Greetings,

I have recently purchased a pair of binoculars and would like to submit some comments about them.

They are made by Optex, distributed in Canada by Gentec International, Markham, Ontario L3R 3L2.

        Model #:        6200
        Magnification:  7x42
        FOV:            367' @ 1000 yds.

They seem have decent optical quality for $150.00. They are quite lightweight for their size (the reason I went 7x42 is that I use them for boating also).

If I have one complaint, it is that they don't focus quite close enough, about 24 ft. minimum.

If you need further info that I may not have thought to include, let me know.

Jamie...--

 |  Jamie Sommerville            Internet:   jamies@storm.ca   |
 |  P.O. Box 718    Winchester   Ontario   Canada    K0C 2K0   |
 |  Grid Locator: FN25hc       Amateur Radio Callsign VE3SKN   |

Hi gord,

After an extensive search on the internet & by phone here in Ottawa & Toronto, we purchased two pairs of B&L custom compacts 7x26....

We've been simply amazed with our compact binoculars. I've previously owned an inexpensive pair. The "teacup grip", the dull grey view & the susceptibility to reflections made these simply unusable. Our new compacts compare surprisingly well to our Adlreblick 7x50's & careful scrutiny is needed to show any difference.

Are you planning to review compact binoculars in the future?

Gord Gallant
gallantg@interlog.com

In October, 1996, I purchased a pair of Nikon 10X42 Superior "E" porro-prism binoculars. Although I got them through Le Naturaliste in Quebec, they actually came direct from Nikon in Toronto, since Le Naturalist does not stock them.

Specifications:

Power: 10X
Field: 6 degrees
Field @ 1000m: 105m
Brightness: 17.6
Eye relief: 17.4mm
Close focusing: 5m
Weight: 710g

Features:
Rubberised coating
rubber fold-down eyecups
Wide neckstrap
Lens covers and rain cap
Soft carrying case

(All information taken from Nikon instruction manual)

I have given myself a year and a bit before passing judgment on these binoculars, and I can now say that I am very pleased with them. While I have taken good care of them, I have not spared them exposure to rain, sea air, salt spray or snow, and so far they appear equal to the challenge of Newfoundland's weather. Nikon does NOT call these binoculars "waterproof" and they avoid the designation "spray-proof", but I have not had any fogging or moisture problems.

These binoculars are exceptionally bright and crisp. The first impression when using them is the high degree of definition in every element of the field of view. Even very distant objects come into sharp focus. Usually, atmospheric interference, as opposed to optical quality, is the limiting factor.

The next most noticeable feature is the neutrality of color transfer. White is white, blue is blue. There are absolutely no "edge" effects around highly contrasting objects, and colors are true in brightness or shade.

The field of view is acceptably wide, and birds are easily located even in dense underbrush. Depth of field seems quite good, requiring less focusing than in some other 10X models I have used. Eye relief is comfortable and the user feels "draw in" to the image. There is no "tunnel" effect. Friends who wear glasses have used these binoculars without rolling down the eyecups and have found them satisfactory.

These glasses are very light and comfortable to carry. I have replaced the factory-supplied strap with an Op-tech strap, but this is not necessary. They feel good in the hand, and the rubbery coating gives a very sure, positive grip even in the cold and wet. The focus wheel has a rubber coating with a deeply grooved "tread", making focusing swift and comfortable, even with gloves on. The "travel" in the focus wheel is not great, meaning that close to far focus (sparrow at your feet to gull on the horizon) is quick.

The soft case has a rigid bottom and is reasonably practical. It is roomy enough to accomodate a cleaning cloth, lens paper, and even a small notebook. It has a draw-string closure and a velcro-secured cover. It is not entirely weatherproof, but it does a pretty good job. The binocular neck-strap doubles as a carrying strap when the glasses are in their case.

I cannot yet speak to the durability of these binoculars, but they retained their crisp allignment following a nasty fall a couple of days ago, when they were literally thrown off my shoulders and wound up in an icy ditch. Fortunately, I also remained reasonably well alligned.

I have two complaints. First, the rain cover for the eyepieces is largely useless (more-so now that it has blown away, never to be retrieved). Second, there is a small piece of material adrift in the left barrel, which appears to be the stuff used to stabilize prisms after they are alligned. This does not in any way affect the image, and in fact I haven't seen the little devil for a while, but I will have to return the glasses to get the offender expelled. That is just a little quirk of manufacturing - I doubt if every pair is supplied with extra prism stabilizing compound - but it does raise a subtle tremor of concern on the "quality control" front.

I have no hesitation in recommending these binoculars to anyone in search of a high-end porro-prism binocular. At $970.00 plus tax (CAN.$$, 1996 price) they are a good buy when compared to other "high end" ten's. You may want to check out the "Better View Desired" website where there is a review of these binoculars. The last time I checked, Nikon 10X42 SE's were BVD's "reference standard" 10X binoculars, and although I haven't seen every pair of ten's in the world, from what I HAVE seen they certainly deserve a high ranking.

