8x42 Discoverer vs 8x42 Fujinon BFL (1 Viewer)

[pw53]

Would anyone on this forum be so kind as to enlighten me regarding the optical quality of these 2 bins and how they compare? I have looked at the Discoverer for a while now and now the Fujinon has come to my attention.

The obvious difference of roof-porro I am aware of; my main interest is the difference in optical quality between the 2.

I thank you kindly for your time and effort.

Paula

 

[Tero]

Not seen either, but pick fast, the Discoverers may disappear. You can check www.bushnell.com/
for their current status.

Looks good, still there
http://www.bushnell.com/general/binoculars_discoverer.cfm?section=Birding

Not all stores are selling them, though.

 

[jedku]

I can't compare the bins for you directly. But I would point out that the eye relief and field of view are very low on the Fujinons: 12mm and 330ft/1000yrds. Unacceptable for me, even with my contact lenses in.

I read some reviews of the BFLs months ago and many people said they were not at all comparable or related to the famous high quality marine Porros made by Fujinon. Perhaps it is better to consider some other Porro prism bins available for around the same price such as Nikon Action EX, Pentax, Leopold or (for a little more money) the excellent Swift Audubon 820 Porros (which I own).
The Bushnells have 420ft/1000yrds and 17mm of eye relief. I hav the older model 7x42 Discoverer formerly manufactured under the B&L label. They are superior to other affordable roof prism bins, IMO. Mine have been used extensively for 7 years including many months of 8 hour days in the field and have held up great and never given me a headache. They are a bit heavy though.

Did you get the email advert from Eagle Optics for the Fujinon? I got that email today and then saw your post.
Paula, it is important to try the bins in your hands too. Many Porros with large objective lenses are tough to hold and focus quickly for small hands. Roofs can be a lot easier or perhaps 8x30 Porros.

 

[Bob A (SD)]

I too received the notification from EO so I looked around a bit for reviews. Here's one I found interesting from Australia:

Olympus 8x40 DPS I vs Fujinon 8x42 BFL

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/index.php?id=76,235,0,0,1,0

As an aside I agree that the FOV is a deal breaker here unfortunately.

--Bob

 

[edz]

Well, I'm caught up with interest in these binoculars. I dug a bit deeper for more written information on both the 8x42 and the 10x42.

First I found that one seasoned tester found the eye relief to measure over 15mm on the 8x. That would be more than enough for me with my eyeglasses. Then I thought about the narrow 6.25° fov in the 8x model. But when I checked my stable, I found of 3 other 8x40/8x42s that I own, only one of them is wider than that. My favorite, the Swift Ultralite is narrower by a bit. And I've never felt that to be narrow. So that won't be a deal breaker for me.

Two very knowledgable and trustworthy observers on Cloudy Nights (both of whom are also avid birders) reviewed both the 8x42 and 10x42 as great binoculars, both going as far back as two-three years ago. Not on the same level as a Nikon 10x42 SE, but from the remarks I read and from the comparisons I've done, seems it would place them well above the Nikon Action Extreme, a binocular that suffers from outer field aberrations and some ghosting. the coatings on the Nikon AE are quite a bit less than premium. FWIW, I liked the Nikon AE 8x40, but sold it, and the AE10x50 is good, but several other common 10x50s are better. The AE12x50 is by far the best performer of that set.

One very significant aspect of the fov issue is this; usually those binoculars with a narrower Afov have significantly better outer field performance than those with a wider fov. For instance the Nikon AE10x50 is stated to have a 6.5° fov (it's really only 6.1°). The Pentax PCF WP 10x50 has a 5° fov. But the Pentax has a wider aberration free fov than the Nikon AE. Likewise the Swift Ultralite 8x42 has only a 53° Afov and the Nikon AE 8x40 has a 64° Afov. But the Swift Ultralite has an equally wide, if not wider, aberration free fov than the Nikon AE. In fact the Nikon AEs outer 20% is so distorted by several aberrations that it's image at that point in the fov is unusable. So these narrower Afov Fujinon binoculars may not be at a shortfall due to narrow field if the narrower field stop in the eyepieces is (as I suspect) eliminating outer field aberrations.

