Opticron 30786 Explorer WA ED-R 10x42 Monocular, 47 mm*138 mm*54 mm

This monocular is worth every penny. Clear image, robust and waterproof. The ED version is what I purchased and it’s ideal. Big enough to let enough light in for low light use, small enough for a decent pocket and easy to operate. Yes the focus wheel requires patience as it’s slower to rotate than others but that’s really not an issue to me. Makes you feel it’s more sturdy than anything else. Hardly stops you operating it. Really pleased I bought this for wildlife use and the 8x magnification is more than enough to make it really useful. The case isn’t anything to get excited about but it does the job. Made a veg tan leather one for mine so the finished package is now complete. All I need to do now is not lose it like my last Opticron!If you’re lucky enough to be able to afford one, I certainly recommend getting one.

I ordered three monoculars in order to choose the right one for me. They were the Opticron 10x40, the Opticron 8x32 and finally, as a sort of cheaper benchmark, the Celestron 10x25. I wanted to replace an old cheap monocular that had fogged up and was impressed at how far the technology has come. I need a monocular that is light and portable to take fishing and walking in the mountains. Seeing the three monoculars side by side, I realised at once that choosing the right one was more complex than I thought. Each one had something to offer and there is a critical balance between price, portability,quality and purpose.The Opticron 10x40 stood out as a beautifully crafted technical instrument capable of delivery quality images. It did everything well - bright clear images, easy to see through, focussed down to around two metres and felt solid and well engineered. As a scientific instrument I loved it but it was too heavy and big for me to comfortably slip it into my pocket and forget about it until I needed it. A really big issue for me was whether, without armouring, it would stand up to the general rigours of life outside. I can see that for someone who used a monocular almost continually - watching a sporting event or birds for example - then this would be perfect. But for me, the size and weight of the Opticron made me reluctantly rule it out.The Opticron 8x32 was armoured and also gave a very good image. Frankly, I find the difference between an 8x and 10x monocular virtually negligible. What counts more is the quality of the image rather than absolute difference in image size. One sees less detail through a more powerful instrument if the image is dull and shaking rather than through something less powerful but with more light and a steadier image. The Opticron 8x32 feels great in the hand, gives a good image (almost as good as its big brother) and is undoubtedly very rugged. With all the armouring it isn’t that much smaller or lighter than the 10x40 but it is certainly tougher and easier to carry in ones pocket. However, it only focuses down to around 5/6 metres and the focussing ring is fiendishly stiff.The much cheaper and smaller Celestron 10x25 came as a complete surprise. I only included it to see how cheaper monoculars compared but its relatively small size and image quality, not to mention its armouring, really impressed me. The light transmission is pretty good and detail stands out even in gloomy conditions. I am not price sensitive and would be happy to pay a higher price for a premium product but I would be hard pushed to choose either of the two Opticrons over the Celestron for convenience, portability, price or image quality.

The build quality is very good. Seems to be as sturdy as it gets. The objective lens cap is held by a piece of rubber so it won't get lost. The eyepiece cover is removable.It's not small or light for a 8x32 monocular, but still very portable.Optically, I can only compare this to old Russian Tento binoculars. It has much better colour fidelity than those, does not change the colours noticeably. The flare resistance is only slightly better, not very good, but usually not a problem. Chromatic aberration is quite bad, worse than the Russian binoculars. It's very noticeable when observing in a snowy landscape or against a white sky. I don't see a difference in sharpness, I feel that it's not bad, but could be better.Overall, I recommend this if sturdiness is important for you and you are not bothered by chromatic aberration. It's definitely a good monocular to take with you for any kind of touring.update: Today I had the opportunity to try a low-end binocular against this monocular. Compared to that, the picture is way-way better. The field of view is much larger, and the contrast of the image is much better. (Probably thanks to the anti-reflection coating.)