xmeecosmic
member
Reged: 10/04/09
Posts: 13
|
|
I am looking for a 10x50 Porro with as large an FOV as possible, good resolution, good mechanics,and that is good in low light situations.
Since most of the 10x50's have an FOV of less than 300 feet,
I have narrowed my prospective list to three-
1 Bushnell Legend
2.Orion UltraView
3.Nikon Action Extreme
Any comments or advice about these three or others would be great
|
Mark9473
Post Laureate
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 3217
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
Your nr. 3 seems to be well regarded on this forum. There's a lot of information in the "mini-reviews" sticky thread in this forum.
--------------------
Mark
Leica 8x20; Vixen 8x42; Swift 8.5x44, 10x50 and 20x80; TS 7x50; Orion 15x63; Docter 15x60
WO Megrez II 80 FD + Baader 90° T2 Amici
|
Rich V.
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 1395
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada, USA
|
|
Take a look here:
10x50 binoculars
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/75/150x100 Saturn III, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 14732
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
might be better if you take a look here instead
http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1770
click on download this document for formatting
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
xmeecosmic
member
Reged: 10/04/09
Posts: 13
|
|
Thanks Rich Mark, and edz for the links. I have read and reread them and understand that the tests placed the Nikon AE a step ahead of the Pentax and the Bushnell and light years beyond the UltraView. If only the Pentax had a wider FOV, the decision would already have been made but its FOV of 261 feet is not wide enough for my intended usages/viewing pleasure no matter how consistently sharp to the edge it is.
If any of you have used any of these binoculars perhaps you could relate your experience with them optically and mechanically. I live out of the states and have no opportunity to compare and contrast them.
|
Rich V.
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 1395
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada, USA
|
|
I have the Pentax PCF-V 10x50, a pre- WP model from at least 5-6 years ago. It provides the same sharp 5° FOV as the newer WP II version. Personally, I don't like the relatively narrow 50° apparent field of view; I find it restrictive and tunnel- like. Many others, though, don't seem to mind. It's a personal thing so YMMV.
I've only used the AE 8x40 but it's wider AFOV is much more appealing to me even if the extra FOV provided isn't as sharp as the center.
See if you can try before you buy; the Pentax and Nikon are fairly easy to find at retailers. Your opinion is the only one that really matters!
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/75/150x100 Saturn III, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
harbinjer
super member
Reged: 12/17/08
Posts: 127
Loc: Southeastern Minnesota
|
|
Rich, how much do you use your 10x50 Pentax's, versus your other smaller binoculars? Do you like the 10x43's better? Do you use them mostly handheld?
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 14732
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
I am looking for a 10x50 Porro with as large an FOV as possible, good resolution, good mechanics,and that is good in low light situations.
Since most of the 10x50's have an FOV of less than 300 feet,
I have narrowed my prospective list to three-
1 Bushnell Legend
2.Orion UltraView
3.Nikon Action Extreme
Actually, FEW of the 10x50s have a Tfov less than 300 feet.
Of all those youve mentioned only the Pentax PCF WP 10x50 and Leupold WRMesa10x50 have Tfov less than 300ft. Most of them are around 320 feet (6.1°), and these three, Oberwerk 10x50, Bushnell Legend 10x50 and Nikon Action VII 10x50 all have between 335' and 340'. FWIW, not in your price range, but AFAIK, the premium Fujinon FMT-SX 10x50 is the only one that achieves 350 feet.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
Edited by EdZ (10/08/09 11:29 AM)
|
Rich V.
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 1395
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada, USA
|
|
I don't use the Pentax 10x50s much any more. I'm a fan of wide field binoculars so for day or night I prefer to use either my 10x35s or 10x43s hand held. Both work well on my monopod when I want to study something a bit more carefully. Even at 10x the monopod helps a lot!
The 10x35s show objects as faint as M1 or M78 from my yard so they're usually around my neck as a "finder" when I'm using bigger bins. Their 7+° FOV is a big plus. They're really light, too.
Really, when I get out to look at the night sky, I'd rather bring out the 16x70s and a mount over anything that's 10x. They only have 1° less FOV than the Pentax 10x50s and the views are MUCH better.
The 10x50s usually stay in the car now in case I run into something interesting. For daytime use, I prefer the 10x35 even over the 10x43, no contest, unless it's raining! 
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/75/150x100 Saturn III, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
xmeecosmic
member
Reged: 10/04/09
Posts: 13
|
|
Thanks edj for calling that to my attention. I guess hyperbolically I was just frustrated that the two models that I was most interested in have narrow FOV's.
Recently, I had read in another forum that you had stated that one of the weak points of the Bushnell Legend 10x50 was that it was "heavy." I believe that is no longer the case as the present model has a magnesium chassis and the specs say it weighs 28 ounces.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 14732
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
call me a skeptic, but could it be they have carried over some specs from the Ultra HD models. A magnesium body binocular for $129 !!! I'd expect to see selling price double that.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Djarum
sage
Reged: 03/12/09
Posts: 219
|
|
I have the bushnell legend. Just got it a few months back. They are over 2lbs. I don't mind the weight. I compared these to the Nikon AE and Leopold Mesa 10x50 in a store. I liked the Legends the best, but its all subjective.
Dj
--------------------
Celestron Astromaster 130eq with a 60mm finderscope
Bushnell Legend 10x50
TMB planetary 5mm EP
Enhanced Wide Angle 6mm EP
Plossl 10mm EP
Plossl 32mm EP
Ultima 2x barlow
Baader M&SG and UHC filters.
|
Djarum
sage
Reged: 03/12/09
Posts: 219
|
|
Just checked the bushnell website. The roof legends are only 28 oz and state magnesium alloy, not the porro prism. Different Binocs.
