 20 and 10 years ago respectively. Mid price stuff has come a long, long way since then.

Steve,

Per always, great writeup.

Do you think there is any particular reason for the ginormous eyecups?
Seems to be pretty popular amongst many lines. It's likely just my preference but they're deal breakers for me.

The eye cups are not particularly large. They are the same size as almost all of the other 8x32 glass I have. The problem I referenced was the slick rain guard and the soft eye cup create a suction. Size of either was not really the issue. Another rain guard of the same size, but not so bloody slick cures the problem. Unless you have really small diameter eyes, it's not a problem.

It is pretty hard to find something not to like here.

Steve,
I should have been more specific - I'm referencing the top width. The Swaro, Leica, Zeiss and Meopta have narrow/rounded eyecups. I really like that - again, likely just me.

OK, gotcha now . There is an issue your illustration gets at that I've talked to my Leupold contact about. He's in Germany at the IWA show (European version of SHOT)and will be back on the 12th.

If you look under your red ring, you will see there is visible a raised ring around the ocular lens. The problem is for eye glass wearers who have to get close to the lens as they can with their glasses. The extra thickness of the eye cup where it folds over and that ring around the lens use up 4 mm of the eye relief. I have had some conversations with him about that very thing and will press the point a little. I agree that the eye cup need not fold over so far as it does. Eliminate that and reduce the ring around the lens and eye glass wearers will be better off. However I can get full fov with a couple of my shooting glasses and also with my reading glasses on, so all is not lost for eye glass wearers.

The narrower rounded eye cup is a pretty simple fix, just use a different style rubber eye cup cover. Should be easy enough for them to fix.

I see what Steve is getting at with his posts about the thickness/extension of the rubber armor illustrated in red by SKane. Maybe it is just me but I haven't experienced any issue with the usable level of eye relief on this model. I received my unit about a week ago and I have been nothing but extremely impressed with the optical performance and build quality of this model.

No, I don't wear glasses but I have had a few people that do wear them try this model and none of them had an issue with seeing the full field of view.

I do agree that the rubber could be "thinned" to allow closer eye placement to the ocular lens surface but I am not entirely convinced it is needed.

I mentioned something in Steve's thread on this model over in birdforum but want to also mention it here. The Mojave 8x32 seems to be the same basic binocular as the Opticron Countryman HD. The oculars and eyecups are identical and I have not seen any comment s in the Opticron forum from folks that had difficulty with the eye relief (eyeglass wearers included).

Just as a point of comparison, I took a pic of the Mojave next to the Sightron 8x32 Blue Sky. It does not appear, to my eyes, that the ocular lens is recessed much, if any, more than the Sightron. I haven't seen anyone have issues with the eye relief on the Sightron so.....

Just thinking out loud.

Also, the diameter of the eyecups is the same as other binoculars I have on hand and actually narrower than many models with larger ocular diameter lenses.

Nice review - I am currently in the market for a new 8X30-8X32 bino. On my short list is the Nikon Monarch7 8X30(Yet to see in person) and the most likely a demo Zeiss Conquest HD 8X32. I have scratched the Swaro 8X30 CL from my list due to sloppy focus knob. I will have to add the Leupold to the list prior to making my purchase. Have you had a chance to work with a Zeiss Conquest HD 8X32? If so how does it compare? Thanks.

Not sure if you were directing this at Steve or myself.

I have handled the Conquest HD 8x32 on two occasions but only briefly. I hesitate to make any comparisons at this time. I will have the opportunity this upcoming weekend to compare the two directly though. I will post more then.

Either of you guys would be great - I was all set to go with the Conquests but now I'd like to hear more about this Leupold. I'm all for saving $300 if the view is close enough. Thanks.

I've seen the Conquest, but the local dealer that had it sold it, so no direct comparison, so I can't comment directly. My overall impression is that is the minimum level you will need to step above the Mojave to gain much,or even anything optically.

If it can be found with 8x, the Mojave will show it to you. How it stacks up to something else for you is for you to call. Anyway I'd sure bend every effort to see both if I were you.

Based on Steve's review, I ordered a Mojave for $420 less than the demo Conquest. I got the last one at that price from that vendor but B&H has them, or at least did over the weekend, for $280. I'm looking forward to getting mine in a couple days.

I haven't used the Conquest 8x32HD extensively, but did fiddle with it for only a few hours. IMO, the eye relief can be finicky, but it has fantastic glass.

Do you get any glare or halo effect with the Mojave? The view is often very similar and very good between binos at this price range but that halo makes me a little crazy. I have owned several Vortex binos and they all have it. If you get the sun just right they are beautiful, but get it wrong and they are nearly unusable. I will be very interested in your review Whttail. Leupold may have got it right, sounds very promising so far.

