Since I cannot find my first choice, the Leica Trinovid 8x32, for less than 1,000 USD NIB (they sell for 1,245 nearly everywhere...), I have narrowed my selection to the following 3 8x30-32 binos:

1) 8x30 Zeiss ClassiC. This bino sells for 579.00 USD. I have handled a Zeiss 10x40 ClassiC belonging to a friend and it is a very good bino with excelent mechanical and optical qualities. It would also fit nicely in my shirt´s left pocket. On the minus side, it is an old design that is not waterproof (in the nitrogen purged sense...)

2) Swarovski 8x30 SLC (Old Model). They can be had for 800 USD (vs 950-1,000 USD of the new models). Apparently, this bino is very popular with PH´s. However, I have heard that some Swarovskis have had problems with losing their nitrogen and had to be sent back for service. Also, it has the focusing ring on the side of the objective instead of on the oculars side.

3) Nikon Premier 8x32 LXL. This bino was suggested to me by a forum member in another thread, who claims it is exceptionally good for its price. I is offered in several internet sites at ca. 950.00 USD. I could not find any specific reviews and I always have thought of Nikon and other eastern binos as "also ran's" comparing to the three top European bino manufacturers. Hence paying out more for a Nikon than for a Zeiss or a Swarovski sounds weird to me. However, I may be wrong...

So if you budgeted a maximum of 1,000 USD to buy some 8x30-32 binos, which one of these three would you buy, and why?

Antonio

The Nikon Venturer/LX's in 8x32 are one of the best binos available in that size, period.

If you're in the US, you can get brand new 8x32 LX'L's from Doug at Camera Lnad for $699.99 shipped.

Here's a couple sites with reviews:

www.betterviewdesired.com

http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm (Scroll down to where it says "Published reviews of optics".

Good luck with your choice.

Thanks for the info Buster...

Do you own a pair of Nikon 8x32 LXL?

In your opinion, how would they compare to the other two binos I cited?

Antonio,

I have no experience with the Zeiss 8x30 ClassiC's, but I'm a huge fan of the 10x40 ClassiC's. Even though they're a bit of a dated design, they're often the binos all others are judged against and I don't think you could go wrong if you can find them at a decent price.

I've owned Leica 8x32 BN's, Swarovski 8x30 SLC's, and Nikon 8x32 Venturer LX's. They're all great optically, but for me, the Nikon's were the best overall package.

I love Leica glass, but never cared for how the BA/BN's felt in my hands.....they feel like a brick to me.

I liked everything about the Swarovski SLC 8x30's except the focus knob being on the opposite end of what I was used to. It's no big deal for a alot of guys, but not something I could warm up to.

The Nikon Venturer's offer a fabulous view, their ergonomics fit me perfect, plus they cost a few hundred dollars less than the others, so what's not to like?......

Having said that, I don't currently own an 8x30/32 because I've found that binos with a 42mm objective suite my needs better. My current glass is an 8x42 Leica Ultravid. I'd prefer 10x's, but I got too good of a deal on the 8x's to pass up.

If at all possible, I'd suggest you get your hands on as many pairs as possible before plopping down your hard earned cash, because what looks and feels good to me, might be completely wrong for you.

Good luck in your decision.

I have the 8x30 swaros.I actually traded the ziess 8x30 for them. I have been very pleased and they rarely leave my side.

I had the opportunity to try a pair of Bruntons. Very good glass. Well built. I am going to buy a pair as back up and maybe a tad higher magnification.

Buster:

Unfortunately in my country there are no shops where I can try high end binos. So I have to rely on what my friends use (mostly cheap stuff...) and what I read in the internet...

What did you feel was the pro-cons of going over from 8x32 to 8x42? My main consideration of getting a 32 instead of a 42 is weight and bulk. I intend to hunt Africa (buff) with them and deer in northern Mexico (stalking). I always have used compacts while hunting: I put them into my left shirt pocket. Would I be able to do that with the 8x32 Nikons? Do you think that they fill my needs (=semicompacts...) well or should I go for 42´s (I have EDF 7x40, which are too heavy and bulky to carry while hunting hard...)

