glad Posted April 16, 2008 Share Posted April 16, 2008 I just bought a pair of : Nikon ProStaff ATB 10x25 binoculars. This is an unsolicited plug because they: have excellent optics [in my humble opinion, since I deal with optics all the time] are made with "ecoglass"; no lead or arsenic are waterproof, fog proof, and rubber coated for better shock resistence come in 8, 10, or 12 X Magnification have a 25 year warranty are really light-about 12 oz can accomodate a small PD (distance between pupils..good for kids and small faces) and they were about $110 on Amazon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shewhorn Posted April 17, 2008 Share Posted April 17, 2008 How's the edge sharpness and are there any chromatic aberations? Seems like every binocular I pick up has super crappy edge sharpness (which as a photographer just makes me go absolutely mental ) and tons of chromatic abs... usually red. Cheers, Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shewhorn Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I checked out the Nikon Trailblazer ATB 10x25 binocular today at REI. Not sure how they compare to the model you saw (interestingly enough I could find either the Prostaff or the Trailblazer listed on Nikon's website). Anyhow... I compared them to a Brunton model and REI's own model (both waterproof). The REIs were $40 and the Brunton... not sure what it was but you couldn't pay me to use them. TERRIBLE optics. They were extremely soft when focused and they were about 1.5 stops below the Nikon. The REI binocular was about a stop below the Nikon but the optics were much much better than the Brutons. A worthwhile consideration at only $40 bucks. The Nikons were the best performers though and that extra stop of light over the REI model could make the difference on a foggy day or at night. Cheers, Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnHuth Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 These aren't optimal for bird watching, but they're great for me: http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-17x50-wb.html It has a range-finding reticle that's displayed in milliradians, and also has a very accurate compass that can be illuminated at night. The optics are very good (to my eyes, anyway). I'd put this more in the category of "serious marine" binoculars. I'm not totally sure, but they seem a lot like an evolution from the binoculars used on submarines in WWII, where they had to estimate range and bearing before firing torpedos (which is not a huge criterion in purchasing binoculars for a kayak). Anyway, I use them for everything, including bird watching J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Allen Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 I checked out the Nikon Trailblazer ATB 10x25 binocular today at REI. Not sure how they compare to the model you saw (interestingly enough I could find either the Prostaff or the Trailblazer listed on Nikon's website). Anyhow... I compared them to a Brunton model and REI's own model (both waterproof). The REIs were $40 and the Brunton... not sure what it was but you couldn't pay me to use them. TERRIBLE optics. They were extremely soft when focused and they were about 1.5 stops below the Nikon. The REI binocular was about a stop below the Nikon but the optics were much much better than the Brutons. A worthwhile consideration at only $40 bucks. The Nikons were the best performers though and that extra stop of light over the REI model could make the difference on a foggy day or at night. Cheers, Joe Joe- I assume by "a stop" below, you mean ~2 fold difference in light intensity? Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shewhorn Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Joe- I assume by "a stop" below, you mean ~2 fold difference in light intensity? Phil You got it. If you really want to see the effects Nikon has a binocular with a variable magnification and you can REALLY see the light drop off on the long end of the lens. Cheers, Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruguru Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 After spending hours researching current options, it's seems to come down to the Nikon ProStaff ($100-ish online) or the Steiner Pro 8x22. I was pretty disappointed in the cheaper Nikon Trailblazer's sloppy focus knob (too much center dead play), and although a bit lighter than the ProStaff it doesn't fold much more compactly, either. REI has a decent waterproof 8x25 for $85 list, but it's clearly (sorry) less bright than even the 10x25 ProStaff. They carry the "eco" version of the ProStaff, but only in 10x, on sale for $133. Has anyone seen/tried the Steiner? It has less eye relief (10mm), so may not be eyeglass friendly. The Nikons and Steiner sit at 15mm relief which seems just barely adequate with glasses. After seeing John's remark re his TWO POUND neck pendulum, and reading that mass might provide stability (especially at 10x?), is it still the case that getting a compact light bin is better? Up around 1-1.5 lbs there are a LOT of contenders compared to the 9-13oz stuff I've been checking out. Interestingly the ProStaff comes in an unusual 9x25 as well as 8 and 10x25. Is 8x still preferred for kayaking? The 9x seems attractive as a compromise, but I haven't yet tried using bins in chop. The 10x is just acceptably jittery on land, so I've ruled it out. Any other decent waterproof contenders? I'm biding on a Nikon Premier 8x20, but the owner's warning me that it'll bring $300. Sheesh. Isn't that Leica/Zeiss/Steiner-land, Joe? My interest is more in seeing seals, rocks and chop rather than birding. