Safari (and general birding) binocular? (2 Viewers)

[soloflyfisher]

I know, I know . . . I need to try them. That's the usual advice when asking about a binocular to purchase. But there's a good chance I won't have the opportunity to try them ahead of purchase, so I'm curious what others might advise.

I am retiring and going on a safari in Kenya in March and want a new pair of binoculars, for the safari immediately, but also as general birding binoculars to use in retirement.

I currently have three pairs of binoculars: Leica 10X42 BAs which I purchased in 1985, a few years after the BAs became available (these have some internal discolouration on a lens); Leica 8X32 BAs, which I purchased closer to 2000, and finally Leica Ultravid 8X20s, purchased around 2012.

Clearly, I've been a pretty loyal Leica customer—so the Noctivids seem the logical next purchase. But I'm very tempted to try the Swarovski NL Pure. I want a 42mm objective (or maybe a 52), and am still going back-and-forth between 8X and 10X.

So with all that in mind I have narrowed down my choice to the following five (see poll)—and want to know what readers would pick. Please vote in the poll—and I'd love to hear your reasons for your choice.

 

[Maljunulo]

If I were younger (as you obviously are) I would buy the NL 8 x42.

For me, a bit too heavy now.

 

[dorubird]

For Kenya in particular, it matters what ph you have because Swarovski armor is sensitive in warm conditions to a certain sweaty ph, may degrading and becoming sticky and then brittle. With Noctivid I have not the slightest doubt that it has the perfect mechanics and finishes regardless of your ph, or humidity or heat conditions in Kenya, or anywhere in the world! Leica Noctivid is like a tank!
Regarding to the power, I would choose 10x because you will look in open spaces and you will appreciate the extra details in the lion's eye Also because your 10x binoculars are quite old and you have many other 8x binoculars that you can choose to pair with 10x on this trip.

 

[kabsetz]

Of the ones you list, for a safari I would pick the 8x42 NL for lighter weight, wider field of view than the Noctivid and better depth of field than the 10x models. You are likely to use the binoculars a lot, and your hands will tire whatever you use but less with lighter binoculars.

Myself, I always use image-stabilised binoculars, and would not consider anything else for a safari either. So I would take with the binocular which still has the best image quality among stabilised models while having practical magnification and wide-enough field of view. That is the Canon 10x42 L IS.
It has better image quality than your older Leicas, and the advantages of IS will make the safari a whole different experience.

 

[Mono]

With the budget to get the binoculars listed above I would prefer to get a "lesser" pair of binoculars and a lightweight scope. One could get a Nikon ED50 with eyepiece and a travel tripod and head and still have £1200 to spend on a very capable set of binoculars. This would give you much great viewing possibilities on the safari and in your future birding.

 

[GHOV02]

My last two trips I used Minox 8x42 and Leica ultravid 8x20. Mostly the 8x42s because the smaller ones are not as steady. I like the 8x range where I've hunted but in more open country 10x would be great.

 

[Dennis Mau]

I would definitely get a 8x42 over a 10x42 for the bigger FOV, better DOF, brighter image, and it is easier to hold steady, especially if you are in a safari vehicle in Africa. I would get a Nikon HG 8x42 because it has an 8.3 degree FOV, it shows very little glare, it only weighs 24 oz. yet it has a 42mm aperture and the armor won't peel off like a Swarovski in the warm humid conditions of Africa when you are sweating. Plus it is only $1000.00, so you could also get a lightweight scope for more distant animals. The Noctivid 8x42 has too much CA on the edges, it has a puny FOV for a 8x of only 7.7 degrees, and it is very heavy at over 30 oz. FOV is the most important specification on a binocular because it makes it easier to find whatever you are looking for, IMO.

