Binoculars

[Steve509926]

A bit of a long shot, but has any forum member got any experience with either of the following:-

8x42 Viking Badger Binoculars

or

8x42 Viking Vistron ED Binoculars

Likes, dislikes? Are they any good? Is the Vistron that much better that it justifies the extra £100

Thanks Steve

[willk]

I have no experience with Viking optics but went through the Bino buying experience not too long ago. I'm guessing that 8x42 is the form you want - it will perform well in lower light and help older eyes on dull days - I too went for a pair (in ED) despite them being much heavier and bulkier than the 8x32 form.

Addressing your specific question: are the Victron worth the money? I'd say probably yes, as the ED (extra-low dispersal) glass and other enhanced specs are where the extra cost lies. Where other specs/cost are comparable, then ED will be the game-changer.

As an aside, when I bought mine, I also sprang for a non-ED glass pair of 8x25 pocket/travel binos that I now keep in the car and use for overseas travel. The relative costs back then were £400/£100. Guess which pair I use most often?

[jonp]

Sorry no experience but did buy Vortex viper hd which equalled bins in far higher price ranges in many reviews. Had mine several years and bought another two pairs for my daughters who love theirs. https://www.bestbinocularsreviews.co...ViperHD-79.htm

[Steve509926]

Originally Posted by willk

I have no experience with Viking optics but went through the Bino buying experience not too long ago. I'm guessing that 8x42 is the form you want - it will perform well in lower light and help older eyes on dull days - I too went for a pair (in ED) despite them being much heavier and bulkier than the 8x32 form.

Addressing your specific question: are the Victron worth the money? I'd say probably yes, as the ED (extra-low dispersal) glass and other enhanced specs are where the extra cost lies. Where other specs/cost are comparable, then ED will be the game-changer.

As an aside, when I bought mine, I also sprang for a non-ED glass pair of 8x25 pocket/travel binos that I now keep in the car and use for overseas travel. The relative costs back then were £400/£100. Guess which pair I use most often?

I am leaning towards the ED bins even though they are so much more expensive. However now you've hinted that you use the 8x25 most often, I am now asking should I compromise and go for the 8x32? Car, travel, lighter, portable, probably easier in the sib. Perhaps it may be the one to go for.

[willk]

Originally Posted by Steve509926

I am leaning towards the ED bins even though they are so much more expensive. However now you've hinted that you use the 8x25 most often, I am now asking should I compromise and go for the 8x32? Car, travel, lighter, portable, probably easier in the sib. Perhaps it may be the one to go for.

I think it depends on the intended use. I specifically bought the 8x42 for wildlife, often in dull conditions. Personally I need a little more light too

The compact bins are always to hand so they get more use. The 42s are big and don't fit into anything other than a backpack. I FOUND a pair of 8x32 Bushnells and carry those in the boat. They are non-ED and quite neat. Viewing quality is OK, almost meh but they are fine for general use - just not as good as ED and that's that. Being free I don't sweat someone dropping them overboard or pinching them...

[Erin]

Where optics are concerned I always buy the best I can afford. The better quality glass (and larger objective) certainly makes a difference when the light starts to fade and also improves clarity when there's high contrast (reduces chromatic abberation).

[Fenlander]

>>>FOUND a pair of 8x32 Bushnells and carry those in the boat.......Being free I don't sweat someone dropping them overboard or pinching them...

That thought is always in my mind when choosing sibbing binoculars. Growing up there were always binoculars in the house and I've continued that tradition. I keep things fairly modest by purchasing used then the willk rule above can come into play.

For general use I have Pentax 16x50, some folks would say that's too much magnification for hand held but I don't find it so as their weight (1000g) seems to damp out movement and they just suit my land based needs.

Mrs F has the very neat (680g) classic Zeiss 10x40 which I use from time to time, mostly for racing, but they don't suit me as well as the Pentax.

Last year I replaced my salt affected generic 8x30 Russian sibbing pair with the Tasco Offshore 21 7x50 model. Nitrogen filled mist free and waterproof. They are well made with a great bright image but physically larger and heavier than I expected so more suited to use in the wheelhouse of a gentleman's motor yacht. I may replace these soon but for now these are the only ones we would take sibbing.

Finally I use a 25x60 Opticron scope which has a really nice image but needs to be on a tripod or supported on a wall or similar.

I paid £50 for the Pentax, £100 for the Zeiss, £17 for the Tasco, £12 for the Russian 8x30 that went before and the scope was a gift from a late uncle's estate.

Do you have existing binoculars as a benchmark to compare your choices with Steve? Buying at used prices I'm happy to take a chance but if buying new I'd only source from a physical shop I could visit and test or buy from Amazon where they could be returned.

If for example I was considering the three Viking models you mention I'd order all three from Amazon, see which optics suited best, then return the other two pairs.

[LittleSumpin]

I looked long and hard for a good set within my budget.

The Steiner 7x50 Navigator is hard to beat.
Well worth your time to consider.

[Fenlander]

I've owned a similar Steiner model, the Commander II variant with a compass/light. Even the basic Navigator model is about £400 new in the UK and they hold their price used. Almost military grade ruggedness, heavy at over 1000g and a bit over the top for UK sibbing.

