View Full Version : Monocular
Anyone find a decent one of these that's lightweight?
I've seen a bunch around on the internet but many of them seem to be either super expensive or of poor build quality. Hiking on ridges makes me think it would be fun to have one of these in my pocket. I've tested out some binoculars in stores, but even the small cheap ones seem pretty heavy. I noticed the higher end ones weigh even more. As for monoculars, there aren't a whole lot out there. At Bass Pro I messed around with the Brunton model and it seemed to be extremely blurry even when focusing in.
I appreciate anyone's experience or insight!
hikerboy57
01-15-2012, 17:38
unless someones invented a digital biocular or monocular(maybe they have), anything decent will be heavy. you could get a cheap kaleidescope instead. you cant see distance at all, but the visuals are terrific, consistently varied!:o
Slo-go'en
01-15-2012, 18:05
I used to carry a monocular - lets see I just dug it up... Tasco no. 516, 8X20, 2.2 oz. Never found it to be very useful so haven't carried it in a long time.
The only monoculars that I can use and get some pleasure out of , are the large aperture type (30-40mm)
I don't have one but have sold optics for 30 years.
The problem with those is that you can get for about the same weight a compact binocular.
To explain, I can see rather well with a good quality 8x20 but find even the top of the range 8x20 mono to be too difficult to hold and to find the subject .
(I have an 8x20 mono from Zeiss)
So I would suggest to look through one before buying, to see how you get on.
I suggest looking at a 7-8x bino , 23-25mm front element (IE 7x25)
The larger the front element the brighter the image will be .
The higher the magnification, the bigger the front element needs to be to give you the same light (same with camera lenses...)
Franco
DocSarvis
01-15-2012, 18:34
The only "decent" compact monoculars are ultra expensive. The 4.5oz Leica Monovid comes to mind @ $500 and is still not particularly useful. As a birder of almost 40 years I have two compact binoculars I have found to be almost as good as a full-sized glass. My Leica Ultravid 8x20 weighs 8.5oz and my Nikon 10x25 Premier LXL weighs in at 10.5oz. Both are waterproof, near indestructible and come with warranties without weasel words. The Leica is just plain tiny but I prefer the Nikon for most birding while hiking. Deals can be found on refurbs on both but are easier to find on the Nikons. As you have noticed from shopping, most inexpensive compact monoculars and binoculars are junk that offer little except eyestrain for your money. Even if you go inexpensive, purchase from a specialist dealer with a 30 day return policy. They are easy to find online under "Birding Optics".
hikerbee
01-15-2012, 21:21
I had the same concerns as you. I didn't want to spend too much money, but wanted a decent binocular or monocular that was lightweight and was clear and bright. I settled on the Aspen 8x25. http://www.rei.com/product/808284/alpen-8-x-25-waterproof-monocular It's 5 oz, waterproof, $55 from REI. The return policy sealed the deal for me. I haven't tested it out in rainy conditions, so I can't speak to that or to longevity. It feels good looking through it, though, and fits my needs. I'm planning on using it for birding on the trail next year. Good luck!
ChinMusic
01-15-2012, 22:38
I have a Zeiss 5x10 monocular. At 23 grams I never leave it at home. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=119357&Q=&is=USA&A=details
Anyone find a decent one of these that's lightweight?
I've seen a bunch around on the internet but many of them seem to be either super expensive or of poor build quality. Hiking on ridges makes me think it would be fun to have one of these in my pocket. I've tested out some binoculars in stores, but even the small cheap ones seem pretty heavy. I noticed the higher end ones weigh even more. As for monoculars, there aren't a whole lot out there. At Bass Pro I messed around with the Brunton model and it seemed to be extremely blurry even when focusing in.
I appreciate anyone's experience or insight!
Save yourself the aggravation and get a quality 8x20-ish binocular (don't go over 8x). It's a sad fact, that especially in this size category, inexpensive bins yield the poorest results. Not as much the case the larger you go, though it's there too.
IMO, the best bin for the buck in the small category is the Bushnell 7x26 Custom. Not particularly light, but a "real" binocular.
As to a genuine quality lightweight, I've had the Leica Ultravid 8x20 and currently have the Zeiss 8x20 Victory... both are top drawer and you can't go wrong with either.
http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa326/bradmacmt/Dutchman%20Lake/Zeiss8x20.jpg
ChinMusic
01-15-2012, 22:59
My choice of carrying a monocular is that I wanted to actually USE it often. I carry it in my front right pocket and can pull it out in an instant. I wouldn't do that with a binocular. I have an excellent Leica, but I would rarely take that on a backpacking trip.
Wow! Thanks for all the feedback. I wasn't sure what people were going to say when I asked. I half expected to be made fun of. Lots of stuff to check out here.
My choice of carrying a monocular is that I wanted to actually USE it often. I carry it in my front right pocket and can pull it out in an instant. I wouldn't do that with a binocular. I have an excellent Leica, but I would rarely take that on a backpacking trip.
Mine are indispensable enough that I carry them in a reachable pocket with my camera... maybe I use a bigger pocket, but I pull mine out and use them constantly.
ChinMusic
01-16-2012, 00:19
Mine are indispensable enough that I carry them in a reachable pocket with my camera... maybe I use a bigger pocket, but I pull mine out and use them constantly.
For a photography trip I carry my good camera stuff but rarely my binocular.
For a long section (or a future thru) I carry a monocular and my iPhone.
For a weekend social trip it is a game-day decision.
.
