Please confirm my logic:
There is hardly a difference, if any, in the optical performance of good quality binos compared to excellent quality binos.
Field width does not improve with size of objective lens, but substantially so when the magnification decreases.
For old eyes you need light transmittance, which is achieved by increasing the objective and decreasing the magnification.
Top roof prisms all about 10x42 or 8x42. For old eyes 8x is beter.

Nikon now makes an 8.5x56 for $380, which should (optically only) be the ultimate binos for a PH!

http://www.swfa.com/c-646-nikon-monarch-atb-binoculars.aspx/

Comments?
Lochi.

Lochi,

Optically the Nikon Monarch ATB 8.5x56 binoculars are very nice, but they are very big binoculars and very heavy. If this is not an issue, I would recommend them. To be honest, I know you can get them for a better price than $380. We sell them for $319.

Thanx Jon

quote:

There is hardly a difference, if any, in the optical performance of good quality binos compared to excellent quality binos.

No, there is a difference, but the question is if it is $500 to $1000 worth of difference to most people.

quote:

Field width does not improve with size of objective lens, but substantially so when the magnification decreases.
For old eyes you need light transmittance, which is achieved by increasing the objective and decreasing the magnification.

A large exit pupil in the binoculars is not going to make any difference if the observer's eye exit pupil is substantially smaller than that. So any binoculars that has a 5mm exit pupil is probably sufficient for most old eyes as they cannot take advantage of anything more. In addition, the field of view of the Nikon ATB 8.5x56mm binoculars is pretty limited (324'/1000yds) when compared to a good 8x42mm.

quote:

Nikon now makes an 8.5x56 for $380, which should (optically only) be the ultimate binos for a PH!

I doubt many PHs would want to carry a heavy (Nikon is afraid to publish their weight, but they do weigh 40.2 oz.) binoculars that will not provide the performance of a good 8x42mm. I don't think any of your rationale holds for an advantage from these binoculars. You would be better off spending that kind of money for Eagle Optics Ranger SRT 8x42mm, Vortex Fury 8x42mm, Stokes Broadwing 8x42mm, Bushnell Discoverer 8x42mm, Minox BL 8x42 BR, Leupold Olympic 8x42mm, Pentax DCF WP II 8x42mm, or Swift Audubon 8.5x44 HHS 8.5x44. However, if you must get large objective binoculars the Vortex Hawk Owl 8x56 are better than the Nikons and have a better warranty.

quote:

You learn something new everyday whether you want to or not.

Geee jackfish!!!
What I learnt today is that there are others out there knowing more about certain topics than I do. Mind you, I learnt that long ago, hence posting my question
Your statement about old eyes not being able to take advantage of exit pupil bigger than 5mm is crucial. If I can buy that statement as gospel, for sure I'd rather use a smaller and lighter bino.
I am in love with my little 10x24 Pentax and shall then probably opt for the Pentax that you advise above. Also my buddy Bigbullet bought one recently and is very happy with it.
Huge thanx!!
old, dumb half-blind PH.

I have a pair of the new Nikons and I have a pair of the EL 8.5x42 Swaros. I prefer the Nikons. They just make for a brighter and clearer image.

So I sold the Swaros on ebay and got my money out of them.

I also have a pair of the new Burris 10x50s. I can't say I would buy another pair, but they are good enough for 90% of all I would want to use them for.