[willk]

Just an aside:

Some years ago I was chartering for a group of National Parks Rangers on a wildlife survey. I went along on one of their stops for the craic and brought my boat bins, a £90 set of basic 'glass' that I had travelled around with over 20 years and always found perfectly adequate for my basic needs. We peeked over a ridge and looked out over a panorama of rocks, weed and seals. The ranger next to me didn't say anything about my bins per se, but offered me a peek through his Swarovski 8x32s. I did so out of politeness but the comparison took my breath away - it was like The Wizard of Oz when the world went Technicolour. I handed them back and caught a fleeting smile pass over his face - IYKYK! Knowing what the difference between €100 and €2000 bins looked like set the worm of dissatisfaction gnawing at my heart and I had to upgrade. Having a beer wallet and a Scottish flavoured granny meant setting my sights on something more realistic budget wise and thus the €400 glass came about. Having done the comparison again, the gap was barely noticeable to my tiring eyes and thus I was content. Very very good for watching woodland critters and observing activity around dusk etc. Crisp image right to the edge of the field etc. I guess I'm saying a little extra can make a huge difference to what you see. Fenlander has the right idea but you'd want to see (through) them before you bought.

[Peter_C]

I went cheaper and am happy with a pair of 7x50 Marine Bushnell binoculars that I paid $123.00 US dollars. Although they have a compass I have never once used that feature, and wouldn't buy ones with a compass again as it effects the field of view. They do float so hopefully they could be recovered from overboard should that ever happen.
https://www.bushnell.com/binoculars/...BU-137500.html

For hiking etc, I have a pair of 25 year old pair Nikon compacts that are far better than the naked eye, but being subcompact the field of view is small. They don't seem to be made anymore but they have a variable zoom feature.

I've found for small boats a 7x50 fixed is a good size binocular.

If I weren't on a budget in life, I would get image stabilized binoculars.

[Steve509926]

Originally Posted by Fenlander

Do you have existing binoculars as a benchmark to compare your choices with Steve?

Not really, Diane has some 10x25 Solognac compact binoculars from Decathlon which I find nearly impossible to use.

I had a lightbulb moment earlier today and remembered we have Martin Mere WWT (rsbp) practically on our doorstep.
I called into the shop there and tried a variety of binoculars.
8x32, 8x42, 10x42, non ED & ED all Viking apart from one. The difference between the non ED and the ED was very apparent, the ED being much sharper and clearer on what was a very dull day. IMO it is worth paying the extra for the ED.
The 8x32 was a little small in my hands, the 10x42 felt ok but is probably a bit too big to carry around all day. The Goldilocks size for me is the 8x42.
I have decided to buy the 8x42 Viking Vistron ED. They are slightly heavier than the 8x42 Viking Kestrel ED, with a slightly smaller field of view. However the Vistron has a more rugged body which feels very comfortable.
The non Viking one I tried, just for a bit of a laugh willk, was a pair of £1999 Swarovski 8x42 ED. Incredibly clear, sharp and the colours appeared better. Without doubt they are better than the Viking Vistron, but for my needs the difference isn't great enough to justify the extra £1800.

Thanks all for the input.

[Fenlander]

A very rewarding exercise Steve. That's what I did with the very first pair I bought with my own money back in the late 70s. Went to a camera shop in town and tried a load looking down the street based on image rather than brand. From then on I always had a reference pair for any further purchases.

[paulbrown22]

Originally Posted by Fenlander

I've owned a similar Steiner model, the Commander II variant with a compass/light. Even the basic Navigator model is about £400 new in the UK and they hold their price used. Almost military grade ruggedness, heavy at over 1000g and a bit over the top for UK sibbing.

Snap, we have both Navigator and Commander binos and love them both. The Navigators are nicely compact, very well made and give a great view.

[paddlers]

Probably covered it further back in the thread but for best light gathering the first number should go into the second number X itself.
7X50 , 8X56 etc
Used binoculars my entire working life . Bought a pair of 7X50 in Schipol airport made by some nondescript maker Carton in the 1980's £100. A bit bulky but still just as good now.

[Steve509926]

Delivered and really impressed.

Lots of little things I like. The flip down lens caps being attached so I can't loose them, comfortable thumb indentations, rugged rubberised body which we'll take some knocks, not as heavy as I first thought (perhaps it's because they sit right in my hands)
The case could do with it's own strap instead of relying on the binocular strap but that's a minor detail.
Well packaged, 99% cardboard. The only plastic being a small bag with the lens cloth in it.
As soon as I unboxed them I obviously took them outside to see what I could see. I focused them on the thin branches of the highest tree (see first pic) straight away a Pied Woodpecker! as clear as day, bright and very sharp which I couldn't see with the naked eye. Took the 2nd pic zoomed in on my mobile then digitally zoomed in. For £199 IMO I think they are excellent.

[Fenlander]

That looks like it's worked out well. If you can see a difference always worth paying that bit more. It is surprising what. reasonable image you can get holding the phone camera lens against the eyepiece of binoculars or a scope. I've an image I took that way in Cornwall last summer, I'll try and look it out.

[Steve509926]

Originally Posted by Fenlander

........ It is surprising what. reasonable image you can get holding the phone camera lens against the eyepiece of binoculars or a scope.

Great idea, I must give it a try

[Fenlander]

Here is an image taken with my phone in normal view. The second image is with the phone lens held to my 25x60 scope on a tripod. I was really surprised.

[Steve509926]

Originally Posted by Fenlander

Here is an image taken with my phone in normal view. The second image is with the phone lens held to my 25x60 scope on a tripod. I was really surprised.