In my last submission on binoculars, I noted that the rain cover for my Nikon 10X42 SE's had blown away. My old binoculars had been supplied with those dinky little discs that fit in or over the eyecups - yuck. I had to make an eyepiece cover, because in Newfoundland you either have one or get used to dumping two eyecups full of rain/sea water down your shirt every time you look at a bird.

The ideal solution was close at hand. I cut the bottom out of a liquid soap bottle, making a shallow cup about one inch deep. this fit snugly over the eyecups, and was held in place by friction. A hole was punched in the edge and a cord tied from the binoculars axle (porro-prisms) to the cover. (It could be tied to the strap, too). Voila! Cheap, light, quick, and easily replaceable. Now a scrap of plastic worth nothing is more or less permanently attached to my near-$1000.00 binoculars, and makes them all that much better.

A friend went to greater lengths. He warmed a piece of PVC pipe in an oven until it softened, and then pressed it into an oval shape, producing a "bottomless bathtub", onto which he affixed a "bottom".

On other little hint for B&L Spacemaster users, who have the 15-45X zoom. The cap of a Kodak film cannister, with the inner lip shaved out with an X-Acto blade, snaps securely over the eyepiece for travel in bad weather.

Cheers,

Hi

Just a note of thanx to Busnell for their sponsorship of this site. I had my old Spacemaster stolen in Ecuador last summer. After agonizing over its replacement, I came to the conclusion that I'd simply buy another Spacemaster, value for the money!

Apologies for this inquery about a product you do not represent, but your authority in the field convinces me you may be of help (and in fact, I have and do own several Bausch & Lomb and Bushnell products). My question concerns a malfunctioning Hertel & Reuss Optik 15x x40x scope made in Kassel. It was a gift and not really very old; it fits inside a fine leather tube with cap and strap. However, images seen through any part of its range are hazy and indistinct, yet, when looking through the telescope in reverse, through the large end, objects are clear, albeit tiny, of course. So what I would like to know is whether Hertel & Reuss Optik is still in existance and, if not, where might I send a malfunctioning spotting scope for assessment? I will appreciate any advice you can provide. And complimnents for the design and content of your excellent web pages.

Gord Gallant
gallantg@interlog.com

Hi Gord:

Fran and I have three pairs of bino's between us, all Bushnell.

I have a pair of 10X50 wide angle; Fran has a pair of 8X30's, and our latest acqusition which I just purchased today is a compact 10X25 "Powerview" by Bushnell.

For what we do with them, I find the optics are adequate, they have a limited lifetime warranty and they are reasonable in price. We like the Bushnell products.

Recently I had to remove my birding eqipment from my trunk to make room for gardening supplies that I was going to pick up. Among the birding equipment, was a Bausch & Lomb Elite 60mm Spotting Scope which they have given me to use and evaluate. I got my gardening supplies shopping done and was repacking my trunk with the birding supplies, preparing to go out and do some birding. I was being lazy and carried as much as I could in one armfull. I got a few items into the trunk and lost my grip on the B&L Elite Spotting Scope. It crashed onto the asphalt driveway from about chest height! It was packaged in its handy padded carrying pouch - but I still feared the worse. I unzipped the pouch and pulled out the scope - so far so good ... no apparent damage so far! I removed the eyepiece cover, flipped off the object lens cover, propped myself against the car and selected something down the street to focus on. To my great surprize and relief, everything looked great! The scope functioned perfectly and didn't even have any scars!

I would never drop a scope on purpose, but I am glad it happened. Now I can wholeheartedly recommend this scope to anyone with great confidence! It is a great rugged scope which is also fogproof and waterproof! Not only that, it has awesome optics - clear, sharp, and bright beyond belief.

Gord,

I thought I would send my thoughts on these binoculars as I purchased a pair last year. I would classify them in the top two of all the other top of the line binoculars. There clarity, field of view and especially close focus are exceptional ( I am over six feet and can focus on my feet). The only drawbacks I have are with the eye cups because they are the fold-down rubber style and the focus takes a little getting used to but I like it now. I would prefer the eye cup style like that on the Swavorski's and Leica's. I actually consider the Swavorski's as the number one binocular and would have purchased them if I could have found them close by at the time I purchased the B&L's. Don't get me wrong I still like the elites and would not change them but the Swavorski's are just a little bit clearer and for some reason I like the feel to them a little better. I was fairly meticulous when I was looking for binoculars. I read several articles and more importantly tried all the top of the line binoculars except the Nikon 10 x 42 E's and narrowed it down to two pairs. After all that, I would still strongly recommend the B&L elites to anyone and would strongly caution people to look around once they find the pair they want as I was quoted prices anywhere from $1030 to $1650. Not to take anything away from your site Gord but I would also recommend people look at Steve Ingraham's site A Better View Desired as it is exceptional when it comes to binocular and scope comparisons. If you have any questions feel free to contact me.

