viper699
Well-known member
agree. I researched a bit. And Nikon does well, but the Vortex’s are a step above no doubt in mymind. Esp with the warranty, and Vortex staff are EASY to get a hold of too! Very knowledgeable staff.
Best Binoculars for Wildlife viewing/Photography
- Thread starter marklangner
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
agree. I researched a bit. And Nikon does well, but the Vortex’s are a step above no doubt in mymind. Esp with the warranty, and Vortex staff are EASY to get a hold of too! Very knowledgeable staff.
fcotterill
Well-known member
I've been using Nikon's Monarch binoculars for over 25 years. My current pair is a M511 12 x 42 and I added a pair of Nikon LaserForce 10x42 with integral rangefinder, which is often very useful to have in wildlife photography.
I use 5 Series as my testing circa 2021 showed their performance is close to the 7 Series and more expensive models. But today it's worth paying a bit extra to have the easywipe silicon lens coatings
bcgforums.com
They've survived very rough use, including being dropped and exposed to rain etc. (I suspect my first pair of Monarch 8 x 42 from 1999 would still work as well today as they did circa 2007 when lost).
All considered, Monarchs are well worth the money for quality and reliability
I use 5 Series as my testing circa 2021 showed their performance is close to the 7 Series and more expensive models. But today it's worth paying a bit extra to have the easywipe silicon lens coatings
Best Binoculars for Wildlife viewing/Photography
I could have sworn I read an article from Steve making binocular recommendations to compliment wildlife photography, but searching the forums and website topics I'm running a blank...any ideas ?
bcgforums.com
They've survived very rough use, including being dropped and exposed to rain etc. (I suspect my first pair of Monarch 8 x 42 from 1999 would still work as well today as they did circa 2007 when lost).
All considered, Monarchs are well worth the money for quality and reliability
Last edited:
BillthePill
New member
Beyond brand name, you may want to consider smaller and lighter bins like 8x32s. Unless you are searching through deep undergrowth at dawn or dusk 8x32s will serve you as well as 8x42s.
Here are a couple comparison review articles of affordable bins from Cornell Lab:
8x32s - https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/best-affordable-compact-binoculars-review/
8x42s - https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/the-cornell-lab-review-affordable-full-size-8x42-binoculars/
Personally I'm not a Vortex fan. I've handled most of their modles at one time or another and never found one I cared for. Their ergos just didn't suite me and the focus knobs are often quite stiff. Also I really disagree about their quality being top notch (not that they are any worse than most brands.) The hunting crowd has a saying about them, "Vortex has a great warranty and you are going to need it." I'll not knock the warranty, if you can send in the pieces they will send you a replacement.
Here are a couple comparison review articles of affordable bins from Cornell Lab:
8x32s - https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/best-affordable-compact-binoculars-review/
8x42s - https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/the-cornell-lab-review-affordable-full-size-8x42-binoculars/
Personally I'm not a Vortex fan. I've handled most of their modles at one time or another and never found one I cared for. Their ergos just didn't suite me and the focus knobs are often quite stiff. Also I really disagree about their quality being top notch (not that they are any worse than most brands.) The hunting crowd has a saying about them, "Vortex has a great warranty and you are going to need it." I'll not knock the warranty, if you can send in the pieces they will send you a replacement.
I have these, and IMO you can't beat them on clarity or price.
Gaduf
Well-known member
I have a pair of Nikon Monarch M7 8x42 binoculars - recently acquired, which I am very happy with. And an older pair of Nikon Aculon 10x 50 binoculars which I have had for many years and still function as new.
Gavin
Gavin
My $0.02...before you buy anything check out Image Stabilized binoculars from Canon and others (I recall Nikon was going to release a pair, but haven't followed up on that). I first experienced using them years ago when actively boating offshore and in coastal waters. They are expensive and a little heavier, but well worth the extra money when scanning for a subject. You wouldn't want to shoot a 10x lens without VR would you? I've had a Canon 10x30 model since the mid-90's and other than a broken battery door that I caused and repaired myself, they've survived everything I've thrown at them. If weight and size is critical, I carry a Nikon 10x25 travelite V that I've had forever.
