Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Glenn Chapel of Astronomy magazine and I have been corresponding about good binoculars for beginners in the astronomy hobby. Mr. Chapel claimed that Phil Harrington would be doing a binocular review soon. This review is occuring in the latest issue--April. Typically Astronomy magazine does equipment reviews for telescopes and telescope related hardware so this is definitely off the path for them.
|
Erik D
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/28/03
Posts: 2574
Loc: Central New Jersey, USA
|
|
NW,
Any clue on what size binos will be reviewed? It's been nearly two years since Harrington's last bino review of 60-100mm astro binos.....
I let my 3 year subscription to Astonomy lapse in in Jan 05 becasue I found much better coverage of astro binos on the internet. (CN bino forum is at the very top of my list!) I guess I will have to invest the $5 cover price for the April issue...
Erik D
|
Blues
sage
Reged: 10/18/04
Posts: 288
Loc: NC
|
|
I haven't read the article but it covers sub $100 binoculars. Just FYI.
--------------------
Elliott
Orion XT8 Classic
Orion Vista 10x50
Live Free Or Die
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Elliot is right. Phil just states some basic information and considerations for buying binos which cost under $100. I have the magazine, but have only skimmed over the article.
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5314
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Hi NW,
If the article is about binoculars that sell for less than $100 I think they are making a bad assumption about newbie buyers. Just because someone is new to amateur astronomy doesn't mean they aren't willing to spend more than $100 if they feel it is worth it.
I worry about a newbie buying a piece of cheap equipment and getting turned off to the hobby.
Rich
Edited by Rich N (02/28/05 06:49 PM)
|
johnirvine
member
Reged: 02/27/04
Posts: 53
Loc: Iowa
|
|
It's there. I just pulled it out of the mailbox. Having not yet read the article it appears to not compare the models head to head but rather to list their specs and give info like "fully multicoated is better than coated" and "BaK-4 is better than BK-7"..etc.
John
--------------------
There wolf. There castle.
Nikon E2 8x30, 10x35; Zeiss Classic 7x42; Swift Ultralite 9x63; Fuji 7x50 FMT-SX
|
Alby
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 02/12/05
Posts: 899
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
I agree with Rich.
I would also think the magazines prime readership would be looking at a more serious instrument?
Alby
--------------------
Alby
Scoping Savant
10in LX200 Classic SCT
Oberwerk BT 100 45
7x50 USSR Binocs
Nikon Action Extreme 10x50 binocs
|
johnirvine
member
Reged: 02/27/04
Posts: 53
Loc: Iowa
|
|
Retraction... he does seem to give impressions on most of the models. I agree with Rich and Alby as well though.
John
--------------------
There wolf. There castle.
Nikon E2 8x30, 10x35; Zeiss Classic 7x42; Swift Ultralite 9x63; Fuji 7x50 FMT-SX
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
What confuses me about the article is that he supposed to be talking about the Nikon Actions, but he seems to be describing the Action Extremes. There's also a picture of the Action Extremes as well. I don't know of anywhere these can be purchased for $100 or less.
Jonathan
|
Alan French
Night Owl
Reged: 01/28/05
Posts: 1484
Loc: Upstate NY
|
|
Quote:
I agree with Rich.
I would also think the magazines prime readership would be looking at a more serious instrument?
Alby
My understanding is that the majority of readers of both magazines have rather modest equipment. Certainly the folks who bring binoculars to our public star parties are not carrying the expensive stuff, and I run into more birders with inexpensive binoculars than with the high end stuff.
I have actually been quite surprised at the quality of some of the less expensive offerings.
Clear skies, Alan
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Quote:
Just because someone is new to amateur astronomy doesn't mean they aren't willing to spend more than $100 if they feel it is worth it.
How would a new person in the hobby truly "feel it is worth it"? Unless your wealthy and/or don't care about blowing money, buying high-end, relatively expensive equipment right off the bat is not sound advice. Don't get me wrong, I don't advise anyone new getting "cheap" binos, but one can spend $100 on binos and STILL get something that is good for the price. And as a side note, the binoculars being reviewed are not binos you would use as a primary instrument, but rather something to eventually supplement your telescope. That being said, I am not surprised about the $100 cap.
|
thane
member
Reged: 01/26/05
Posts: 55
Loc: Poulsbo, WA 47° 43.907' N ...
|
|
I think NW is right but maybe the important issue is motivation. I've been able to afford better instruments for all my adult life, but never spent more than $150. I've always owned 4-6 bins and telescopes at any one time, all under $150. I finally realized I wasn't spending time with them because, as Pavlov would say, "If it's painful, you'll do something else... If it's enjoyable, you'll keep doing it." So I got over it and bought a BT100 and 8 TeleVue eyepieces. The best advise is don't spend more than you spent on your primary vehicle, but if you really feel you must, then go for it.