A lot of the Swarovski's especially the NL 8x42 have a lot of glare in the bottom of the FOV which would be very irritating in the bright sun in Africa. There is a reason why Swarovski's are known as 'glare monsters'. I know I have had just about all of them. I compared my Swarovski NL 8x32 closely to my Nikon HG 8x42 and the Nikon was brighter because of the bigger aperture, was just as light in weight, had nearly as big of FOV at 8.3 degrees versus 8.5 degrees for the NL and had way less glare for 1/2 the price. The only advantage the NL had over the HG was slightly sharper edges, and you had to put with the FP strap attachments, peeling armor and the goofy side load case.

 

[GrampaTom]

"Oct 2024 - NLs are simply the best" NL's are simply the best!

Post #1
"I think I have to admit that Swarovski NL's are the best binoculars out there IMO, especially optically. I have tried over 100 binoculars and nothing wows me the way an NL does when I look through them. No other binocular has the huge FOV that is tack sharp right to the edge and comes as close to optical perfection as the NL. You might like the ergonomics or light weight of a Zeiss SFL better or the saturated colors of a Leica Noctivid, but no binocular is as close to being perfect as an NL. The NL's are also very bright and very transparent and no matter what binocular you try when you come back to them, they will wow you. Zeiss SF's are very good and are a little better with glare and CA on the edges, but they have some glare also, and they don't have the sharp edges and perfectly corrected FOV that the NL does.

FOV is very important because it makes it easier to find birds, and you can scan larger areas faster and if a bird suddenly flies to another tree you can follow them easier. The sharp edges of the NL make that huge FOV even more effective because you can see birds at the very edge of the FOV clearly. The Noctivid has great saturated colors, but it doesn't impress with it's relatively small FOV compared to the NL or SF. I think the NL has a combination of great fluorite glass and some of the best coatings in the industry that sets it apart from even other alpha level binoculars. When you look at the objectives on an NL, you see almost no reflections. It almost looks like there is no glass there. That is a testament to how good their coatings are. Not everybody agrees with Allbinos but every time they test an NL it ends up in first place even besting the Nikon WX a binocular that costs $6000 in the 10x50 class. NL's are about the most expensive binoculars out there, and they are the best. I guess it means you get what you pay for.

Binoculars rankings - AllBinos.com​

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.
www.allbinos.com

Last edited: Oct 19, 2024

 

[etudiant]

Of the ones you list, for a safari I would pick the 8x42 NL for lighter weight, wider field of view than the Noctivid and better depth of field than the 10x models. You are likely to use the binoculars a lot, and your hands will tire whatever you use but less with lighter binoculars.

Myself, I always use image-stabilised binoculars, and would not consider anything else for a safari either. So I would take with the binocular which still has the best image quality among stabilised models while having practical magnification and wide-enough field of view. That is the Canon 10x42 L IS.
It has better image quality than your older Leicas, and the advantages of IS will make the safari a whole different experience.

That certainly fits with my experience in Tanzania, the IS was very helpful not only for getting detail on small birds such as Cisticolas, but also for decent views of large predators, such as leopards, that are often found lounging in trees quite far away. Of course the Canon is heavy and bulky, so it takes some getting used to, but as a birding instrument it is unexcelled imho.

 

[crinklystarfish]

From your shortlist:

10x, because of the likelihood of greater distances being involved in much of the viewing in a Kenyan-safari scenario; and because 10x is an excellent all-round choice for birding across multiple habitats upon your return.

NL Pure, because they are cutting edge and truly exceptional.

Enjoy the trip, and retirement!

 

[Patudo]

@OP - my take on this is probably slightly contrarian, and I've never been on safari, so you need to take this with the requisite helping of salt, but ... I would just take the three binoculars you already own. You and the Mrs can use the two larger binoculars as needed and bring the small one for backup.

I know, I know ... it flies against the ethos of this subforum (BUY BUY BUY!!!) and your optics dealer will not thank me for this. But there are some practical reasons for my suggestion. First and foremost is that you should be very familiar with them, so handling should be intuitive (you won't be trying to learn a new binocular while in a new environment and looking at unfamiliar creatures). Second, and also pretty important I'd say: both Leicas can not only take knocks; you also won't be too fussed about getting them dinged if they bang against the Land Rover, or assorted terrain features - as may very likely happen in safari conditions - than you might be with a brand spanking new $3000 binocular.