Cheers!
Cheers!
Many thanks for the review articles and perspective.I've been using Nikon's Monarch binoculars for over 25 years. My current pair is a M511 12 x 42 and I added a pair of Nikon LaserForce 10x42 with integral rangefinder, which is often very useful to have in wildlife photography.
I use 5 Series as my testing circa 2021 showed their performance is close to the 7 Series and more expensive models. But today it's worth paying a bit extra to have the easywipe silicon lens coatings
Best Binoculars for Wildlife viewing/Photography
I could have sworn I read an article from Steve making binocular recommendations to compliment wildlife photography, but searching the forums and website topics I'm running a blank...any ideas ?
They've survived very rough use, including being dropped and exposed to rain etc. (I suspect my first pair of Monarch 8 x 42 from 1999 would still work as well today as they did circa 2007 when lost).
All considered, Monarchs are well worth the money for quality and reliability
fcotterill
Well-known member
Really great articles. Learned a bunch. Many thanks!I owned an earlier Monarch 8x42, until I left these in the bush on a sampling trip! I tried a more affordable lesser known brand, which worked but I realized not as well when I bought the new pair of Nikon Monarch 5 12 x42. I find the greater power useful to look into patches of shade etc at longer distances. These are light and easy to carry across my body with a heavy telephoto+DSLR. 8 x 42 gather more light, and have wider FoV etc. All their models are tough, waterproofed etc
here are some links bookmarked [updated]:
Best Bird Watching Binoculars Reviews (2025)
How to choose the best bird watching binoculars, 2025 birding binocular reviews & top models in low-mid-high price ranges. Nikon, Bushnell, Vortex, Leica, morewww.birdwatching-bliss.com
Best Binoculars For Bird Watching In 2023 - 2024
Bird watching is undoubtedly one of the best outdoor activities since way back, and till now, is continuing to gain popularity with all ages, allowing us tobest-binoculars.uk
Nikon changed their models recently, so these help to dissect what's what
Nikon Monarch Binoculars Comparison Review (2025)
Nikon Monarch binoculars (2025) review and comparison of Monarch M5, M7 and Monarch HG binoculars. What's the difference between the models? Which one is best for bird watching?www.birdwatching-bliss.com
The Vortex Viper HD and Vortex Razor series of binoculars are not Swarovski quality but they are BOTH TOP NOTCH in their respective price ranges. And I can assure you that Vortex is thought of much more highly in the hunting crowd than Nikon when it comes to binoculars and rifle scopes. Been an active part of that crowd for 40+ years. Only once you get in the $1500 and up range would I go a different direction than Vortex. If there were widespread quality control issues which is simply not the case and wrong to imply Vortex would have gone out of business a long time ago offering the warranty that they do.
In terms of image stabilization, bInoculars tend to be treated more roughly, often a lot more roughly than expensive cameras and camera lenses and for this reason I would have no interest in adding any onboard electronics particularly in lower priced binoculars. For some applications maybe or if you had a medical issue maybe but i can never once think of a time when using a very good set of regular binoculars (Vortex, Leica, Swarovski) that I’ve thought to myself that I wish they had image stabilization.
There is always a tradeoff between field of view and magnification - just like in photographing birds. It's easier to find a bird with a wide field of view, but for the view you want, you need a narrow field of view and more magnification.
More magnification has two major drawbacks. Stabilization handles the most obvious issue associated with more magnification. As with a long photo lens, it allows you to stay on the subject with more precision at high magnification. When stabilization is used in a camera - even at high shutter speeds - it helps to stabilize the image in the viewfinder. With binoculars it has a similar function. 10x or 12x binoculars usually need some level of stabilization to maintain a stable view. The reason most recommend 8x binoculars is in large part because they are more stable. If you add stabilization, many people would want 10x, 12x, or even 14x.
More magnification brings up the second set of problems - even with stabilization. At 12x you have a narrower field of view, but you also have less light. The result is the view is darker unless you have larger lenses. In photography that's called faster glass - f/2.8 or f/4 long lenses. So even with stabilization, you will have a larger front element of the binoculars which makes them larger overall and heavier. Add to that the weight of the stabilization mechanism. So while stabilization is helpful, the primary use case with more magnification is complicated by the larger front element and overall heavier weight.