I look forward to any and all future comments. I think glare and stray light control are strong points with the Mojave.

Steve, when the eye-cups are extended all the way up,are they firm without any movement or play?

Thats been my biggest complaint with most of the Green Ring Leupold.

There is a little play. That is a characteristic of a lot of mid price binoculars. They do stay up in the last notch, which is where I use them, and they have stayed up going in and out of the case and there is not enough movement to cause issues that have made me have to stop and fiddle with the eye cup. I agree that can be...well...annoying . I do not notice any wiggle in the extended eye cup against my face when using it. I noted it when I had the glass out of the box, but I do not notice it in use. But that depends on how much movement bothers an individual I guess.

That is at the root of my complaint about the surface tension with the rain guard. That might work things loose in the long run. I will make the point to Leupold.

Steve, thanks for the reply

The 16mm ER is adequate for non eyeglass wearers? The older I get this seems to be an issue with some of the 8x32's I've messed with.

It is about perfect for me. But I'm kind of a middle of the road sort when it comes to eye relief.

Just for a bit of clarification. Why are those eye cups, or more to the point I guess would be that type of eye cup in general, a deal breaker for you? Before I go off assuming you are an eye glass wearer I guess I better ask. Personally, since I don't wear glasses when using binoculars I can't fault them for being uncomfortable in use for me in any way. I'll bring up the eye cups up with Leupold as I think its is a simple fix that could be fixed in their next production run.

The only thing I can think of is that general style is easy to get and won't add to the cost much. Maybe when the optics people kick the bare binocular over to the arts and accessories folks, adequate thought does not get put into the exterior accouterments.

Steve,

I do not wear glasses. I just did a quick check of some smallish binos.
The Vortex and the EL have the smallest outside-lens-to-outside-cup diameter of the four at just a hair under 1/4", followed closely by the Theron at 1/4", then the Yosemite at 3/8". For tighter and deeper eye sockets like mine, the harder it is to get comfortable in the positioning. It's my one gripe against the Yosemite - well, that and I've just now discovered that the hinge won't keep them in a fixed position.

I went by the local Sportsman's Warehouse and look at some of the dual hinge 10x42 Mojaves and 10x42 Zeiss Conquest (all they had) - now I know that these are not exactly what we are talking about but, the Zeiss was a much better bino. In features, feel, overall quality and view. I would like to find the 8X32 in each but that is not likely to happen. Unless the 8X32 Mojave is much better than the 10x42 then I think the Zeiss is worth the extra $ for me. I will wait until you guys can actually review the 8x32's side by side and be very interested in your findings.

Would you really expect them to "feel" the same, given the mojave is less than half the cost?

I do wear glasses. Any input on a mid range bino, or will these work well?

Steve thank you very much for this. I think I've found my next glass purchase!

Can't remember if you had to use 0-rings on your Meopta or not. However, Meopta lists the ER of the 8x32 Meostar as 15.4 mm.

I don't much care for the x42 or x50 mm Mojave series binoculars either. I like the new 8x32 quite a bit. I will grant the Zeiss will show a better build quality, but for 3x the price it ought to. I've been looking for a good sort of all in one 8x32 and the Conquest is on that list. The Mojave is now on that list too. So is the Kite Lynx 8x30 which probably nobody here ever heard of.

So, you are the one who has to like it. I would be surprised if you don't like it. Whether or not you like it enough for your purposes is another story . All I can say is you are going to have to let you tell you which ticks off the checkpoints.

Skane,

The Yosemite center hinge issue is an easy fix. Take the tripod adapter cover off of the center hinge. Use either a wide flathead screwdriver or a spammer wrench and tighten. Problem fixed.

The distance from the edge of the exposed ocular glass surface to the outside edge of the rubber eyecup is 3/8th of an inch. Keep in mind that it is contoured differently so it may not be as much of an issue as you think. I just put the two side by side for comparison.

Centershot,

The Mojave 8x32 is an entirely new design. It isn't of the same lineage as the 42 mm models that proceeded it. As I mentioned earlier I will get the chance to compare the Mojave 8x32 to the Zeiss and a few others this upcoming weekend. I will be sure to post my thoughts.

Paradiddle,

I think you would be hard pressed to find a higher performing bino at the mid price point. As was eluded to earlier though, the "fit" of any given binocular is going to vary from person to person. I would have a hard time believing many folks would find fault with the Mojave 8x32 especially considering the relatively inexpensive price tag.

There is too many variables in individual eyes and the corrective prescriptions those eyes require to make much comment. Too much depends on how close to your eyes are to your eye glass lenses. The closer they are, the less eye relief you will need, and vice versa.

