Any experts out there?
Looking to buy a new pair, mainly for bird watching. Budget up to to £400. 8X or 10X magnification - am leaning to 10X as often observing water fowl at quite a distance. Recommendations welcome.
|
|
Sorry to immediately drift your thread! I work as a volunteer at a bird reserve and we use variable zoom Swarovski monoculars on tripods. whatever you buy I think 8x or 10x magnification will need some sort of tripod or support
|
|
OK up to 10X have fairly steady hands! Already have a pair of Nikon Travelite 10X 25 which are excellent for travel and general use but don't have the light gathering capability or the field of view I require for wildlife.
|
|
I am sure you know what you are up to. I hope you find something that meets your needs and pocket! Christmas present perhaps?!
|
I have a pair of Minolta Classic 10x50 for which I paid Jessops about £50 for some 7 years ago.
= Excellent!
|
>> I have a pair of Minolta Classic 10x50 for which I paid Jessops about £50
>> for some 7 years ago.
>>
>> = Excellent!
>>
A while back I compared a 30 quid pair of binoculars with my 80 quid Pentax pair from Jessops and a 400 quid pair belonging to a friend - all 10x50. The difference between the 30 quid and 80 quid pairs was obvious, but couldn't see a difference between the 80 quid and 400 quid pairs. Diminishing marginal returns and all that.
|
Well I do know £400 is a lot of money for binoculars because I like used and I like value.
Just my opinion but I see a bit of the emporer's new clothes thing about expensive birding binoculars. Until recently I owned a pair of late 70s Russian 7x50s which were as clear and bright as anything I've used... bit large and heavy though.
Owned quite a few pairs of Zeiss but they don't seem to be that special (compared with the Russians) considering their reputation and used prices.
I've had some Steiners recently... this model...
www.amazon.co.uk/Steiner-Commander-7x50-Compass-Binoculars/dp/B000KU2TL8
Everything proof, focus free and a good talking point with everyone that saw them. Nice and sharp/bright but still not massively better than the benchmark Russians.
My year in year out ones for mixed use are a pair of Pentax 16x50s. They are bright for their spec and the small tradeoff in light is worth it for the magnification.
|
BTW these are what the most avid lifetime birdwatcher I know currently uses..
www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SWIFT-AUDUBON-ED-8-5-X-44-ABSOLUTELY-IMMACULATE-/221321595874
I think they were test/award winners a few years ago.
|
Neither an expert, nor a twitcher, but I went through the same thought process about 2 years ago.
For many years, I had used a a pair of excellent, lightweight Pentax travel binoculars (8x21); they had accompanied me for some 8 years when I was doing power-line surveying work and were much better made than a friend's equivalent Nikons. I decided, however, that I needed something to let a bit more light in in dimmer conditions.
We went over to CleySpy - not a million miles from you, in the village of Glandford. A very knowledgeable chap asked me what sort of price range I was looking at, so I plucked £200 out of the air. He presented me with half a dozen pairs and said "Go outside, sit on the bench and try them out." I spent best part of an hour trying them; some felt clearly more comfortable than others, and I settled on Helios Aero ED 8x42. The feel of the binoculars is everything so my advice would be to try them out - and take your time. At that time, the Aeros were £199, but I see they are now down to £159.
www.cleyspy.co.uk/helios-aero-ed-8x42-i3963.htm
I should add that after we had paid, I asked, out of curiosity, if I could try a pair of Swarovskis. He happened to have a second hand pair for £1000. They were way out of my price range, but they were noticeably better than anything else that I had tried earlier. Having said that, I tried my mate's Swarovskis sometime later, and they seemed no better than my Aeros.
|
You can google as well as I can, but this looks to be a comprehensive overview both of what you might give thought to and some up to date reviews. I thought it interesting anyway.
www.bestbinocularsreviews.com/birdwatching-binoculars.php
|
|
Cleyspy is a good idea - been past there many times. It's making a comparison that's difficult and normal shops don't really offer much of an opportunity to try the things out.
|
I regularly go birding in a group and have the opportunity to try a wide variety of brands. It does seem you get what you pay for and I bought Minox HG 8X43 binoculars; they were the closest to Leica and Swarovski that I could afford. Unless you plan to regularly use a support I would stick to 8X rather than 10X. Plenty of other good suggestions in the thread and of course personal preference comes in to it.
alfalfa
|
Very happy with our Nikons:
Nikon Aculon A211 8x42
Went for the cheaper end of the range but excellent value for money, coming in at £85 or so.
|
|
Light-gathering capacity is also important and tends to be associated with lower power. 7x50 used to be favourite with yachtsmen. Maybe RSPB can offer expert advice?
|
>> Light-gathering capacity is also important and tends to be associated with lower power. 7x50 used
>> to be favourite with yachtsmen. Maybe RSPB can offer expert advice?