I can comfortably use 10x binoculars - and as a photographer experience with long lenses is helpful in handling more magnification, a narrow field of view, and even more weight. I'm also pretty comfortable finding a small subject with a narrow field of view - but it can be challenging. I'd probably look for 12x binoculars if stabilization was available.
All this points to the direction of electronic binoculars - essentially a camera and binocular EVF with stabilization, ISO for lower light, and an electronic or digital zoom. That's how I use my cameras and long lenses today. I lead bird walks with just a camera and long lens. I don't even use binoculars. I have a stabilization in the camera and lens, I have ISO to compensate for low light, I have a Fn button programmed to zoom to 50% or 100%, and I can capture the image I see immediately. It's available for about $1100 as a Z50ii with 50-250mm kit lens - or with my full frame camera and much longer lenses.
Canon 10x30IS. I like them so much I'm on my third pair! 
Another vote for Nikon Monarchs. I have a pair of 8x42 Monarch 7s that I like a lot and use in my kayak, canoe, hydrobike and pontoon. Waterproof and nitrogen filled for fog resistance.
I have a smaller pair of Nikon 8x30 Monarch HGs that I tend to take traveling, as they are smaller. The HGs are a bit more expensive, but very nice.
bkgeist, It looks like you may wear glasses. If so, trying a pair of binocs before buying is a good idea to make sure that the eye relief is sufficient for you. I wear glasses and find both pairs of my Monarchs are comfortable for viewing.
I have a pair of 14x Canon image stabilized binocs. A bit heavy, but nice in the right circumstances. I think Canon makes a 12x image stabilized pair that is waterproof and nitrogen filled. Have considered it, as waterproofing is important to me in the kayak and canoe, but like my Monarchs a lot so have not bought a pair of the Canons. The lack rof waterproofing is why I have not tried the new Nikon stabilized binocs.
Saint
Member
I have Swarovski 8.5x 42 EL's, 10x25 pockets, and 10x32 EL's. The 10x32's are by far my favorites. They are the perfect size, and they let in more light than you think. They are my go to when out birding with any camera configuration. If I'm carrying a lot of gear, like a backpack, audio equipment, and camera I go to the pocket 10x25's.
We just got a pair of Zeiss SFL 10x40s. They were on sale earlier this Spring, for $300 off of the regular price of $1799. Very bright, excellent close viewing, waterproof, excellent optics, small size, and very light weight at 22 ounces. For a 10x40, that's quite light. My wife is quite small and these fit her hands well. They also fold close together. Her small size means this is a necessity for her binoculars.
They were an upgrade from her 8x32 Zeiss conquest hds. Those are still nice, but they have a narrower field of view. She has found that she can handle the 10x40 from a stability standpoint.
We decided to upgrade since we use our binoculars every day, more than my cameras.
Zeiss also has come out with new lightweight versions of their SFL binoculars. They are 8x50, 10x50, and 12x50. The 10x50 is around the same weight as regular 10x40 binoculars of orher high end manufacturers like Swarovski, Leica, and others. I want to try out the 10x50s. They are a larger barrel diameter. How comfortable that is I don't know.
So far so good. We've slowly upgraded our binoculars over the years from Nikon to Zeiss conquest hds to the SFL versions, but like I said, we use them constantly.
They were an upgrade from her 8x32 Zeiss conquest hds. Those are still nice, but they have a narrower field of view. She has found that she can handle the 10x40 from a stability standpoint.
We decided to upgrade since we use our binoculars every day, more than my cameras.
Zeiss also has come out with new lightweight versions of their SFL binoculars. They are 8x50, 10x50, and 12x50. The 10x50 is around the same weight as regular 10x40 binoculars of orher high end manufacturers like Swarovski, Leica, and others. I want to try out the 10x50s. They are a larger barrel diameter. How comfortable that is I don't know.
So far so good. We've slowly upgraded our binoculars over the years from Nikon to Zeiss conquest hds to the SFL versions, but like I said, we use them constantly.
