Brunton Lite Tech Monocular

This is perfect for my indoor and outdoor target pistol and rifle shooting. It is so hard to see where you hit the target beyond 10 yards using 22's let alone larger calibers. I read a lot of reviews and looked at a lot of Monoculars and for me, this is the best! I have expensive Leupold VX-1 and VX-2 rifle scopes, Leupold spotting scope and a Leupold RX-1000 TBR DNA Range Finder and this Monocular is more portable and easier to usethan any of my other scopes mentioned. If you know your optics, you know Leupold is one of the best on the market for optics in any scope group. This is not to say that the Brunton Lite Tech 81-00682 is better than my Leupold's but for my purpose, it is the best for my needs and that is finding a way quickly to see where I hit the target. My Leupold spotting scope is great for this purpose also but pulling out a $500 spotting scope for range practice is an over kill and not convenient for less than 100 yards. Your Lens objective is small as well as the area your looking at. You can't use this scope for tracking something that is moving. It works best at a fixed area like a target. I've used it at 50 yards and it was great. I'm not sure what 100 yards is like but my eyes are not very good and at 50 yards, if I can see my hits "clearly" with this inexpensive scope, I am a happy camper. When I am shooting beyond 50 yards, I pull my Leupold Spotting Scope. PLUS.....You buy it, you try it, you break it......just return it and no questions asked. Where do you get that kind of customer satisfaction other than Amazon!

i still haven't tested the waterproofness and will probably never get to it. the size and design of the monocular are perfect. but i was really disappointed that in the middle of the view there is a blurry area the way you have to move the the object of interest to wards the edge to see it clearly. this really shouldn't be and i had cheaper monoculars before that didn't have this problem. also the range of focus adjustment could be bigger. i will still use it but of course not buy another brunton product unless i can check it thoroughly or have it replaced if it's faulty.

I wanted a small pair of binoculars or a monocular to throw in my hiking kit (Maxpedition 12x5 bottle holder with two side pouches). I looked all over the internet for anything cheap and waterproof, and basically this is all there is, so I gave it a shot.I have to say that for its size, price and durability, I'm glad I chose it. No, its not a powerful set of binoculars. No, its not made of Adamantium. But I've owned this for two years, have used it hundreds of times, and it hasn't broken or failed me. And if it did, I would just buy another for $20.Its not that powerful either, but what do you expect from something that weighs as much as a fork? If you're into hiking and camping, you know that you can't afford to take a pair of binoculars with you due to their size and weight. if you're into golf, it needs to fit in your pocket or attach to your bag and not obstruct your swing. I bought this to spot golf balls, find schools of fish while on shore, and look at nature while out hiking. It does all three really well for something that fits in your pant pocket.I highly recommend this to any outdoorsman on a budget.

Well, what do you expect for the price? Don't expect too much. The scope is easy enough to use, focuses well, but there is noticeable pin cushion distortion and the weirdest thing occurs with my scope. No matter how you orient the scope, the image is rotated slightly counter clockwise. If you are looking at the horizon, it tilts to the left and if you are looking at vertical poles or trees, they all lean to the left. Kind of annoying.

With optics, you generally get what you pay for, so I wasn't terribly surprised when this little monocular performed commensurate with it's price.The first thing I noticed is that the image was particularly dim, even for a 22mm objective and small exit pupil. I suspect this has mostly to do with mediocre roof-prism execution.The second issue is that the image lacks the "focus snap" often seen in decent optics. Good optics have a very distinct point of best focus; the image 'snaps' into focus, the better the optic, the more pronounced the effect is. Instead, this monocular "mushes" through focus, the image remains subtly blurry as you pass through the region of best focus. This is typical of low-end optics, and is generally the result of poorly executed curves in the objective lens assembly.The field of view is pretty small, too, which can make target acquisition difficult, and the view less functional and less aesthetic- it makes viewing feel a bit like observing through a paper towel tube. Wide angle optics are difficult to execute well at low cost, so this is, like everything else, to be expected for the price. The trade off here is that the image stays sharper and un-distorted across the field of view.Lastly, the close focus is longer than it's supposed to be- specs list it as 10 feet, but mine won't focus closer than 18 feet. With small optics, it can be fun to focus on close things, like flowers and bugs. The specs clearly state the close-focus distance, so this isn't a fair criticism. I point it out simply because a closer focus distance might have made these at least a little fun to use.The thing works, but, really, it's not a particularly functional or enjoyable optic. The best I can say about it is that it's better than nothing. It's also teeny, so there's minimal consequence to throwing it in your pack.I was hoping to be be pleasantly surprised by this little monocular, but such was not the case. Realistically, if you're interested in something that's truly functional, let alone more pleasant to use, look elsewhere... and be prepared to spend a bit more.