Small low mag monocular (1 Viewer)

[tom666]

I like the idea for a small low mgnification monocular. Search in the web and i focus at two zeiss 4x12 and 6x18 and one nikon 5x15 hg. Any opinions from somebody who has personal experience with those monoculars and may be a ''comparison'' with leica 8x20 ultravid binocular [i have it] ? PS sorry for my english.

 

[Troubador]

I like the idea for a small low mgnification monocular. Search in the web and i focus at two zeiss 4x12 and 6x18 and one nikon 5x15 hg. Any opinions from somebody who has personal experience with those monoculars and may be a ''comparison'' with leica 8x20 ultravid [i have it] ? PS sorry for my english.

Hi Tom

I have had the Zeiss 6x18 for many years and it always travels with me on holidays. The close focus ability is really really good and actually the magnification increases at close focus to (I think) 9x. For looking at insects and flowers and even things in rock pools by the sea they are so useful.

The push-pull focus action sounds strange but it works very well and can even be done with one hand if you need to. As a companion for a close focusing binocular I highly recommend it.

The Zeiss will focus as close as 30cm. The Leica will only focus as close as this if you attach a supplementary lens.

Good luck.

Lee

 

[Brigadier]

I have the Zeiss 4x12 B monocular and agree with Troubador.

As infinity it's probably the sharpest optic I own. It also has incredibly close focus for insect study and map reading. A very, very useful device.

Another interesting monocular is the Zeiss 5x10 Mini Quick.

 

[tom666]

thanks for the answers.what about er (i wear glasses).the 4z12 or 6x18 is more apropiate for theater or sports?

 

[NDhunter]

thanks for the answers.what about er (i wear glasses).the 4z12 or 6x18 is more apropiate for theater or sports?

Tom:

I've got the Zeiss 5x10 Miniquick, the optics are very good for its size,
It fits in your shirt pocket, even has a clip.
I don't know how it compares with the larger ones, this is the only
monocular I've tried.
The eyerelief seems good for eyeglasses.

Jerry

 

[aostling]

I have an order in for the Celestron 6x30 monocular, which I'm hoping to use for hand-held digiscoping with my Sony RX100. The monocular is cheap enough ($35) for me to undertake this as an experiment. I want this combination as an ultra-light outfit for a trip to Ecuador, where I am sure to encounter sightings of colorful birds.

If the digiscoped image is better than what I could obtain by simply blowing up the image I will consider it a success. I have a lathe, and can machine a simple plastic adapter for attaching camera to monocular.

 

[ceasar]

Hi Tom,

I have the Zeiss 6 x 18. I like it. It is 3 and 3/4 inches long. Fully extended it is about 5 and 3/4 inches long. It comes with a small, well designed, zippered leather case and lanyard.

I think that 6x is the lowest power for practical all around use. 4x would not be strong enough for me for overall general use and anything much more powerful would be too hard to hold steady. As it is one has to experiment to find the best way to hold a monocular steady.

The 6 x 18 focuses with a draw tube located at the objective end of the tube. For distances beyond about 10 feet focusing is minimal and the draw tube requires very little adjustment.

With the draw tube fully extended I have been able to focus down to about 9 or 10 inches. At this distance the field of view is very small and it can be hard for me to hold the monocular steady. Good lighting of the subject is also helpful.

It has long eye relief and it's rubber eye cup can be folded down for use with glasses. Pressing it up to one's glasses can help steady the view. In this instance I think that the 6x might be more appropriate for sports unless you prefer a wider field of view and then the 4 x 12 might be more useful.

It is an all purpose handy optical item to carry around with you because it is versatile and will fit in all but the smallest of pockets. It can be used at a concert or for a quick look at a scenic view, bird, animals, bugs, flowers etc; but for sports events and concerts it's not as good as a compact 8 x 20 binocular IMO.

Hope this helps,

Bob

PS: I have used my Leica 8 x 20 Trinovid at concerts and they worked very well for me. I think they are easier to hold steady than a monocular at that kind of event and not much more intrusive.

 

[tom666]

Thanks ceasar. Anyone with experience with both ZEISS and NIKON monoculars?

