Jump to content


Photo

Is it alot easier to handhold 10x50 than 12x50?

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 DJastronomer

DJastronomer

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 20 May 2013
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 27 July 2014 - 09:25 AM

Hi everyone!

I have three binos and I use all of them for astronomy. These include 7x35, 8x40 and 12x50. I use the smaller ones alot cuz they are very easy to handhold, and have a wide fov. But sometimes i want to go deeper (I live in a white zone) and then I use my 12x50 but these bino's are too shaky and have a rather restricive fov (4,5 degrees)
So I was thinking about getting a 10x50, and my question is: Is it significantly easier to handhold 10x50 than 12x50? :question:

#2 bumm

bumm

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 619
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Iowa

Posted 27 July 2014 - 09:46 AM

I wouldn't say that the difference of 2 power is going to make A LOT of difference. Sounds like you have a nice selection of binoculars that complement each other. Short of using some type of mount, which can negate some of the convenience of binocs, sometimes just sitting in a chair where you can lean back comfortably can help quite a bit.
Marty

#3 223ackley

223ackley

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010
  • Loc: Central Indiana

Posted 27 July 2014 - 10:46 AM

All other things being equal, I think yes but maybe not a huge difference. I can hold my 12X Bushnell H2O Porro with the angled eye cups very steady amazingly enough though.

#4 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11209
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 27 July 2014 - 11:04 AM

Is it significantly easier to handhold 10x50 than 12x50?


I find the shakiness of the image significantly more obtrusive in my 12x60s than in my 10x50s. But that's almost entirely an aesthetic issue. Despite the shakiness, the 12x binoculars still show a lot more than the 10x binoculars.

#5 djeber2

djeber2

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1375
  • Joined: 02 Jul 2004
  • Loc: Cloudy Midwest

Posted 27 July 2014 - 11:50 AM

Despite the shakiness, the 12x binoculars still show a lot more than the 10x binoculars.


This is what I have always believed. I prefer seeing something with a shakier view as opposed to not seeing it due to less magnification.

#6 faackanders2

faackanders2

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2367
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2011

Posted 27 July 2014 - 12:12 PM

Hi everyone!

I have three binos and I use all of them for astronomy. These include 7x35, 8x40 and 12x50. I use the smaller ones alot cuz they are very easy to handhold, and have a wide fov. But sometimes i want to go deeper (I live in a white zone) and then I use my 12x50 but these bino's are too shaky and have a rather restricive fov (4,5 degrees)
So I was thinking about getting a 10x50, and my question is: Is it significantly easier to handhold 10x50 than 12x50? :question:


Get a garret pistol grip monopod for your 12x50, one of my best buys. Views are geat at 12x when they aren'y shakey; and if you get extra pads you can do quick switches to help stabilize your lower power binos also.

#7 kkokkolis

kkokkolis

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2153
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Piraeus, Greece

Posted 27 July 2014 - 01:06 PM

Have you thought about the Canon IS 10x30 or above?
I missed an opportunity (twice) to get them for 200€ because I considered them small and got the Zeiss Terra ED 8X42 instead but even 8x is shakier than my 18x50 IS (and they can't be mounted conventionally).
10x50 are shaky, yes. Perhaps, if you are happy with them 12x50, you could spend your money on a nice mounting solution, although for me the true charm of binoculars is the handheld function.

#8 DJastronomer

DJastronomer

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 20 May 2013
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 27 July 2014 - 01:36 PM

Thanx for your replies everyone.
I have a tripod that I sometimes use, but just like kkokkolis I think that the true charm of binoculars is being able to handhold it (don't really like fiddling with tripod and L-adapter).
My 12x50 is not THAT shaky, but still shaky enough to suck the fun out of it for me.

But you talked me out of getting 10x50. Maybe a monopod-solution is the best one for me. Seems more stress-free than a tripod.

As for the Canon-IS, I'm actually throwing glances at them, but they are not within my price-range at the moment.

#9 darknesss

darknesss

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2013

Posted 27 July 2014 - 01:55 PM

Attach long tubes to the objectives to reduce the angle of your hands' movement.

#10 DJastronomer

DJastronomer

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 20 May 2013
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 27 July 2014 - 03:25 PM

Attach long tubes to the objectives to reduce the angle of your hands' movement.


You mean like a dewshield?

#11 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11209
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 27 July 2014 - 04:10 PM

I think that the true charm of binoculars is being able to handhold it ...

Maybe a monopod-solution is the best one for me. Seems more stress-free than a tripod.


Anything a monopod can do, a tripod can do too, but not vice versa. I basically agree with you with respect to tripod-mounting, but when I do it, my favorite position is sitting in a chair with the tripod tilted back on two legs.

As for the Canon-IS, I'm actually throwing glances at them, but they are not within my price-range at the moment.


Understood. But price aside, they're clearly the answer to your problem.