All I can say is that I only need reading glasses and (thank you Lord) I don't need them for anything else. I can get full view with my over the counter reading glasses, which do not seem to sit particularly close to my face. I also can get full field view with a couple of pairs of shooting or fishing glasses. Those seem to set closer to my eyes than those that don't.

SO all I can tell you is to find a way to look at them for yourself. Might call CameralandNy and see if they have somebody at their optics counter who wears glasses you can talk to about the Mojave, or whatever else might work. Getting something that works is a lot more important than what it is or who makes it.

Thanks for the info on fixing the Yo's!
And thanks for measuring the ocular surface. It's likely only a big deal to me but I've never been able to get comfortable with those slabby-type surfaces.

Frank & Steve - thank you.

Glad you enjoyed it. If you get a set, let it be known what you think

I did add an O-ring gasket to lengthen the ER a bit. I'm anxious to compare the mojave to the euro hd.

No - but..........the reviews have been very positive and have me second guessing my choice of the Zeiss Conquest HD 8X32. I do think for me the extra $300 is going to be worth it. I have had several - pretty good binos but I am now ready for a really good one.

Update: Just ordered the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 demo from Cameraland....I think I will be satisfied with this one.

Ahh, the power of preconceived notions.

That aside if the eye cups don't mess with you you will like them .

I spent some time with a Zeiss 10x32 at a Cabelas a week ago and just can not get them out of my mind - very nice to my eyes and hands. I had no issue with the eye cups but did not get to spend 'lots' of time behind them so time will tell. There are many positive reviews on the net about them as well as a video demonstrating their 'durability' that is pretty interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H64FCbtKKqs I seriously doubt it will be the last bino I every buy as I like to try new things every 4 or 5 years or so, that timeframe seems to be when the next big thing comes along anyway. Living in the middle of no where has some draw backs - like having to buy to try, but I'll trade that for uncrowded open spaces and public lands.

I posted that video here myself. Yes it is impressive. FWIW, that was a slight yank of your chain on my part. If the eye cup lets you assume proper placement...then there is no doubt you will get along with them just fine. Like I said, they are on my short list too.

I sure wish there was a place within a couple hours where comparing these and a few others was possible, but it just does not exist - so read reviews make my best guess, order from New York and hope for the best. I suppose I'm not exactly married to them and could sell them at a little loss, but I'm hoping my homework will prevent that. At any rate I should know in a few days!

That's certainly the big problem with optics selection these days. The places that have a decent selection are too few and too far between to be of much use in many cases. So we do what you do, research as best we can and do what we think will work for us. Hey, sometimes we are right too. So anyway, I would not sweat the Conquest too much. I'd be pretty surprised if you don't like them a lot.

You can usually return them assuming still in new condition...no need to lose any more than the return shipping if you aren't happy with them.

Thanks, I do believe Cameraland will do that - I'm hoping I don't need to find out. I have yet to hear anything negative (except maybe the eyecups?) about them - so hopefully they will work out.

Hey, relax about the eye cups. I was just pulling your chain a little . The comment in general was centered around my belief that the way a binocular fits your face and eyes are the most important things about a binocular. Usually when there is a gripe it may well be because the eye cups don't extend far enough for a particular user to get the distance from the ocular lens they need. They will likely be just fine for you.

Centershot,

I don't think you will have a problem with them either though every person is different of course. The Mojaves are fast becoming my go to binocular. I believe they are going to replace my Sightron SII 8x32s at this point. I just have a hard time putting them down....even at work.

Thanks - until you guys mentioned it I never even noticed the eye cups on the several Conquest's that I tried. A couple of 10X42's and a 10X32. I just turned them out, put the binos up and went wow. I started seeing detail on mounts across the store that I did not notice with the others. And really liked how they felt along with the smooth workings of the focus knob (unlike the Swarovski CL-awful). The Conquest HD had that immediate feeling of quality.

Well, it's been six months since the last guy posted on these. Have any of you guys had a chance to give these a good honest try? I'm thinking about buying some of these, based solely on the positive reviews I've seen..

I kept the review set I had and I probably use them at least as much as any other binocular I own. I guess when it comes right down to it, I'd be happy enough if the Mojave 8x32 was my only binocular.

Thanks Steve. I've seen your review all over the internet. Good stuff. I'll be trying a pair out this weekend for deer season. I'm hoping they work out well for me.

Great binos, as far as I'm concerned. Here's how I rate them:

Pros:

1. Perfect size for woods hunting
2. Excellent glass.
3. Good ergo's.
4. I love the rubberized armored coating. Extremely quiet when bumped against things.
5. Great light gathering.
6. Good eye relief
7. Comfortable strap.
8. Wide eyepiece didn't bother me like I thought it would.

Cons:

1. Focus ring sounds/feels gritty.
2. Rubber lens caps sticky.