Another good one to try is the Nikon Monarch HG 8x30. Many people prefer it over the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 and the Swarovski 8x30 CL. It has the advantage of being smaller, lighter and more compact than either and that for most people is always a good thing, although it sounds like you have bigger hands which might be a problem.Thank you for your suggestion, I will keep it in mind.
My lens has a magnification over 10x (600mm focal length).
Yes, this summer I bought some cheaper (around 200€) binos, a 8x42 and a 10x42, tested them for a few weeks, and sent them back because of their poor performance (strong CA and distortion), but I was able to decide, which magnification I prefer. When I stopped somewhere, I was constantly holding them in my both hands, looking through both, when inspecting an object, and since I knew I will send them back, I have ignored the image quality, just paid attention for the magnification I need!
Somehow I found the 10x much more pleasent to use, for me it's the sweet spot, and I don't look through the binoculars all the time, only for short periods, and yes, handshake could be a problem, but it was much-much more easier to disreagrd it, when I had the opportunity to try 10x binos with great FOV (Delta Optical Titanium HD, Monarch HG)! Also, when I'm out there and I'm looking through binoculrs or just a camera, I'm always picking up a stable position, crouching down, or lean against a tree!
I'm not searching for a bird, wild boar, deer etc. in the forest all the time, I usually look at very distant objects, buildings during my hikings! I enjoy looking for airplanes, helicopters as well, since they fly pretty low where I usually hike, I guess, no need to explain, why is the 10x prefered for this, right? It was also better looking for astro objects, the Moon etc. As I explained in my introduction, I'm here, because I know you birders are the most picky, when it comes to binoculars, that's why I'm here.
And why I'm looking for a ~600€ binocular instead of a cheaper piece? Because comming from photography, I see the flaws in image quality, it annoys me more than an average person, and I can't tolerate poor quality in optics. I know I have to agree with some, have to make a price-related compromise, but I know I would be unhappy if I didn’t buy the best I could afford, and let's be honest, the price is always proportional to the quality, binos are no exception!
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Monarch M7 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter dries1
- Start date
Sydneybirder
Active member
Thanks for that explanation, it's now obvious that you've done your research and are making an informed choice. Like most things in life there are pluses and minuses to every choice so what suits me doesn't necessarily suit you. I know what you mean about seeing the flaws, once you've become accustomed to excellent optics it becomes difficult to go back. Unfortunately I now have champagne tastes but only a beer budget!
If you've tried the Monarch HG what did you think about it compared to the Monarch 7?
My only comment here is that many people can appreciate and prefer using high-end binoculars, whether they give a hoot about bird watching, or not.
There are a vast number of applications for binoculars that don't involve "serious birding", or ANY birding at all. Are these other applications such that one need not choose to use high-end binoculars? (Not in my view.). Any time I pick up a pair of bins to view something, I quite appreciate using fine quality binoculars, even if some may not consider them "necessary" for applications other than birding.
Who defines what a "serious birder" is? Do you need to book an expensive travel trip to South America, to seek out some rare birds, to be considered a "serious birder"?
I enjoy looking at birds, all manner of other wildlife, as well as city scenes, distant rural scenes, various human activities, concert performers, sports activities, the moon, planets, the stars, etc. All with binoculars. And I fully enjoy using top-notch optics to do so. I don't think I'm what some might call a "serious birder", but I do watch birds with binoculars, every day!
Last edited:
I did not try the Monarch 7, only the HG from Nikon's line.
I'm a novice, didn't had the chance to hold too many binoculars in my hand in my whole life, especially not expensive glass.
We have a disadvantage here in our capital, when it comes to buy binoculars. I have found 4 stores here in Budapest that sell serious binoculars (two hunting stores and two astronomical telescope stores), but all of them are located in narrow, dark streets, surrounded by tall buildings!
And sadly none of the shops have the best stock, the Delta Optical, the Kowa, and the Monarch 7 and HG are located in different stores.
So I will have to always buy two of them, and test them, before bringing back. (And as a side note, I shouldn't care, but I know it will be an uncomfortable feeling to always bring back the binos and buy another one for a week of use, the sellers will look stupid)
Speaking about the HG, i can't say anything bad about it. Maybe if I had the chance to use some alpha glass, it will be a different story, but now for the first time looking through a bino like this, I had the wow-feeling: I saw distortion close to zero (thats where the surrounding buildings with their parallel lines come in handy), razor sharp image, no CA, not even on sunny windows and rooftops, and a wonderful wide FOV.
