Anyone know much about monoculars?

[Ttaskmaster]

I'm in need of a monocular, but I've no idea what brands are good these days.
I have some little Miranda 8x22 binos from the early 90s, but they were cheap even back then and are now knackered.

This will be used out on hikes and the like, to find landmarks, spot birds and animals, maybe some static tripod use, etc. Will be stowed in a pocket or pouch, so needs to be fairly small, no spotting scopes or anything like that. Will occasionally be used by young children, so needs to be fairly robust and/or cheap enough (maybe £50-100) to replace if they break it.

- Small enough for a pocket or webbing pouch.
- Relavtively robust, but cheap enough to replace if it gets too dinged up.
- Decent magnification. Somewhere between 10x and 20x, ideally with a zoom feature.
- Lens caps front and rear, included or available separately.
- Standard size camera/tripod mount socket.
- Lanyard point.

What do people suggest?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I would also look at objective size as a wider objective means a brighter image.

These Hawke Endurance monoculars don't look too bad:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hawke-Endur...0786NNRPW?th=1

The 10X42 model is £109.ED glass,weathersealed,magnesium alloy body,tripod mount and an external focusing knob which should work better with gloves.

Edit!!

There also these compact zoom binoculars:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-Binoc...%2C145&sr=1-28

Upto 24X25,25MM objective is not the brightest though.

[j1979]

I know nothing at all about them, but i would probably just go to aliexpress and choose one with 4.8 or higher ratings.

Find one you like, stick it on the wish list, then checkout the srolling recommended list that pops up and look at the items with the most sales. The voice of the masses usually collectivly get the best product or at least the best bang for your hard earned treasure.

[g8ina]

The absolute best pocket scoptics Ive ever used was a small 8x21 binocular by Olympus. Bought quite a few pairs, esp as gifts for fellow wildlife enthusiasts, small enough to fit in a pcoket but with an amazing amount of light collection.

[Ttaskmaster]

These Hawke Endurance monoculars don't look too bad:

Actually, I was considering the Hawke Nature-Trek 10x25 ones that are just the tube. A bit thinner and easier to carry, but possibly still underpowered.
I understand the need for a large objective lens, but the trick is going to be finding the balance between image brightness and pocket size... I'd say the latter is more important, because if it's too bulky I'll just end up not carrying it.

There also these compact zoom binoculars:

They look awesome and I'd love to give them a try, but alas way too bulky for carrying. That's why I'm after a monocular.

[Saracen999]

I'm in need of a monocular, but I've no idea what brands are good these days?

Well, "good" is relative, of course. Obviously, Leica, Zeiss, Olympus, Swarovski, etc. Bring money. Lots of.

I have a few decent pairs of binoculars, including Leica, but only one "mono", and it's more of aa monoscope than monocular, by which I mean, not "pocket". Aldi had them at about £50 a few years back, and I went in a few days too late, after the weekly deal haad gone. But the manager said he thinks he has one sitting on a shelf out back. He disappeared, returned 5 mins later clutching one. "How about £8?" he asked. You can guess my reply.

It's not great, and it's certainly no Leica, but at that price ....

However, it's also about a foot long, and 4" diameter at the widest, so hardly pocket.

I did notice, when looking around, that quite a few specialist suppliers offered "pre-loved", and some looked like decent buys. Anything Leica, Zeiss, etc is still going to be way more than your £50-£100 price range (or rather manky) but there were many items I didn't recognise brands of.

Other than that, localised ads, maybe? But it's pot luck if you find a right bargain, or naff-all.

[Zak33]

Look for the Barr & Stroud Sprite Mini 10x25

Amazon isn't always the cheapest, so check ebay etc

It's acceptable for £30 ish

But useless in low light, as you would expect at 10x with 25mm front lens

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

These Hawke Endurance monoculars don't look too bad:

Actually, I was considering the Hawke Nature-Trek 10x25 ones that are just the tube. A bit thinner and easier to carry, but possibly still underpowered.
I understand the need for a large objective lens, but the trick is going to be finding the balance between image brightness and pocket size... I'd say the latter is more important, because if it's too bulky I'll just end up not carrying it.


They look awesome and I'd love to give them a try, but alas way too bulky for carrying. That's why I'm after a monocular.