I just put this together for a friend over at Nikon Cafe, a few thoughts. (He was contemplating a great deal on some Zeiss SFL 10x40 Which he ended up buying, and or Nikon Monarch HG) He had an old Leica Trinov pair from 30 years ago, that while still good, he was ready for an upgrade with new coatings.
Binoc thoughts on what I own.
I currently have in my stable a compact 10x25 Cabela compact ED glass, waterproof, made in Japan by Nikon or Canon for Cabela in 2006. Stunning compact binocs, that stay in my vehicle 100% of the time. No longer made of course. and my Astronomy binocs are a Fujinon 16x70 purchased 15 years ago.
Zeiss Conquest 10x42 (one notch down from the SFL/top line). Was around $1100-1300 US new, 6-7 years ago. I bought used from a cafe member who tried them for a few months on the railroad, but they were to large and heavy for using from the train cab, he purchased a 8x32 Zeiss SFL, paid $$$$ for them. I bought these binocs from him at a significant discount, and it was also as part of his Christmas gift to me. He was my best friend, and just passed from Cancer 2 years ago.
Next is my Monarch 7, purchased 3-4 years ago, on a big sale, normal price was $600-700 range, bought at steep discount new. At the time Nikon was revamping their binocular lineup, and changing the monarch 5,7,9 line, and the 7/9 were melded into the current HG. You may note that my binocs exterior are identical to the HG. Same focus, bracing, caps, knobs.
Third and final pair in the stable is my Nikon EDG 10x42, the first great pair of binocs purchased, (I have had good in the past including a Swaro 10x42 top line, that I sold soon after purchasing the EDG.)
First, I wear eyeglasses, this creates issues with me on some brands of binocs, including eye relief with glasses. I also have astigmatism, so usually, I use them with my glasses. During astronomical use, I sometimes take my glasses off. Yes I use both the EDG and Fujinon for astronomical use.
Why I no longer own Swaro, back then, their eye relief, and field of view when using glasses was not as good as Zeiss or Nikon EDG (best back then). But most important, they glared more in bright backlighted conditions toward evening, when viewing into fields with the sun setting in front of you. Not good. Caveot, that was a decade or more ago.
My Nikon EDG, I purchased and paid I think $1700 US on sale, new, Full retail back then was over $2200-2300. Equal in quality and in some instances better than the top Zeiss and , (at that time). I checked all three brands a lot back then. Made my choice. Back then, at that time the EDG were obviously better than the Swaro and Zeiss. There was disbelief in the birding community, back then, brand loyalists could not believe it, but my experience and actual comparisons with other owners copies, I stand by my thoughts that the EDG and EDG II from Nikon in 2008-2015/2017 or so were better than any Zeiss or Swaro at THAT time.
Zeiss and Swaro both upped their game greatly in the last decade. They made binocs equal to the EDG starting in the mid early teens in my humble opinion. Then Nikon discontinued the EDG II line at that time.
The Zeiss I purchased from my friend are great, and 98% of my EDG. They are that good. The Nikon Monarch 7, are 92-95% of the EDG. I am using % to indicate how close all these are really. You see the biggest difference in strong backlights, field of view, eye relief. Which keeps the Nikon monarch 7 closer than expected.
The Zeiss are my spouses primary binocs, and stay in our bedroom, the Monarch 7s stay in the living room for fast casual use, grabbing and going to the porch. We use binocs on our farm and property a great deal. Finally the EDG are my hunting and outdoor binocs and get the most use and abuse. They are the most rugged, weigh the most, but are still my best binocs, with the newer Zeiss close behind.
What follows is a spacing project with dots instead of numbers, to give my thoughts a visual impact.
Weight in this order lighter to heavier:
Monarch 7…Zeiss Conquest………….EDG
Glass flare in backlight quality: EDG…Zeiss………Monarch 7
Eye relief and field of view: EDG..Monarch 7..Zeiss. All pretty close
Glass color accuracy, contrast, aberrations, and edge of view sharpness:
EDG..Zeiss…..Monarch 7
Final thoughts: The newer Zeiss SFL are designed to be very light with faster focus knobs and are a big difference compared to the SL or Conquest line of old. I am not sure how the Nikon HG compares to the Monarch 7/9 line, but bet it is at least as good and probably better. Those used EDG are still probably better, than your new choices, but warranty, repairs, and weight, age, I would say avoid them, but they are great.
