Some monoculars are really durable.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...th-century.html

What couldn't you believe?

20x50 binoculars are difficult and expensive to engineer for satisfactory performance and a Tripod will still be required for even the high end 20x50s and will still even need to be used in good lighting conditions. Cheap 20x50s, well I suspect you will see a lot lot more using these. (sorry for the recommendation). The field of view will be very restricted, low light dusk and dawn conditions will be effectively useless and focusing quite difficult let alone distortion, aberration, focal range and colour definition by comparison.

Even 20x50's with good glass are difficult to use. 20x is difficult to handhold for a steady view and 50/20 = 2.5mm for an exit pupil, not a lot of light. Many years ago when I had a need for a big lens, I picked up a set of 15x80 binoculars. It came with a tripod mount to hold it steady and the 5mm exit pupil was much brighter than even the best 20x50 binoc's. The difference of course was $$ -- those 15x80's came with a serious price-tag. Magnifying power is a good selling point, but power doesn't mean much if the image is bouncing around or is too dim to make out detail.

I have two pair of 8x30's (Nikon & Steiner) and they work well in bright sun; these days with eyes that have many more years on them, my daytime binoculars are 7x35 Nikons (5mm exit pupil) which work dawn-dusk. For the time between dusk and dawn you need to be looking for a 7mm exit pupil which is the most your eye can use, 7x50 binoculars with good glass are the standard.

Back to the subject of monoculars -- the monoculars small enough to drop in your pocket will generally have small objectives lenses and that makes for a dim image -- 8x20, 8x25. I suppose those are okay for daylight spotting, the objective being to identify a landmark for navigation and such. Birdwatching or other extended viewing, needs better glass and needs to provide a steady, bright image. I don't see that happening with a small pocket monocular.
$.02, ymmv

I didn't communicate well... The inexpensive 20x50 binoculars I tested were one of the clearest and most enjoyable binoculars in the store. I bought them. They're barely shaky, and I can focus them to crystal clearness. I just tested them again a second ago to make sure I'm not imagining things.

People's recommendations have not lined up with what I've testing. Maybe it's my eyes or something else with me. So be it.

Field of view is one thing lacking in my inexpensive binoculars. However, given a choice, I prefer more magnification over more field of view. Another thing is that they're only for long distance viewing (which is OK for me). I cannot focus on anything that is less than 10 feet away, but anything above that is doable. I'm not sure if that's standard for all binoculars.

I was in Cabelas this evening. Tried a 5x monocular. Startlingly clear, bright and sharp image. About 3/4" x 5". Only problem was the price. $175.00.

It has been my experience that in optics, one nearly always gets what one pays for. Ireckon's remarkable experience being an exception to that rule.

One question to ask, is how good of optics do you need? I like to be able to observe the Alaska wildlife that I see when out hiking and whatnot. As I noted above, for me Steiner 8X30 Military/Marine binos are a good compromise between quality and price I can afford. They are more than adequate for watching bears from a safe distance. I bought them for about $250 or so.

Others may have different needs. An old friend of mine is a very serious birder, serious enough to have been president of a large east coast birding group. He uses Swarovski binoculars that cost several thousand dollars. They are indeed somewhat sharper and brighter than my Steiners. For him the extra edge the Swarovskis provide is worth the extra money. For me not so much.

Others will choose a different point on the price vs quality spectrum. It all depends on what you need and what you can afford.

Well, the store where I tested did not have any binoculars that were priced at $300 or more, and my inexpensive binoculars were not the best, just one of the best. They are good enough such that spending a lot more did not make sense. I just want binoculars for the back of my truck so that I can occasionally have a better view of something on the mountain. Last year, I used my binoculars only about 3 times, and I was quite satisfied with the experience each time.

Back to the original topic, I've had trouble finding monoculars or small binoculars that I like. I know for somebody who's in the market for monoculars, it's senseless to make the leap to nice, big binoculars. If I test any of the smaller binoculars mentioned in this thread, I'll report back.

My initial thought was to bring up the issue of Relative Brightness, but then I read the article at Optics Planet on the topic of "Twilight factor and Relative Brightness". It seems to back up AKSAR's post above quite well.

The 7mm fully dilated pupil (night vision eye capability) isn't achievable by everyone and will get smaller with age. It may be preferable to have a number of different sets of binoculars for use for different circumstances rather than have a very expensive single set trying to cover everything.

I have a pair of Bresser 8x56s (Meade of Germany). They are heavy @ 1.1Kg and quite bulky, have quite a narrow field of view @ 101m/1000m, but they are exceptional for low light conditions with that 7mm exit pupil and the light gathering 56mm objective lenses. They cost me around $75 from a discount store called Lidls. They will for example beat even Nikon Monarchs 8x42s in low light conditions.


Bresser 8x56s identical to these.

A more portable set of binoculars might well be these BARSKA Naturescape 8X42 Waterproof Binoculars. I have found these to be excellent general purpose use binoculars. Again considering the cost these are a bargain @ the price shown. Weight is 600 grams.

I have also found these Olympus 8x25 PCI Binoculars to be excellent considering the weight and cost (paid around $60 for them). In terms of performance/weight @225 grams/price ratio a candidate for the BOB.

Looking at the prices being paid online for some very credible high performance optics, overall there are some very good price deals around especially for the lower magnification/wider exit pupil binoculars (hence low light use at dawn/dusk). Why are a set of 16x50 Nikon Aculons considerably more pricey than a set of 7x50 Nikon Aculons is a bit of a mystery to me. i.e. Current Amazon.com prices;

Nikon 8247 ACULON A211 7 x 50 Binocular (Black) - $87
Nikon 8250 ACULON A211 16 x 50 Binocular (Black) - $136

Does the purchasing public think magnification is the be end all to purchasing binoculars?

Magnification does seem to be a big selling point, but in my old age I've begun to value other attributes. My current go-to binocular are Nikon Action Ex 7x35 --- really good (not Swarovski great, just really good) optics in a lightweight rubber armored polycarbonate body. Easy on the eyes, they work for me.

No affiliation w/ Nikon or Opticsplanet.