I should have mentioned why I chose the Zeiss 5x10 monocular over a more powerful model. My reasoning was that more magnification in a monocular is real hard to stabilize. Even with the 5X10 I find myself pinching it to the brim of my cap. It is harder to keep a monocular still.
I checked one out at REI several years ago. It was tiny and hard to hold steady. It might be of limited use, but the field of vision is very narrow (which is one thing that makes it hard to hold steady).
My mom got me a cheapo set of binoculars, Bushnell 8x21, but they weigh almost 1/2 pound, so I don't often take them unless there's something I know I'll want to see from a distance.
Rain Man
01-16-2012, 12:20
I used to carry a monocular .... Never found it to be very useful so haven't carried it in a long time.
Exactly my experience. I have an REI model that I took through the Smokies, but found little use for it. It has been collecting dust for several years and I'm giving it away in the "Pay It Forward" thread on HammockForums.net right now.
A monocular seemed like a good idea to me, but I have to admit it was a piece of gear I never used. YMMV.
I'll add that my digital camera has 12x optical zoom and gives me everything the monocular did anyway.
Rain Man
.
Exactly my experience. I have an REI model that I took through the Smokies, but found little use for it. It has been collecting dust for several years and I'm giving it away in the "Pay It Forward" thread on HammockForums.net right now.
A monocular seemed like a good idea to me, but I have to admit it was a piece of gear I never used. YMMV.
I'll add that my digital camera has 12x optical zoom and gives me everything the monocular did anyway.
Rain Man
.
I checked Hammockforums.net and it's already gone! Wow.
Rain Man
01-16-2012, 16:11
I've had something taken in two minutes in that thread! The monocular was there for a couple of days.
Rain:sunMan
.
A monocular is the single most compromised and nearly useless device I can imagine. I suppose it's better than nothing... maybe.
Mountain Mike
01-19-2012, 23:08
I have several light weight monoculars & binocs but never bring them on the trail. A few weeks on & you learn how to spot where the trail runs by other signs. Unless you are an avid bird watcher it's just a toy that has weight. First thing to be culled out of a long distance hikers packs.
Wise Old Owl
01-20-2012, 00:05
http://www.rei.com/product/777607/rei-z13-10-30-x-25-monocular
I tried this and it was better than most focus at first was "trying" after a little practice the 4 oz package was easy... now I like it.
I have several light weight monoculars & binocs but never bring them on the trail. A few weeks on & you learn how to spot where the trail runs by other signs. Unless you are an avid bird watcher it's just a toy that has weight. First thing to be culled out of a long distance hikers packs.
That's funny stuff right there...
SunnyWalker
05-21-2012, 00:34
I tried Monocular, it didn't do for me. Now I carry a pair of Brunton, Lite-Tech binoculars.
dornstar
05-21-2012, 01:18
Like others, I tried one for a bit too, but never really used it on the trail and ultimately couldn't justify the weight.
SunnyWalker
05-21-2012, 09:00
I dont carry the binocs on the AT. On the CDT they come in right handy.
I've researched them extensively and keep coming back to the Vortex 8x36 Solo. Don't confuse with their tactical model that has a reticle (worthless IMHO). Check out the second link for a video review by the company. Cheers!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&sku=676638&is=USA&A=details&Q=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgEokHVmZtc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
BTW, most people are jaded against monoculars after trying the cheap low power small objective models from companies like Brunton. I should know I have one.....
You know good optics when you look through them sorta like using a set of sharp chefs knives instead of the Wal-Mart set your mother-in-law gave you last Christmas.
Feral Bill
05-21-2012, 12:24
I've researched them extensively and keep coming back to the Vortex 8x36 Solo. Don't confuse with their tactical model that has a reticle (worthless IMHO). Check out the second link for a video review by the company. Cheers!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&sku=676638&is=USA&A=details&Q=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgEokHVmZtc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
BTW, most people are jaded against monoculars after trying the cheap low power small objective models from companies like Brunton. I should know I have one.....
You know good optics when you look through them sorta like using a set of sharp chefs knives instead of the Wal-Mart set your mother-in-law gave you last Christmas.
For the same weight and price one can get decent Nikon binoculars. I don't see the advantage.
gpburdelljr
05-21-2012, 12:59
I have a Brunton Eterna 6x30 monocular. Good optics, easy to point, fits nicely in the hand. It is not light however (11.5 oz) and doesn't fit easily in a pocket.
For the same weight and price one can get decent Nikon binoculars. I don't see the advantage.
Yep, prolly can but the thread is titled "monocular"..... gotta stay focused. :D
Feral Bill
05-21-2012, 15:19
Yep, prolly can but the thread is titled "monocular"..... gotta stay focused. :D
I figured it was like telling a person who asked about tents that they should hammock.
Ha, ha! But its worth a shot. You hangers are hardcore!
Feral Bill
05-21-2012, 16:10
Ha, ha! But its worth a shot. You hangers are hardcore! Sorry, neither a hanger or hardcore. Maybe hardcore about my SVEA, but how could I not be?
If I am carrying a camera, I use the zoom lens.
I have a BAK-4 monocular I like. The brand isn't critical, if BAK-4 optics. It is sharp and bright in a small optic.
These can be quite inexpensive, if you comparison shop online.
WingedMonkey
05-22-2012, 08:40
If I'm not cutting weight and if I'm going where there is enough bird watching to merit it, I carry an old 30X30 telescope (spotting scope). Weighs 4 1/2 ounces, compacts to 8" telescopes to 16" It's good enough to tell if I'm looking at an Osprey or a Bald Eagle. It works for telling if that's a game warden's truck in the woods or a poacher's.