Hope these thoughts help. My gut says, get the Zeiss SFL.
For information purposes only. The new Swaro Pure I have not looked through or tested visually. I expect excellence of highest magnitude. Same with new ultra Zeiss.
Binoc thoughts on what I own.
I currently have in my stable a compact 10x25 Cabela compact ED glass, waterproof, made in Japan by Nikon or Canon for Cabela in 2006. Stunning compact binocs, that stay in my vehicle 100% of the time. No longer made of course. and my Astronomy binocs are a Fujinon 16x70 purchased 15 years ago.
Zeiss Conquest 10x42 (one notch down from the SFL/top line). Was around $1100-1300 US new, 6-7 years ago. I bought used from a cafe member who tried them for a few months on the railroad, but they were to large and heavy for using from the train cab, he purchased a 8x32 Zeiss SFL, paid $$$$ for them. I bought these binocs from him at a significant discount, and it was also as part of his Christmas gift to me. He was my best friend, and just passed from Cancer 2 years ago.
Next is my Monarch 7, purchased 3-4 years ago, on a big sale, normal price was $600-700 range, bought at steep discount new. At the time Nikon was revamping their binocular lineup, and changing the monarch 5,7,9 line, and the 7/9 were melded into the current HG. You may note that my binocs exterior are identical to the HG. Same focus, bracing, caps, knobs.
Third and final pair in the stable is my Nikon EDG 10x42, the first great pair of binocs purchased, (I have had good in the past including a Swaro 10x42 top line, that I sold soon after purchasing the EDG.)
First, I wear eyeglasses, this creates issues with me on some brands of binocs, including eye relief with glasses. I also have astigmatism, so usually, I use them with my glasses. During astronomical use, I sometimes take my glasses off. Yes I use both the EDG and Fujinon for astronomical use.
Why I no longer own Swaro, back then, their eye relief, and field of view when using glasses was not as good as Zeiss or Nikon EDG (best back then). But most important, they glared more in bright backlighted conditions toward evening, when viewing into fields with the sun setting in front of you. Not good. Caveot, that was a decade or more ago.
My Nikon EDG, I purchased and paid I think $1700 US on sale, new, Full retail back then was over $2200-2300. Equal in quality and in some instances better than the top Zeiss and , (at that time). I checked all three brands a lot back then. Made my choice. Back then, at that time the EDG were obviously better than the Swaro and Zeiss. There was disbelief in the birding community, back then, brand loyalists could not believe it, but my experience and actual comparisons with other owners copies, I stand by my thoughts that the EDG and EDG II from Nikon in 2008-2015/2017 or so were better than any Zeiss or Swaro at THAT time.
Zeiss and Swaro both upped their game greatly in the last decade. They made binocs equal to the EDG starting in the mid early teens in my humble opinion. Then Nikon discontinued the EDG II line at that time.
The Zeiss I purchased from my friend are great, and 98% of my EDG. They are that good. The Nikon Monarch 7, are 92-95% of the EDG. I am using % to indicate how close all these are really. You see the biggest difference in strong backlights, field of view, eye relief. Which keeps the Nikon monarch 7 closer than expected.
The Zeiss are my spouses primary binocs, and stay in our bedroom, the Monarch 7s stay in the living room for fast casual use, grabbing and going to the porch. We use binocs on our farm and property a great deal. Finally the EDG are my hunting and outdoor binocs and get the most use and abuse. They are the most rugged, weigh the most, but are still my best binocs, with the newer Zeiss close behind.
What follows is a spacing project with dots instead of numbers, to give my thoughts a visual impact.