This is what the cheaper non-ED 8X42 version looks like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00rlcTtikdI

The ED version should have lower CA. Is that too big??

[Ttaskmaster]

The ED version should have lower CA. Is that too big??

Again, they're rather nice and, unlike the Amazon cheapy versions, do seem quite trustworthy in terms of robustness when stowed in a pocket or pouch...
But alas, that hoofing great dorsal hump housing the focus wheel mechanism is what spoils the compactness and portability in this instance. It takes up about the same Width x Height as compact binos, which defeats the point of a monocular.
I might take a punt on that design if I find the old 15x50 version.

I think my options at this point are mainly the B&S Sprite Mini, or the Hawke equivalent.
I'm resisting the urge to splurge on the Vortex one with the pointless MRAD reticle, though!

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Again, they're rather nice and, unlike the Amazon cheapy versions, do seem quite trustworthy in terms of robustness when stowed in a pocket or pouch...
But alas, that hoofing great dorsal hump housing the focus wheel mechanism is what spoils the compactness and portability in this instance. It takes up about the same Width x Height as compact binos, which defeats the point of a monocular.
I might take a punt on that design if I find the old 15x50 version.

I think my options at this point are mainly the B&S Sprite Mini, or the Hawke equivalent.
I'm resisting the urge to splurge on the Vortex one with the pointless MRAD reticle, though!

The 10X25 version of the Hawke seems to not have the knob on it,but shares the same construction:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hawke-Endur.../dp/B0786J3HRK

[Ttaskmaster]

The 10X25 version of the Hawke seems to not have the knob on it,but shares the same construction:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hawke-Endur.../dp/B0786J3HRK

The Nature Trek 10x25 version has the exact same form factor, but without the ED lens.
I'm tempted, as comparison reviews betwixt the two suggest there's no real discernible difference in image quality, but the NTs are somewhat cheaper... Unless there's some other really cool option (like the Celestron with compass and reticle), I'm guessing that's my best choice?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The Nature Trek 10x25 version has the exact same form factor, but without the ED lens.
I'm tempted, as comparison reviews betwixt the two suggest there's no real discernible difference in image quality, but the NTs are somewhat cheaper... Unless there's some other really cool option (like the Celestron with compass and reticle), I'm guessing that's my best choice?

ED glass will mean less colour fringing in high contrast areas,but if the optical formula is the same image quality otherwise should be similar.

[Ttaskmaster]

ED glass will mean less colour fringing in high contrast areas,but if the optical formula is the same image quality otherwise should be similar.

I went to look for some image comparisons "with and without ED glass"... and got splurged in the face with a bunch of Ed Sheeran pics where he's not wearing glasses - Bloody Google!!

TBH, I don't need a photo-perfect image as much as I need magnification, compactness and sufficient clarity to ID what that building/footpath sign/land feature is several hundred yards away. I'm mainly going to be navving with an OS map.
Moreover, the aforementioned reviews generally assert that ED glass doesn't really become worth the extra money until you're spending proper cash for the higher end lenses.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I went to look for some image comparisons "with and without ED glass"... and got splurged in the face with a bunch of Ed Sheeran pics where he's not wearing glasses - Bloody Google!!

TBH, I don't need a photo-perfect image as much as I need magnification, compactness and sufficient clarity to ID what that building/footpath sign/land feature is several hundred yards away. I'm mainly going to be navving with an OS map.
Moreover, the aforementioned reviews generally assert that ED glass doesn't really become worth the extra money until you're spending proper cash for the higher end lenses.

This would be the closest to what I would say is colour fringing, which I have seen in the realworld:
https://imgsv.imaging.nikon.com/line...g03_pic002.png

[g8ina]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00006G33O

these are the ones I mentioned.

[Ttaskmaster]

This would be the closest to what I would say is colour fringing, which I have seen in the realworld:

I seriously doubt that any half decent optic is that bad.
Even my very cheap old ones, which were probably made long before ED existed, have only the slightest hint of this, and then only under very specific conditions. So unless decent companies have forgotten how to make decent optics without ED, I'm not worried.

these are the ones I mentioned.

Thanks, but they're way too bulky.