Note: I get commissions for purchases made through links in this post.
Finding the right Eyeskey binoculars can be an adventure. To the best of my knowledge, Eyeskey is a Chinese company that is able to make optical equipment very cheaply. For example, you will usually be able to find Eyeskey 8×42 binoculars for less than $200.
This is not to say that they are poorly made. Apparently many people are very satisfied with their purchases. It’s just that finding the pair of Eyeskey binoculars that you really want can take a lot of work because the company doesn’t do a good job of telling you which model is which. In some cases, model numbers seem to be non-existent, making it very hard to tell which pair you’re looking at.
In this Eyeskey binoculars review, I’m going to try to clean up this mess as much as possible for 5 pairs of 8×42 Eyeskey binoculars. You can let me know later if you think I succeeded in this task.
If you’re in a hurry and just want to check the pricing and availability of one or more of these Eyeskey binoculars (all 8x42s) at Amazon, you can click the links in the list below. I realize the items in the list don’t look consistent, but that’s part of the mess I’ve been talking about.
If you want to skip ahead to a certain section of this review, you can click a link in the box below. Otherwise, you can just keep scrolling and reading as usual.
- 1 What’s Up with the Eyeskey Model Numbers?
- 2 What Are the Similarities among These Eyeskey 8×42 Binoculars?
- 3 Eyeskey EK8561 8×42 Binoculars
- 4 Eyeskey M1-0842 8×42 Binoculars
- 5 Eyeskey 4331885643 8×42 Binoculars
- 6 Eyeskey EK8543 8×42 Binoculars
- 7 Eyeskey 4332112202 “Upgraded” 8×42 Binoculars
- 8 What’s the Verdict on the Eyeskey 8×42 Binocular Models?
What’s Up with the Eyeskey Model Numbers?
The short answer to that question is that I have no idea. As I hinted at above, there are some models that, on Eyeskey’s own website, simply do not show a number of any kind. There might be a table with a label for a model number and other information, but no one has seen fit to actually fill in the information we want.
So in some cases, I’ve resorted to using a number found at Amazon. I’m not sure where the person who originally listed this number got it from. It might be a UPC, but I don’t know that for sure. At least it’s something we can use for reference.
The numbers used in the link list above simplify the picture somewhat. Most of these models have more than one reference number. I believe the numbers starting with “EK” (as in, EyesKey) as well as the one starting with an “M” are official codes from the company.
Here is a summary of what I found in my research.
Model EK8561 is also called 4331885369 at Amazon.
Model M1-0842 (from the Eyeskey site) is also known as EK86010842 at Amazon. The “842” in each number likely refers to the power and lens size (that is, 8×42) of the binoculars. The fact that the Amazon number starts with an “EK” but the Eyeskey number does not is kind of strange.
The third set in the list is one of those that Eyeskey does not assign a number on their site. The number 4331885643 comes from Amazon.
The fourth number is model EK8543-8X42 at the company site. I shortened it in the list above because you already know that it’s an 8×42 style. This really just shows another example of the inconsistency of Eyeskey.
The last model, which is 4332112202 at Amazon, is actually found on two pages at Eyeskey. One of the pairs of binoculars there is called “upgraded”. It is also called that at Amazon. What the actual upgraded is from the other pair shown at the company site I have not been able to determine.
So there’s the mess I warned you about. How do we make sense of it all?
There are 2 factors I tried to use when determining which pair was which for this review.
The first factor was field of view (FOV). I figured that that number should be different enough from one pair to another that I could tell which set of binoculars I was reading about.
I was wrong.
While the FOV number did help, it wasn’t enough. So the second factor I looked at was the actual style of the binoculars as shown in pictures. For all the similarities among these binoculars (and there are many, as you’ll see below), each pair has a unique look.
What Are the Similarities among These Eyeskey 8×42 Binoculars?
Even when looking for similarities it was sometimes difficult to tell if a given pair had a certain feature. There was sometimes more information on the center knob in a picture than in any textual description on the same page.
As best I can tell, all five of these models have the following features in common.
- Fully multi-coated lenses
- Bak-4 prisms
- Roof style design
- Close focus of 6.6 feet
- Twist up eyecups
- Flip down lens covers
- Right eye diopter
- Tripod adaptable
- Carrying case
- Neck strap
- Cleaning cloth
- User manual
- 30-Day warranty
A few of the items in this list will need a little more explanation for a given model, as you’ll see below.
Eyeskey defines the warranty on their site like this.
“LIFETIME WARRANTY, NO REASON RETURN WARRANTY: All our products have been covered with lifetime warranty plus 30-day money back guarantee. You can apply for return without any reason within 30 days, simple and convenient return process.”
