Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Aaron
sage
Reged: 08/28/06
Posts: 234
Loc: Eugene OR
|
|
I think I'm ready to get my first pair of binoculars. I'll spend up to $200+, and a good deal is always nice too.
I've got a 12" f5 with a 9x50 RACI finder and an ETX70 w/ RDF. Somewhere along the way, someone recommended 9x50 binoculars (or something close) to match my finder (for star hopping). I've used various types of binoculars, including large mounted ones, and think at the moment I'm looking for a hand-held pair (I have no money or room for a bino mount). I actually used some image-stabilized ones last night (nice - but not a whole lot of improvement over my own steadied hand).
I want the binoculars for a few purposes: mainly, to help star hopping and for general wide-field viewing. I'd also like them to take when I travel for quick looks at super-dark-sky I might be passing through. I've been looking on Astromart some, but don't really know what I'm looking for aside from '9x50'
I figure you experts will do better than hours of my own research on the internet (and it'll take less time  Actually, CNers have never steered me wrong before...
Thanks,
Aaron
--------------------
12" Lightbridge
Telrad, StellarVue F50
10.5mm XL, 17mm Stratus, 35mm Stratus
TV 2x Big Barlow
Lumicon UHC
My Sketches and Photos
Eugene OR
Eagle's Rest OR
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Hi Aaron,
I'd jump right into a 10x50. The difference from you finder is negligable. Get a new one. There so many different 10x50s you could get, it's boggling. Really, most of them in that price range are pretty good.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Jay_Bird
professor emeritus
Reged: 01/04/06
Posts: 680
Loc: Nevada 36N 115W
|
|
Hi Aaron
Welcome to bino forum.
Until this thread fills up, take a look at the pinned thread that's at the very top of bino forum for some initial advice, and try the 'best of bino forum' and mini-review links.
9x50 is an uncommon bino size. You may want to look at 10x50 or a wider field pair of 8x40. 7x50 could also be nice in dark skies, if you make full use of the 7mm exit pupil.
All of these are likely to have 6 to 7 or 8 degree true field of view, likely a bit wider than your 9x50 finder, and I think that's good for your intended pathfinding use.
Your $200 budget puts a number of respectable porro binocular choices into consideration. Adding another $50-$100 will bring more mini-review examples into that fold.
Best, Jay
--------------------
'these things stand like stone - kindness in another's troubles, courage in your own' Gordon
|
edwincjones
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/10/04
Posts: 4423
|
|
I would suggest going to a local binocular/sporting goods store and trying the binoculars in person checking confort in holding, optics, quality of build. What works for one does not work for all. Pick out your favorites, the check with us/other binocular sites (birdforum.com) to confirm your opinions.
edj
edj
--------------------
n w arkansas
Binocular, Solar, General Amateur Astronomy
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10146
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Aaron ,
If yourself and other members here don't mind me making what could prove to be an important point , just because you are used to enjoying 9 x 50 views through a mounted finder scope , do NOT automatically presume that , without practice , you will be able to hold a 10x binocular as steady as you will need to , in order to provide you with views comparable to what you are used to seeing through the finder scope .
Also consider that " finders " are monoscopic instruments , uncluttered and optically unhindered by prisms , which is a GOOD thing -- but countering that , forfeit in the region of 40% in perceived contrast , and of course , do not provide naturally orientated images , as binoculars do .
These are things which I can only image could take some getting used to .
You have made no mention of your pupil dilation or eye relief requirement ( in other words , do you need to wear glasses when using binoculars ? ) , but your mention of " star hopping " , " general wide - field viewing " and " super dark sky sites " , combined with my own personal experience is nudging my hunch towards wishing and hoping that you could find a 8 x 50 binocular with a 8 degree TFOV .
Because I doubt if you will , I am going to suggest you give at least as much serious consideration to a 8 x 42 as you do to a 10 x 50 .
Regards and all the best of luck with this venture !
Kenny
--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton
Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera
|
rickertk
sage
Reged: 06/14/07
Posts: 221
Loc: Outer Philadelphia suburbs
|
|
Actually, since it's a RACI (Right angle correct image) finder, his finder is a lot more like one half of a binocular than anything else. If nothing else, it means that binocular views should be fairly similar to the finder views and match star charts well (and not inverted/etc).
