Thanks for your replies.I'm leaning towards the Pentaxes.

I concur- excellent glass for the price.

Pentax, Jay

I'm looking into buying binoculars for my upcoming trip to RSA in May.If you could buy these binoculars for a good price(cost) which one would you choose.
Bushnell Discovery 7x42,Legend 8x42
Pentax DCF SP 8X43
Minox 8.5x42 BR
Leupold Pinnacles P2 8x42

Timny,

My March '04 Rifle Magazine arrived today, complete with a John Barsness article on binoculars in his regular Optics column. He follows a "top birding optics site" which rates the Nikon 8X32 Premier as a reference standard, and is "...the best glass of its size right now". Price is $700.

He has some other "good binocular buys" (prices are street).

Bushnell 8X32 Legend $280
Leupold 8X42 Olympic $320
Swift 8.5X44 Audobon $320
Pentax 8X43 DCF SP $480 Sightron 8X42 $400

Barsness also notes that the "...Pentax line plays with the big boys at half the price."

jim dodd

I have a pair of Minox 10x42 that I really like. My only concern is if they are durable enough for the demands of Africa. No problem sitting in my box blind in Texas, but bouncing around the bush in Africa is a different story.

Good Binoculars for Africa Other Than Zeiss, Leica or Swarovski
Bushnell 8 x 32 Legend (High $200 price range)
Leupold 8 x 42 Olympic (Mid $300 price range)
Nikon 8 x 32 Premier ($700 price range)*
Pentax 8 x 43 DCF SP (High $400 range)
Sightron 8 x 42 ($400 price range)
Swift 8.5 x 44 Audubon (Low $300 price range)
* Rated as one of the very best binoculars by most optics writers.
These are recommendations from: Optics by John Barsness / Rifle Magazine / Mar. 2004

Given your short list, I'd go with the Pentax.

What about if you were looking in th 750 and up price range...Which optics would you choose/do you have? The reason I ask is I am in the market for a pair of bino's. Right now I am leaning towards the Swarov's EL's because of the contoured eyecups/doubler options.

quote:

Originally posted by bulldog563:
What about if you were looking in th 750 and up price range...Which optics would you choose/do you have? The reason I ask is I am in the market for a pair of bino's. Right now I am leaning towards the Swarov's EL's because of the contoured eyecups/doubler options.

Bulldog

Youu will never be sorry with a set. I traded a set of custom leather work with Tony Makris for a set in 2001, and have never looked back

Brad

Bulldog563, here's a copy and paste of my reply to your add in the classifieds.

"I don't want to start a war, but IMHO, a doubler is a gimick and a waste of money, and I personally think the Swarovski EL's are overpriced. Swarovski is the king of advertising, so people are willing to pay a premium for the name.

I've owned two pair of 10x42 EL's, and while they're nice binos, they're no better optically than the Leica 10x42 BA/BN's, Zeiss 10x40 ClassiC's, Zeiss 10x40 Victory II's, and Nikon Venturer 10x42's I've owned and used. Who knows, maybe the 8.5x EL's are better, but I wasn't overly impressed with the 10x EL's. And to top things off, the contoured eye-cups are not supplied as standard equipment, so Swarovski will charge you $50.00 for them on top of their already ridiculous price for the binos.

If you can find a good, clean, used pair of EL's in the $950.00 to $1150.00 range (believe me, it can be done if you're patient), I'd say go for it, but I wouldn't spend any more than that.

I think you owe it to yourself to find a store that carries all major brands and get some personal hands on time with the various binos because what feels and looks good to me, might be completely wrong for you.

In short, before I spent $1500.00 on a used EL, I'd be on the phone to Doug at Cameraland to get his best price on a Leica 10x42 Ultravid, Zeiss 10x42 FL, or Nikon 10x42 Venturer "LXL"; I'll bet you'd come away with at least $150.00 to $200.00 in your pocket. Or, you could buy the Zeiss 10x40 ClassiC's from Cabelas and have plenty of $$$ left for a good spotting scope.....forget the doubler!

The Docter Optik brand is supposed to be great for the money, but I have no personal experience with them."

I've owned and do own all of the big boys named and discussed here, and for your money the Zeiss ClassiC's from Cabela's are the best buy for the price. I've taken them to Africa twice and been through thick and thin and not a single problem. Listen to Buster, he's got a very valid point.

