I'm afraid to ask....binoculars

[KFC911]

Just need a decent pair, to be used in full daylight at less than 150 yds, small is good. Now restrain yourselves....recomendations?

[pwd72s]

https://www.leupold.com/observation/binoculars/

[cabmandone]

I used some Bushnell auto focus Bino's that weren't bad. They were cheap but did the job. I suppose it depends on what you want to glass.

[pwd72s]

These in 8 power are about as cheap as I'd want to go. Binoculars are one of those "get what you pay for" items. Steiner has a good reputation, but a good price as well.

BX-1 Yosemite 6x30mm Porro Natural : LEUPOLD BX-1 YOSIMITE BINOCULARS | Shop Brownells

[Cajundaddy]

8x42 is a great all around size and everybody has a pretty good pair. I like Swift, Nikon, Celestron, Polaris for quality views under $200.

This is a pretty good guide:
http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2016_affordable_8x42/review.html

[vash]

Budget. Vortex diamondbacks.

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by vash

Budget. Vortex diamondbacks.

That's because you're a "Meateater" fan!

Nikon Monarchs are another good binocular.

[Taz's Master]

I'm going to second Vash's recommendation. You can buy better glass, but you'll have a difficult time getting better value for your money. Bright and clear. And their warranty is excellent.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by vash

Budget. Vortex diamondbacks.

Methinks we have winner

Thanks all!

[imcarthur]

I did a bunch of research for good smallish light weight low cost binoculars to take to Kruger (leaving tomorrow). The Opticron Savannah R 8x33 was the final choice.

Review

B&H

Ian

[KFC911]

^^^^ Thanks! Still shopping around

[masraum]

Originally Posted by KC911

Just need a decent pair, to be used in full daylight at less than 150 yds, small is good. Now restrain yourselves....recomendations?

How much do you want to spend. Give us a range or a cap and we'll give you the best value under your cap.

As stated, 8x42 is a good size, not too big, easy to hold and not too terribly affected by motion. 10x50 is also a good size, but I think 8x42 is a bit better.

I have a pair of Nikon 8x42 Monarch 5s and they are pretty stupendous for the price which is still not cheap at $300 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/910856-REG/nikon_7576_8x42_monarch_5.html

Here's a nice selection of 8x42 that range from $100 up to $1000. the difference will be the focuser, how sealed they are, how water resistant they are, and the quality of the optics and coatings.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Brand_Pentax&ci=1010&N=4083534123+4294955796+4294956493+4291315846+4291 123588+4291369190+4291284238

If you wanted to "go big or go home" ($$ not size) look up Swarovski binoculars. You're talking up to $2k-3k for those.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by vash

Budget. Vortex diamondbacks.

Originally Posted by craigster59

That's because you're a "Meateater" fan!

Nikon Monarchs are another good binocular.

Yep, both of those are good, but even in those, there are a range. Vortex makes 3 or 4 different 8x42 (but I think only one is the diamondback) in a range of prices from $100 up to several hundred). Nikon makes several versions of the Monarch (3, 5, 7) and they range up to about $500, I think.

[enzo1]

The Best Binoculars & Binocular Reviews Website

[theFONZ]

I've used Bushnell Legend Ultra HDs for a few hunting seasons. They do a pretty good job for minimal price. I have the older rubberized version and the new M-series.

[Bill Douglas]

I've got about 4 or 5 Carl Zeiss binoculars. My favorite pair are 10x50. They are excellent optically compaired with most new stuff and are considerably cheaper too being second hand and old off ebay.

[tevake]

From my boating days I hung onto a pair of Fujinon 7x50 binocks that are heavy but oh so good. Had a nice but cheap pair kept at hand for most use, but in low light the Fujinon pair were just night and day better. Really good at making the most of the available light. Remarkably better.
That quality may be usefull in hunting a application, but am not sure what the specs are that indicate superior low light capability.

Cheers Richard

[John Rogers]

I have a set of Bushnell 7x50 that I bought the first time I went to Hong Kong in 1970 and are just as clear today as they were then. I can spot shots with my 50 cal muzzle loaders at 300 yards with them easily.

[sugarwood]

Used on Ebay is probably the way to go

[masraum]

Originally Posted by tevake

From my boating days I hung onto a pair of Fujinon 7x50 binocks that are heavy but oh so good. Had a nice but cheap pair kept at hand for most use, but in low light the Fujinon pair were just night and day better. Really good at making the most of the available light. Remarkably better.
That quality may be usefull in hunting a application, but am not sure what the specs are that indicate superior low light capability.

Cheers Richard

The average person's pupil can dilate to 7mm in the dark. From what I understand, as you age, that usually decreases. The "ideal" binocular (for low light purposes, like astronomy) has an exit pupil that matches what your eye can dilate to. 7x50 is considered pretty ideal in the astronomy crowd for a good all-around binoc because the exit pupil is roughly 7 (50 divided by 7). In bright light, that's clearly not as important, but if you had something that was 10x25, those would obviously give up a lot in low light performance to something like a 7x50 or even 10x50 or 8x42.