So you know the feeling, I tasted champagne, and don't want to go back to regular beer, but I have to find something in between.
I have the 8x30 version and think they are the best bino's below 500 euro.
Peregrine Took
Well-known member
I think they compare favourably with binoculars in the £350.00-£400.00 bracket, which, to my mind, says they're over-priced. Optically, I found the Kowa BD II XD much better. I don't want to sound too much like I'm Nikon M7 bashing, but having ordered a pair online and been determined to love them I'm in the 'not impressed' camp. I returned them and bought a pair of Zeiss Conquest's. (If you want more detail I've already left several posts on the subject on these pages.)
.
Last edited:
You bought a pair costing twice as much as the m7. Ofcource they are gonna be better..
Peregrine Took
Well-known member
If you actually read what I wrote, I said the Kowa BD was better and is £100.00 less than the Nikon M7.
And I got the Conquest's for £710.00... nowhere near twice the price of the M7. I mentioned the Conquest's simply to suggest that if you're thinking of buying the Nikon's for £500.00, then consider spending a little more on something much much better.
I did think the 8x30 was the best of the M7 bunch, followed by the 8x42. The false colours of the 10x42 were shocking.
I know some people care about distortion when looking at birds, but we're not doing architectural photography so it's not something that bothers me. That said - and back on topic - the M7's are no better than the BD's, but 25% more expensive. Notwithstanding the fact that I wasn't even looking for distortion, I thought the Kowa's were only marginally bettered by the Conquest's in all respects.
.
Last edited:
Nikon E2 8x30 IMO is the best binocular under $500 period. It kills the Nikon M7 8x30. It competes with most 8x30 and 8x32 roofs costing $1000 and more including the HG, Conquest HD and Kowa Prominar, plus you get a bigger FOV and better 3D.
Old vs new: Nikon 8x30 EII vs 8x30 Monarch HG
www.holgermerlitz.de
Last edited:
I agree. They are way overrated. Way too much distortion. Took a pair to Florida with me once. The Alligators looked like they had mustache's!
Last edited:
master5
Well-known member
Has anyone else had their hands on the M7's yet? I have a Nikon store credit, so I am pretty much stuck going with some Nikon's. The credit is almost enough to cover the cost of the M7, but would also go a long way toward some HG's.
I am pretty well set on getting 8x42's. I am most interested in Low Light performance and a natural looking view with the ability for wildlife to "pop" out of the picture; Where you feel like you are part of the picture (if that makes any sense).
I'm less worried about the intricacies of CA or color fringing.
Does anyone have any thoughts on those 2 characteristics between the M7 and HG? I am in Kansas City and can't find any stores that have both to try out.
I am pretty well set on getting 8x42's. I am most interested in Low Light performance and a natural looking view with the ability for wildlife to "pop" out of the picture; Where you feel like you are part of the picture (if that makes any sense).
I'm less worried about the intricacies of CA or color fringing.
Does anyone have any thoughts on those 2 characteristics between the M7 and HG? I am in Kansas City and can't find any stores that have both to try out.
I think a large FOV goes a long way to get to the immersive experience you are looking for. The FOV specs of the MHG and new M7 8x42 are the same, a large 8.3 degrees. I haven't put hands on the new M7, but my experience with the old version and MHG lead me to conclude the following:
The MHG will offer improved contrast, a brighter image, and a larger sweet spot. None of these improvements are drastic, but they are enough that if you are comparing the two binoculars side-by-side you will prefer the MHG. If the new M7 is any better than the old one, this difference might be quite minimal. In any case, the M7 is a really good pair of binoculars- good wide view with excellent ergonomics and light weight. These don't get as much credit as they deserve, probably due to the Nikon branding and MIC stigma. I would, for example, take an M7 8x42 over a Leica Trinovid HD 8x42 any day of the week. I currently use a MHG 8x42 for almost all of my birding and I am very fond of these binoculars. My only ding on them is CA. If you aren't worried about CA, I don't think you will find a better pair of binoculars for birding without shelling out $3k to Swarovski.
What do you mean by quality - optics, mechanics, general build quality, or?