edz

 

[Bob A (SD)]

Edz,

A classic case of whatever floats your boat. All of my 8x bins are 7.5* or better (60* AFOV). My 6.5x is 8* and my vintage 7x is a fairly well corrected piece with a whopping 11* FOV (77* AFOV). My 9x35 is 7.3* and even my 10x is a wide 6.6* (both >65* AFOV). Agreed that in most cases edges suffer as a trade off against FOV. My astro bins are 9x63 with a meager 5* (45* AFOV) accordingly because for that use I want edges sharp so I'll sacrifice FOV. But if used for terrestrial viewing it feels like I'm looking through a straw... no 3D nice depth of field effect unfortunately.

No question I've become a FOV junky and for most uses that becomes a key criteria for me. But it sounds like you are used to narrow FOVs and also value edge performance over FOV. So the Fujis would no doubt work for you. For me that FOV carries too great a penalty of killing off peripheral views which I find enhance the immersive sensation bino views can provide.

--Bob

 

[jedku]

If you are birdwatching, a wide field of view helps to get on birds in flight and flittering warblers quickly. The outer edge being not tack sharp is not really a problem. It is important that a large area of the center is sharp. I prefer to have about 420ft at 1000yrds or about 8 degrees of arc. Anything more is prone to flaring. But anything under about 7 degrees is too narrow for getting on the bird fast.

The edge to edge sharpness is important for astronomy where one might want to view an entire constellation or other phenomenon within a single field of view or perhaps mounted on a tripod. Usually, the result of these designs in affordable bins is a narrow field of view.

The worst are the inexpensive roofs which often have a narrow field of view and only a small center "sweet spot" of clear focus.

 

[pw53]

My thanks to all who have taken an interest in my querry. Indeed I did receive the e-mail from EO and considering I have been looking for an affordable 8x42 it peeked my interest. I am however spoiled optically because my main bins are the SE 8x32. Sometimes I wonder why I need another pair at all and yet I keep looking and reading.

I have tried several and send them back: Katmai 6x32, Papillio, Bushnell 7x26 Customs and Olympus Magellan 10x42. I never realized that I am such a finnicky person when it comes to optical quality .....so maybe I should just be content with what I have! I may be saying this now, but I know my search is not over. Thanks so much for taking the time... Thanks, Paula

 

[Pileatus]

My thanks to all who have taken an interest in my querry. Indeed I did receive the e-mail from EO and considering I have been looking for an affordable 8x42 it peeked my interest. I am however spoiled optically because my main bins are the SE 8x32. Sometimes I wonder why I need another pair at all and yet I keep looking and reading.

I have tried several and send them back: Katmai 6x32, Papillio, Bushnell 7x26 Customs and Olympus Magellan 10x42. I never realized that I am such a finnicky person when it comes to optical quality .....so maybe I should just be content with what I have! I may be saying this now, but I know my search is not over. Thanks so much for taking the time... Thanks, Paula

Paula,

Once you become totally comfortable with the SE it is extremely challenging to find a roof prism model with a comparable view. As an SE owner, you know what I'm talking about. You are not being "finicky"; you are simply unwilling to settle for a lesser view than you already experience with your SE.

I've looked at every 7X/8X binocular above a $1000 and only a few approach the overall viewing pleasure of my SE 8X32. I ultimately purchased a 7X42 Ultravid, whose centerfield matches that of the SE. However, if I had to choose the binocular I'd want on a bird in the average viewing situation the SE would win every time.

Ask yourself how many hours of birding you miss because you own an SE. Based on your response, you may or may not need a waterproof, fog proof roof prism binocular. Obviously, the SE is not designed for harsh weather. Last year I spent 10 days birding in Alberta and rarely touched the Ultravid. This year, I split my usage 50/50. My wife, who avoids harsh weather, uses her SE about 98% of the time.

Happy birding!

John