Banner
journeyman
Reged: 09/29/09
Posts: 9
|
|
I posted this in the beginners forum and was referred here:
I am a beginner and would appreciate advice.
I want to get a reasonably decent pair of binoculars just for looking at the distant hills and surrounds and for watching planes and helicopters that fly over.
I wear glasses all the time and would like to be able to make out as much detail as possible. i don't know my eye pupil data.
I got a cheap pair which are 10x25 compact roof prism and I can see kinda ok with them. What detail should i be able to see on distant hills. What detail should i be able to see on a passing plane
What do you think of http://www.amazon.co.uk/Celestron-71137-UpClose-10X50-Binoculars/dp/B0000CAOGV/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
I looked at http://www.amazon.co.uk/Celestron-71144-UpClose-20X50-Binoculars/dp/B001590KV4/ref=pd_cp_ce_1 which did not seem great to me. Not any better than my own.
But the guy would not let me go to a place where i could observe the distant hills and i could not concentrate with him waiting.
The Bresser 10x25 i have i can twist one of the eye pieces. why one. And for viewing should you close them together until there is only one lens or have 2 seperate views with each eye
Thanks
Edited by Banner (09/30/09 08:41 AM)
|
Tony Flanders
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/18/06
Posts: 3469
Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA
|
|
Quote:
I want to get a reasonably decent pair of binoculars just for looking at the distant hills and surrounds and for watching planes and helicopters that fly over.
I wear glasses all the time and would like to be able to make out as much detail as possible. i don't know my eye pupil data.
I got a cheap pair which are 10x25 compact roof prism and I can see kinda ok with them. What detail should i be able to see on distant hills. What detail should i be able to see on a passing plane?
Most cheap roof-prism binoculars aren't very good. The rule of thumb is that conventional porro-prism binos are a better bet than roof-prisms until you get into the mid to upper price range. And for terrestrial use (as opposed to astronomy), it's also usually recommended to stick to 8X or less unless you have a compelling reason to go higher.
Having said that, unless the binoculars are downright defective, they should still work OK. I gather from your questions that you're not really satisfied. Can you explain why?
It's impossible to answer your questions about "what kind of detail should I see." How far are the hills? How high are the airplanes? How fast are they moving? Can you describe the kind of detail that *you* see? It's not easy to put into words.
In any case, you should see much, much more with any decent binoculars (and even with most low-quality binculars) than with just your unaided eyes.
--------------------
Tony Flanders
First and foremost observing love: naked eye.
Second, binoculars.
Last but not least, telescopes.
And I sometimes dabble with cameras.
|
94bamf
professor emeritus
Reged: 12/15/08
Posts: 722
Loc: Kansas City,Mo
|
|
How much money do you wanna spend? That is the main limiting factor. Without a price guide, you will have people recomending Canon IS binoculars that cost $800+ and somebody else might recomend $64 Celestron Skymasters..
If you are willing and able to spend around $150, then there are many decent choices. Either way I would budget no less than $75 if you can. The Celestron Upclose models would be better than no binoculars, but beyond that I would avoid them..
Ken
--------------------
Telescopes:
Celestron C6 SCT on CG4 mount
Skywatcher 8 inch F/5 Newt on a GEM
Celestron 8 inch Starhopper Dob
Celestron Oynx 80ED
Celestron C130 Mak
Celestron C102HD
Binoculars:
Nikon 7x35 Action
Nikon 7x50 Action
Zen Ray Summit 10x42
Celestron 10x42 Noble
Orion 10x50 Scenix
Celestron 10x50 Noble
Pentax 12x50 PCF WP II
Celestron 15x70 Skymaster
Oberwerk 20x60
Zhumell 20x80
Edited by 94bamf (09/30/09 09:47 AM)
|
94bamf
professor emeritus
Reged: 12/15/08
Posts: 722
Loc: Kansas City,Mo
|
|
BTW.....You can twist one eyepiece to match focus to each individual eye. In other words, you adjust the main focus wheel to make a sharp image in your left eye. Then you adjust the right eyepiece diopter to match focus with your right eye without moving the main focus wheel. It is important to do the left eye first because that side is fixed to only the main focus wheel. Once you get the right diopter matched to your right eye, you no longer need to adjust it again, because now both eyepieces are matched to the difference between your two eyes. Now you adjust the main focus wheel and the binoculars will keep that adjustment/difference and always be focused perfectly for both eyes. If your vision is the same or close in both eyes, you might not need to adjust the right diopter much, but sometimes the binoculars themselves will have a difference for each side. I have pretty equal vision in both eyes, but a few of my binoculars require a fair adjustment of the right diopter to match focus..