Keith
--------------------
Oberwerk 11x56
Orion 8XTi
|
PhilH
sage
Reged: 01/27/05
Posts: 233
Loc: Long Island, NY
|
|
Aaron,
Just to throw in some additional comments to the good advice you've already received, here are a few things to keep in mind while window shopping:
1. Make sure the binoculars have fully multicoated optics. At this price, they probably do, but just make sure.
2. Also, be sure the binoculars have BaK-4 prisms for total internal reflection. Again, that's expected at that price.
3. If you'll be hand-supporting them, stick with 10x50s, but even still, make sure they have a tripod socket built into the central hinge. One day, you may decide you prefer the steadiness of an external support.
4. Check eye relief, especially if you must wear glasses. Some may disagree, but I'd say that 15 mm is the minimum, while 20 mm is even better.
Good luck,
Phil
--------------------
Phil Harrington
"Binocular Universe" Columnist, Astronomy magazine
Author: Star Ware || Star Watch || Touring the Universe through Binoculars || et al...
http://www.philharrington.net
http://www.observingsites.com
"Two eyes are better than one!"
|
Tero
member
Reged: 08/21/07
Posts: 46
|
|
Is a 10x50 worth all the weight etc compared to a 10x40, in astronomy? Not that there are that many 10x40 porros worth looking at.
--------------------
birder
|
Aaron
sage
Reged: 08/28/06
Posts: 234
Loc: Eugene OR
|
|
Thanks all for the excellent advice. Some new points were brought up I hadn't fully considered.
Let me clarify some: I was recommended to 'get something similar to my finder' for best results star hopping. This was partly in response to my bad light pollution and difficulty star hopping. I am not plagued with as much light pollution now, although I still see the advantage of pre-scouting a star hop with hand held binoculars. I am also more advanced in my skills, and (now that I think about it), I can more easily adjust from bino-view to finder-view if they vary some, so 'close to 9x50' may not be so important.
I do wear slight prescription glasses, although I don't wear them when observing (yet). This does limit my naked eye vision, but I can still star hop with a telrad.
I also have a pretty steady hand - extra magnification (10x50) is fine. I wasn't avoiding it intentionally - more that I had a "9"x50 finder (and didn't realize this was an uncommon binocular size).
One of the main reasons I want binos, is to grasp more light than my naked eyes. This leans me more towards 50mm than 42mm. It is a noticeable difference in brightness? I know the differences in magnification will affect the view too.
Aaron
--------------------
12" Lightbridge
Telrad, StellarVue F50
10.5mm XL, 17mm Stratus, 35mm Stratus
TV 2x Big Barlow
Lumicon UHC
My Sketches and Photos
Eugene OR
Eagle's Rest OR
|
hallelujah
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/14/06
Posts: 1660
Loc: Colorado Rocky Mt. High
|
|
Tero,
For some of us a little extra weight is not a bad thing. Myself, I notice that the heavier porro prism binoculars are steadier for handholding, and that is important when scanning the heavens. It is also beneficial for bird watching.
Also, the additional light gathering of a 50mm is advantageous, especially under light polluted skies. Actually, as you increase aperture it helps to pull out fainter stars, etc.
Nighttime viewing is alot different than daytime terrestrial.
There are alot of good 10x42 binoculars, if you are willing to pay the price. I don't know of any good quality 10x40 porro prism binoculars.
--------------------
Pentax 12x50mm PCF WP II FMC/WP/FP
Pentax 16x60mm PCF WP FMC/WP/FP
Pentax 20x60mm PCF WP II FMC/WP/FP
Orion 12x63mm Mini Giant FMC/JAPAN
Orion 15x70mm Little Giant II FMC/JAPAN
Orion 16x80mm Giant FMC/JAPAN
Orion 20x70mm Little Giant II FMC/JAPAN
Orion 30x80mm MEGAView FMC/JAPAN
Barska 30x80mm X-Trail LW FC
Burgess Optical Series II 20x90mm FMC/WP/FP
Handel's Messiah**Hallelujah! For the LORD God Omnipotent Reigneth
|
lwd
member
Reged: 06/07/07
Posts: 55
Loc: 39N, 76W
|
|
Aaron,
My two cents: I have 10 X 50 and 15 X 70s. I handhold the 10 X 50 and they are great for sweeping the skys and finding stuff. I then use the 15 X 70s (on a camera mount) for closer looks.