Also, why do you want to 10x instead of 8x? Although it seems that 10x sell more among hunters, many optical gurus favor 7-8x unless glassing very long distances. Are you happy with your Leica Ultravid or do you still long for 10x?

Kudu 56: Do you find the focusing wheel of the swaros 8x30 awkward, and do you ever feel like needing 42mm binos?

Thanks guys

If you wonder why I'm so hot on image stabilized binocs...first let me preface this by saying that I used to sell hunting equipment for a large retail store, so I've seen a lot of binocs and had the opportunity to putz around with them for many hours. I went shopping for new binocs, price was no object. I was prepared to shell out whatever. The best I had seen up to that time was Nikon's Venturer 10X40's. So I go to a place that stocks the best of the best...you name it, they had it, and after quite a session of comparing, I'm torn between the most expensive Swarovski and the Nikon Venturer. Hate to be long winded, but let me explain my priority for hunting optics...detail. My theory is if you can more clearly see something with one binoc than another, it's better...duh! Like trying to pick up an animal bedded down in tall grass with just a little piece of antler sticking out to give up it's position. So while I'm agonizing trying to make a decision, I happen to see a Canon image stabilized binoc that I hadn't even considered because it didn't cost over 1000 bucks, and I didn't consider that they really worked. What a shock. I was easily able to read the print on small merchandise labels all over the store that I couldn't begin to see with the other binocs due to image shake. So unless you're the unshakeable David Tubbs of the binoc world, or carry a tripod around with you on every hunt, the fact is you will see more stuff, and you can go to a higher magnification to boot. A hunting buddy of mine spent a couple of hours looking through my 10X30 Canon IS and ordered one the next day. He couldn't believe how much more he could pick out, and how much less eye strain there was after prolonged scanning. So before you plop down megabucks, give them a try. The only potential downside is that they use batteries, but even in the coldest weather(I live in Maine), a couple of lithiums last for many hours. If you do decide to try them, please let me know what you think.

quote:

Kudu 56: Do you find the focusing wheel of the swaros 8x30 awkward, and do you ever feel like needing 42mm binos?

It is comfortable to me. You just have to get used to it.

I would like the 42mm in low light conditions but it is usually to dark to shoot anyway.

My son has 7x42's. And at dusk or sunrise he sees things that are only forms to me with my 8x30's. But mine are also lighter, I try to travel very light. I have coverd 12 miles in a day on foot,hunting elk, and the weight does make a diference.

Here in Wyoming the 10x will show more distortion(heat waves) on warm days than a lower power.

The 8x30's will not fit in your pocket. I use the crooked horn bino strap, I hardly know I am carrying my bino's.

I prefer a 42mm objective because it gathers plenty of light during those ever critical first and last few minutes of the day, but it's not overly bulky. Eventhough they're "compact", no 8x30/32mm that I know of will fit in a shirt pocket.

I prefer 10x's because the country I hunt tends to be more open, so I like the extra magnification. Some people like 7x's and 8x's because they believe they can hold them steadier, which causes less eye-strain. I've never had a problem with 10x's. Anything more than 10x needs to be mounted on a tripod.

I haven't even had a chance to use my Ultravids in the field yet, but I plan to rectify that shortly. Been spending way too much time at work and doing honey-do's!

As I understand it, the professional binocular gurus prefer the lower power binos in the 7 to 8 power range over 10 power for the increased resolution. I just switched from 10 to 8 power and I can tell the difference when bird watching.

Just my thoughts, your opinions may vary.

Thanks very much for your answer guys...

Zupspoon: Although your suggestion is interesting, I am not comfortable with complicated electronic optics that need batteries. My Murphy dominant gene will insure they fail at the worst possible time...

Anybody handled Leicas Trinovid or Ultravids and Nikons LXL in 8x32? If so, please tell me your experiences regarding focus (too fast, too slow), ergonomics, weight, eye relief, customer service, etc.

Regards

Ant,

My vote is for the Nikon LX 8x32 also.
Great glasses.focus is on the fast side but you get used to it.
I also have Swarovski 10x42 el but always pickup the nikons over the swaros.they are that good.
I have a like new pair of Leitz 7x35 for sale.

