Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Bino suggestion?

I have been reading the thread on lower end binoculars and have decided to try a pair; 8x32 or 42 i think is what i am going to try. I have never owned a pair of binoculars in my life.
Tentatively narrowed down the list to Nikon monarch, Bushnell Legend, or the Leupold Katmai.
Any of you guys or girls that have any recommendations would be most appreciated.

Out of the three you listed I would probably opt for one of the Monarch configurations. I have owned both the 8x42 and the 8x36 (as well as the 10x42) and would be satisfied with either of the choices for general hunting. The 36 mm is a tad smaller but the focus speed and tension was faster. The 42, though a bit larger, is still quite compact and very lightweight. Both offer excellent optics for the price.

I have also owned a pair of the 8x32 Bushnell Legends. I thought they seemed a bit sturdier than the Nikons but they were also a few ounces heavier. Optically I think the Nikons were a hair better with a more neutral color tone. The Bushnells seemed to have more of a green-blue color bias.

Lastly, I did own a pair of the Leupold WR Katmais in 8x32. They are probably the most compact 32 mm binocular out there. Brightness and color rendition were wonderful in them but I found the sharpness to be a little off compared to the competition. That was before they were phasecoated. I was not sure if the lack of sharpness was due to the lack of phasecoating or possibly the use of Bk-7 prisms (instead of Bak4).

Lastly, might I also suggest the Pentax DCF-SP 8x32s? I think they offer superior optics to all of the above (plus build quality is excellent) and Doug typically sells them for right around $350. They would be my choice if I was looking for an 8x32 in this price range.

Hope this helps.

I would not buy until I checked out the Eagle Optics Ranger SRT 8x32mm or 8x42mm. You can find them at your nearest Wild Birds Unlimited.

Another look is deserved by the Vortex Fury 8x32mm or 8x42mm.

Both the Eagle Optics Ranger SRT and Vortex Fury have the best warranty in the business. If you order either from Eagle Optics you have 30 days to return it for a refund (minus shipping) if you don't like it.

Doug at CameralandNY has the Vortex line and will also give one 30 days money back.

I checked them all out in this category and went with the Nikon Monarchs in 8x42. Great bin and very pleased with my choice.

Checkout this link for a good bino report. Remember though that it was written in 2005 and a lot has changed since then. You will note that the Nikon Monarch was the number one pick in the $200-500 price category. The Bushnell Legend has since been completely redesigned and is now more competitive.

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/winter2005/Age_Binos.html

I'm not sold on the Nikon Monarch ATB which leads me to say you better look at them all yourself. If you properly focus the binoculars and then stack two pairs looking quickly between them at distant, hard to resolve objects the better of the two will become apparent.

The Eagle Optics Ranger SRT has been improved over the Eagle Optics Ranger Platinum Class which was reviewed at Cornell, and the Vortex Fury was not available then. From my evaluations my Eagle Optics Ranger Platinum Class 8x42mm are noticably better than the several pairs of Nikon Monarch ATB 8x42mm I have compared them to. The SRTs are even better. The Vortex Furys are right there too, maybe even better than the SRTs.

I'm with Frank on this one. Go for a Pentax DCF SP. The 8X42 Monarch I checked out last spring was no where near as good a glass as many others I've played with.
For hunting, long experience in all kinds of cover and light, has convinced me that good binoculars are more important than your choice of scope sighted rifles. They enable you to find game. Game that you have not already seen. Game that is so well blended into it's background or concealed by cover that you will never see it first. See them first and the game is yours. If they see you first, you better be darn good and darn lucky.
Do yourself a favor and buy the Pentax SP's. E

Gentleman, the Pentax SP is in a totally different price class than the Nikon Monarch. Up here, an SP 8x43 can be had for $600, while the Monarch 8x42 is $350. Apples to apples they are not. This gentleman asked for input on lower end bins, not middle of the price point. Having said that, a look at the Cornell report will give the poster a group response to them that you cannot get with input from one poster.

In the end, your own eyes will make the right decision coupled with your own observations regarding the feel, balance, ergonomics, weight, manufacturer's service reputation, features and so on.

EE, the poster is in the US. That means he can get the SP's for $350 from Doug, etc.
There really is not much difference between a Leica class bino and an SP. But there is a much bigger difference between a Monarch and an SP. E

Well with all due respect E, that is your opinion. According to the writer that wrote the Cornell study, it is the Monarch optics that are getting close to the Leica class. No offense E, but Cornell has a lot more credibility with their opinion than yours does. I sit up and take notice when I read credible group opinions from the likes of Cornell or Consumers Magazine. But again, it still comes down to our own eyes and if the SP makes you all warm and fuzzy feeling in this price point, then so be it.

Although the Cornell survey does give one a starting point, there are significant flaws I can see in how the 40 individuals evaluated the binoculars and the classification methodology they were forced to use.

Just a look at the image quality parameter shows that the methodology is flawed as this should be an absolute scale and it is evident that it is not. The highest rank for image quality is a 5, lowest a 1. The Zeiss Victory FL T* 8x42mm scored a 5, which I probably agree with as it is about the best I've seen, but a look at how the others compare relative to that, to each other across categories, and the top and bottom of each category and it is immediately evident that there is something wrong with the study. There is no way that the Nikon Monarch 8x42mm can be a 4.3 and the Pentax DCF SP 8x43mm a 3.7. Just ain't happening, I don't care whose eyes they are. So, while it may be a good tool to narrow down choices, I would not say that it is the last word on binocular evaluation. One's own eyes when comparing a variety of glass are.