If I had it to do over again, I would opt for the 9 X 63 size for my handheld model (or 9 X 60, depending on brand). As others will tell you, the key factor in handholding tends to be magnification, rather than raw size. Going down one magnification while going up slightly in aperture, will allow you to see a little more (find dimmer objects) while making the handholding slightly easier.
Garrett Optical makes a 9 X 60 for $100; Orion makes a 9 X 63 for $200. Can't recommend any specific brand as I have no experience with them. But if you look around, you will find a good selection of choices in this size range.
lwd
|
Aaron
sage
Reged: 08/28/06
Posts: 234
Loc: Eugene OR
|
|
I didn't realize there were 9x60 models - but that sounds like what I'm looking for: 'star glasses' more than magnification.
I look into models in that size-range too!
--------------------
12" Lightbridge
Telrad, StellarVue F50
10.5mm XL, 17mm Stratus, 35mm Stratus
TV 2x Big Barlow
Lumicon UHC
My Sketches and Photos
Eugene OR
Eagle's Rest OR
|
camvan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/02/05
Posts: 2086
Loc: British Columbia
|
|
I would look at the options that come from Garrett Optical (www.garrettoptical.com) and Oberwerk (bigbinoculars.com). I believe Oberwerk carries something like the 9x60's, but I am unsure about Garrett Optical.
I refer you to them because the binoculars come with awesome warranty and each pair is checked by an experienced optician, whereas most others are not (ie. Orion, other big labels). yes it's worth spending the few extra $ for that quality assurance 
--------------------
Cameron
"Aperture can only be replaced by even more aperture. Dark transparent skies cannot be replaced by anything else." - Stathis Kafalis
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Rarely would I recommend a 9x63 (or any other 7mm exit pupil binocular) unless I knew two things to be true about the user.
1st, that he has eye pupils that dilate to 7mm. Otherwise the extra aperture is wasted. Not everyone has eye pupils that dilate to 7mm. If yours are only 6mm, then you would never get to use the full aperture, you would be using a 9x54. In that case, you'd have been better of with the 10x50.
2nd, that he would always be viewing from a dark site. Sure a 7mm binocular makes a brighter image, but that includes the brightness of the sky background and when background is bright, you may be pretty unhappy with a very bright 7mm exit pupil.
Binoculars with 7mm exit pupils are special animals. These would never be my recommendation as a first binocular.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
PhilH
sage
Reged: 01/27/05
Posts: 233
Loc: Long Island, NY
|
|
I agree with Ed that 9x63s are *not* the way to go for a first (and only) binocular. Aaron shows his location to be Eugene, OR, which I'm sure has more than its fair share of light pollution. As a result, his pupils will never dilate to 7 mm. Since 9x63s have a 7 mm exit pupil, the net result will be a reduction in image contrast.
Instead, follow the advice of 10x50s, with their 5-mm exit pupils.
FWIW,
Phil
--------------------
Phil Harrington
"Binocular Universe" Columnist, Astronomy magazine
Author: Star Ware || Star Watch || Touring the Universe through Binoculars || et al...
http://www.philharrington.net
http://www.observingsites.com
"Two eyes are better than one!"
Edited by PhilH (08/24/07 06:43 AM)
|
JoeF
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 03/18/05
Posts: 1112
Loc: 'Sunny Loftus' - N E England
|
|
I tend to think that your first pair of binos should be more general purpose than astro specific. Theres just so much fun to be had from a decent pair! For me that sets the limit at 10x50 as anything bigger or higher powered really isn't all that steady to hold. Even 10x50's are bad enough at times, so get a pair that can be mounted, even a humble monopod can make a real difference.
I wouldn't worry about duplicating youre finderscope view exactly because of the different way you will use the binos compared to the finder. The finder is mounted and therefore you can take your time scrutinising a small section of the sky whereas with handheld binos you spend far more time just scanning around.
Your big decision is whether roof or porro prism. I prefer the roof design as I find it easier to point and equally, identify the bit of sky where I'm looking. However this is probably just a personal thing and my best advice would be to try as many types as you can before you buy.
Last point, binos are as bad as scopes, get one pair and I promise you you'll want another pair soon enough.
