Upgrading/changing from Nikon Monarch 7 10x42

[Dr Forinor]

A little background to the Topic Title.

I made a spur of the moment purchase a good many years ago and bought a Bushnell Trophy XLT 8x30, this was without having any knowledge on binoculars or know what was good/bad (relatively speaking).

After using them for a while I felt I wanted to upgrade (both to a little more knowledge and being "more hungry for better").

I did a little reading (perhaps not as much as I should have) and then proceeded to go for the Nikon Monarch 7 10x42 (I was debating between this and the M7 8x42).

Now after having used it a little I'm not fully satisfied, for 2 main reasons;
- I find I do get a little shake sometimes - intermittent, depending on how far/fine the subject is
- The clarity/crispness/sharpness is a little disappointing (perhaps I expected too much at this price point)

So now I am thinking of changing, again. I have been reading a lot more this time as I do not want to make another mistake. To help you, help me, my uses with the binoculars are nothing specific. I am not a hunter, so it doesn't matter for a kill. I am not a birder specifically. BUT, I love nature, I don't go out as frequently as I would like to but when I do I like to enjoy it. If that means I spot a bird of prey in the distance then brilliant, if that means I spot some other wildlife in the distance then excellent - I want to take it all in.

When I did use my Bushnell 8x30 to watch some deer, I kept on wishing I could see more of it - ie I was wishing I could have more magnification. Now with these 10x42, although the shake isn't horrible, when I do get a little judder it's annoying - I'm thinking is it better to have no shake at less magnification, or sacrifice the detail?

1. I understand some of it may just be practise and that shake that I experience may go, is that correct? Yes I can use a tripod, but there are many times where that just doesn't happen, might be a spur of the moment "oh look over there" etc etc.

2. If I upgrade to a more expensive binocular, will that be easier to manage the 10x, or will it be just the same?
(Justification for my thoughts here: I use magnification for work - albeit on a smaller scale, and the more expensive instrument is much easier to handle than the less expensive at the same magnification. I am an avid coffee lover, and over at the coffee forums they always say it's easier to get nice coffee from an expensive machine than a cheaper machine even if you do everything the same).

3. Should I sacrifice detail and stick with 8x, given I am only using it for general, and not specialised purposes?

4. I have narrowed down my shortlist to pretty much the Nikon Monarch HG. Reasoning for this is I am trying to keep the costs as low as possible while obtaining something that I will actually enjoy. If it was for specific purposes (ie hunting etc) then I would spend the extra and go for the Swarovski SLC 8x42, but I think for my "general use" I don't need something of that calibre. Am I thinking right, or can someone correct me?

5. Is the jump from the M7 to the MHG significant enough, or do I really need to go to the SLC? My main gripe with the M7 is I find the crispness is lacking. The outer edge is noticeably blurry (enough for me to keep thinking "am I actually in focus").

Sorry for the rambling, I tried to get all of my thoughts down so as to give you all a fuller picture of the little battle in my head - I hope it's all cohesive.

 

[Dr Forinor]

Sorry, for those of you who don't know the prices in UK, approx;

Nikon Monarch HG 8x42 - £ 800
Nikon Monarch HG 10x42 - £ 850
Swarovski SLC 8x42 - £1250

 

[homebru.trout]

While the shake you're experiencing could be the glass, my feeling is it's probably the fact that it's a 10x unit that is the majority of the issue. My glassing life changed the day I put my 10s on a tripod. I think most folks don't realize how much micro-movement is going on when holding a set of 10x binos. It isn't immediately apparrent like when you try to hand hold a set of 15s.

Monarch HGs are very well thought of here in the states as a good mid-range option. You'll get one of the widest FOVs available in a 10x bino plus whatever Nikon's field flattening technology is. I haven't used Monarch 7s before so I have no idea what the performance gain to the HGs is. Having used the HGs and the SLCs I can tell you the SLCs are not a 50% premium in performance over the HGs which is essentially what you're paying.

Try stabilizing your 7s...either with a tripod or handheld with a rest and see if that helps. Failing that I really feel there are some fantastic optics to be had in that $1000-1250 USD price range and the HGs are certainly one of those.

 

[Dr Forinor]

Thank you for your reply.

That was also my understanding re the extra for the SLC, the extra money isn't necessarily justified in the glass alone, part of the extra is due to the branding.

I have ordered a tripod mount for the 7, to try and see how much difference they make. Problem is, even if they do make a huge difference, the problem still lies in that I won't/don't always want to be with a tripod - hence the consideration for the 8x.

 

[Newtosavage]

Honestly, you might be disappointed in how little difference there is between your Monarch 7 and any of the $1K range binoculars. The Monarch 7's are that good.

 

[Dr Forinor]

Honestly, you might be disappointed in how little difference there is between your Monarch 7 and any of the $1K range binoculars. The Monarch 7's are that good.

Oh really? Am I really expecting too much from them, then?

The Monarch HG not a worthy upgrade? How about the Swaro SLC?

 

[Kenn]

I can't hold 10's well enough to make them useful and have found that 8x32's give me a wide FOV and a stable image. I think the Monarch 7's are very good, but if they aren't clear to you you may find the HG's to be a big improvement.

 

[Newtosavage]

Really depends on what it is about your 7's that you aren't happy with. The Swaros will pull in more light, but they are MUCH heavier and bulkier than your M7's. The HG's are slightly better in every respect, but enough to justify a 2x cost increase? I'm not sure about that. You will see 99% with the M7's that which you'll see with the HG's.