Weight in this order lighter to heavier:
Monarch 7…Zeiss Conquest………….EDG
Glass flare in backlight quality: EDG…Zeiss………Monarch 7
Eye relief and field of view: EDG..Monarch 7..Zeiss. All pretty close
Glass color accuracy, contrast, aberrations, and edge of view sharpness:
EDG..Zeiss…..Monarch 7
Final thoughts: The newer Zeiss SFL are designed to be very light with faster focus knobs and are a big difference compared to the SL or Conquest line of old. I am not sure how the Nikon HG compares to the Monarch 7/9 line, but bet it is at least as good and probably better. Those used EDG are still probably better, than your new choices, but warranty, repairs, and weight, age, I would say avoid them, but they are great.
Hope these thoughts help. My gut says, get the Zeiss SFL.
For information purposes only. The new Swaro Pure I have not looked through or tested visually. I expect excellence of highest magnitude. Same with new ultra Zeiss.
Bill Ferris
Well-known member
I've got an old pair of Swift 10x50 Audubon Kestrels (porro prism) that has served me, well, for 30 years. I had them refurbished a year ago, mostly for sentimental reasons.
I got the Kestrels while working at Wild Birds Unlimited in Madison, Wisconsin, in the early 1990s. I was in the optics department - Eagle Optics - and specialized in sales of astronomical telescopes, eyepieces, and accessories. I used the Kestrels for binocular observing of the night sky long before I used them to identify birds & wildlife at distance when out doing photography.
Eagle Optics had a reputation amongst birders as the best mail order optics retailer. We sold to a lot of government agencies and, of course, private citizens. We occasionally sold EO branded optics in partnership with the manufacturer. This was the origin for what would become Vortex Optics, which was founded by the man who owned Wildbirds Unlimited/Eagle Optics.
Naturally, when I decided to add a compact roof prism binocular to bring with me on backpacks, I purchased a Vortex product. This was 15 years ago and I chose the 10x25 Spitfire. They lasted about 5 years. The build quality was middling, at best, and that was reflected in the price.
About 10 years ago, I upgraded from the Spitfires to a 10x28 Viper. I got 6 good years of use out of the 10x28s before the focusing mechanism failed. It was about this time that I decided to upgrade from the Swift 10x50s so, I ordered a pair of 10x50 Vipers.
As it turned out, the 10x28s were not repairable and Vortex replaced them at no cost under the unconditional lifetime warranty with a pair of 10x42 Vipers. As good as those are, I prefer the 50mm aperture for the additional light-gathering.
While Vortex isn't in the same class as Leica & Zeiss in terms of optics or build quality, they're affordable, deliver excellent image quality at their price, and are covered by Vortex's lifetime, no-fault warranty.
Plus, it's a company run by good Wisconsin folks
I got the Kestrels while working at Wild Birds Unlimited in Madison, Wisconsin, in the early 1990s. I was in the optics department - Eagle Optics - and specialized in sales of astronomical telescopes, eyepieces, and accessories. I used the Kestrels for binocular observing of the night sky long before I used them to identify birds & wildlife at distance when out doing photography.
Eagle Optics had a reputation amongst birders as the best mail order optics retailer. We sold to a lot of government agencies and, of course, private citizens. We occasionally sold EO branded optics in partnership with the manufacturer. This was the origin for what would become Vortex Optics, which was founded by the man who owned Wildbirds Unlimited/Eagle Optics.
Naturally, when I decided to add a compact roof prism binocular to bring with me on backpacks, I purchased a Vortex product. This was 15 years ago and I chose the 10x25 Spitfire. They lasted about 5 years. The build quality was middling, at best, and that was reflected in the price.
About 10 years ago, I upgraded from the Spitfires to a 10x28 Viper. I got 6 good years of use out of the 10x28s before the focusing mechanism failed. It was about this time that I decided to upgrade from the Swift 10x50s so, I ordered a pair of 10x50 Vipers.
As it turned out, the 10x28s were not repairable and Vortex replaced them at no cost under the unconditional lifetime warranty with a pair of 10x42 Vipers. As good as those are, I prefer the 50mm aperture for the additional light-gathering.
While Vortex isn't in the same class as Leica & Zeiss in terms of optics or build quality, they're affordable, deliver excellent image quality at their price, and are covered by Vortex's lifetime, no-fault warranty.