Thanks for the help. I found a pair of Swarov's for 1000.

Swarovski quality is not only marketing hype. I use a oldish 10x42 SLC, and believe me, I have seen blood on animals so far off that other Ph's with inferior optic could not see. (This happened twice already, and saved us a long time following up.) Also, when it is your work to find and judge animals, get the best optics you can afford.

Gentlemen, Africa is no harder on Binocs than any other place, and is gentle compared to Alaska, Canada, and the arctic! One thing that is a must on any glass that is to be used in the three very wet, and cold climates mentioned above, absolutely must be water proof, and price doesn't guarintee that! A glass the will do fine in Africa will look like they came out of a sunken ship, after a week in September in SouthEast Alaska, if they are not waterproof.

All the top brands are good, but as others have said there some that are just as good with much smaller price tags. The ones that fit you, are not too heavy,and are weather resistant, at a fair price get my vote over $$$$ for a name! I like most thing made by Leica, and Zeiss! I also don't believe Swarovski's are worth the difference in price. The Zeiss sold by Cebela's is a real buy, IMO!

I thought the zeiss classics where not as good as the pentax SP's that I use, the fold down eyecups don't work as good for me and the objective lense cap system on the pentax is much better. I think the classics are dated technology, while the best in their day, they are outclassed by the best jap glass albeit by a small margin, but still for half the price

Some may not like the Zeiss ClassiC eye-cups, but I've never had a problem with them (don't wear glasses) and actually prefer them to the twist up eye-cups of Leica, Swarovski, Nikon's, etc. Granted, it's pretty trivial, but it seems more often than not, one of the twist up eye-cups works it's way down when you least expect it, but not with the ClassiC's. They also act just like the winged eye-cups offered by Kahles and Swarovski in that they fit well enough to block light from entering the sides. A common complaint I've heard about the SP's is glare off the lenses from light making it past the eye-cups.

I won't argue that the SP's are great for the money, but until they've proven themselves the way the Zeiss ClassiC's have, the Zeiss 10x40's from Cabelas will remain what I consider to be the "best bang for the buck".

Anyone have experience with the 2X doubler and/or the contoured eye cups for Swarovski bino's.

Before you buy anything try a pair of 10X42 and 8X32 Leica Ultravid. I have both and they can not be beaten. Also go to http://www.riflescopes.com and look at their used or demo list. The list is quite large. I have done alot of business with them and have been very happy.

Sprig

already bought a pair of 10X42 EL's

Any opinion on Steiner's? By the way I have a pair of 8X32 Leupold Katmai's. I think they're a great value considering size, quality and price.

I really like my Steiner Merlins. They are 8X42 which is my preferable configuration. They are extremely clear and were better than the low end Zeiss Stuff and close enough to the high end Swaro's for my money.

That being said, the trade off is if something happens to them. They are not as easy to repair as Swaro's, etc...

I see a lot of complaints on here about Steiners but they are always about the opening
price point units. From $400 up, they are very good binoculars.

Any good reviews anywhere on the new Zeiss Conquest binocs?

I like the Nikon porros - mine are the immediately previous model (or name), the Nikon Superior E 8x32. In addition to the great glass quality, they have a feature I can't do without in a hunting glass - the assymetrically ground lenses.

These lenses, as opposed to standard spherically ground lenses, have the advantage of removing the spherical abberation from the left and right sides of the "view." As you pan a normal glass away from a telephone pole, for instance, the pole gets closer to the edge and as it does so, it appears to bend. This bending is greatly reduced in assymetrically ground lenses, and the pole appears vertical as it exits the field of view (FOV).

When panning for animal movement, I look for slight movements (ears, for example) against a still background. That action is easier with assymetrically ground lenses as the bacgroung moves evenly as you pan, instead of appearing to accelerate, depending upon where in the FOV it lies. It's difficult to explain, but the animal appears the right shape, no matter how close to the edge it appears.

For this, I'm willing to put up with a glass that is less waterproof and shockproof than the better roof prism glasses. They are reasonably water resistant and shock resistant - no problems in eight years - but they aren't as sturdy as the best roofs. It's a tradeoff I make gladly, especially given the Nikon's lifetime warrranty.

Edited - Binocular and spotting scope reviews can be found at the birder's site - http://www.betterviewdesired.com

Jaywalker