The best pair I ever had for plane watching were 7x50. As ambo says a good bright image and field of view favoured by sailors. In fact I think I read somewhere they were the standard Naval binoculars.
The 7x50 pair were nicked and I replaced them with 10x50 Greenkats which I still have. Very little real gain over the seven power as the greater magnification was lost to greater sensitivity to shake. Image not quite so bright either.
The problem is size/weight. Too big for a pocket. Can be worn round the neck on a broad strap but they're a bit of an encumbrance when walking etc.
|
The RSPB do offer advice but it is quite sparse...
www.rspb.org.uk/advice/watchingbirds/equipment/binoculars/
They also have their own online binocular shop linked in the articles.
>>>Light-gathering capacity is also important and tends to be associated with lower power. 7x50 used to be favourite
It's important GCN gets a pair to suit his own needs. Some folks will not consider anything other than ultra compact but in truth many £200+ pairs of compacts have worse clarity than a £40 used pair of conventional 7x50s from Ebay. However if you want to have a pair with you at all times to fit in a tweed jacket then compacts are probably the way to go.
If early morning or late in the day are times GCN might be out then light gathering is probably more important. If however he was an occasional daytime user upping the magnification at the slight expense of light gathering could be worthwhile.
As might be indicated by my first post price is not always a guide to how the image quality looks to a particular user so side by side comparison is invaluable. I'd not want to spend £400 without a good opportunity to test a range of models.
|
|
Brompton I don't know what make your 7x50s were but the Greenkat 10x50s you replaced them with did not have a good reputation so not total proof upping magnification to 10x is a problem. I see GCN is currently using a 10x25 compact, after those a 10x50 would seem very bright.
|
|
I tried the RSPB 8x42 HG binoculars at an independent shop in Buxton. Compared with Leica, Swarovski, Opticron etc. For the money (around £450 discounted, rather less than the previous!) they seemed good. Even better if you know someone who works for RSPB - bigger discount.
Last edited by: NIL on Wed 4 Dec 13 at 20:04
|
Yes light gathering is important and is determined by the size of the objective lens 7X50 will have a large objective lens and be very god in poor light conditions - something of great concern to yachtsmen.
As in all things I need compromise between reasonable magnification - eight or ten times are favourites amongst bird watchers, size of objective lens, for field of view and light gathering and cost.
Probably looking at 8X42 or 10X42 in a compact design (not porro prisms which I find heavy to hold for extended periods). Also would like reasonably robust construction.
I tend to favour the 10X magnifications since much of my bird watching is on the Broads where the birds, mainly wild fowl are fairly distant. Downside of high magnification is of course a smaller field of view so more difficult to find the subject and a jittering of the image caused by a shaking hand is that much more pronounced than in lesser magnification
I intend to take up Haywain's recommendation and make a trip to CleySpy next week to try out a selection.
www.cleyspy.co.uk/
|
BTW a very good binocular resource I've used loads is the bird forum...
www.birdforum.net/forumdisplay.php?s=b14a6f2fded0b649de875c8a52a693b4&f=112
You do have to read the comments bearing in mind some folks are very biased towards their own favourites.
|
|
That CleySpy place looks ideal. I see they do used too and testing something conventional like these... www.cleyspy.co.uk/swift-focus-8x40-i5433.html as a benchmark for comparison would give a start point for image quality.
|
Ordered a pair of these earlier today as Mrs F has become interested in astronomy; seemed like a safe bet, and at the right sort of price (top end of budget):
www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0000AKGX3/
But it's not too late to cancel the order...?
|
I think they should be as good as anything new at that price. If you were OK with used there are a pair on Ebay finishing in 5hrs that are currently at £21... probably make £30.
Here is a realistic user test of the Olympus on the bird forum I mentioned earlier...
www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=107702
|
>> If you OK with used there are a pair on Ebay
I'm fine with used; Mrs F on receiving them as a Christmas present, er, less so... :)
|
>>>Mrs F on receiving them as a Christmas present, er, less so... :)
Ahh so you're getting yourself some new binoculars as her Christmas present... well played.
|
>> >>>Mrs F on receiving them as a Christmas present, er, less so... :)
>>
>> Ahh so you're getting yourself some new binoculars as her Christmas present... well played.
:)
No really, she's actually getting into astronomy - went along to the monthly local society meeting last week and has already bought a couple of books. And although she is a Brian Cox fan, I don't think it's just that - more of a 'what are we doing here' sort of thing.