I hope this makes sense..
Ken
--------------------
Telescopes:
Celestron C6 SCT on CG4 mount
Skywatcher 8 inch F/5 Newt on a GEM
Celestron 8 inch Starhopper Dob
Celestron Oynx 80ED
Celestron C130 Mak
Celestron C102HD
Binoculars:
Nikon 7x35 Action
Nikon 7x50 Action
Zen Ray Summit 10x42
Celestron 10x42 Noble
Orion 10x50 Scenix
Celestron 10x50 Noble
Pentax 12x50 PCF WP II
Celestron 15x70 Skymaster
Oberwerk 20x60
Zhumell 20x80
|
leo9
super member
Reged: 06/17/08
Posts: 123
Loc: Western Oregon, USA
|
|
Banner, welcome to CN.
We really need a lot more information from you to help with reasonable ideas, but the first thing I noticed is that your favored targets move -
Tracking moving objects with binoculars over 10x will be challenging. Also you should pay attention to field of view, most binoculars will be ok with FOV around 5.0 degrees or greater -- less FOV makes things challenging to follow. Personally I favor the 8x40 category of bino for what your seem to want to do.
Also check out the stickies at the top of this board ... there is a lot of useful information there.
--------------------
Pentax WCP II 8x40 & 20x60
Nikon AE 10x50
Trico SkyWindow
------------------------
"If it's worth doing, it's worth over-doing."
|
Banner
journeyman
Reged: 09/29/09
Posts: 9
|
|
Thanks everyone. First I am not sure what to compare my current one s with as I have no other experience so i may be being unreasonable.
Tony Flanders, the hills are a few miles away I guess. I can see phone masts that are just visible to the naked eye a lot closer but not too much detail. I can pull in a religious cross that is barely visible with the naked eye and see there is some small building in front of it but not what it is. I can see cows not visible to naked eye but not their heads say close. Should i be able to? I am not sure what to expect
Haven't seen any planes yet not sure how high fast they would be
The eye cap, rolled up cos of my need for glasses, keeps turning down on one side of the binocular and that is annoying
94bamf Thanks for the info re the right eyepiece diopter. As regards money I am in Ireland and we have euro. One shop said I would need to go to 300 euro for a decent pair. I looked at the Celestron Up close 20x50 but was not impressed, no better than the ones i have from what i could see but as i said in first post i did not get much chance to look.
So i guess i would go 200 euro anyway and maybe 3 and will go for porro prisms
Leo9 I will check out the stickies.
Thanks
|
hallelujah
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/14/06
Posts: 2157
Loc: Rocky Mt. High Colorado
|
|
Banner,
300 euro sounds like too much to spend, I sent you a couple of Private Messages with internet links for your part of the world.
--------------------
Celestron Traveler 8x25 & B. & H. 8x40 FC JAPAN & Revue 10x50 CF Porro FC JAPAN &
Pentax 12x50 PCF WP II FMC & Pentax 16x60 PCF WP FMC &
Pentax 20x60 PCF WP II FMC & Orion 12x63 Mini Giant FMC JAPAN &
SPECTRUM I 20x65 FC JAPAN &
Orion 15x70 Little Giant II FMC JAPAN & Orion 20x70 Little Giant II FMC JAPAN
Orion 16x80 Giant FMC JAPAN & Orion 30x80 MEGAView FMC JAPAN
Barska 30x80 X-Trail LW FC & Burgess Optical Series II 20x90 FMC
Hallelujah! For the LORD God Omnipotent Reigneth
|
Banner
journeyman
Reged: 09/29/09
Posts: 9
|
|
hallelujah
Ok thanks
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 12911
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Banner ,
While there is no doubt that on very clear days , the special magic of high magnification can certainly provide a special " buzz factor " when viewing long distances , but to put this in perspective ,looking at cows on hills from a few miles away , you are not going to be able to see their heads distinctly even with very expensive spotting scopes of manageable sizes at maximum magnifications of around 60x - 100x .
Longer distance daytime viewing has been one of my favourite pastimes for almost 45 years now , and I came to the conclusion years ago that just one instrument is not going to enable me to see EVERYTHING I like to see .
I like to see the woods AND the trees from as far away as possible , but usually enjoy looking at the woods rather than the trees , if you understand what I'm saying .
Probably the top fifty most memorable scenic views for me have actually been seen by NAKED EYE , and what magnification does is create optical illusions of unreal versions of those magnificant natural views , without taking away the natural beauty of them .
To that end , you may be surprised by the number of occasions any given landscape appears a more satisfying sight when larger areas of it are seen through two eyes at modest magnifications than smaller sections of it through a single eye at much larger magnifications .