I purchased a pair of Leica 8X20 BCA binocs about 8 years ago. I can't say enough good about them. Of course larger glasses are nicer to look through but certainly not nicer to carry.

My personal opinion is that people too often overlook the fact that the smaller and lighter a pair of binocs is, the more often you will be willing to tote them along. I have a nice pair of 7 X 50's too but I sure don't carry them around . . . use them for astronomy mostly.

I like the 8 X 20's more each year it seems.
I had a pair of inexpensive 8 X 25's before I got the Leicas . . . they were a disaster. I finally threw them out . . . mechanics and optics were poor. With binocs . . . spend 'til it hurts . . . really hurts. A good pair will be a joy for a lifetime. A poor pair . . . frustration and wasted money.

Dear Gord,

I'd like to comment on my 2 pieces of optics after using them for some time, as initial impressions sometimes change after the rigours of regular birding.

1). I've had my B & L Elite 8 x 42 binocs for about 5 years. They are optically superb, and bright and sharp. They are the original design for this make, which I personally prefer to the more recent design, that seems to me at least to have less depth of field. They are very comfortable to hold and use. But they've had what to me is more than their fair share of problems for a binocular that costs nearly $1000. I've sent them back twice - once because the rubber coating was coming off and the focus wheel was making a grinding noise - they were repaired under warranty.

The second time, more serious, the image became degraded because of scratches on the lenses - B & L said it was my fault for cleaning them too roughly, and therefore they weren't covered under warranty - it was a very expensive repair! Now, I only use a Lens-pen to clean the lenses, and watch very carefully for the beginning of any scratches. Each time, I sent them by courier to Bushnell Sports Optics, and apparently they have a special technician who deals just with Elites. They were gone for some 3 weeks on each occasion.

2). Just over a year ago I replaced my Kowa TSN-2 Scope with a Nikon Fieldscope-II ED, 60mm. objective. I chose the smaller objective over a 77mm. because the scope is smaller and lighter, and therefore I don't mind carrying it around. I got it with an angled eyepiece, so I can use a shorter and therefore lighter tripod, for the same reason. I use a 30mm. wide angle eyepiece. It's superb, with a bright, sharp, crisp image. When other birders used to older or bigger scopes look through it, they are invariably surprised at how sharp and bright this image is from a small instrument. One comment, though - I got it by mail order from Eagle Optics in the U.S., then at least the cheapest available even allowing for thre Loonie (not as low then as now). This apparently voided the lifetime warranty that comes if you buy it in Canada, and it only has a 1 year warranty. However, at the moment the image and ease of use are the same as the day I got it, and I'm extremely pleased with it.

There is one small scratch on the objective, which occured when I knocked over the tripod onto the road at the side of the Granary at Churchill, in my excitement to photograph my first Ross's Gull in June 1997, but it doesn't seem to have affected the image, and it's a constant reminder of that great trip!

Good birding!

**************
Richard Stern
Kentville, NS
Canada
rstern@fox.nstn.ca
*************

I just got my Pentax 8x42 DCF WP binos after many years using a pair of mini Bushnell 8x20 and a big pair of Celestron 7x50. I loved the lightweight Bushnells but couldn't find things in them easily. I new I needed to graduate to a pair of porro prism 8x42 waterproofs. I picked up a pair of Fujinons in a store one day, but then choked at the price. I was able to get the Pentax pair through a friend at a great price. They are incredible- eye relief is 22 mm which is the feature I looked for first being an eyeglass wearer. Then, I gave them a good working over on the weekend in some wild spots in N. Oakville near 16 mile Creek. See some movement, point, focus, there's the bird in superb sharp detail unlike I've ever seen before.

I think they'll retail here in Canada for $700-800 (but you'll have to check this out, I'm only estimating) as they are $499 US in catalogues.

They are 26 oz (760 g) and feel solid. Focus is smooth and very sharp. I highly recommend them. Compare when looking at Zeiss, Fujinon, Meade, Bausch and Lomb, even the Nikons which will be almost $2000?

I have been using a pair of Bushnell Custom 7x35's for 19 years and heavy use through this time period.

I purchased them new for 300.00 Cdn.and they have served me unfalteringly birding in Europe, USA, Canada, and recently in Central America. Last Summer, wet season in Central America I found myself six weeks into birding where even my leather watch strap began to grow mold. I will not bother with details, suffice it to say that not only did I require a wet suit, but so should a pair of binoculars. I can recommend these Bushnell binoculars for almost every environment.

Other than an extended Monsoon season in one's life there should be no reason to enhance or part with a piece of such obvious quality and mechanical ruggedness. Even by todays phase corrected, silver coated, protein rubber armored examples, these models perform extremely well. They are bright, well coated and very sharp. Good color resolution is a big plus.