Dj
--------------------
Celestron Astromaster 130eq with a 60mm finderscope
Bushnell Legend 10x50
TMB planetary 5mm EP
Enhanced Wide Angle 6mm EP
Plossl 10mm EP
Plossl 32mm EP
Ultima 2x barlow
Baader M&SG and UHC filters.
|
xmeecosmic
member
Reged: 10/04/09
Posts: 13
|
|
Hi. I just looked at the Bushnell site and it says 36 ounces for the Porro. However, I got my information from the OpticsPlanet, Optics4 Birding, and Eagle Optics site (many others, too) and for the Porros the specs say 28 ounces.Also on a video found at Encyclopedia.com merchandising the Legend 10x50 PORRO it lists the weight as 28 ounces. I forget where I saw about the magnesium chassis but that also had clearly stated Porro not roof prism-so much then for believing all that is said on the Optic Distributors spec sheets. They seem to have gotten that information from the same source.
|
xmeecosmic
member
Reged: 10/04/09
Posts: 13
|
|
DJ,
Would you please share as to why you prefer the Legends over the others? I realize that it is subjective but it could be helpful, nonetheless.
Weight is not an issue for me either, its just that I had seen the PORRO specs for the 10x50 all over the place (except I did not go to the Bushnell website) say 28 ounces.
|
Francisco S.
member
Reged: 01/08/09
Posts: 34
Loc: Bay Area, CA
|
|
Rich,
Do you find that 10x43 give you enough light viewing the night sky?
I have 8x40 Nikon Action, and thinking of upgrading, but not sure whether to get 10x50 or 10x42.
--------------------
Francisco
Megrez 88FD
Vixen LV 15mm, NLV 5mm, Parks G.S. 2x Barlow
Oberwerk/DSV-1
|
Man in a Tub
Not Retired!, But a little cranky!!!
Reged: 10/28/08
Posts: 2059
Loc: San Francisco, CA
|
|
Why not the Nikon 12x50 Action EX? I know 12x is at the limits of handholding. But I really like mine. Mounted or handheld. I did some practice with my new Garrett monopod two nights ago. It was great before the hardly waning Moon got too high.
Clear skies! Some have 'em, some don't!
--------------------
Todd
Brunton Eterna 15x51 ° Garrett Optical Signature Series 15x70
Nikon Action EX 12x50 ° Oberwerk 15x60 and 20x80 Standard
Orion Paragon Plus Mount and Paragon XHD Tripod
Garrett Optical Series 2000 Grip-Action Monopod
|
Francisco S.
member
Reged: 01/08/09
Posts: 34
Loc: Bay Area, CA
|
|
I am leaning toward the Nikon Action EX ATB porro, not sure about the size though. I know that during the day I won't need large pupil size, so even 3mm is OK, but at night my eyes could be 4mm or 5mm. So 10x42 or 10x50 would be plenty, for the 12x and up, I will need to use a *pod, that would make binos less portable.
--------------------
Francisco
Megrez 88FD
Vixen LV 15mm, NLV 5mm, Parks G.S. 2x Barlow
Oberwerk/DSV-1
|
Rich V.
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 1395
Loc: Carson Valley, Nevada, USA
|
|
Francisco, for astro use, going up from 8x to 10x will make a bigger difference than your choice of 42mm or 50mm objectives. The 10x50 will go deeper but it won't be all that noticeable. I actually prefer my wide field 10x35 or my 10x43 over the 10x50 most of the time, FWIW.
If you're looking for a light, compact all-around binocular a 10x42 roof can be a good choice. Comparing size side-by-side, a 10x50 Porro can look huge in comparison. For daytime use the roof's small size is really handy, IMO.
If astro use is your only concern, the 10x50 Action Extreme gives a lot of "bang for the buck" if you don't care about the compact form factor of a roof bin. The Porro prism binocular will more likely have a better illuminated image than the roof bin also, due to their design differences.
Also, a Porro prism binocular will usually provide a given level of performance for a lower price than a roof bin so they may be considered a better value. I'm actually a big fan of Porros (my sig line proves it)!
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/75/150x100 Saturn III, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 E2, 7x35 E, 8x30 E2, 7x26 Custom, 8x23AS Diplomat, 8x23 Travelite
Scopes:
C9.25, 6" f8 reflector, SV80S
|
Djarum
sage
Reged: 03/12/09
Posts: 219
|
|
Quote:
DJ,
Would you please share as to why you prefer the Legends over the others? I realize that it is subjective but it could be helpful, nonetheless.
Weight is not an issue for me either, its just that I had seen the PORRO specs for the 10x50 all over the place (except I did not go to the Bushnell website) say 28 ounces.
When compared to the Nikon AE, they seemed, to me, to have a slightly larger usable FOV. The FOV was about the same. The Nikon AE were sharper dead in the middle, but the falloff to me, seemed sharper from the center than the Bushnells. The Mesa's just didn't have the expansive view of either. They were pretty sharp and I did like the focus lock of the Mesa's though. I think it really depends on the type of observing one wants to do. I think if critical observing is important, the Pentax or Leupolds would be the better choice. If just wanting to enjoy expansive views of the sky, the Nikon AE or Busnells would be the better choice I think. Overall, I ended up with the Bushnells. And, they are heavy, especially compared with some of the light weight designs from GO or Oberwerk. They seemed about the same weight as the Nikons.
Dj
--------------------
Celestron Astromaster 130eq with a 60mm finderscope
Bushnell Legend 10x50
TMB planetary 5mm EP
Enhanced Wide Angle 6mm EP
Plossl 10mm EP
Plossl 32mm EP
Ultima 2x barlow
Baader M&SG and UHC filters.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 