 

[Brigadier]

tom666,

I haven't had any experience with Nikon monoculars, but another brand to consider is Opticron:

http://opticron.co.uk/Pages/monos_menu.htm
http://opticron.co.uk/Pages/gallery_scope.htm

 

[Kevin Conville]

Tom, here's a thread I started 3 years ago regarding the Nikon 5x15.
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=135508

I still have it and still use it when walking my dog. Great tool but occasionally find myself wishing for a bit more magnification. The answer IMO is not a higher mag monocular however, they're too hard to hold steady. No I'll keep the low mag monocular and live with it's limitations and switch to bins when I need more.

 

[Bob Philpott]

My wife has a nerve problem in her arm which stops her holding binoculars for any length of time. We bought the opticron waterproof monocular some year ago (the ones with the finger grips) and they definitely OK. They are kept in the car and I find they are a good substitute for when you are not in a position to carry the binos.

 

[hinnark]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Leica Monovid seem to be one half of an Ultravid. In theory the extra-lens for close-up magnification that comes with the Monovid should fit to one barrel of the Ultravid as well. But you asked for low magnification. Zeiss tripler 3x12. One of the smallest telescopes available. Very versatile. Works as a telescope, magnifier and booster. In theory this one can be really always with you. In practice for people like me who lost all kind of things like caps, scarves and gloves at every occasion this little gem could be sometimes a bit of a source of anxiety.

Steve

 

[tom666]

Hi Tom,

I have the Zeiss 6 x 18. I like it. It is 3 and 3/4 inches long. Fully extended it is about 5 and 3/4 inches long. It comes with a small, well designed, zippered leather case and lanyard.

I think that 6x is the lowest power for practical all around use. 4x would not be strong enough for me for overall general use and anything much more powerful would be too hard to hold steady. As it is one has to experiment to find the best way to hold a monocular steady.

The 6 x 18 focuses with a draw tube located at the objective end of the tube. For distances beyond about 10 feet focusing is minimal and the draw tube requires very little adjustment.

With the draw tube fully extended I have been able to focus down to about 9 or 10 inches. At this distance the field of view is very small and it can be hard for me to hold the monocular steady. Good lighting of the subject is also helpful.

It has long eye relief and it's rubber eye cup can be folded down for use with glasses. Pressing it up to one's glasses can help steady the view. In this instance I think that the 6x might be more appropriate for sports unless you prefer a wider field of view and then the 4 x 12 might be more useful.

It is an all purpose handy optical item to carry around with you because it is versatile and will fit in all but the smallest of pockets. It can be used at a concert or for a quick look at a scenic view, bird, animals, bugs, flowers etc; but for sports events and concerts it's not as good as a compact 8 x 20 binocular IMO.

Hope this helps,

Bob

PS: I have used my Leica 8 x 20 Trinovid at concerts and they worked very well for me. I think they are easier to hold steady than a monocular at that kind of event and not much more intrusive.

Bob i think you used both Zeiss 4x12 and 6x18 .Any coments about the hugh fov 4x12 and the extra magnification 6x18?

 

[ceasar]

Bob i think you used both Zeiss 4x12 and 6x18 .Any coments about the hugh fov 4x12 and the extra magnification 6x18?

Tom,

I've never tried the Zeiss 4 x 12. It does have a very wide FOV but it doesn't have enough power for me for me to use for sporting events.

See it's specifications here: As you can see it is quite small.

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/zeiss.pl?page=zeissmonocular522050

Bob

 

[Brigadier]

I find the extra wide field of view and super steady hold of my Zeiss 4x12 B makes it very suitable for concerts and theatre as well as quick scans of the landscape – and as I said it my earlier post, it's an optical gem, doubling as a handy magnifier for insect study.

These things are very personal, of course. The best thing is to try both the 4x12 and the 6x18 and see which one you like best.

I wouldn't recommend anything over 6x in a small monocular – too shaky to hold.

 

[aostling]

I have an order in for the Celestron 6x30 monocular, which I'm hoping to use for hand-held digiscoping with my Sony RX100.

It arrived, and within the hour it was back at UPS for returning to Amazon. It was an ergonomic nightmare, virtually impossible to focus using the very stiff ring, essentially just a diopter correcting ring with wider stops. The twist out eyecup has no detents, unlike the eyecup on the Zen-Ray 8x32 monocular which does have detents.

The Zen-Ray is fine to look through, and has a tripod bushing, but has too much curvature of field to be viable as a low-magnification "telephoto" attachment for my RX100.