For rainforest birding, however you will need rubber armor and aperture. This combination works well with Pelagic, Spring warbler and raptor watching as well as extends twilight work.The price tag of a forty ounce armored binocular however is evident in the jungle as yet undocumented nasty bush threatens to rip off anything not actually defined as an appendage. After sliding around in the red muck all day I really appreciated a small pair of ..you guessed it Bushnell 7x26 Customs!. Small enough to whip out of its semidry compartment these never fail to impress me in "being there" in the glove box or for when a guide and big optics and a canteen are too overwhelming a load.

I also use 2 older Spacemaster scopes and find Meade research-grade orthos to be as good as the plossl eyepieces in these spotters.The orthoscopics are contrastier.

I have respect for these Bushnell products, as they have served me well without any problems. I am sure this will be my experience into the next century as well.

I wish I had found this page a couple months ago. My binocs were stolen, and I had to replace them. What a task!

Stolen glasses: I owned a pair of 10x28 Discoverer (Bausch & Lomb) binoculars for 17 years. They were billed as waterproof, and they lived up to it. I loved the close focus and the superb clarity. I would highly recommend them for any birding or hunting application.

Replacements: In December, I purchased a pair or the new ZEISS Ergonomic 8x30 binoculars. I was concerned about the long lasting quality I was used to with the B & L, but I needed something to help 44 year old eyes gather more light. I considered the B & L 10x, but they were too heavy. Friends have had less than wonderful results with NIKON, and in head to head comparisons, my eyes preferred the B & L Discoverer 10x42 over Nikon's Monarch series. I opted for the name of ZEISS for longevity, while hoping the quality would come along. Although the ZEISS is considerably more than the B & L ELITE or Discoverer line, I'm not sure the quality is any different. Ask me again in 17 years.

Comments: I've used the glasses only a few days, but a couple points were discovered. 1) There were no caps provided, so I had to use a make-shift shield to keep rain off the lenses. I wasn't concerned about fogging, only about viewing through water droplets. 2) The housing was far noisier than anticipated. I had expected the housing to be rather quiet no matter what the temperature. When the temperature dropped below 15 degrees Farenheit, every touch caused a clink sound. As a hunter, it made me wish for the rubberized housing of my B & L. Birding is far less critical, so this is likely not an issue for most readers. I would like to have known it for myself, however.

Rejected glasses: Before my B & L 10x28 glasses, I owned a variety of binoculars from Bushnell, Jason, Tasco, and the like. All were fine for a year or so, but weather and use took its toll on each pair and they had to be replaced. That is why I was so very pleased with my B & L, and why I was so careful in choosing a pair that should last me the rest of my life. A $50 pair a year or a $400 pair for life???? For me, I'll take the latter. I know I am hard on them, and choose the durable.

Back-up binocs: For fair weather birding, I have found great use in a pair of Bausch & Lomb 9x35 Zephyr glasses. They are clear and quick to focus. The only detriments are the lack of weather proofing, and the weight. I also have a pair of Bushnell Trophy 10x25 binoculars that make me appreciate my good glasses.

Hello,

I have been casually birding for a few years now and had been going through one cheap porro bin after another. Last fall, I really caught the birding bug and decided to invest in a serious pair.

After much research (and anguish), I decided on the Leica 8x42's. These binoculars have never let me down. They are clear and bright with sharp contrast and an incredible depth of field. The close focus is much better than advertised (12' or so). (I compared two pairs side by side in the store and I took the one with the better close focus).

I was considering the B&L Elite 8x42 and Swarovski as well but I am comfortable with my decision. While the Swarovski are in the same league, the Leica "passport" warantee is better.

While on a business trip in Atlanta, I also purchased a pair of Swarovski mini 8x20's which I think are excellent. They were marked down in the store from $399 to $299 and I haggled with the store owner and she gave them to me for $200 because they had been in the store a while. I guess I got a bargain.

I am currently in the throws of a decision of which spotting scope to buy. More anguish.

Good birding!

==
Patrick Hanly
patrick_hanly@yahoo.com

Gord: Enjoyed reading your reviews in Canadian Birding, on-line edition. While I do more general wildlife viewing, particularly eagles and coyotes, I thought I'd pass on some field testing results I've run in extremely cold weather, as I struggle to replace my 18 year old Bushnell Banner 7x50IF marine binoculars, which weigh an un-godly 1100grammes, but have survived 2000km bungied to my sea-kayak deck, or hanging [somewhat lumpily!] around my neck...

I was able to sign out a pair of the Leica 8x42 Ultra, from the local camera store, and did a full use test for several hours at -42C, in twilight.

Amazingly, at this tempreature, where conventional tool steel begins to lose its ductility and shatter, the Leica's centre focus worked just fine. While I would recommend in these cold conditions that the Leica eye-cups be kept in the 'down' or eyeglasses position, so that convection currents don't carry your eye/body vapour up and into the lenses where it will freeze...I suspect that the -25C minimum spec that Leica quotes is because the sliding eyecups could crack below that tempreature....

I gave the Leica's the full field treatment, which is bringing them, cold-soaked to -42C, into a heated building, where they will be covered with moist inside air which their cold condition condenses on the spot...they had no interior condensation, despite this 60C degree tempreature jump...