#12 KeithC

KeithC

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 191
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2006
  • Loc: Atlanta GA

Posted 27 July 2014 - 05:28 PM

I think that the true charm of binoculars is being able to handhold it ...

Maybe a monopod-solution is the best one for me. Seems more stress-free than a tripod.


Anything a monopod can do, a tripod can do too, but not vice versa. I basically agree with you with respect to tripod-mounting, but when I do it, my favorite position is sitting in a chair with the tripod tilted back on two legs.

As for the Canon-IS, I'm actually throwing glances at them, but they are not within my price-range at the moment.


Understood. But price aside, they're clearly the answer to your problem.


So would a bipod be a better solution since your tilting the tripod up onto two legs anyway? I was looking at a pair of shooting sticks and wondered it they would work better than my monopod.

#13 DJastronomer

DJastronomer

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 67
  • Joined: 20 May 2013
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 27 July 2014 - 08:18 PM

Understood. But price aside, they're clearly the answer to your problem. [/quote]

The smallest IS model that is recommended for astronomy is 10x30 and it usually costs around 500 USD. that is as much as my main telescope (127 mm mak on EQ3) or as much as two of my secondary scopes combined (Shorttube 102 and 90mm mak)
I'm just not sure if I'm willing to spend that amount of money on a 30mm bino, even if it has IS-function and great optics. However if I could get them for 200-300 USD ( or if I would have lived in a region with 300+ clear nights per year), maybe I would have thought differently.

Thnx again for your replies everyone!

#14 darknesss

darknesss

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2013

Posted 27 July 2014 - 08:25 PM

Attach long tubes to the objectives to reduce the angle of your hands' movement.


You mean like a dewshield?

Sort of... they have to be sturdy.

#15 jimb1001

jimb1001

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 462
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Florida

Posted 28 July 2014 - 01:13 AM

[quote name="DJastronomer"]Understood. But price aside, they're clearly the answer to your problem. [/quote]

The smallest IS model that is recommended for astronomy is 10x30 and it usually costs around 500 USD. that is as much as my main telescope (127 mm mak on EQ3) or as much as two of my secondary scopes combined (Shorttube 102 and 90mm mak)
I'm just not sure if I'm willing to spend that amount of money on a 30mm bino, even if it has IS-function and great optics. However if I could get them for 200-300 USD ( or if I would have lived in a region with 300+ clear nights per year), maybe I would have thought differently.

Thnx again for your replies everyone! [/quote]

If you're looking at IS bins as a few nights a year device you're right, they wouldn't be worth it for you.

But if you consider them as a 1-15 year investment that you can use in the daytime for birdwatching, sporting events, etc. they can make more sense.

The biggest drawback I find with my IS bins for astronomy is that, even with IS and 14x there's not that much to "study", as you would with a telescope.

They work great for the moon but Saturn looks like a slightly elongated disk. Jupiter, a bright disk, Mars, a bright orange dot.

Yes, sweeping the Milky Way is interesting, for a while. Things like the Pleiades are good for bins, for a few minutes.

But they are limited for astronomy, as all bins are. I do use all my bins quite a bit during the day and that helps justify the cost.

#16 pierce

pierce

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 34
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 04 August 2014 - 01:11 PM

re: lying on back with tripod...

 

http://www.garyseronik.com/?q=node/204

 

I adapted this concept with my 10x50s with a few minor changes.  I installed the tripod bracket on the binocs upside down, so the binocs are UNDER the monopod crossbeam..  I used a 2.5 lb dumbell weight instead of the jar-of-pennies.  I used a manfrotto superclamp instead of building my own.   I used a manfrotto 496rc2 ballhead on the end of the monopod, and a 804rc2 3-way head on the tripod (I already had ALL this stuff in my photography kit).   the friction can be adjusted so things move smoothly and stay where you leave them.

 

IMG_0036-XL.jpg

(but, thats before I inverted the binoc bracket)

 

so the drill is, aim chair at what you want to look at, place tripod+binoc assembly next to chair, sit, ENJOY!


Edited by pierce, 04 August 2014 - 01:12 PM.


#17 daniel_h

daniel_h

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Joined: 08 Mar 2008
  • Loc: VIC, Australia

Posted 04 August 2014 - 05:37 PM

I don't stop seeing shake until I get below 10x power, usually 8-9x, so I don't think the 10x power will be that much difference for you (though the shake I exp. with 12x is definitely more than 10x power)

the monopod will be good - I have a benro with manfrotto pistol grip, works well



#18 JustaBoy

JustaBoy

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4356
  • Joined: 19 Jun 2012

Posted 04 August 2014 - 07:37 PM

The Shake is of course always there. - You can hold 16x as steady as you can 6x.

 

The higher mags just make the amplitude of the shakes look larger and so more noticeable.

 

But, you knew that...:-)

 

 

Thanks,


Edited by JustaBoy, 04 August 2014 - 07:38 PM.


#19 KeithC

KeithC

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 191
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2006
  • Loc: Atlanta GA

Posted 04 August 2014 - 10:56 PM

re: lying on back with tripod...