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruguru Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 Forgot: What about a good MONOCULAR instead? My thought is that having one eye free increases local awareness and balance in chop while trying to scope out 8-10x, but one guy told me that extreme fatigue results, such that one necessarily resorts to shutting (or patching if target shooting with a scope!) the second eye. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brambor Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 I second the choice of a monocular. After all that's what the pirates used...it's gotta be good... Forgot: What about a good MONOCULAR instead? My thought is that having one eye free increases local awareness and balance in chop while trying to scope out 8-10x, but one guy told me that extreme fatigue results, such that one necessarily resorts to shutting (or patching if target shooting with a scope!) the second eye. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pintail Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 <...$300. Sheesh. Isn't that Leica/Zeiss/Steiner-land?> Ernie: nowhere near! I have only ever owned Leitz binoculars (and love them); but you pay for 'em, b'gad! I am surprised by the choice of x25 -- sounds far too limiting for me. My old and first pair are 10x40 and very bright. I might be wrong; but I don't fancy x25 (I bought a small pair of 10x22 compacts for my ex-wife, many years ago -- they were a bit tough on the eyes after 10x40s!) Yer pays yer money...(Nikon make some nice glasses) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterB Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 After spending hours researching current options, it's seems to come down to the Nikon ProStaff ($100-ish online) or the Steiner Pro 8x22. I was pretty disappointed in the cheaper Nikon Trailblazer's sloppy focus knob (too much center dead play), and although a bit lighter than the ProStaff it doesn't fold much more compactly, either. REI has a decent waterproof 8x25 for $85 list, but it's clearly (sorry) less bright than even the 10x25 ProStaff. They carry the "eco" version of the ProStaff, but only in 10x, on sale for $133. Has anyone seen/tried the Steiner? It has less eye relief (10mm), so may not be eyeglass friendly. The Nikons and Steiner sit at 15mm relief which seems just barely adequate with glasses. After seeing John's remark re his TWO POUND neck pendulum, and reading that mass might provide stability (especially at 10x?), is it still the case that getting a compact light bin is better? Up around 1-1.5 lbs there are a LOT of contenders compared to the 9-13oz stuff I've been checking out. Interestingly the ProStaff comes in an unusual 9x25 as well as 8 and 10x25. Is 8x still preferred for kayaking? The 9x seems attractive as a compromise, but I haven't yet tried using bins in chop. The 10x is just acceptably jittery on land, so I've ruled it out. Any other decent waterproof contenders? I'm biding on a Nikon Premier 8x20, but the owner's warning me that it'll bring $300. Sheesh. Isn't that Leica/Zeiss/Steiner-land, Joe? My interest is more in seeing seals, rocks and chop rather than birding. Thanks. I' m not a big fan of the higher-power, lower depth of field (e.g.10 x 25) binocs, because I dont see how one can keep them in focus while in a jayak. Obvously they're compact & lightweight compared with more standard birding binoulars (e.g. 8 x 40 ) but the focusing depth of field is small, and at that high magnification(10x) combined with low depth of field(25) the image can be jittery and not so bright while in a moving kayak. The pair I have my eye on is the Leupold Wind River 6 x 32 Katmai . Reasonably compact, some sacrifice of magnification gets a less jittery image , good depth of field and brightness , and high ratings from the Cornell Labaratory of Ornithology which receives freebies from virtually every manufacturer and runs their own tests. They're about $300. Though binocular optics have improved considerably over tha past decade so that you can get better optics for lower prices , good quality still transates into $$ : you get what you pay for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruguru Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 Hey Peter, I just tried a very mysterious "Field & Stream Armor-Tech 8x32" at Dick's in Saugus, and am now in agreement that the light-gathering and depth of field of a larger objective is attractive. These pretty compact bins were a bit heavy, but seemed sturdy, comfortably balanced, and had bright crisp contrasty images I've tried to google them in all possible ways and get nowhere, as Dick's stores carry different stuff from their web store. At $90 they may be worth a shot. I'm willing to drop to 7x for stability, as well, but haven't found any 7x30 or 7x32 waterproof that are compact and affordable yet. I did try the cheaper ($100) Leupold 8x25 and was surprised how dark and mushy the lens was compared to the excellent Nikon ProStaff. Wish the proStaff were available in a compact 7x30-32 size. The Alpens seem attractive and similar to the Nikon ProStaff in geometry/design, but again, difficult to