Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Big "3" binocs: Really that much difference?

I have the Nikon 8x32 SE ("Superior," when I bought them). They're porro prism, and won't cost a Kimber's price. I've never seen better optics for any price and are found for about $700.

The tradeoff is extreme surdiness and waterproofing. You'll need a roof prism set instead of these if you want to use them to hammer nails or to observe salmon from underwater. Short of those extremes, I find them ideal. With Nikon's lifetime guarantee, I suspect you could send them back with nailhead imprints...

Thanks to all for the replies and with sharing your experiences.
FWIW,
I purchased a set of Zeiss 8X40mm ABK a few days ago because the price was right and they have a good reputation for brightness.
Bought them from Doug.
I figure these binoculars will be my main hunting pair and I'll use my Nikon Monarchs as truck/birding binoculars.
The Nikons are much lighter and I get a bit of image shake from them, so I'm hoping the heavier Zeiss model is easier to use in hunting season.
I plan on a shoulder harness for the added weight.

Regards,
Phil

I own binoculars from Leica,Swarovski,and Ziess. I have Swaro 8x30,Leica 10x42,and Ziess 8x56. All of them are excellant in all respects.

Eremicus has never owned or used Swarovski's but he read some years ago that they are bad to fog. Take his advice with a grain of skepticism.

Britt

Does your 8x56 get much use?

No, doc. I read it from Mr. Barsness just a few weeks ago that that still is the case for them.
Tell me something. If I repeat what he says, we should all take it with a grain of salt ? What about when he says it ? We should ignore, or take what he says with a grain of salt ? Just because we own them and like them. After all the effort and care he takes to learn these things for us ? I think he is well worth listening to. That's because I have, and found his advice on optics has been of great benefit to me. E

I could not disagree more. I think we may have discussed this previously but if not. I had gone through several discussions which seem to support that the natural "zone" of focused human visual attention is around 10 degrees (not counting peripheral vision). The closer the true field of view in a given binocular comes to that 10 degrees the more relaxed the field of view.

And as a side note I would add that when you combine a binocular with this trait and good depth of field then you tend to find the most relaxed image, in my experience, possible. This is one reason that I tend to prefer the various 7x high end binoculars on the market.

It is interesting that you mention the Pentax ED though. I have yet to look through a set though I have owned the SP models. The only characteristic I remember seeing either model lacking, on paper and compared to the high end models, was field of view. I believe it was something they sacrifice because of their aspheric eyepiece design. The benefit is the ability maintain better edge of field sharpness.

Good discussion but I gotta run.

Yep,

I use it hunting deer over food plots on afternoon hunts from permanent stands. It is almost like having night vision when it comes to low light situations. It lets me see if the buck at dusk is a 150 class shooter or a 120 class youngster.


Britt

E.....whatever,your really not worth taking seriously so most people here don't.


Britt

what about what CAS says? WHat about everyone in the alaska forum minus a couple who have had and heard of great success with swaro in "ALASKA"....

Popcorn... check, drink... check.

I bought Zeiss because I read E's posts about *some* Swarovskis fogging? I can't have that! I can't pay that kind of money and have fogged binoculars.
Hell, I have a set of Sears brand 7X50mm from 1975 and a Bushnell Banner rifle scope from 1979 and they haven't fogged yet.

It was Zeiss or Leica for me. Zeiss won on price.
I didn't want to spend over a grand on a set of binocs.
I'm certain I'll be happy with my Abby Kong lenses! Or something.lol.