I am, after many many years, able to spend a little money on some good gear.
I have a budget of about $600-650.
I have two courses of action that I would hope for some advice on.
I may either get a Nikon SE and spend the whole kitty, or split the pot and go with a E2 and a Sky and Earth scope to go with it.
I do live near Lake Michigan and would love to be able to look for migrating and wintering water birds, but I also want excellent binoculars as I would be using them for the bulk of the time.
I am also considering some other models. The Zeiss Conquest, Minox, or Pentax instead of the SE; the Eagle Optics Ranger or Bushnell Discoverer instead of the E2, and maybe the Eagle Optics Raven scope instead of the Nikon.
At the moment I am leaning toward the E2 and Sky and Earth combo platter.
Thanks
My humble opinion:
The E2 + scope option is better than the binocular-only option, because: (1) it's more versatile (scope adds a much higher magnification); (2) the E2 has about the widest field of view available; (3) the superiority of the "best" binoculars is only a tiny step higher than the view of the E2; (4) the E2 is one of the most user-comfortable binoculars around (SE's have eye-position-sensitive blackout problems); and (5) I don't think that the other binoculars you listed (except the SE) provide a superior view.
Just an opinion.
Thank you.
I just arrived home from examining the Zeiss Conquest. They were very nice, good and light, very sharp, and being a roof and a Zeiss will probably survive anything. On the downside, they will cost the whole budget and the field of view is narrow compared to the SE and E2. They did not have either Nikon to compare, but I got a look at the Sky and Earth scope and did find it nice for the cost.