Now, for the 10x30 Image Stabilized Cannon binoculars, they died about thirty minutes out at -22C, which is well below their rated tempreature. The ambidextrous switch locked in the 'stabilized' position. I have no idea how the store coped with them when I brought them back cold-soaked; I suspect they kept them in a fridge in a plastic bag, as the optics are not nitrogen purged, nor even shower-resistant...

Now, if I could just find some second-hand Leica's...

All the best,

Though not from Canada, I enjoy perusing this web page. Lots of user input. Thanks for the effort to keep it current.

My wife & I use Swarovski binos. She the SLC 8 X 30s & I the SLC 10 X 42s. There are many quality optics available that equal the Swarovski glasses, but we love the "warm fuzzy" feeling knowing our optics will perform whenever & wherever we are birding. They truly are capable of performing under the worst of conditions. I also have a pair of Swift 8 X 42 Ultralites. I believe they are of equal optical quality to the Swarovskis (or nearly so & for much less money), but they are a bit more susceptible to damage from knocks & bumps and are not waterproof. when we expend the time, effort & money traveling to a new birding area, we know our optics will function no matter the conditions.

Discussing birding optics is a bit like discussing cars. Our opinions are shaped by our experiences, good & bad. I vote for quality for both optics and durability.

Thanks again for the great forum.

Hi, Gord.

Just noticed that you were Butterflying with Gary S.
My old 10x 50 Discoverer B.and Lomb. binoculars finally gave up the ghost and B&l. replaced them under warranty.

The new binocs. focus very closely and are bright. Twice in the last week I've birded/butterflied with Henrietta (O'Neil) at Pt.Pelee and the new glasses are better than the model that they replace.

Thought that you might be interested.

Hi,

A grab bag of elite binoculars I considered:

About two years ago I finally worked myself into enough of a sweat to spend the money on a really decent set of binoculars.

First I bought a Burris Signature 8x42. They seemed like a moderate choice. Then the company, a US-based hunting shop, went out of its way to let me know birders were not their desired market. After I returned the Signatures in protest, I chose a nice Bausch and Lomb 7x42 Discoverer. These were roughly comparable to the Burris set optically, were slightly heavier, and had a much wider field of view. For about a year they were fine.

And then I hit another optics sweat. The short version of the story is that I had a spontaneous chance to compare my Discoverers with their phase-coated competition. After a while looking at a range chart through both types, I started to feel like I could never really even focus the Discoverers; the phase coated binoculars were that measure better.

In an obsessive way, I started cataloging the features of every binocular I could get specs on. I considered all powers, and every brand readily available from retail outlets. I made spreadsheets, and I sorted and resorted them all: by types (porro/roof), and close focus distances, and so on. Eventually, after having culled through the entire list several times, I came to the following basic impressions of the various contenders on my final list:

B&L/Bushnell:

Discoverers, Legends: Very nice packages, especially the newer Bushnell Legends with the soft, ridged armor. Not phase coated, and the difference shows. Both models were much more satisfying at 7/8 power than at 10. Bright and contrasty, and the 7x models have that great field of view. Woodland bird choices. I kept my 7x42 Discoverers.

Elites: The 8x42s would be the ideal woodland binocs, and there's no better choice for butterflying than the 8x42s with their close focus. I personally didn't see any particular advantage to the higher power B&Ls. The 50 mm objective models, with the odd 'bent down' porro shape, are nicely light for such big glasses. In general my impression is that B&Ls aren't as durable as the other big money binoculars, which scared me off.

Nikon Models:

Venturers: Supposedly these are a notch above other elite roofs optically, but I didn't see it. I did feel their increased weight, and in general they felt like too much -- sort of like a Lexus "Luxury SUV" (Ha!) I looked at through them, I thought. Considerably higher in price, too, like the Lexus.

Superior Es: These were the class of the porro prism choices. The 8x32s would be the way to go for me. The 10x42s somehow seemed a bit narrow to look through. I'm not entranced with the warranties and general durability of Nikon as a brand, but these are the best view for the money if you read the reviews. These made me realize how much nitrogen purging must mean to me in the cold.

Egret II, "Action Series" binocs: These were very good values at the prices they went for. They didn't feel especially solid, especially when I was seeing Swarovskis and Leicas next to them, but then they're porros, and they go for 1/8th the price in some cases. If I was giving a 12-year-old birding binocs, I'd probably go with one of these.

Celestron:

Regals, non phase coated: These are the same as the Burris model I had. (Ditto for Eagle Optics Rangers and a few other clones, too.) They've got narrower fields of view than some competitors, but are among the lightest options at their various powers and have very nice close focus.

Various porros: Never was really struck, though they have a pair with ED glass objectives that would have been nice to see. Seemed generic and not especially rugged.

Swift:

The only model I really took a shine to was the little Eaglet at 7 power. It's a tiny clone of that Celestron Regal. It has an incredible close-focus distance, and in general it was a very good deal with a wide view. Again, no phase coating on the ones I looked at, and I already had a 7x pair so this was a less attractive option.