 

http://www.garyseronik.com/?q=node/204

 

I adapted this concept with my 10x50s with a few minor changes.  I installed the tripod bracket on the binocs upside down, so the binocs are UNDER the monopod crossbeam..  I used a 2.5 lb dumbell weight instead of the jar-of-pennies.  I used a manfrotto superclamp instead of building my own.   I used a manfrotto 496rc2 ballhead on the end of the monopod, and a 804rc2 3-way head on the tripod (I already had ALL this stuff in my photography kit).   the friction can be adjusted so things move smoothly and stay where you leave them.

 

IMG_0036-XL.jpg

(but, thats before I inverted the binoc bracket)

 

so the drill is, aim chair at what you want to look at, place tripod+binoc assembly next to chair, sit, ENJOY!

Pierce, how much of a breeze can that rig handle without tremor?

 

Regards

 

Keith



#20 John F

John F

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 628
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2004
  • Loc: Washington State

Posted 06 August 2014 - 12:29 AM

I have owned 4 different 12 x 50s at various times between the years of 1992 and 2013.  From that experience I think there is a significant difference (for the worse) between a 12x50 and a 10x50 and I would not get another 12x50 unless I primarily planned to use with a mount.  However, in my case, that means I won't be getting another 12x50 period because I already have a superb 15x60 which I use with a mount and U'd much rather have that (for mounted use) than a 12x50. 

 

In terms of value for the cost the Fujinon 10x50 FMT-SX is probably the best option out there.  In terms of nice weight, excellent ergonomics, and optical performance as good or better than any other 10x50, the Swarovski EL is probably the best one if cost of not a prohibiting factor (and especially if you primarily plan to hand hold them for both astronomical and terrestrial use).

 

John Finnan



#21 penguinx64

penguinx64

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1435
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2013
  • Loc: Holland

Posted 06 August 2014 - 05:54 AM

I tried both side by side looking at Jupiter.  10x50s were difficult to hold steady, but 12x50s were nearly impossible. As for magnification, I could not see the Galilean moons with 10x50s but I could see them as itsy bitsy teeny weenie little dots with 12x50s.  That's about the only magnification difference I found.  Everything else looked about the same, except for the extra shakes.  For me, the extra magnification just wasn't worth the hassle, at least for astronomy anyway.



#22 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8773
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 06 August 2014 - 06:36 AM

Twenty replies into this thread, I have to wonder to what extent the findings are dependent on the individual binoculars tested. I believe that increased mass and size are beneficial to hand-holding binoculars. Most 10x50 and 12x50 are however made to be relatively small and light which is counterproductive. Attaching something to the instrument would help. A 12x60 may also be easier to hand hold than a 12x50.



#23 Guilherme Lessa

Guilherme Lessa

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 178
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Brazil

Posted 06 August 2014 - 07:50 AM

Twenty replies into this thread, I have to wonder to what extent the findings are dependent on the individual binoculars tested. I believe that increased mass and size are beneficial to hand-holding binoculars. Most 10x50 and 12x50 are however made to be relatively small and light which is counterproductive. Attaching something to the instrument would help. A 12x60 may also be easier to hand hold than a 12x50.

 

That's another point in favor of the Fujinon FMT-SX, which is quite heavy and bulky. But all in all it seems like it's a preference/ability issue. Some people are ok with the shakes, others not so much. Some people have strong arms and hands, others are just plain weak like me... I've seen people saying it is a matter of practice, and will be able to report no this some years from now.


Edited by Guilherme Lessa, 06 August 2014 - 07:53 AM.


#24 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11209
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 06 August 2014 - 09:16 AM

Twenty replies into this thread, I have to wonder to what extent the findings are dependent on the individual binoculars tested. I believe that increased mass and size are beneficial to hand-holding binoculars.

Many people feel that way. Probably even more feel exactly the opposite. On the whole, I prefer lighter and smaller, but what matters even more is how the particular model fits in my hands.

 

Binoculars are very individual things; one person's experience definitely doesn't apply to another.



#25 Lou3

Lou3

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 19 Jul 2012
  • Loc: PA, USA

Posted 06 August 2014 - 12:19 PM

The smallest IS model that is recommended for astronomy is 10x30 and it usually costs around 500 USD. that is as much as my main telescope (127 mm mak on EQ3) or as much as two of my secondary scopes combined (Shorttube 102 and 90mm mak)
I'm just not sure if I'm willing to spend that amount of money on a 30mm bino, even if it has IS-function and great optics. However if I could get them for 200-300 USD ( or if I would have lived in a region with 300+ clear nights per year), maybe I would have thought differently.

 

For many of us, objective size doesn't correlate to the instrument's significance in our overall observing experience.  If you spend a lot of your observing time with binoculars, it may worth it to spend more so you can have the observing experience you want.  Of course, you can always hold out for a good deal.


Edited by Lou3, 06 August 2014 - 11:25 PM.







Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics