Why is it so hard to find a competent binocular... (1 Viewer)

[Trinovid]

Maybe I'm easy to please. I guess we are all just different ...

I like the way you think! Accepting that others have different tastes and needs is a very good thing.

 

[Maljunulo]

Not to mention the perpetually cynical.

Indeed.

 

[chill6x6]

Zeiss Terras are certainly competent. Sure I had to buy a case in some instances but competent, yes. Opticron has several models that are competent and I have a few. Cabela's and Leupold both offer competent binoculars. As mentioned Nikon M5 and M7 are certainly capable binoculars. Meopta offers the Meopro models that are certainly competent. I'm sure others as well. All competent birding binoculars without breaking the bank. IDK...I don't find any problems finding competent binoculars.

 

[Mike Crawley]

My partner has a pair of 8x32 Zeiss Terra binoculars.
They were supplied with a really good strap (similar to those on higher grade binocular) and a great case which is stiffened to form a semi hard exterior. Don’t know if it’s designed to take a really hard knock but it inspires confidence in the safety of the binoculars.

 

[Murmur]

I would certainly say the Kowa Genesis range (disclaimer - happy user of the 8x33 for over 5 years) would fit. I've replaced a lost objective cover with some from Opticron.

 

[wdc]

I'll add the Vanguard Endeavor to the list. I used the 8x42 model for about 6 months, before I began to realize the IPD setting couldn't quite match my somewhat naturally crossed eyes. In all other respects a fine binocular, so my problems with it were my own. I remember comparing the Vanguard 8x42 with the Swarovski EL 8x32 in the shop, and being able to see a difference in contrast and detail in the shadows (swarovski was a bit better) but the price difference was enormous. There are plenty of less expensive binoculars that do a fine job for birding.

-Bill

 

[SeldomPerched]

I consider a binocular to be "competent" = really usable if:

• It has slip-on tethered objective caps that can be easily removed.
• It has tethered ocular guard(s) that can be easily removed.
• Decent optics.
• Either it is robust enough that a bag is not needed, or it has a practical small lightweight bag.
• It has a non-horrible strap.

Yet, most of my "usable" binoculars end up being alpha! Why is it that it's so difficult to find a competent binocular at a decent price?

My Conquest have unusable objective caps. My Zeiss Terra have no good case to speak of, and the 8x25, not even caps. My Fuji Technostabi 12x28 does not have usable caps. And so on and so forth.

Sure, my Leica UV, Zeiss FL, are fantastic optically and competent. But why is it that cheaper binoculars skimp on what are in the end very cheap, but also very necessary, accessories?

I know exactly what you mean but I'm only bothered if the mechanics are letting me down and of course if the collimation is out or the optics just aren't delivering. (Or if the instrument is hard to hold still but that is another matter!)

I suppose a jubilee 'Paddington' edition of any bin over here in Britain could include a pocket in the case for a marmalade sandwich!

Tom

 

[opisska]

Maybe because your definition of "competent" is far from universal? I can't see myself ever using objective caps on a binocular for example.

 

[Maljunulo]

I suppose a jubilee 'Paddington' edition of any bin over here in Britain could include a pocket in the case for a marmalade sandwich!

Tom

Marmite, perhaps?

 

[jring]

Hi,

I agree with the decent optics and robust mechanics points - those are relevant to me... the rest can be easily fixed with aftermarket parts.

Joachim

 

[exup]

I think expectations based on price play an important role.........then a 1000 or 2000 USD/EUR/GBP device should be flawless",

This is the crux, IMHO.

I have been buying a few Canon IS bins recently .......10x42L on the way.
With IS, there is a large stepped improvement on detail of what can be seen and for me this is likely unachievable (?) with any non-IS bin (unmounted).

IF I was to buy an "Alpha" at twice the cost of the 10x42L IS, I would expect it to be darn perfect. I expect I would be very disappointed.

 

[takitam]

No other 10x bins can beat the Canon L IS when it comes to detail being seen and the quality of the view. Especially for prolonged observation. But there are other factors preventing people from liking them. Some dislike the form factor, others hate that they are battery powered. I was one of those people and I cannot for the life of me understand why, now that I have them. I think I was making up stories about durability or other such nonsense, really don't know why. To feel better about myself I guess.

I have read complaints about 'artifacts' in the view but I can't complain about any such thing. The only thing that still bothers me occasionally are the eyecups. Took a while to learn how to set them up and everything is fine now, but they could be better.

Now, if only I could use them more to actually enjoy the world outside...

 

[Troubador]

Not to mention the perpetually cynical.

No, they are always happy.

Lee

 

[[email protected]]

No other 10x bins can beat the Canon L IS when it comes to detail being seen and the quality of the view. Especially for prolonged observation. But there are other factors preventing people from liking them. Some dislike the form factor, others hate that they are battery powered. I was one of those people and I cannot for the life of me understand why, now that I have them. I think I was making up stories about durability or other such nonsense, really don't know why. To feel better about myself I guess.

I have read complaints about 'artifacts' in the view but I can't complain about any such thing. The only thing that still bothers me occasionally are the eyecups. Took a while to learn how to set them up and everything is fine now, but they could be better.

Now, if only I could use them more to actually enjoy the world outside...

The Canon 10x42 IS-L and the Fujinon TS 14x40 are probably the two best IS binoculars. The Canon has slightly better optics with the ED glass, and the Fujinon has a little better IS system with fewer artifacts. Either one is supreme for seeing detail, with the Fujinon perhaps being a little better because of the higher 14x magnification. It is too bad they couldn't improve the ergonomics and the eye cups on the Canon. Without a doubt, if you want to see detail without using a tripod, there is nothing better. Try reading distant lettering with an IS binocular versus a non-IS binocular, and you will quickly see what I mean. There is no competition.

 

[Trinovid]

No, they are always happy.

Maybe so, just as long as they don't have to worry about which binocular best fits their needs. Then all is good.