26 of 27 people found the following review helpful
Decent binoculars, with 2 drawbacks,
This review is from: Nikon 8246 ACULON A211 10 x 42 Binocular (Black) (Electronics)
I purchased these today at a local sporting goods store. They are a "decent" pair of binoculars that only really have 2 flaws. The bridge is plastic and can flex. This means if you are viewing through the binoculars at an odd angle and somehow manage to apply more pressure to one or the other eye cups, you can cause the bridge to flex enough to throw one or the other sides out of focus. (The same as having an improperly adjusted diopter.) Fortunately, this does spring back into focus as soon as pressure is released. Still, it's annoying that it can happen at all, even if it's only in rare circumstances.
Second, they aren't waterproof. If you take these in the field, you will have to pack a plastic bag in case it rains.
Other than that, they appear to be good binoculars. Viewing is bright and clear, and objects come into crisp focus once the diopter is tuned to your eyes. The eye cups are nice and snug so they stay put where you set them. The included lens caps fit well and have tabs for attaching to the strap. The strap itself is on par with an entry level DSLR camera strap, so it's good enough not to have to replace it, and the carry pouch is sturdy enough as well.
The instructions specifically caution against storing them in a hot vehicle, which is too bad, because I had planned on keeping them in my vehicle as a "knock around" pair that I wouldn't care if they got beat up.
For a little more, the Leupold Rogue series of binoculars are perhaps a better choice, having a metal bridge and being waterproof, but with slightly inferior eye cup design. I have the Rogue 8x50 and I'd gladly trade these Nikon for another pair of the Leupolds.
Tracked by 2 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Apr 27, 2014 12:30:20 PM PDT
I am sure the Leupold 8x50 rogues are a bit nicer, all be it 2x less magnification. And they should be, they are in a different class than these Nikon Aculons.These cost 77.00 on amazon, whereas the Leupold Rogue 8x50 are costing more than double that price (168.00 amazon). I would not call that "a little more", but significantly more money for waterproof and metal bridge. If you want to step up to a comparison that is equal to the Leupolds, the water And fog proof and all metal Nikon Prostaffs or Monarchs are easily their equals and at around that price with even better features.
If you compare these Aculons to any at close to the same price and features, these are some of the best.
Posted on Sep 18, 2014 1:40:01 PM PDT
Terry R says:
THANK YOU for pointing out the weakness of the plastic bridge. I'm a life-long deep-sky observer and raptor watcher. I own 3 pair of Zeiss (15x60, 15x50 and 7x50), and a 16-yr-old pair of Nikon Diplomat 10x25s that are razor sharp edge-to-edge, and are visually the finest compacts I've ever looked through. I was thinking of getting these Aculon 10x42s for a friend who manages a private mobile-home park and needs a cheap-but-reliable bino to keep an eye on comings and goings at the park's entrance, from his hilltop vantage point. Seems I need to look elsewhere.
In reply to an earlier post on Sep 18, 2014 4:03:34 PM PDT
You're welcome. It really is a shame because the optics were quite nice for the price point, but the flexing bridge was a deal breaker for me. I ended up getting some Pentax that have been excellent.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›