But aren't the Swaros/whatever better, I hear you say? Personally, I doubt the Leica BA/BNs really give up a great deal in actual field use - most likely a lot of the game/birds/whatever will be pointed out for you by the guides anyway; it gets bright quickly in the tropics so you likely won't be viewing for extended periods in twilight, when the superior brightness of the latest binoculars might help for 10-15 minutes or so, maximum; and if it's really blindingly Africa-bright, the lower light transmission and performance against glare of the Leicas might actually help you. (Scratch all that if you're doing a specialty trip into the rainforest to see bongo/okapi/Congo peafowl, of course.) And you're probably going to be looking at a lot of game animals, from impala size to the biggest of the big, rather than trying to find and ID little passerines; I doubt very much a frickin' elephant is going to look any less impressive through a Leica 10x42 or 8x32 than a Swaro or whatever.

Put all that together and I really think there is a strong case for taking the binoculars you are fully familiar with, and which are really pretty good, in terms of both durability and field performance. But if you put a .470 Nitro to my head (hang on ... did you mean that kind of safari? ...) I suppose I would pick the 10x42 NL as the format that for me is the best all-rounder. But if your experience with the Leicas has made you favour 8x, by all means go for the 8x42 of either manufacturer. They are both brilliant binoculars in their own way. The 10x52 NL while (IMO) offering the utmost in absolute image quality, is a bit of a handful - maybe not on safari if you are doing most of your glassing from a vehicle, but later on in its service if you are doing lots of birding on foot. If you can afford a dedicated binocular for long-range glassing, especially if you expect to be doing so from a viewpoint or similar fixed location, the 10x52 would be outstanding for that task; but I reckon that - unless you're one of the he-man types that occasionally pop up here - after lugging it on foot for half a dozen birding trips there's a real good chance you'll find yourself wanting to use a x42.

Have fun on your trip and let us know how you get on!

 

[GrampaTom]

Brilliant

 

[ReinierB]

NL 12x42 😉
And otherwise NL 10x42 or NL 10x32.
If I would go 8 power, I would go NL 8x32.
However, for safari I would go 10 or 12x.

 

[bcskr]

Having been to Africa more than once I do not recommend 10x because most of the time you’ll be getting close enough to the animals, and the movement of other people in the vehicles will make 10x difficult to hold steady. 8x will be perfectly adequate.

 

[tenex]

Patudo has given great advice except that you don't want the 10x42's lens discoloration on safari, and don't have time to get it serviced which I would otherwise recommend. On 10x vs 8, I'll defer to those who've actually done safaris and know the situations you'll be in, although personally I'm so accustomed to 10x that I wouldn't want to do a trip without one. (Do you need bins at all for animals close to your vehicle, and aren't there others further out?) You probably don't want/need to lug anything bigger than 42mm. So if you want to end up with an NL, get the 10x42 and practice a bit. If you're not sure, get any reasonably good one and reevaluate afterward.

 

[soloflyfisher]

Lot's of great advice—thanks for all the comments. Of course, they only add to my indecision since there's no consensus.

Good news is after a lot of calling around, I found a place about a three hour drive from where I live that has the entire NL Pure line to try as well as the Zeiss SF and one Noctivid 8X42 still in stock (they are closing out Leica, so the one that remains is also marked down significantly). Going to try to head out on Saturday and try them all.

 

[soloflyfisher]

@OP - my take on this is probably slightly contrarian, and I've never been on safari, so you need to take this with the requisite helping of salt, but ... I would just take the three binoculars you already own. You and the Mrs can use the two larger binoculars as needed and bring the small one for backup.