The Ultralite porros you read about as a best buy have a very crisp image. Alas, they also have little finicky eyepieces that made me feel like I was looking through a pair of compacts.

Leicas:

The 8x32, 8x42, and 10x42 options were all high on my list when I went to make my final choice. They all came off, because they just weren't comfortable or well-balanced in my medium-sized hands. They've got hard ridges all over, and I just didn't like them. My wife liked them better, but I crossed them off almost immediately. Try them in your hand first.

Zeiss:

The Zeiss 7x and 10x40 binocs got the highest immediate brightness reaction from me. Even comparing them against the pair I bought, I gave them a brightness edge. They also are slightly more expensive, had a "water resistant" label rather than "proof," and I got the feeling the warranty was a guaranteed replacement rather than a guarantee that they'd always work. More to the point, they had those armored ridges again, and I couldn't decide exactly how my hands were supposed to grip them with the fairly dramatic narrowing. Still, the 10x40s were my second-to-last choice.

Pentax:

DCA Phase-Coateds: I couldn't believe how muddy these were. I went in wanting to see that bargain phase-coating advantage, but they were worse than the Discoverers I was used to. The 8 and 10 power versions both disappointed me. They also had narrower fields of view by a measure and a half. Maybe I was looking through a bad pair, or two bad pairs? The odds seem pretty low against both of them being bad samples.

Swarovski:

I tried the old porro "Classics" in both 8- and 10- power models. Optically they were fine, and they're waterproof porros, which was nice to think of, but the eyepieces were comparable to those on the Swift ultralites -- little squinty rubber cups that I couldn't be comfortable with.

The SLC roofs were all among my favorites:

The 8x30s would be just fantastic for general birding. The focus being out front didn't bug me a bit once I'd tried it, and they'd have such a convenience advantage at their size and weight... I suppose I didn't get them because I liked what I got just that measure better. Their view was very warm and open and striking. These were the binocs that got me started shopping again, actually.

The 7x42s were very bright, comparable to the Zeiss 7 powers. Woodland birding would be wonderful with them.

I went with the SLC 10x42s, though. The pros would be: FOV (330' at 1000 yards, high for 10 power), depth of field (very good for higher power glasses), durability, contrast, very nice glare resistance, great low light performance, and all the thoughtful 'packaging' in the world. The only negative I can think of is that I also bought the rubber, SLR-camera-style eyecups, which trap warm moist air in cold weather and fog the lenses. It's easy to remove the fancy eyecups in winter and replace them with the regular screw-down pair.

If I had it to do again, I really could have gone with any of the Swarovskis, with the B&L Elite 8x42s, or with the Zeiss 10x40 tank commanders. The new Swarovski ELs would be top of the heap, probably.

I don't think I could emphasize how comfortable the Swarovskis allow me to be. The Canadian climate (and now the Minnesota climate) are not issues, period. We have two six-year-olds, and I have no worries about bumps that might kill my glasses. None of the other final few on my list gave me that feeling, not to the same extent.

Now, to make that list of spotting scopes...

Ian Westray
ianwestray@earthlink.net

Fumoto Classic Compact 7 x 24 - Tue, 6 Jun 2000

Gord,

Thanks for a great website. Hope you don't mind someone from UK emailing you, but I wanted to tell you about the Fumoto Classic Compact 7 x 24 binocular.

The Fumoto is sold in 7 x 24, 8 x 24 and 10 x 24 sizes, but the 7-power version is much the best. It may not have the aperture of a big binoc but it's amazingly bright; much brighter than any 20mm roof and bright enough for woodland birding. The clarity and resolution are amazing; it resolves fine detail as well as (or better than) a top-quality big glass. It's lightweight (250g), the field of view is wide (7.4 deg), the depth of field is good, it's quick to re-focus, comfortable to look though, easy to hold steady, and it's built on a solid metal (repairable) chassis. Yet it's less than 40% of the cost of a top-make roof prism compact.

I don't know whether the Fumoto is sold in Canada. In the UK it's imported by Monk Optics (www.monkoptics.co.uk) and a re-badged version, the Opticron MCF 7 x 24, is also sold here.

The Fumoto Classic Compact also confirms my theory that, at any given price level, porros always outperform roofs.

I believe that small, lightweight binocs often see more use than big ones because you carry them everywhere. Compacts are great for backpacking and they're unobtrusive in urban situations where large binocs attract unwanted attention.

I'd like to hear more people's comments on compacts.

David Hodges
djhodges@dera.gov.uk

--

The Information contained in this E-Mail and any subsequent correspondence is private and is intended solely for the intended recipient(s). For those other than the recipient any disclosure, copying, distribution, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on such information is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Review for Canadian Optics Page - 16 Dec 2000

Mr. Gallant;

I live on Puget Sound, just a ferry's ride from Canada, so I hope that I can contribute to this web page of yours.

