Nagging feeling......

[drdougrx]

I have this nagging feeling.  My brother-in-law and I are going to SE Alaska for brown bear and moose.  He needed binos.  We went looking and he wanted to look at zeiss conquest, swarovski or some kind of steiner.  His research told him that the zeiss would be best.  Off we went to the Kittery Trading Post in Kittery Maine and he start picking the various models and makes up for a look....me too. 

He realizes that after handeling the zeiss, he doesn't like them.  The Swaros were way too expensive and the steiners were heavy.  Then we looked at nikon monarchs.  10x42 and 12x42.  BAM.....he likes'm.  Problem is me too.  At 21 oz they were really lite and they appeared very clear.

Here's the rub.  I use leica BN 10x42s.  The nikons were soo much lighter.  The next day, we brought them to the range and compared.  I was hard pressed to see the difference.  Am I crazy or should I just go ahead and get me a pair to save weight.  Does anyone here think there's a major difference??

[Cement Man]

I have to admit that I do not own any Leica or Zeiss binos, but I have looked through them and they are extremely fine glass.  I do own the Nikon ATBs and they have been rugged, waterproof, and optically excellent.  I would not trade them for anything else.  When I see what the Optic Zone sells the Nikons for now, I think they are an incredible value. 

[kyelkhunter3006]

I've never looked through Leica's, but I've heard that they are very fine.  I've handled the Ziess, Swarovski, Kahles, and Steiners.  They were all darn nice too.  For the money though, I think it's hard to beat the Monarchs.  I told a friend to buy the older one, 10x40, and he's never regretted it.  I personally have a set of the Bushnell Legend 8x32 and I wouldn't trade them for anything.  The Rainguard is what sold me on the Legends.  I also used to have a set of the Burris Signature 10x50's and they were very fine, but a bit more than I was willing to pack.  If you sell the Leica's, you could probably get one each of the Nikons.   

[Dave in WV]

Since you already have a good 10x42 binocular why not check out Nikon Monarch 8x36 and Bushnell Legend 8x32 binoculars. They're more compact and light.  Gunwriter John Barsness rates the Bushnell Legend as a best buy in it's class.

[Redhawk1]

I have 2 sets of Bino's and both are Zeiss. I have a pair of Zeiss Diafun 8x30 MC and a pair of Zeiss Victory FL 8x42. I would not trade them for anything. The Zeiss Diafun 8x30 MC is what I carried in Alaska on my Caribou hunt, light weight under 16 oz. I also brought my Zeiss Victory FL 8x42 and used them  more while in camp and not hunting. I looked hard at Leupold, Nikon and found the Zeiss to fit my needs the best.

[drdougrx]

Thanks for the replys!! 

Redhawk...I also have a pair of zeiss diafuns, 10x32's as well as swarovski 8x32 and a aweful pair of redfield 7x35s that I bought in the 80's.  Including my Leicas...I like the 8x32 sworos best in all catagories except pwer (I'd prefer 10 power).

So...does anyone think I'm underpowered using these??

[kyelkhunter3006]

I think that 8x is probably the best all around power for a field binocular.  The difference between 8x and 10x doesn't mean much to me.  If I was wanting a higher power than 8x, I'd probably go for a 12x for serious long range glassing, but I'd have to rest them on shooting stix or a tripod to make effective use of that power.

[Redhawk1]

I think the 8 power is better. I looked at a pair Zeiss 10x30B MC as well as the 8X30 and I thought the 8 power was better. But 10 power in not over power in my opinion. 

[Zachary]

I used to think that "bigger is better."  While this is true in some instances, it is not true in others.  As for binos, I used to use 10x and even 12x.  Now, after much hunting experience, I find 8x to actually be a better choice.  I like the wider field of view.  I need to see how many points a deer has on its head.  I don't need to see low long its eye lashes are.

Keep this in mind.  Clearer 8x optics will give you a better result than cheaper optics in 10x.  Get good optics in 8x.

Zachary 

[Ahab]

I used to think that "bigger is better."  While this is true in some instances, it is not true in others.  As for binos, I used to use 10x and even 12x.  Now, after much hunting experience, I find 8x to actually be a better choice.  I like the wider field of view.  I need to see how many points a deer has on its head.  I don't need to see low long its eye lashes are.

Keep this in mind.  Clearer 8x optics will give you a better result than cheaper optics in 10x.  Get good optics in 8x.

Zachary 

Yup, I concur, ended up with Pentax 8X36 roof prisms phase coated.

[drdougrx]

Interesting responses.....My swaros are pretty hard to beat.  I have a Pentax 15x45x50 spotter that I'm planning to bring with me as well.

[Dave in WV]

With all things equal the 8x will seem more clear than the 10x. If you don't think I'm right, hold the 8x on top of the 10x and alternate looking through them. A 32mm objective lens gives you an exit pupil of 4mm with 8x optics. You need a 40mm lens to get the same exit pupil size. A smaller exit pupil than 4mm is not going to be as user friendly as 4mm or bigger. The smaller the exit pupil, the more exactly aligned to the bore axis of the optics you need to be.

[SDS-GEN]

I took my nikon ATB's to SE Alaska this year and they did just fine.  Actually they were the only glass we needed, bears were easy to spot and getting in range was no problem.  Mine are 8x42's.  I work through a Leica microscope every day and the optics are pretty darn good, the swaro's and Zeiss' I've seen are great too, I just can't see paying the price for the more expensive glass.