If I were going up from M7's, I probably wouldn't stop at the HG level.

 

[Dr Forinor]

I can't hold 10's well enough to make them useful and have found that 8x32's give me a wide FOV and a stable image. I think the Monarch 7's are very good, but if they aren't clear to you you may find the HG's to be a big improvement.

Just to clarify, you think the HG's will or will not be big improvement?

Really depends on what it is about your 7's that you aren't happy with. The Swaros will pull in more light, but they are MUCH heavier and bulkier than your M7's. The HG's are slightly better in every respect, but enough to justify a 2x cost increase? I'm not sure about that. You will see 99% with the M7's that which you'll see with the HG's.

If I were going up from M7's, I probably wouldn't stop at the HG level.

I find the outer blurry edge to be more prominent than I would like, as in it's not just the outer most 5% but more and it's noticeable enough that it gets annoying. In terms of gathering light I think they are fine. (Perhaps I would like extra clarity in the center too but that's nitpicking now).
Would you say the Swaro SLC is enough of a noticeable upgrade?

 

[Newtosavage]

HG's will be an improvement. Not sure they will be enough to satisfy you, but maybe they will. Only you will know the difference. For my money, the HG is not 2x the binocular that the M7 is.

SLC or Meostar HD or Conquest HD will be a noticeable improvement.

 

[Dr Forinor]

You are echoing what has been said about this topic in other forums also.

Thank you for your input.

Any other suggestions, anyone?

 

[Kenn]

"Just to clarify, you think the HG's will or will not be big improvement?"

I'm betting it will be. I have Nikon 8x32 SE's and 8x32 LX's. If you compare them side by side the clarity is great in both and you would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other. BUT, when you use the SE's for a couple of hours in the field then switch, you'll notice. The SE's are superior (you can't buy them any more). In the store the differences are negligible but in the field they make a big difference. Also, the way they feel in your hand will make a big difference. For me there are no binoculars that feel as comfortable as the Swarovski 8x32 EL's, but I just can't part with the money.

 

[Dr Forinor]

"Just to clarify, you think the HG's will or will not be big improvement?"

I'm betting it will be. I have Nikon 8x32 SE's and 8x32 LX's. If you compare them side by side the clarity is great in both and you would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other. BUT, when you use the SE's for a couple of hours in the field then switch, you'll notice. The SE's are superior (you can't buy them any more). In the store the differences are negligible but in the field they make a big difference. Also, the way they feel in your hand will make a big difference. For me there are no binoculars that feel as comfortable as the Swarovski 8x32 EL's, but I just can't part with the money.

Thank you for that,

 

[JustJustin]

Another guy recently converted by Rokslide to use a tripod. Even the best tripod is bulky and heavy to pack but a tripod is worth its weight in gold sometimes (unless it's a heavy, cheap piece of trash, then it might be worth its weight in silver)


Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Dr Forinor]

Another guy recently converted by Rokslide to use a tripod. Even the best tripod is bulky and heavy to pack but a tripod is worth its weight in gold sometimes (unless it's a heavy, cheap piece of trash, then it might be worth its weight in silver)


Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Hehehe. I do have a tripod,I've just ordered the Binocular tripod adapter so I'll see how I get on with that.

 

[huntabsarokee]

Not sure if this helps but I have the M7s in 8x42 and the SLC in 10x42. There is a definite difference in build quality but glass wise probably not as much as the $$ difference would indicate. On Saturday I carried the Nikons just because they are much lighter. As I was using them I thought to myself do a really need better glass than this for spotting deer at 400 yards or less. No they were fine. I do feel the focus isn't as smooth as the SLC and they feel cheaper but maybe its just the heavier weight of the SLC make them feel "better". Also I do feel I can see just as good with the 8x vs the 10x bc of the shake on the 10s.

 

[Dr Forinor]

That was a great help, thank you for that.

Perhaps my biggest mistake was getting the 10x as opposed to 8x.

 

[Dr Forinor]

I went on an extensive test tonight, comparing the 2 binoculars that I have:

Bushnell Trophy XLT 8x32
Nikon Monarch 7 10x42

Not to compare the binoculars directly against each but to compare the magnifications. After an hour and half, it's quite clear that I much prefer the 8x, not the 10x.

I think the 10x almost made me feel slightly sick, is that possible?

I'm going to get rid of my M7, and get a good 8x.

Still on the cards;
Nikon Monarch HG 8x42

I now also have added to my shortlist;
Leica Ultravid 8x42 HD Plus

Reason for choosing the Leica is because it seems to have the characteristics that I think I'll enjoy (vivid colours/contrast).

Either way, I need an 8x, not a 10x.

 

[Kenn]

Audubon has a good review of many binoculars from entry level to top of the line and it seems unbiased. It at least gives you an idea of what they like. The HG rates very high, and many others are worth looking at.

 

[Newtosavage]

Not sure if this helps but I have the M7s in 8x42 and the SLC in 10x42. There is a definite difference in build quality but glass wise probably not as much as the $$ difference would indicate. On Saturday I carried the Nikons just because they are much lighter. As I was using them I thought to myself do a really need better glass than this for spotting deer at 400 yards or less. No they were fine. I do feel the focus isn't as smooth as the SLC and they feel cheaper but maybe its just the heavier weight of the SLC make them feel "better". Also I do feel I can see just as good with the 8x vs the 10x bc of the shake on the 10s.

Nice to see such an honest objective post about optics on this forum.