I had wanted to add to my optics collection. My Zeiss Design Selection 8x20 and Nikon Superior E 8x32 are both wonderful binoculars, and satisfy me greatly. But I wanted to round it all out with a ruggedly built full sized high end roof prism from Nikon, Zeiss, Leica, or Swarovski. I thought of getting a 10 power glass, but did not want the weight that came with the 50mm binoculars, 56mm in Zeiss' case. A 42mm would do. They are usually about 9-10 oz. lighter then their big brothers. The Nikon Venturer LX 10x42s were the only 42s with enough eye relief for me, as I wear glasses. Their weight, however, was just a little too much. The Leica and Swarovski 10x42s had too little eye relief, and I found it hard to hold them steady. Zeiss has their 10x40 Victory, which I did try. But I have read very few, if any, reports on the Victory line, and figured that they were too untested for me to drop a big load of money for one.

I then figured that I'd go for a larger exit pupil instead of the magnification, and get a 7x42 glass. The Zeiss, Leica, and Swarovski 7x42s all had great images and enough eye relief. Optically, I was leaning toward the Zeiss 7x42 Classic, but they just did not seem as rugged as their Leica and Swarovski counterparts.

Now, I had much earlier peeked throught the Nikon 10x42 Superior E, but not while comparing it with other binoculars. On a wim, while testing the 7x42s out, I did such a comparison. Well, there just was no comparison! To begin with, the eye relief was perfect, much better then the other 10x42 binoculars. The depth of field was astonishing for a ten power glass, as was my ability to hold it steady. The image? Everything. I could see everything, far and near, with extreme clarity and brightness, right from the get-go. The view was a very easy and natural one. Except for a slightly lessened depth of field, it matches my 8x32 SE in its ability to give me a natural and strain free view. I just couldn't say no what I was seeing! So I bought it.

Steve Ingraham of "Better View Desired" and John Pratt (whose review is found earlier on this page), have both reported on the 10x42 SE. Both have used their 10x42 SEs in inclement weather, and neither reports much of a problem with weather sealing. Living on Puget Sound as I do, these reports are rather heartening. So I am satisfied that I have some of the best optics that can be had. And use them I do.

I should also say that I do not have the problems with the SEs' loose rainguards that others have reported. However, the eyecups on my binoculars are kept down to accommodate my glasses. The rainguards fit perfectly now!

Patrick Ryan
Anacortes, Washington
neptune9@thesimpsons.com

Some great binoculars from Orion,
and comments about 'exit pupils' and our eyes. - Wed, 21 Feb 2001

I have and use binoculars for several reasons. Astronomy is one of the uses they are put to. When observing at the telescope a binocular is very valuable because it bridges the huge gap between the human eye and the tremendous power of a telescope. I also use them for birding and nature observation. I am a keen hiker and live near the shore of lake Huron, which is busy and great for binoculars as there is lots of activity from two legged creatures of both the beaked and non-beaked kind! I have long owned a pair of 1950s vintage army issue premium german binoculars (Hensoldt Wetzlar Diagon 8 times 30) This great binocular served me well for years and is still what I use when hiking and mountain biking, as their bulletproof construction and water resistance allows unlimited abuse. I am convinced if I drove my car over them they would still maintain their perfect columation! However, manufacturers have learned a thing or two about optical coatings since the mid 50s, and I was yearning for the light grasp of a larger glass.

At that time I figured I had a budget of around $300 cdn.(today I would have budgeted more, I know better) That limit narrowed my choices and meant that if I wanted a glass with some degree of the optical excellence I had grown accustomed to with the Hensoldt binocular I would need to shop hard. I had already decided that I wanted a 7 times 50 glass. (I'll talk about that later) I had figured correctly that marine binocs were probably out of the picture because of the added weight and optical quality penalty, within my price limit. I had also assumed correctly that roof prism binocs would not have the required optical quality in my price range.

I visited a store that had a very large selection of binoculars of all price ranges. I checked 5 or 6 models out that fit my qualifications. Two of them I quickly rejected because of some quirk or flaw I found intolerable. There were three models (all 7 times 50) left- a fujinon, a no-name brand 'mil spec' armored waterproof which seemed good optically and not very heavy in spite of my prejudices, and an Orion Ultraview.(this California company has a website at www.telescope.com) I'm sure I drove the sales staff crazy because I spent about an hour and a half in the store comparing these three glasses. There were some things I really liked about the fujinon and the 'mil spec' glass, but images in the Orion consistantly outperformed the competition. The Orion binoc also had a nice rubberized skin and felt good to hold. It all came down to whether or not I was selecting on the basis of optical quality. The Orion's images where markedly brighter, more contrasty, more colourful and had 'pizazz' that the others lacked.