Well, okay Jack, I see your point. My concern about the Cornell test is well, two things...it is 2 years old and things change fast in optics; 2) the bins were solicited from manufacturers. That raises the possibility that the product may have been cherry picked or even altered prior to sending them for evaluation. That can also get caught by Cornell and I suspect they were watching for out this. All it takes is for a suspect bin to be compared to a store model. Having said that, I did numerous side by sides with Monarchs vs Leicas, Swaros, etc. and came away agreeing with the Cornell findings. The Monarchs are that good but not as good as the score shows. I also maintain that 40 sets of eyes are better than one set, regardless of how good your judgement and sight is. Maybe you have been looking through a bad set? The ones I got are really superb and not just because of the optics...the ergonomics and weight stand out too. I got a look at the Pentax SP's for a side by side but they were in 10x42mm so it was not a fair comparison. I agree they are nice bins but that isn't unique...there are a lot of great optics available in this price range.

FWIW, in my own tests, I would rate the Pentax DC SPF significantly higher than the Nikon Monarch ATB.

Had both in 10 power, and a few others, in my hot little hands recently and compared them firsthand.

I don't really keep up on the relative prices, but assuming rough parity there, I would opt the Pentax, hands down, over the Nikon.

rb

I've owned and used the Pentax SP's and WP's, and have friends that still drive both.

They don't seem as durable as some others.

There's more to good glass than glass...

Gotta agree.

rb

I've lugged the Pentax 8 x 42s for years and am pleased with them. I'll be taking them out today. I got them from Eagle Optics, but that was before I knew about Doug. Eagle Optics was very good to me, though.

If I had it to do over again I would get a pair of the 8 x 33s from Pentax if the Big Three were out of reach. For what I do the extra bulk is not worth the benefit -- although I am very fond of the glass I have.

I haven't used the other, less costly, brands. One thing I wish I had never done is look through some Leica glass in the same size category. Makes you realize what all the fuss is about Necessary? Maybe not. Worth it? Absolutely! When glassing does the step from excellent to superb quality make a difference? Absolutely.

I thought differently until I did it myself.

You're welcome, bino sellers!

Close to the Leica class ? Don'tmake me laugh, EE. That could only be close as in 1/2 mile is close.
Rick sent me one last spring for my opinion. The worst glass of the whole bunch. I've got an old, beat up B&L Zephur that my grandfather bought way back in 1958. It will run away and hide from the Monarch. I know. I stacked them. Not even remotely close.
There are many who believe the Pentax DCF SP is a better glass than the much older Zeiss Classics. I haven't stacked them, but Barsness assures me this is so. E

Obviously, you haven't read the Cornell report E. I wish you'd put JB's book down and read something a little more current for a change. Remember, I am not on the Cornell team of 40 reviews that gave the group opinion...I am simply repeating part of what they said. I did do a side by side with the Leica and Monarch...the Leica wins optically hands down but I don't like the way they feel in my hands....the Swaro is much better that way. IMO, the Monarch is a great bin for the money and it just so happens that Cornell said the same thing. If you disagree, you are still allowed to do so.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm just as sick of hearing about the Cornell report as JB's book. 1st hand experience such as Rick Bin,Brother dave and FrankD, hold much more stock than quoting some source that may or may not have questionable testing methods.JMO

Well, George what can I say but try to explain the dynamics of the situation as I see.

I went through the chore of checking out just about every binocular available from Bushnelll to Swarovski and did as many side by sides as I could. I would have purchased the Zeiss Victory bin for $2200 but we still have to eat and even if funding were not the issue, I wouldn't buy them. I therefore set my price range and ended up picking the Nikon Monarch 8x42mm because it was the best in the price range to my eye....not the best binocular, the best in this range.

I found out about the Cornell report afterwards....just so happens they came to the same conclusion as I did...have you read the report George? I happen to think that collective reports on this high a level are far more credible than anything your eyes could ever read on this site from individual posters. While I look to the likes of John Barsness or Rick Binn for their comments, a report like this is far more useful to most people than the opinion of one person. The reasons are obvious, put 40 trained observers/bino users together and each gives an opinion vs one set of trained eyes from a gun web site. Remember, each person has biased, different things they look for and so on. But collectively, they will generally give a well rounded report. Oh and if you don't think that Cornell is credibile, then perhaps you need to go Goggle the topic and do some research. I also studied the comments from Consumers magazine on this topic. That is because I have found that over the past 25 years that I have been a member of Consumers Union, they have been right in their assessment 95% of the time. As for Cornell Report, it is an excellent, well written report from a group that are devoted to excellence in orthonology. These guys want to see their birds or butterflies with the best clarity, color and brightness. I sincerely hope you can see the parrallel between birding and hunting.

So George, I hope now you'll agree that the Cornell Report is a useful tool in helping someone decide which binocular to buy. I hope you'll also understand why I will continue to refer buyers to it. Enough said.

I'll stick by my previous assessment...