And do not underestimate the detrimental effects that heat haze and mist have on longer distance observing , which higher magnification only makes worse .
For now , with a 200 Euro budget , I would settle for the best 8 x 42 or 10 x 50 Porro Prism binoculars you can get .
Make sure you buy from somewhere that will accept a return if you are not satisfied .
At that price level , the usual suspects of Nikon Action Extreme and Pentax PCF probably ought to figure highly on your wish list .
Good luck and keep in touch here !
Kenny
|
hallelujah
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/14/06
Posts: 2157
Loc: Rocky Mt. High Colorado
|
|
Quote:
At that proce level 
Kenny
Help me out here Kenny
Never mind, the light finally came on. 
Edited by hallelujah (09/30/09 07:35 PM)
|
GlennLeDrew
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/18/08
Posts: 1304
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Banner,
I see that you have little experience with binoculars.
When you ask what you shold expect to see, look at the magnification. It's the first number in the bino's specification. Your 10X25's magnify things 10 times larger than you see them with your unaided eye. Therefore objects will appear 10 times closer. A 20X50 bino will magnifiy things 20 times and make them appear 20 times closer.
So as you can see, if making out detail in *very* distant objects is priority number one, then higher magnifications will probably be better than lower magnifications. But then a tripod will likely be a necessity in order to steady the view and, if the bino is large/heavy, save your arms the strain.
--------------------
Home-made 11X50 right angle bino, 8.1 deg. FOV
Modified 26X100 bino, 3.5 deg. FOV
Home-made Mk II RA bino, using interchangeable objectives and eyepieces
My Gallery
Mediocre minds discuss people. Good minds discuss events. Great minds discuss ideas.
|
Banner
journeyman
Reged: 09/29/09
Posts: 9
|
|
Quote:
Banner,
I see that you have little experience with binoculars.
That is right I only have one cheap pair so have nothing to compare it with
Quote:
When you ask what you shold expect to see, look at the magnification. It's the first number in the bino's specification. Your 10X25's magnify things 10 times larger than you see them with your unaided eye. Therefore objects will appear 10 times closer. A 20X50 bino will magnifiy things 20 times and make them appear 20 times closer.
So as you can see, if making out detail in *very* distant objects is priority number one, then higher magnifications will probably be better than lower magnifications. But then a tripod will likely be a necessity in order to steady the view and, if the bino is large/heavy, save your arms the strain.
I will probably go for one you suggest if I can locate one in a shop rather than online as i need to examine it. I also read that the bigger the objective the more detail
|
Banner
journeyman
Reged: 09/29/09
Posts: 9
|
|
http://www.outdoorsupermarket.com/p-886-gelert-panorama-binocular.aspx
Anyone any experience of the bins anbove. I tried them and even tho they have only 5 mm eye relief and i wear glasses they were much clearer than mine. i could see the religious site I mentioned previously in much greater detail and see the building in front of it
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 12911
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Banner ,
I suspect your 10 x 25 compact roof could be so poor that you are getting a misleading impression as to the apparent greatness of any other binoculars that happen to have a reasonable exit - pupil .
I've never seen the Gelert name before , but I've seen about a dozen of those type of clunky , brighter coloured , plastic bodied 10 x 50s with ruby or amber or bright yellow objective coatings , under various guises .
They are often seen for sale at sunday market and car boot sales in England and in tourist gift and curiosity shops in Canary Island resorts , and I do not recommend them .
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
|
Banner
journeyman
Reged: 09/29/09
Posts: 9
|
|
Quote:
Banner ,
I suspect your 10 x 25 compact roof could be so poor that you are getting a misleading impression as to the apparent greatness of any other binoculars that happen to have a reasonable exit - pupil .
Think you are right. I will wait and get a decent pair. It is hard when the folk in the shops do not know much. Think I will go to the city
I wondered why the lens had a red tinge as he took it out of the glass display case
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 12911
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Banner ,
Just a suggestion , but for the price ( around 125 Euro ) I think you could do a LOT worse than try the Helios HR Ultimate 10 x 42 , as shown here :
http://www.swoptics.co.uk/view.asp?KEY=1957
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
|
Banner
journeyman
Reged: 09/29/09
Posts: 9
|
|
Quote:
Banner ,
Just a suggestion , but for the price ( around 125 Euro ) I think you could do a LOT worse than try the Helios HR Ultimate 10 x 42 , as shown here :
http://www.swoptics.co.uk/view.asp?KEY=1957
Kenny
Thanks for the suggestion, as you know much more about these than me. I appreciate it and might well get them. Another thing about the Gelert is they are 75 euro but only 29/39 sterling which is about 31/41 euro
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 