The Three Little Binoculars James E. House


The three 8x25 compact binoculars tested are, left to right: Leupold Rogue, Nikon Travelite VI, and Olympus Tracker PCI.


Sometimes I think we are so


caught up in the idea of ultimate performance that we do not take time to enjoy ordinary opportunities. The smallest group, the longest possible shot, the most versatile scope, and the most optically perfect binocular are all elusive dreams. As I have grown older, I have found that I like to travel light and each year the lighter the better suits me. Somehow, the superlative has become less important. That is also the situation with regard to one type of equipment that has fascinated me for years. I am talking about binoculars. First of all, it is not a pair of binoculars. One does not ride a pair of bicycles and one does not look through a pair of binoculars. One device has two cycles (circles or wheels) and the other has two oculars (one for each eye). Choosing a binocular is a per-


sonal thing and there is no instrument that is absolutely perfect. Two of my favorites are an old Bausch & Lomb Zephyr 7x35 and an old Nikon 7x50. Both are bright and provide a view that is adequate for most purposes. Howev- er, both are rather large, especially the Nikon, so often I want something that is smaller. Although I shunned them for many years, compact binoculars are today quite different from those of a generation or two ago.


Page 14 Spring 2012 Binoculars are characterized by


two numbers. The fi rst is the magni- fi cation and the second is the diam- eter of the objective lenses (such as 7x35). Another important property of binoculars is the relative brightness, which is a number that is obtained by dividing the objective diameter by the magnification and squaring the result. For example, a 7x35 binocular has a relative brightness of 25, which is obtained by dividing 35 by 7 to get 5, then squaring 5 to get 25. In this evaluation, I compare


three of the most popular compact binoculars with regard to their use in general viewing. The Nikon Travelite series began in the 1980s as the replace- ment for the older Nikon Venturer II compact that was a highly regarded compact binocular that was eventu- ally phased out in the early 1990s. I have two of the 8x23 Nikon Verturer II models, and they have sort of become the standard to which other compact binoculars are compared. I have been using 7x20 and 9x25 Nikon Travelite II models for many years with great sat- isfaction. The Travelite binoculars are of the single-hinge reverse porro prism type. The current version of the series is the Travelite VI so you can see that my old compacts are dated. However, for this project I wanted to test some


current compact models. One of the popular types of compact binoculars is the roof prism construction typifi ed by the Steiner Predator Pro series and many others. This is a personal issue, but I do not like the double hinge that characterizes this type of binocular. There are simply too many degrees of freedom, and I fi nd it diffi cult to keep the interpupil distance constant while using these binoculars. As a result, I decided that the single-hinge porro type would be the subject of evalua- tion. The purpose of this exercise was not to decide “good, better, and best” but rather to see how well all three of the chosen models perform and to add to my collection. I was not about to get so im-


mersed in the hardware that I would spend $500 or more for a compact bin- ocular so I limited my choices to those from three of the most famous makers: Nikon, Olympus, and Leupold. More- over, to keep some things constant, I chose models that are all 8x25. I sim- ply cannot hold a binocular of 10x or 12x steady, especially a lightweight compact model, so it was decided that 8x would be more suitable. That decision also was based on the experi- ence I have had using 7x20 and 9x25 Travelite II models over the years. The new Nikon compact is the Travelite VI, the Olympus is the Tracker PCI, and the Leupold is the Rogue. Two of the huge suppliers of cameras and other optical equipment are B&H Photo and Adorama in New York. Having decid- ed what I wanted to test, a phone call to B&H Photo got the Nikon ($70.94) and Olympus ($78.99) binoculars on the way, and another to Adorama added the Leupold ($84.95 with free ship- ping). All three units were delivered within three days. I should state that I bought the binoculars in the same way as any consumer might so there was no special selection. Some of the pertinent data for the binoculars are shown in the accompanying table on page 16. Like most sportsmen, I do not


have sophisticated equipment avail- able for testing optical devices. I have


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204  |  Page 205  |  Page 206  |  Page 207  |  Page 208  |  Page 209  |  Page 210  |  Page 211  |  Page 212