#2289105 - 07/02/08 07:28 PM
Decent Lightweight 8 x 32 Porro prism
|
jimmyp
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 11/28/03
Posts: 1961
Loc: Georgia
|
Online
|
|
I know the Nikon Superior E is the best and is water resistant, anything new on the market that is about as good, about as water resistant, for a little less coin?
_________________________
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." Ronald Regan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2289763 - 07/03/08 08:22 AM
Re: Decent Lightweight 8 x 32 Porro prism
[Re: jimmyp]
|
jackfish
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 1920
Loc: Western Wisconsin
|
Offline
|
|
The Celestron Ultima DX 8x32 porro prism binoculars are on sale right now for $90-100. They are not as good as the Nikon Premier SE ($550), but are about as good as any midrange ($400 or less) roof prism binoculars. They are waterproof, but they certainly are not lightweight at 30 ounces.
You'ld be looking at an 8x32mm roof for more money than a Nikon Premier SE to get an equal view and there are no 8x30/32 porros that come close. I haven't seen the Vixen Foresta 8x32mm porros ($240) but I'd guess they are pretty good for Chinese glass and will have a view about as good as roofs that cost up to $600.
_________________________
You learn something new everyday whether you want to or not.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2290064 - 07/03/08 11:27 AM
Re: Decent Lightweight 8 x 32 Porro prism
[Re: jimmyp]
|
SteveC99
Campfire Regular
Registered: 07/29/07
Posts: 271
Loc: Yakima Valley, Washington
|
|
Offline
|
|
The list of 8x30-32 binoculars in the porro flavor is pretty short these days. The Nikon SE has as good an image as anything else you can find, porro or otherwise, even $1,500 high end "Euro" glass. I have an 8x (6x too) Leupold Yosemite which is a very good glass. It it, to me anyway, brighter and has better resolution than my Monarch 8x42. It is at some slight disadvantage in low light, but it has to be pretty dark for it to not work. The 6x Yosemite is better close in and in dim light. The Celestron Ultima weighs a lot more than the Yosemite does and the Forresta has a much smaller fov than the Yosemite. If you are OK with a full size porro look at the Swift 8.5x44 ED Audubon. Swift also makes porros in their Ultra line that aren't overly big. Leupold offers a couple of good porros, but they are full size and heavier than the Yosemite. I won't go so far as to put the Yosemite in the same optics class as the Nikon SE, but it it at least as close as anything else not called Nikon SE, that is also light weight. It won't break the bank either if you don't like it.
_________________________
Steve
Theodore Roosevelt: "Do what you can where you are with what you have"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2291418 - 07/04/08 05:36 AM
Re: Decent Lightweight 8 x 32 Porro prism
[Re: NH Hunter]
|
jimmyp
Campfire Ranger
Registered: 11/28/03
Posts: 1961
Loc: Georgia
|
|
Online
|
|
it looks like the 8 x 32 SE is still the best choice, maybe I cann find a used pair.
_________________________
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." Ronald Regan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#2293168 - 07/05/08 06:40 AM
Re: Decent Lightweight 8 x 32 Porro prism
[Re: jimmyp]
|
FrankD
Campfire Regular
Registered: 12/11/06
Posts: 454
Loc: Lehigh Valley, PA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Everyone nailed the current choices in/near the configuration you requested. I have the 8x30 Yosemites and have a pair of the Ultima DXs on order. After Jackfish's comments I look forward to seeing how they perform.
_________________________
Frank
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: SYSOP, RickBin
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
18939 Members
65 Forums
198075 Topics
2438720 Posts
Max Online: 1366 @ 08/07/07 07:51 PM
|
|
|