find locally. What's YOUR weight limit for what hangs around your neck? Ern Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEL Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 more standard birding binoulars (e.g. 8 x 40 ) I'm no birder, aside from being a strange duck, but I have enjoyed a Bushnell 8x40 which has lived up to promise of being water and fog proof and were well around $100 as I recall. Not small or lightweight, but have often added enjoyment to paddles. Ed Lawson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruguru Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 The pair I have my eye on is the Leupold Wind River 6 x 32 Katmai . Reasonably compact, some sacrifice of magnification gets a less jittery image , good depth of field and brightness , and high ratings from the Cornell Labaratory of Ornithology which receives freebies from virtually every manufacturer and runs their own tests. They're about $300. Though binocular optics h Pete, What about the similar Leupold 6x30 Wind River YOSEMITE for $100? The Katmai's are dense at 19 oz, yet the compact Yosemite's still heavy at 17. Great eye relief for glasses and wide view with large exit pupil may make use in chop a lot easier. I'm going to look for more 6-7x.... Ern Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spider Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 I have several pairs of binoculars. thought I might mention some things I've come to realize over the years. My "best ones " are waterproof ( I'll just say I considered myself lucky to pick them up for under $1,000 many years ago) They are great..but like many other waterproof binocs they will sink like a stone if you drop them overboard. I wanted a pair I could use one handed so I went for 8x40 like some other folks mentioned. On a day like today, when I brought them to do some birding, I keep in mind that I don't let them just hang on my neck... I support the weight some how or another so I don't get neck problems from the weight of them (they are a bit under 2 lbs, I learned that lesson the hard way). Glad to have them today as todays trip was primarily for birding..saw a Bald Eagle flying at a distance and wanted to know if it was an adult or a immature and for a better view just to enjoy the beauty of them in flight. A couple of days ago I had a different pair of binocs, much lighter, in the same area, only that time I saw a Snowy Owl perched, but my binocs are not handy... I land the boat, get out, get the binocs get back in the boat and put them up to my eyes... they were next to useless. I could see a bigger image of what I was looking at but no detail they are (7-15x 25 zoom.) Still they are a favorite pair because they are small and light. If I want to see if there are whitecaps or land marks I need to see for navigation they are fine. Though they are not water proof, and would also sink like a stone...yet I would not cry to long because I only paid about $70 for them and are actually fine for casual birding in fairly close proximity. ...last thing before I ramble to much ... I learned that no matter what optics I had for the day I had to keep in mind what boat I would actually be paddling. One boat I call my "boat of perpetual motion" it's a lively one, it wants to go, go, go. I am often sculling while others can just sit still in theirs. Binocs tend to magnify any movement. If I raise the glasses to my eyes in that boat I just about always need to raft up with somebody or stabilize it some how or over I will go (or at least feel that way) .... I actually forget most the optic ratios but I remember 10x 50...8x40... 7x35 were pretty popular for general all round use. Happy viewing ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtmllr Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I just saw a commercial for a new movie and John Travolta was using the ProStaffs backwards I have a pair and often people try to use them the wrong way too. Funny to see misuse of things in serious movies, even if cheesy "done a million times already" action flicks. I think they were ProStaffs anyway. Maybe there's a special agent trick when using them backwards? Perhaps they just look more tactical on film that way. But as stated, "Wax's methods aren't exactly regulation." 1:34 in the trailer. I had to suffer through a few different trailers to confirm what I thought I saw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruguru Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 The Katmai appears much more compact and solid than the Yosemite. I found a couple of competing 6x in the $350 range too, as well a bunch of vintage (WWII) German and Japanese 6x30's. Given the comments re weight, jitter, and brightness, I might just try Ellen's 5x25 "Extra-Wide" (680' at 100yds, 16.6 oz, NOT waterproof, but under $100) Bushnells on the water to see just how these criteria balance before buying a waterproof pair. They just weren't quite light enough nor pocketable for theater use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterB Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 The Katmai appears much more compact and solid than the Yosemite. I found a couple of competing 6x in the $350 range too, as well a bunch of vintage (WWII) German and Japanese 6x30's. Given the comments re weight, jitter, and brightness, I might just try Ellen's 5x25 "Extra-Wide" (680' at 100yds, 16.6 oz, NOT waterproof, but under $100) Bushnells on the water to see just how these criteria balance before buying a waterproof pair. They just weren't quite light enough nor pocketable for theater use. For using binocuolars in a kayak, waterproof is an obvious requirement: it would be folly to use anything else . I have trouble imagining a bicoculars in the $100 range being waterproof. Most binocs are advertised as such,. but as with some restaurant describing its execrable food as "gourmet", it may not really be so, and you have to root around to find out what one advertizes as "waterproof" really means. Using binoculars.