what u guys use ? what u like ?what not to get?
i'm buying a new set thinking of nikon monarch bushnell discovery or elite or steiner .... i dont wanna spend 1500 on leica or swarowski but i would like some thing good quality

I use a 7 x 40 Meade. Works ok. Love the fog proof feature.
Cost me about AUD $ 140 at the time of purchase (about 4 years ago)

I've gone thru 4 sets of inexpensive ones now, one set was self adjusting. None was up to snuff. I finally bought a good set...Leupolds Windriver Cascades 10x42's. Got them at Walmart for near $300.00. Finally got something that works for me. I avoided pricy binocs in the past, take it from me, If it's under $200.00 you won't be happy. Sugest you relly do some research here...
Keep it coming...

two points to remember when buying binoculars. get as big an objective lens as you can - that determines how they are in low light conditions and the next thing is the magnification should never be more than 1/5 of the objective lens. That makes an acceptable light level in poor light conditions. The more you magnify with a given lens the darker things appear. My 8 x 50 minolta's are pretty nice in those early morning hours just as the hills begin to light up. They stay clear and bright right up through sunset. Sometimes I wish I had a bit more power but I don't think I could hold 10 x 80's steady enough to see anything more than I can with the ones I have.

Beck's Classic. German optics. Had them a long time. Can't remember what I paid for them. Small, light and compact, but effective.

What PaulS is talking about is the exit pupil. The largest amount of light - the biggest angle - is rated at 7. Your eyes cannot handle any figure larger than 7. It's a ratio, by the way...

7 is better than 6 but 8 is of no benefit over 7 whatsoever. To get this figure, divide the size of the objective lens by the rate of magnification. 8 x 56 bino's have an exit pupil of 7. So do 6 x 42. And you thought that they just made up these sizes, didn't ya?

But... as a rule of thumb, as an indicator, exensive bino's perform better than cheap ones so a set of swarovski 10x40 will be perform better then a cheap and nasty pair of 8 x 56, even though the exit pupil would be 4.

The other indicator that you should look at - and it sort of points to quality - is the depth of field. The better the glass, the deeper the field. It means that you are not constantly refocusing as you look over terrain - they are more forgiving.

Me? I use a set of Canon 10x30 Image Stabalising bino's. I found them in a camera shop and thought "Well, I wouldn't turn a canon camera away..." and picked them up. Great stuff. I know that they are not as clear as your superb 8x56 but when I hit the button, the clarity is unbelieveable. Your shakes and wobbles get magnified too but mine don't.

They live in my game bag which goes out when I do. In there lives my knife, gloves, range finder, range card, map etc.

D

Its doubtful I'll ever own a pair, but Swarovski is about the best you can get period. They run $1900 USD though for a pair... once you look through a pair however, you can absolutely see why they cost so much.

www.opticsplanet.net/s...42-el.html

The Nikon Monarch's seem pretty good for the money. In fact its the binocular I'm currently saving up for and will buy this fall as we get closer to hunting season.

Me personally (I am embarassed to admit this), I carry a pair of $9 bushnell 8x20's and my 15-45x60mm spotting scope when I hunt. I spend most of my time using the spotter. Its quite a bit heavier than binos but I glass farther than bino's can go. Heres a typical view from one of my hunting spots (note the spotter in the lower right corner)

www.huntingnut.com/mod...deer02.jpg


-DallanC

Dallan,

Nothing wrong with cheap Bushnell binoculars. Thats what I carry. Not to sure of the specific model though havnt seen them since last hunting season.

Reason you might ask ?? Simple unlike alot of the other brands they are small, lightweight and I couldnt care less if I drop them or bang them around.

After all accidents happen, so why buy a 500$ or more binocular just to have them broken ??

Dimitri

I can't say they are the "best", but when I am hunting or when shooting prairie dogs I can look though my NIKON binoculars all day without getting a headach.


longwalker

Oops. Sorry...Rule 2 instead of rule 3.

Strictly 10 X 42 for me.....

Think I mentioned that.....<grin>

Yup...You did, but it doesn't hurt to refresh ones memory. I think that , just like scopes, the power of a pair of binoculars is the choice of the purchaser. My Beck's 12X25's "<grin>" work for me quite well in fact.

I usually get throwed out of a conversation for touting a 10X......seems lots like lower power, can't figure why....TIC

I'd use a 12X if the package suited me....I like a straight line....

Kahles 10-42,made in Austria in same plant as Swarovski for about 2/3 the price.I cant tell any difference between them.

I guess how much you spend for Binos depends on how much money you have to spend on them and what their application is going to be. My 10x42 Nikons pretty much stay in the truck. To heavy to pack around.
Usually carry 8x23 Nikon Travelites. They seem to serve my needs fine. Lately though, I have been just using the optics in my Bushnell rangefinder which are seven power and very clear. This seems to work very well also for my applications. I would imagine this could be another endless debate, but fun anyways.--tr