Maybe it's just that I turned 40 years old... ;-)
--------------------
Oberwerk BT100, 7x50 Mariner, 11x56
Mak 127mm
16" SCT f/1.2 Project
eBay ID: thane*grooms
|
medinabrit
professor emeritus
Reged: 10/27/04
Posts: 537
Loc: medina ohio USA.
|
|
sometimes the joy of having something material is more satisfying than looking at the figures in a bank savings statement
brian
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5314
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
I wasn't suggesting eliminating sub $100 binoculars from the magazine review. Just don't eliminate 100+ dollar binoculars from the review.
Am I surprised "Astronomy" put a $100 limit on the binoculars in their review? No. But, IMHO, they aren't doing their readers a favor by doing it.
NW, if the magazine doesn't review the better binoculars the newbie sure as heck won't know if they are "worth it". Reviewing them might help the newbie figure out if they are worth it.
Rich
Edited by Rich N (03/01/05 12:46 AM)
|
KennyJ
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10163
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Some interesting comments amongst the rush of posts to this thread.
Regarding Rich's last one , I think it's more difficult to "prove" or convince anyone , including seasoned binocular users , that the difference between a $200 and a $100 is "MORE worth -it" than the difference between a $100 and a $10 model.
I've not , and probably never will see this article.
If the primary purpose was to restrict contenders to $100 worth of goods , fair enough , --- but surely there ought to be indications of expected improvements with larger instruments , higher magnification and much more expensive purchases ?
Regards , 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
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Rich, there certainly are some fine binoculars much greater than $100 which "could" be used with a telescope, but typically I think most telescope astronomers don't do this...for the reason Thane stated. Hence the nature of the article. And besides, binocular astronomers are not their target audience...sadly. I think it would be great to see a +80mm bino reivew in one of these huge astromony magazines though.
Ya know, it wouldn't hurt to make a suggestion to one of these magazines to do this...
|
rouseyfire
super member
Reged: 11/09/04
Posts: 143
Loc: loveland,colorado
|
|
For current non-bino owners, the information on $100.00 or less binoculars may be beneficial for those first time buyers but I would assume that most readers of an astronomy magazine would want additional info on the 'better' and 'bigger' binoculars.
Even if I can't afford it, I am still interested in reading about the better quality items that I can save for or dream about.
Thane: About the primary vehicle comparison--We just purcahsed a new vehicle--I can't wait to tell the wife that I can now spend an equal amount on binos, scopes, etc. 
--------------------
glenn
Orion SVP 127 Mak
Pentax 8x32SP
Pentax 12x50
Oberwerk 20x80 deluxe II
|
Rich N
Post Laureate
Reged: 09/22/04
Posts: 5314
Loc: San Francisco Bay Area, Calif...
|
|
Hi NW,
I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you saying amateur astronomers, the ones who use telescopes, aren't likely to buy a binocular that cost more than $100?
Rich
|
johnirvine
member
Reged: 02/27/04
Posts: 53
Loc: Iowa
|
|
Hello,
I guess my big beef with the article is that it included binoculars with what I assume to be characteristics which might result in dissapointment, e.g. bins with BK-7 Prisms. Even not having looked through any of the bins highlighted I would think that there are several which could have been eliminated from the running and not even included in the review.
If the article was intented to be for beginners then why not include a couple "tiers" of prices to appease consumers who are not willing to invest as much and those who might be willing to spend a smidge more with information as to why it might be advantageous (or not) to part with that extra buck.
John
--------------------
There wolf. There castle.
Nikon E2 8x30, 10x35; Zeiss Classic 7x42; Swift Ultralite 9x63; Fuji 7x50 FMT-SX
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Without a doubt John. Some of those binoculars I would never consider purchasing, but I should also say that binoculars ARE my primary instrument, so for me, putting more money into binoculars is definitely justified. So depending on the target audience, maybe your "tier" suggestion would have been better.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 