So now let’s take a closer look at the differences in each of these five 8×42 binoculars to help you see what else you’re getting and to help you decide which pair (if any) is what you really want. Be sure to note the stylistic differences in the pictures below too.
My apologies for the small pictures. Eyeskey doesn’t provide any larger ones that you can get at easily. I think you can still see the differences among them.
Eyeskey EK8561 8×42 Binoculars
As I mentioned above, the EK8561 is called 4331885369 at Amazon. Keep that in mind if you do some searching on your own.
All of these binoculars have a field of view (at the standard 1000 yards) between 350 and 450 feet. This is pretty decent for this style of binoculars. The EK8561 has an FOV of 356 feet.
More than one of these models is described as having “green films” and that they are “Eco-Glasses”. If I had to guess, I would say this applies to all five models.
They probably all also have rubber armoring, which is included in the description of 4 of the 5 models. It appears from pictures that the fifth has such a coating too, which is designed to make them “shock proof”. At this price point, however, I’m not sure how much shock they can really absorb, if you happen to drop them on a hard surface.
The weight of the EK8561 is one of four ounce amounts: 20.3, 22, 23.6, or 32. Since I obviously don’t have these in front of me to weigh them myself, my best guess here would be 23.6 ounces. This is similar to what I found for some of the other models.
The exit pupil diameter is either 5.15 or 5.25 millimeters.
The physical overall dimensions (LxWxH in inches) is either 5.5 x 1.9 x 4.8 or 5.7 x 2.05 x 4.92.
Eyeskey M1-0842 8×42 Binoculars
The M1-0842 model is called EK86010842 at Amazon.
The FOV is 388 feet at 1000 yards. The most reasonable figure I could find for the weight is 23.6 ounces. The exit pupil diameter is 5.2 millimeters. The dimensions are 5.3 x 2.1 x 4.9 inches.
For the M1-0842, there is a little more information given than usual. These have HD glass. Since this is the only pair (of these five) that specifies this feature, I hesitate to say that it applies to all of them. Then again, perhaps it does.
While all of these are waterproof, this is one of (at least) two pairs that you can submerge safely for up to 3 minutes. Again, does this apply to all these models? I don’t know.
Eyeskey mentions that this one has a “camouflage sheath”, but there’s nothing in any picture that shows anything in camo style, so I think this is a misprint.
The eye relief of this model is 17.5 millimeters, and the interpupillary distance ranges between 56 and 74 millimeters.
Eyeskey 4331885643 8×42 Binoculars
The FOV of this model is 388 feet. Other than that, there is virtually no more information that would distinguish this pair from any other, based on what Eyeskey tells us.
Specifications like weight, exit pupil, dimensions, and even close focus distance are not provided. I’m guessing that the close focus is 6.6 feet as it is for all the other models here.
Only this model and one other are noted as having their lenses “phase correction coated”. Your guess is as good as mine as to whether or not this applies to all five pairs.
Eyeskey EK8543 8×42 Binoculars
The FOV here is 356 feet. It is (currently) incorrectly given as 388 feet at Amazon.
The weight is either 23.6 or 23.1 ounces. The exit pupil diameter is 5.15 millimeters. The close focus distance is most likely 6.6 feet, though I did find it given as 13 feet too.
The dimensions are either 5.7 x 2.1 x 5 or 5.31 x 2.05 x 4.92 inches. This is another model mentioned as having a submersion time of 3 minutes and an interpupillary distance of 56 to 74 millimeters.
Eyeskey 4332112202 “Upgraded” 8×42 Binoculars
This “upgraded” model has the largest FOV at 430 feet. It weighs 24.5 ounces and has a magnesium alloy body. (Do the others have one too?)
This is the other model specifically noted as having “phase correction coated” lenses.
Take your pick among these possible dimensions: 5.6 x 2.1 x 5 or 5.7 x 1.3 x 5.1 or 5.7 x 2.2 x 5.2 inches.
What’s the Verdict on the Eyeskey 8×42 Binocular Models?
I probably wouldn’t have even considered writing this review of these binoculars if they weren’t so popular and if owners didn’t seem so pleased with their purchases.
But they are, so I did.
You might end up with a pair that feel like junk to you. But that can happen with more expensive models from other manufacturers too. (Though the odds are significantly lower.)
Still, at this price point, you might give them a shot, especially if you can’t afford anything more or if you don’t intend to use them more than occasionally. Dedicated birders and hunters, for example, will probably want to look elsewhere.
So if you think these any of these are satisfactory for your purposes, check out Eyeskey binoculars in general at Amazon here, or use the links to specific models at the top of the page.
Was this post helpful?