I know, I know ... it flies against the ethos of this subforum (BUY BUY BUY!!!) and your optics dealer will not thank me for this. But there are some practical reasons for my suggestion. First and foremost is that you should be very familiar with them, so handling should be intuitive (you won't be trying to learn a new binocular while in a new environment and looking at unfamiliar creatures). Second, and also pretty important I'd say: both Leicas can not only take knocks; you also won't be too fussed about getting them dinged if they bang against the Land Rover, or assorted terrain features - as may very likely happen in safari conditions - than you might be with a brand spanking new $3000 binocular.

But aren't the Swaros/whatever better, I hear you say? Personally, I doubt the Leica BA/BNs really give up a great deal in actual field use - most likely a lot of the game/birds/whatever will be pointed out for you by the guides anyway; it gets bright quickly in the tropics so you likely won't be viewing for extended periods in twilight, when the superior brightness of the latest binoculars might help for 10-15 minutes or so, maximum; and if it's really blindingly Africa-bright, the lower light transmission and performance against glare of the Leicas might actually help you. (Scratch all that if you're doing a specialty trip into the rainforest to see bongo/okapi/Congo peafowl, of course.) And you're probably going to be looking at a lot of game animals, from impala size to the biggest of the big, rather than trying to find and ID little passerines; I doubt very much a frickin' elephant is going to look any less impressive through a Leica 10x42 or 8x32 than a Swaro or whatever.

Put all that together and I really think there is a strong case for taking the binoculars you are fully familiar with, and which are really pretty good, in terms of both durability and field performance. But if you put a .470 Nitro to my head (hang on ... did you mean that kind of safari? ...) I suppose I would pick the 10x42 NL as the format that for me is the best all-rounder. But if your experience with the Leicas has made you favour 8x, by all means go for the 8x42 of either manufacturer. They are both brilliant binoculars in their own way. The 10x52 NL while (IMO) offering the utmost in absolute image quality, is a bit of a handful - maybe not on safari if you are doing most of your glassing from a vehicle, but later on in its service if you are doing lots of birding on foot. If you can afford a dedicated binocular for long-range glassing, especially if you expect to be doing so from a viewpoint or similar fixed location, the 10x52 would be outstanding for that task; but I reckon that - unless you're one of the he-man types that occasionally pop up here - after lugging it on foot for half a dozen birding trips there's a real good chance you'll find yourself wanting to use a x42.

Have fun on your trip and let us know how you get on!

Good advice. I'm definitely taking the 8X32 (for my wife) and the 8X20 to carry around when I'm not birding primarily so I'm prepared if something interesting flies by.

But I do want a 42 mm (I like them better than 32 for general use) in either 8X or 10X, and my old 10X42 BAs have some discolouration on a lens, so those are really ready to be replaced (or serviced) anyway.

 

[dwatsonbirder]

Some great advice here, and would back up both Patudo and bcskr - use what you already have, and you don't need high power bins.
I've been eight times to seven African countries for birding (and mammal watching) trips and never really missed anything with my 7x42 (formerly Swarovski SLC, latterly Zeiss FL), nor has my wife with her 8x32 (formerly the venerable Leica BA, and latterly an Opticron traveller).
Something with a decent build quality that provides a steady (wide) view is all you really need in most circumstances - for everything else, either use a scope or use a bit of fieldcraft to try to get a bit closer!

 

[soloflyfisher]

The 8X seems to be leading in the polling. I can get the Noctivid 8X42 on clearance for $2,500 CAD. The NL Pure 8X42 is $3629 CAD. That's gonna be a factor too.

 

[soloflyfisher]

Be sure to try the NL's against the bright sun! I would hate to see you get all the way over to Africa and miss a Lion or a Leopard because of the glare in an NL, or suffering the embarrassment of having to borrow a Nikon HG 8x42 so you could see him! Try the Nikon HG 8x42. You just might save yourself some money and aggravation, and then you could also get that lite weight Nikon ED50 spotter.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/803114949-USE/nikon_8320_fieldscope_ed50_13_30x50_spotting.html

I should give the Nikons a closer look. Maybe I'm biased toward the "alphas" but my uncle who owned a camera store was always big on Nikon (after Hasselblad and Leica).