Binoculars for Safari - Kenya, Tanzania, SA, Zambia

I've finally conceded the point that, even with long lenses, I should bring a set of binoculars with me on some upcoming safaris, but need a bit more advice.

One of the safari companies suggests 8x32. Do you all feel that's about right? If not, what do you recommend? I've seen reference to 7x as well - what combo there?

What other factors should I take into consideration? Any brands to look for or stay away from?

Of course, with all the other expenses, looking to keep cost down, but don't want to cheap out and get a pair I'm always fighting with or which disappoint. I'm guessing the same rule of thumb applies here as with tripods: small, cheap or light - pick any two?

Will be going to Kenya (Masai Mara), Tanzania (Serengeti and Ngorongoro), South Africa (Sabi Sands), Zambia (South Luangua), Botswana (Chobe), so lots of different terrain.

Appreciate any guidance you can provide!

8x is probably the best range for safari. Don't be tempted by 10x as the image will be noticeably dimmer and more wobbly. The size of the object lens will have a huge bearing on how bright the image is. A large lens (40mm or thereabouts) will give a brighter image than 32mm, but the binoculars will be heavier. You'll also have a choice between roof and porro prisms - I recommend roof as they'll be slimmer and lighter.

As with most things, you get what you pay for. More expensive bins will have better optics for a brighter image. They also tend to have longer eye relief - a measure of how far from the eyepieces you need to be. A short eye relief can make cheap bins a pain to use - or impossible if you wear glasses.

I've looked at a few 8x42 (or thereabouts) models.

At $70 these Bushnells are very cheap. But an eye relief of just 17mm would turn me right off.
These Nikon Monarchs have a great reputation at just $280.
Finally, at $2350, are my preferred safari bins - Swarovski 8.5x42.


Ideally you want to go to a store where you can try out 8x42 or 8x30 bins from different makers so you can tell how much eye relief you need, how heavy the various types are and how they feel in the hand (how well balanced are they, how many turns to focus from near to far).

Best of luck.

+1 on the Swarowski bins they are about as good as it gets! However they are EXPENSIVE! I have a pair of the Nikon 8x42 DCF Monarchs and they are a great pair of general purpose bins. I use them to find things to photograph - if you want to observe rather than photograph, or have loads of dosh, then the Swaro's are very hard (if not impossible) to beat!

Thank you both! Am looking at the Nikon Monarchs and the Trailblazers, along with Bushnell Legend HD and Minox BV BRW.

I'm having difficulty with figuring out the difference in the two Nikons, and am leaning toward the Trailblazer for the significant price difference. But willing to spend the extra if there's something significant I'm missing.

As for the Swaros... out of the budget since I have only occasional use for binos in general and don't find myself using them most of the time I take them along.

Nikon Monarchs 10 X 42 is all u need

Lone-eagle wrote in post #12628323
Nikon Monarchs 10 X 42 is all u need

Oops, meant I was leaning toward the Trailblazers (previous post now edited). What am I missing between the Trailblazer and the Monarch model?

BurBunny wrote in post #12629040
Oops, meant I was leaning toward the Trailblazers (previous post now edited). What am I missing between the Trailblazer and the Monarch model?

Don't know anything about Trailblazer, Monarch 10X42 is what I have & they are good for the price

BurBunny wrote in post #12628183
I'm having difficulty with figuring out the difference in the two Nikons, and am leaning toward the Trailblazer for the significant price difference. But willing to spend the extra if there's something significant I'm missing.

There are two main differences that will be relevant. First, the Monarchs are 10% lighter, which will make a difference if they're used for a full day. Second, and probably more importantly, the Monarchs will, thanks to the different glass and the multiple coatings, give a brighter image.

I know I keep banging on about the importance of a bright image, and it might seem daft because you're going to bright, sunny, Africa. However, most of the time you'll be out near dawn and dusk. And a lot of the more interesting animals will be skulking in the shade. I've seen people get very frustrated, peering into the murk with their 10x28 bins, trying to find a leopard in a tree.

So you're not going to be surprised when I recommend the Monarchs. The main difference between them and the Trailblazers is the same difference as what made me choose Swarovski.

hollis_f wrote in post #12630443
There are two main differences that will be relevant. First, the Monarchs are 10% lighter, which will make a difference if they're used for a full day. Second, and probably more importantly, the Monarchs will, thanks to the different glass and the multiple coatings, give a brighter image.