I have used the Orion binocular for nearly two years now. Did I make the right choice? My answer is a qualified 'yes'. I am still happy with them. I still am delighted with bright, sharp, colorful and contrasty images through them. Multicoatings on the objectives and eyepieces work. I still think they represent very good value in their price class. However, I really believe that 7 power is too low for a 50mm glass. The 7 power glass was encouraged by national defence branches for use on tanks.Birding, nature, and astronomy are applications that are at least slightly different, I think! The exit pupil, which is the column of light that exits the eyepiece and is the image of the objective lens, is a big 7 mm. Exit pupil size is equal to the objective lens size of the scope or binocular divided by the power. The pupil of a middle aged person's eye only expands to about 6mm or so. Since the exit pupil is the exact image of the objective, using a 7mm exit pupil glass with a 6mm pupil eye is the same as using those binoculars with an aperture mask (piece of cardboard with a small circular hole placed centrally over the objective lens) of 6/7ths of 50mm, or 42.5mm in diameter. So, a middle aged person is using what amounts to a 42.5 times 50 glass. A 42.5 times 50 binocular of the same design and optical quality would give absolutely identical performance.There would be no difference at all in either brightness or detail resolution between 7 times 50s and 7 times 42.5s. It makes putting up with the extra weight and size of a 7 times 50 kind of pointless. And one other negative of a large exit pupil glass. I don't wear glasses, and have moderate astigmatism. Most people are astigmatic to at least some degree. Astigmatism is much less of a problem when the pupil 'stops down' your eye, and your eye becomes a 'slower' lens. When you use a glass with only a four mm exit pupil, for example, your eye is 'stopped down' automatically by the narrow light column, even at night when your pupil is dilated to a greater diameter. For persons with astigmatism, a small exit pupil binocular produces sharper images, at least at night and in deep twilight. my experience with many different telescopes and eyepieces shows this to be true.

The bottom line in all this discussion is that wish I had purchased the corresponding 10 power binocular. Many folks online have praised this model. In general, if you are over 25 I think you should buy a glass with an exit pupil of 6mm or less. That still makes the classic 8 times 40 birding glass a very solid choice. It provides a reasonably bright view and only 'wastes' aperture in very bright situations when our pupil size is 3 or 4 mm. The argument that what is best for the military is best for birds isn't valid, and the traditional birding wisdom is still true.

Best of luck, and may your life list keep growing!
Sincerely, Bruce Russell, Clinton, Ontario
grussell@odyssey.on.ca
-oh, by the way, Orion stuff is available north of the border from EfstonScience, Toronto.(and I wasn't paid to say this!)

Canadian Optics Page - Fri, 23 Feb 2001

Hello from Switzerland to all the contributors and readers of this very interesting page. I assume you don't mind comments from the "outside world". I am currently searching for the "perfect pair of binoculars" and I am thus browsing wherever I can find information. Well, for one thing, I own a pair of Leica 8x20 and I am extremely pleased with them. They are actually my second pair. I owned a previous model with smaller eyelens diameter and that always bothered me as I have to wear eyeglasses. But the current model is truely superb. That is to say, the 8x20 is the type you can virtually always have with you, but of course they are limited by the 20mm objective lenses under low light conditions.

My second pair is a Leica 8x32 which I bought for the combination of weight, close focussing and general optical performance. Again, as far as optics are concerned, they are superb, with astonishing brightness and contrast for a 32 mm type. There are two gripes about these glasses, though. One has to do with the 32mm optics: birding under twilight conditions in the forest does not give the colors, anymore. Thus, I am now trying to get a pair with 40 or 42 mm. The second gripe has to do with handling. That styling with the longitudinal ribs may look ok, but there is no place to rest your thumb. I agree with one of the other contributors to this page that you should try the binoculars in your hands. From that point of view, I suggest now either the Bausch & Lomb Elites or the Zeiss Victory models. The latter has a particularly fine velvety feeling. As for my Leica 8x32, I worked on that rugged armoring with a variety of files till those uncomfortable ridges were gone on the underside. The feeling is now much better, but why do I have to mutilate such an expensive pair of binoculars first? I have owned these Leica binoculars for several years and I have used them extensively under tropical moist conditions, and they are still bright. The center focussing knob has a bit of loose play by now which I don't like. I also know that on a pair of 10x42s that focussing did disconnect all of a sudden after a few years. The same happened on a pair of brand new Zeiss 10x40 Victory! As for the Swarovski EL model: I just don't believe that it can be mechanically durable with its type of drive. The two models I tried both had less than smooth focussing even from the start.

Thus, as you see, none of the top of the line models seems without any flaws. I'd like the Zeiss 10x40 for its lower weight but I would like more information on its ruggedness. Or else, the Elites, once they come with better eyecups than those foldable rubber types.

Robert K. Furrer, Sempach/Switzerland
rkfurrer@hotmail.com

This website is intended to inform birders of the various optics available for birding. It will take a while before it is truly comprehensive. Any input from birders, photographers, optics professionals, etc. would be greatly appreciated.

I will do my best to research this topic and continuously add to this site.

I will try to gear the information to Canadian dealers, distributors, and endusers. However, this is not always possible or practical.