Either way, it opens up a lot more options for Christmas/birthday presents. Along with learning to play the bass guitar.
|
>> Ordered a pair of these earlier today as Mrs F has become interested in astronomy
Similar to my Minolta 10x50's and quite good for studying heavenly bodies, I've found.
|
>>>quite good for studying heavenly bodies, I've found
Well you aren't too far from the beach.
|
>> Ordered a pair of these earlier today as Mrs F has become interested in astronomy;
>> seemed like a safe bet, and at the right sort of price (top end of
>> budget):
>> www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0000AKGX3/
>>
>> But it's not too late to cancel the order...?
My current 'best' binoculars are a similar Olympus model. 8-16x40 zooms and very good indeed for most things. Several small and cheap 7 or 8x20 pairs live on window cills and in cars for occasional use or watching birds at bottom of garden.
The old c1978 Greenkat 10x50 set mentioned upthread live by the back door as grab kit for aircraft and more distant bird sightings. They were dropped about 20yrs ago and need messing with to avoid double vision. The big issue I had with them was their useless dust sealing - even the fluff from the velour lining of the supplied case got inside.
|
>>>need messing with to avoid double vision
Usually not worth it unles the used value exceeds £75 but I use this guy to reset the collomination of my binoculars when needed. Fair prices, good work and helpful.
www.actionoptics.co.uk/Repairs.htm
|
>>Ordered a pair of these earlier today as Mrs F has become interested in astronomy;
According to Wikipedia, you need 20X to see the Rings of Saturn. This implies a telescope and tripod.
|
|
ambo, could you point me at that Wikipedia article please?
|
Says 30x here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn
I saw the rings though my old 10-30 x 50 nocs back in the mid 90's when we lived in the Canaries.
Tripod mounted of course.
|
|
Does the same apply to the rings of Uranus, or do you need more specialist optics for that?
|
>> :-)
Sorry. Somebody was going to ask.
Actually I had forgotten that the rings of Uranus were only discovered in 1977, so you would need special tackle however you read it.
|
>>ambo, could you point me at that Wikipedia article please?
Sorry, I can't now get back to it. I found it while I was browsing in the general areas of telescope power and light-gathering, earlier today.
|
>> >>ambo, could you point me at that Wikipedia article please?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binoculars
If you text search the page ( Ctrl-F ) it's the third occurence of 'saturn'
|
>> According to Wikipedia, you need 20X to see the Rings of Saturn. This implies a
>> telescope and tripod.
I've asked Santa or a cheap astronomical telescope. The National Geographic one currently on offer in Aldi will do the job.
|
"I intend to take up Haywain's recommendation and make a trip to CleySpy next week to try out a selection."
CG, as you mentioned a budget of up to £400 in your first post, a reasonable approach might be to ask for half a dozen 'up to £200' (I'd be interested to see what you think of the Helios Aero, if they have them), pick out the one you prefer, then test that against half a dozen in the £400 area. Allow plenty of time.
I believe that binoculars are a personal thing and, to a large extent, you have to trust your instincts. It must be some 35 years ago now, that I was trying some acoustic guitars in a Leicester music shop; one, priced at the princely sum of £75 was exceptionally comfortable to to play and sounded wonderful. But, I had never heard of the make - it wasn't a Gibson, Martin or Guild - so I gave it a miss. It was, in fact, an early Lowden - now accepted as one of the finest guitars available and costing around £4,000. As I say, sometimes, you should just trust your instincts!
|
Well after nearly a year of dithering and trying out friends binoculars I finally got down to Cley Spy last week and spent and interesting hour or so comparing a half dozen pairs of binoculars. It certainly is a very personal thing and doesn't just come down to the optics. I had decided on 10x42 event though the majority of birdwatchers go for 8 x 42 since I tend to watch on the Broads and marshes where the extra reach of a 10x is useful.
In the end I elected to buy a pair of Nikon Monarch 5s - sort of mid-range for £315 and so far am well pleased with them.
Thanks for all the advice everyone.
|
|
Well done. As with cameras, the best binoculars are generally the ones you enjoy using and are happy to carry with you. You see more that way. Have fun!
|
|
Nikon binos also have top quality lenses like their cameras, as is the case with my 9x25 pair which fit easily into a pocket or the glovebox for ready access.
|
|
Yes, was slightly swayed by ownership of Nikon DSLR and a pair of Nikon Travelite 10x25 binos which have served e as excellent travel binos for the past 15 years.
|
|
I also have Nikon film and DSLR models - as an aside, there are also Nikon's Mitsubishi links...:-)
|
Blimey CGN you take your time!