Joe
--------------------
Orion Optics 200mm f6 & Accufocus on GP/E Mount
Opticron BGA 10x50 Binos
NELM 5.2 rural skies
Under tripod canine footwarmer
|
BobinKy
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 04/27/07
Posts: 948
Loc: Country road
|
|
Quote:
Aaron wrote:
I think I'm ready to get my first pair of binoculars. I'll spend up to $200+. . . at the moment I'm looking for a hand-held pair . . . I want the binoculars for a few purposes: mainly, to help star hopping and for general wide-field viewing. I'd also like them to take when I travel for quick looks at super-dark-sky I might be passing through.
Based on the above preferences you described in your first post, here are my recommendations.
Under $200
Garrett Optical Classic PCF-WP CF in the 8x45 size $99.95.
Garrett Optical Classic PCF-WP CF in the 7x50 or 10x50 sizes $119.95.
Oberwerk Mariner CF in the 7x50 $149.95 or 8x40 $129.95 sizes.
$200-$300
Garrett Optical Signature HD-WP IF in the 7x50 or 10x50 sizes $249.95.
Oberwerk Ultra IF in the 10x50 size $269.95.
Orion Savannah CF in the 8x42 $239.95 or 10x50 $259.95 sizes.
Orion Resolux IF in the 7x50 or 10x50 sizes $279.95.
Personal factors
Some factors for you to consider are: Exit pupil size you require. The 7x50s have 7mm, which some people think is too large and prefer the 5mm in the 8x42s and 10x50s.
Do you want center focus (CF) or individual eye cup focus (IF). The IF is great if all you are going to do is night sky observing because once you focus them you never have to focus them again, unless someone changes the focus. However, if you plan to view during the day you may find the CF to be more flexible.
The weight of the binoculars is another factor with some. The heaviest pair I own for hand held use is 24 oz.--and I do not want to hand hold anything much heavier. Many people find they can hold 3-5 pounds with no problem.
The above models are porro prisms. If you find you will be doing more daytime nature viewing than night sky viewing, you may want to consider switching to roof prisms. The roofs are lighter and more compact--a completely different type of instrument.
And if you spend more, then, of course, your options increase! My personal preference of the above porro models are the Garrett Optical Classic PCF-WP CF 8x45 and the Orion Savannah CF 8x42. The Garrett Classic has nice optics and a wide FOV. On the other hand, the Savannah feels so nice in your hands--the rubber armor has the perfect amount of squish--and the locking eyecups with multiple positions are sweet.
. . .
If you can spend more, my personal preference becomes the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 820ED CF $479.95 weighing in at 24 oz, an amazing porro instrument for nature daytime and night sky viewing. The color vibrancy is excellent.
. . .
I hope this helps.
--------------------
Bob
38° Kentucky, USA
Edited by BobinKy (08/24/07 10:00 AM)
|
PEterW
super member
Reged: 01/02/06
Posts: 142
Loc: SW London, UK
|
|
15x70, whip 10x50 in the daytime and should provide better views than smaller bins at night. They can be handheld and have nice balance in the hand. A tripod would be recommended, but as they are fairly lightweight, a normal cheap camera tripod should be sufficient. Make sure you get a good strong L-bracket, I have a 'robust looking' plastic one and it is too flexible.
That should easily come in under your budget.
Cheers
PEterW
|
Jay_Bird
professor emeritus
Reged: 01/04/06
Posts: 680
Loc: Nevada 36N 115W
|
|
If the Savannah's are twins to Leupold Wind Rivers, then look to Bass Pro Shop's current $199 sale.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12581
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Well, besides the exit pupil issue, which is a big issue, there are other reasons to steer clear of 7x binoculars for astronomy. A 10x50 binocular will see about a half magnitude deeper than a 7x50 binocular, just by nature of the increase in magnification. That's a pretty big jump that'll put a whole different perspective on finding your way around. For that reason alone I'd recommmend against any 7x choices. A 10x50 will also see about a half magnitude deeper than an 8x40.
And once again, I would stress, for a first binocular do not get a binocular that requires a mount. You will sometimes want to mount even a small 10x50, but you do not want to be put in a position where you need to mount a larger binocular to see what you are trying to figure out.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
|
5 registered and 11 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: EdZ
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1564
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 