Antonio,

I had the same concern...fact is that if the batteries or electronics fail, they revert back to regular old binocs, shake and all. Even if you don't buy 'em, try 'em!

PS...my vote for regular binocs goes to the Nikon LX also.

If you want rugged take a look at the Steiner 8x30 Military R models. They also have a mil scale reticle which is handy for ranging, and individual eye piece focus which is pretty much a “focus once and forget about it†system. Small, light weight, and virtually bomb proof.

Zug:

That is an interesting concept. How good are the binos when the batteries do not work?

If money was no object (it unfortunately always is...), how would you rate the Nikon 8x32 LX against the Leica Ultravid 8x32 BR or the Leica Trinovid 8x32 BN?

Antonio...the raw optics are pretty good. If you want some real good info on binocs, check out the bird watcher sites(but don't tell anyone...lol). Those folks are FANATICS when it comes to binocs and spotting scopes. Makes sense. Lots of great objective and subjective data.

Zug:

I already did, and those guys have their own "pushfeed vs. controlled feed" kind of discussions regarding binos. Binos are for them what rifles are for us...

After much pseudo-scientific barble, they always say at the end of their lengthy reviews that in the end one should choose one top-line bino built by one of the great 3 brands and see which one handles best, so one is back to square one...

As I cannot compare those binoculars myself, I am asking what others experienced...

Antonio, very few dedicated Swarovski,Leica dealers handle high end Nikon Optics for a reason. Draw your own conclusions.

Semprelk

I know...

Additionally, if there is a huge price difference between the two, it must be due to something. I just want to get a handle on whether the difference is due to a brand overprice, quality, technical aspects, etc. To give you an analogy, a Mercedes Gelaendewagen is certainly "better" than a Jeep Wrangler, but if you just hunt with it a Jeep is more than sufficient, and under some considerations, even better than the GW.

Antonio

Lets just say that a very high Euro and giving their dealers a nice chunk of change for the privilege of selling their "High End" optics might be a factor . I am sure there is a smaller markup on Nkons. Not taking anything away from the high end glass but there is a lot of BS factored into their price as well.

Anyone that thinks that Leica, Nikon, or Swarovski uses anything except the best available optical glass, coatings and manufacturing techniques doesn’t know very much about optics.

Along with Canon and Zeiss, Nikon and Leica have been at the forefront in setting the standards in optics that all other manufacturers strive for, and Swarovski is right up there with them.

Any real difference in any of these brands would come down to features and style not on optical quality.

quote:

Anyone that thinks that Leica, Nikon, or Swarovski uses anything except the best available optical glass, coatings and manufacturing techniques doesn’t know very much about optics.

And yet a lot of people will argue until they are blue in the face that the German/Austrian is better then Nikon.

quote:

Originally posted by SempreElk:

quote:

Anyone that thinks that Leica, Nikon, or Swarovski uses anything except the best available optical glass, coatings and manufacturing techniques doesn’t know very much about optics.

And yet a lot of people will argue until they are blue in the face that the German/Austrian is better then Nikon.

“Better†is an extremely subjective term, especially when used to describe optics by people not having any optical background and/or training.

I don’t particularly care for Nikon rifle scopes, but that is based on style and features NOT on anything having to do with their optical quality.

quote:

“Better†is an extremely subjective term, especially when used to describe optics by people not having any optical background and/or training.

No optical training here but my eyes see no difference in resolution,quality of materials between the top Euro brands and Nikon High end and certainly not anything justifying a 300-500 dollars in price difference.

quote:

Originally posted by SempreElk:

quote:

“Better†is an extremely subjective term, especially when used to describe optics by people not having any optical background and/or training.

No optical training here but my eyes see no difference in resolution,quality of materials between the top Euro brands and Nikon High end and certainly not anything justifying a 300-500 dollars in price difference.

I have NEVER heard anyone knowledgeable in optics say that Nikon lenses were not top of the line.

As far as the overall quality of the mechanics of their scopes is concerned I really can’t comment on how they rate...but optically their glass and coatings are as good as anything out there. Just my opinion.