I have an uncle who is very considered in his investigation of any new purchase and sometimes spends the best part of a year going into every dealer/shop he comes across that stock the item and each time spends ages looking and questioning the sales people as if about to buy that moment... then thanks them profusely and leaves saying there's no rush.
Anyway well done on those Nikons, they should serve well. The light weight of modern models is useful. I bought some older binocs a couple of weeks ago that Mrs F has just claimed for horse racing. They are seemingly almost unused Russian 12x40s from about 30yrs ago with stunning optics but they do weigh 50% more than yours.
She's happy to carry the weight to have great image quality.
Like you we find the extra magnification of 10 or 12 useful over the often advised 7 or 8... and neither of us have trouble holding them still.
Of course I'm at the other end of the financial scale... they were £10 from a probate clearance.
|
Also visited Cley Spy recently but in our case their place at Cley Marshes NWT centre. CS's shop was inaccessible on account of work on new NWT education building but they were operating in the shop/cafe.
I'm quite happy with the Olympus 8-16 zooms I've had for several years but we wanted something for Mrs B. Mainly for birds in garden at home so ability to focus close was a must. She struggles a bit with optical equipment so needed to try several. Knowledgeable young sales asst reckoned she needed a pair that allowed smallest possible angle between lenses but with a wide field.
Tried some v expensive kit but in end found a pair of 'Forest Optics' 8*42 at a sale price around £70 fitted the bill. So far very pleased indeed with them.
Earlier, at the Motorhome & Caravan show we'd tried something I found a novelty; fixed focus binoculars. As explained these basically bring the infinity focus in as close as possible. While having a good bright image and a blessed lack of need to faff with diopter adjustment they just wouldn't work with the close view needed in the garden.
Might have been tempted for aviation use though if price were no object.
|
>>> found a novelty; fixed focus binoculars.
Earlier in the thread I mentioned I dealt a used pair of these.. www.amazon.co.uk/Steiner-Commander-7x50-Compass-Binoculars/dp/B000KU2TL8
They were my first personal experience of fixed focus but as you say limiting when than ran out of focus at short range. However for their intended military or marine use by the time you were under the focus range you would either have been killed or run into anyway.
|
Shouldn't have mentioned my Olympus zooms.
About fifteen minutes ago heard loud plane noises outside - rapidly varying 'saw-buzz' propeller type noises. Turned out to be a couple of Extra 300s from Sywell's Blades team out on a jolly.
While watching both eyepieces and their respective lenses/mechanisms fell out. At first I thought a loose screw but closer examination suggests metal fatigue :-(
|
>> Shouldn't have mentioned my Olympus zooms.
>> While watching both eyepieces and their respective lenses/mechanisms fell out. At first I thought a
>> loose screw but closer examination suggests metal fatigue :-(
Took them top local optics shop with view to repair but proprietor sucked teeth in car mechanic fashion and tried to interest me in £300 Minoltas. No way I was going for that and snapped up a 'Medion' branded pair of 8*40 @£29.99 from Aldi as a stop gap.
Last resort check with Olympus and turned out the old ones had a 25yr warranty!!! No need to find receipt; serial number was sufficient proof of provenance. Old set duly dispatched to Olympus/Ricoh in Nottingham a fortnight ago.
Today, on return from my CAB day, I found mysterious DHL package from Portugal(!) lodged with neighbour* at number 25. Turned out to contain brand new replacements.
* She and I are both early retirees and share duty as parcel collection for half the road. Her hall today looked like a sorting office....
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 17 Dec 14 at 20:47
|
|
Brilliant service, I'd say. Don't suppose Olympus sell many new pairs if the warranty keeps replacing the old ones.
|
That's what happens when you buy quality...:-)
Had something very similar when I bought my first digital camera in 2001, a Minolta, which I acquired for £199.99 after much research on the Internet (the usual price was £350).
It went faulty after about a fortnight and, after contacting Minolta, I was asked to send it back at their expense to Milton Keynes. After examination, I was advised that it could not be repaired in reasonable time and that they were sending me a brand new replacement.
Still have it, although it's not used now, but it delivered quite remarkable photos for a 2Mp camera thanks to a cracking 3x zoom lens. This was before Minolta linked up with Konica....
|
" a blessed lack of need to faff with diopter adjustment "
Surely once you have set the diopter adjustment there's no need to ever change it - unless of course someone else uses the binos.
|
>> Surely once you have set the diopter adjustment there's no need to ever change it
>> - unless of course someone else uses the binos.
Sometimes use then with glasses and sometimes without. Even with glasses it seems to vary (varifocals issue?)
|
Binoculars - Meldrew