I know I keep banging on about the importance of a bright image, and it might seem daft because you're going to bright, sunny, Africa. However, most of the time you'll be out near dawn and dusk. And a lot of the more interesting animals will be skulking in the shade. I've seen people get very frustrated, peering into the murk with their 10x28 bins, trying to find a leopard in a tree.

So you're not going to be surprised when I recommend the Monarchs. The main difference between them and the Trailblazers is the same difference as what made me choose Swarovski.

Thank you, Hollis! That's what I needed to know. When I saw the side-by-side comparison, other than the weight I just wasn't able to determine what it was which made the Monarchs worth $100 more. I absolutely get what you're saying about the light factor. As a primarily underwater photographer, I know light is king.

And, since you mentioned the critter at the top of my "really really want to see" list, you had me at "leopard."

Boy, I have a pair of 10x monarchs but if I was making the trip to Africa, I would be highly tempted to get something better. I have no experience at all with this company but they rent Swarv's.

10x
http://www.optics4rent​.com/productdetail1.ht​ml

8-32's
http://www.optics4rent​.com/productdetail4.ht​ml

In my experience I do not see all that much more in image jump between the 8's and the 10's but I fully agree with size and weight. I also agree with light transmission. The 8's will be noticably brighter with same size optics up front. Please do not think I am unhappy with my Nikons, I am not. But I would hate to get half way around the world, and in the dim evening light, not be able to make out details of a once in a life time view of a animal. I understand we each have to make our decisions and compromises according to the circumstances we face. No matter, be sure to have fun.

res wrote in post #12634945
Boy, I have a pair of 10x monarchs but if I was making the trip to Africa, I would be highly tempted to get something better. I have no experience at all with this company but they rent Swarv's.

10x
http://www.optics4rent​.com/productdetail1.ht​ml

8-32's
http://www.optics4rent​.com/productdetail4.ht​ml

In my experience I do not see all that much more in image jump between the 8's and the 10's but I fully agree with size and weight. I also agree with light transmission. The 8's will be noticably brighter with same size optics up front. Please do not think I am unhappy with my Nikons, I am not. But I would hate to get half way around the world, and in the dim evening light, not be able to make out details of a once in a life time view of a animal. I understand we each have to make our decisions and compromises according to the circumstances we face. No matter, be sure to have fun.

Appreciate that link! Renting is usually an option I pursue, but for both trips I will be out of the US 3+ weeks x 2 trips, that adds up fast! In addition, since I will be going back semi-regularly, a pair of my own makes sense.

I'll have to budget for the Swarovskis eventually (right after the 70-200 IS II).

Here's where i bought mine

http://www.eagleoptics​.com/binoculars

Bianchi wrote in post #12647404
Here's where i bought mine

http://www.eagleoptics​.com/binoculars

Wow! Some fabulous pricing there - about 10% less than B&H, Adorama, etc., and great feedback ratings. Thank you!

I've used Swarowski, I think they're bulky. Optically they're very good. I moved to Leica about 6 years ago and use their Geovid series and have them in 8x42 and 10x42. 10x42 handheld are difficult to use, it's best if you can rest them on something. The 8x42 are excellent, reasonably light and easily handheld. The Geovids have the built in laser, and will report the distance to what you're looking at, I've had good results out to about 1200 yards. This can be handy. Optically, Leica is excellent, I find them easier to use for long periods than the Swarowski.
Cheap binoculars will give you eye strain/headaches and are a PIA to use.

rick_reno wrote in post #12710736
I've used Swarowski, I think they're bulky. Optically they're very good. I moved to Leica about 6 years ago and use their Geovid series and have them in 8x42 and 10x42. 10x42 handheld are difficult to use, it's best if you can rest them on something. The 8x42 are excellent, reasonably light and easily handheld. The Geovids have the built in laser, and will report the distance to what you're looking at, I've had good results out to about 1200 yards. This can be handy. Optically, Leica is excellent, I find them easier to use for long periods than the Swarowski.
Cheap binoculars will give you eye strain/headaches and are a PIA to use.

I just dug the 10x42's out to verify what I remembered (above), they're not bad. I usually use the 8's, it's been a few years since I had the 10's out, and fooling them tonight I don't think they need a rest to be stable. If you get these, bring an extra battery. They take a little round 3V battery, mine says CR2 on it. I had a hard time finding one last time I needed one.

Enjoy your trip.