(birding/sealwatching etc) from a kayak is unique activity requiring a unique set of attributes. Hardcore birders who can steadily hold a not-very-light pair of binocs in their hands for long periods , favor 10x 40, but what works on land will not in a kayak. I have a pair of Zeiss 7x42: Splendid! Not very high magnification ,but an incredibly bright, clear image, and incredible depth of field, so focusing is nearly instant, great e.g. for forest birdwatching where light is low. . However , they're very big and bulky , fine for use while trodding about on land but unsuitabe for kayak use. I think that for focusing on moving objects (birds, seals etc) from a moving platform , where high magnification translates into a jittery image, lower magnification (less jittery) combined with ease of focusing (depth of field) and compactness & "stowability" (sorry Christopher) all comes together around 6x32. Birding in a kayak is simply not going to be quality viewing : one needs to have hands on the paddle and be mostly paddling, so fixing and focusing on an image , looking at it quickly, then moving on, is important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEL Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 I have trouble imagining a bicoculars in the $100 range being waterproof. I have the same opinion and even if waterproof at first, how long will they stay that way. That said and while I cannot say I have put then under water for any period of time, my little Bushnell has spent time in rather wet/salty places. FWIW, salt crust has been cleaned from them, While obviously not of the quality needed for serious use, they have suited my needs well which involve very casual watching of birds/seals/etc. and navigation aid. My thought is at least I have one and it does add greatly to enjoyment while out and about.. Here is a link to the unit I have which was less expensive than I thought. Would prefer lesser magnification actually. http://www.shopbushnell.com/detail/BSN+130805 Ed Lawson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruguru Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Pete, Found a partial review of some 6x32, with comments re the Vortex vs the Katmai and Yosemite: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=20739 Ern Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEL Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 If looking at high end binoculars, why not check out Swarovski binoculars? Ed Lawson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pintail Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 Oh, my! I see you, too, Mr. Lawson, have expensive taste... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Martinsen Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I've been using these for years, in the 10x32, have had good luck with them. http://www.brunton.com/product.php?id=313 Seen lots of cool stuff. They live in a dry bag/lap bag, get rinsed off periodically in fresh water, the lens cleaned with an optics rag. If I need them handy while paddling, I put the neck strap on, tuck them into my pfd with the lens cap on. Pretty good for being able to look ahead and try to assess conditions in front of you, or having a peek at conditions further out while still in camp. Great for checking out wildlife on the water or in camp, or when I worked as an outdoor educator, checking on students... The next addition to my kit might be a megaphone... Don't think the specifics of the bino's or manufacturer are so important as getting out and actually using them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEL Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 when I worked as an outdoor educator, checking on students... The next addition to my kit might be a megaphone... Would that be to yell, "Stop that you two." after careful/thorough observation determined there was a need for the admonition? Don't think the specifics of the bino's or manufacturer are so important as getting out and actually using them... You mean your gear is just the the means for doing things? Radical thought. Ed Lawson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brambor Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I've got a nice pair of "forgotthebrandname (maybe nikon)" water proof binoculars and for some reason I seldom need to use them. It's not too much fun to bob around and look through binoculars at the same time, they aren't usually close enough to make a difference and the binoculars that are close enough are usually too heavy. Would that be to yell, "Stop that you two." after careful/thorough observation determined there was a need for the admonition? You mean your gear is just the the means for doing things? Radical thought. Ed Lawson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.