Plus, it's a company run by good Wisconsin folks
I will add, I have used vortex rifle scopes, they have good glass and warranty too.
Calson
Well-known member
I have more than a few binoculars but the ones I use when carrying a camera are the Swarovski 10x25 Pocket Mountain ones. They are compact enough that their carry case fits inside a water bottle pocket on backpack and as they only weight 12 ounces I have them hung off my neck the entire time I am shooting.
The 25mm objective is OK with the 10x magnification in low light. The surface area of a 25mm objective is 56% greater than for a 20mm objective.
I do not hesitate to grab the case for the Swarvo binos and that is what counts. For non photo birding I was using a 12x50 binocular but upgraded to a Sig Sauer Zulu 6 16x42 image stabilized binocular. With it 16x image magnification I no longer take a spotting scope and tripod. The Sig Sauer weigh 21.9 ounces and the AA battery lasts for a full year of use.
The 25mm objective is OK with the 10x magnification in low light. The surface area of a 25mm objective is 56% greater than for a 20mm objective.
I do not hesitate to grab the case for the Swarvo binos and that is what counts. For non photo birding I was using a 12x50 binocular but upgraded to a Sig Sauer Zulu 6 16x42 image stabilized binocular. With it 16x image magnification I no longer take a spotting scope and tripod. The Sig Sauer weigh 21.9 ounces and the AA battery lasts for a full year of use.
FWIW. Buy the best you can afford without necessarily buying new. I’ve had 2 pairs of 2nd hand Leica’s first the 8x32 BA version that got nicked in 2012. I replaced these with a pair of 8x42 BN the same year and still have them and no intention of replacing them and they still have that “walk in “ feel that quality optics give you.
Plus in 2022 I had an issue with some grit in the eyecups and Leica UK serviced them and replaced the rubber grips all free of charge as the 30yr warranty was still valid!
It was like getting a new pair, never ever regretted getting quality, get the right ones you will have them for life.
Just my experience.
Plus in 2022 I had an issue with some grit in the eyecups and Leica UK serviced them and replaced the rubber grips all free of charge as the 30yr warranty was still valid!
It was like getting a new pair, never ever regretted getting quality, get the right ones you will have them for life.
Just my experience.
Last edited:
Somehow you guys always cost me money. I have binoculars covered - but I don't have a golf rangefinder. So now I have a Nikon Rangefinder on order and scheduled for delivery next week. It has the optics and some magnification - and VR is very useful. It will be useful for photography - especially long lens work. Of course, this also means playing more golf. The course I play most often was redone and they removed distance markers assuming everyone had a rangefinder. Hopefully the rangefinder will work for me until I shoot my age.
fcotterill
Well-known member
I have a pair of Nikon LaserForce 10x42 binoculars with the integral rangefinder. Quality of the optics is in the Monarch league but they're obviously heavier.
They are very useful to quickly measure a distance, and the high precision is a bonus. I bought them to use with my subject size cheatsheet.
Nikon LaserForce 10x42 | Rangefinders | Nikon USA
Nikon combined binocular performance with the ranging technology of a 1900-yard rangefinder in the LaserForce 10x42 Rangefinder Binocular. Shop now!
www.nikonusa.com
Maurie
Active member
I use Fujinon stabilised 16x28 for boating on the ocean. Before I bought I tried the Nikon and the Canon equivalents and to my eye the Fuji was the best - and the cheapest! Weight is about 1.24lbs. Waterproof 30m
Calson
Well-known member
The Sig Sauer 16x42 are exceptional binoculars and the image stabilization is excellent. These draw about 20% the power of other IS binos and a single AA was put in after I bought them in August of 2024 and that same battery is still in use.
What is also different with these is that there are two levels of IS provided. One for scanning and another in a target mode when focused on a single subject. I can easily hold the 16x binos and they are one of my lightest binoculars at 21.9 ounces. For general birding these are now the ones I use.
What is also different with these is that there are two levels of IS provided. One for scanning and another in a target mode when focused on a single subject. I can easily hold the 16x binos and they are one of my lightest binoculars at 21.9 ounces. For general birding these are now the ones I use.
Another vote for Vortex Optics.