Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

The BEST Binoculars I've EVER Looked Through!

  • Please log in to reply
212 replies to this topic

#26 hallelujah

hallelujah

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,928
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Loc: North Star over Colorado

Posted 09 March 2010 - 01:02 PM

Nothing in my collection can compete with the views that I get through my Orion MEGAView 30x80mm.

My favorite views are the Orion Nebula, the Double Cluster, the Pleiades, the moon, Saturn, & Jupiter, just to name of few.

My discovery of Comet Holmes was with my 30x80mm. :jump:

#27 KennyJ

KennyJ

    The British Flash

  • *****
  • Posts: 37,648
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Lancashire UK

Posted 09 March 2010 - 01:37 PM

I mainly use binoculars for daytime use .

I've yet to look through any binoculars with magnification greater than 15x that I've really enjoyed the views through.

Memory can play strange games , but it was looking through a Zeiss 15 x 60 when I was 13 years old that made the greatest impression on me -- but that was 45 years ago .

I've briefly looked through most of the top rated 42mm roofs from Leica , Swarovski , Nikon and Zeiss but for me there is more to this than just the VIEWS -- a binocular has to FEEL just right in my hands AND be adjustable without any fiddling about for me to be REALLY comfortable with it .

To that end , due to the current trend for centrally located diopter adjustments , which I abhor , the only one of recent models that I actually " prefered " to my 10 x 42 Nikon SE was the occasionally even more maligned Nikon HGL 8 x 42 .

Kenny

#28 richtea

richtea

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 309
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2005
  • Loc: UK Yorkshire

Posted 09 March 2010 - 02:40 PM

Hi Andresin

Well i guess it would be the old fashioned East German Zeiss Jenoptem 10 x 50 porros i bought many years back
Up to that point i had only looked through smaller and less expensive bins
The first time i had the Zeiss adjusted to my eyes i was just mesmerized by what seemed to be a huge wonderful portal
I recall spending a lot of time simply looking at anything and everything in my path just to prove the view would still be there the next day
For these reasons they were the "ones"

Incidentally on looking back that spell was actually the best time i ever had using any binoculars and also the time i analyzed the view and make, model etc etc etc the least

Regards
RichT

#29 kcolter

kcolter

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 447
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Missouri, USA

Posted 09 March 2010 - 04:54 PM

I've said aloud, or thought "wow" several times when I've looked through binoculars. The TAK 22X60 might give the most color-free lunar edge of any binocular I've seen, it comes close to that instant transition from luminescent eggshell white to inky black that a Zeiss APQ refractor delivers; the light grasp of the big Fujis or the Nikon 20X120, particularly at a site dark enough to see the entire veil neb in one field or to make the star clouds towards the center of the galaxy look like they do in astrophotos is breathtaking, but I would also mention that the first time one puts a truly widefield binocular to one's eyes and gets the "picture window" view that the SARD 6X42 or the Bausch & Lomb Mark 41 provides is stunning in its own right. I can't quite bring myself to pick just one bino as the best view I've ever seen. Tak 22X60 for optical quality, big FUJI for light grasp, SARD/B&L Mark 41 for field of view.

#30 Joe Ogiba

Joe Ogiba

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,250
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2002
  • Loc: NJ USA

Posted 09 March 2010 - 08:32 PM

For low power and the widest FOV of any ultra premium 7x binoculars I like my 7x42 Zeiss FL's. For the best handheld 10x view I like my 10x42L Canon IS. For the best 15x handheld view I like my 15x50 IS. For best views in binoculars up to 16 lbs I like my BT80-45's with 20mm Pentax XW's or 28x110's for standard non angled binoculars. For 12x handheld binoculars that are lightweight I like my 12x36 IS II .

#31 PJ Anway

PJ Anway

    Double-Star Observer

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,250
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2003
  • Loc: North Coast 46°N 86°W

Posted 09 March 2010 - 09:05 PM

Zeiss 15X60's do it for me. No field curvature, outstanding contrast and sharpness, and 15X in an over 4° FOV - sweet!

#32 Erik D

Erik D

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,067
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Central New Jersey, USA

Posted 09 March 2010 - 09:21 PM


Best IS Binoculars

ERik D

#33 Paul G

Paul G

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,011
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 10 March 2010 - 07:03 AM

Zeiss 15x60 B/GA T*. Great contrast, nice fov, only 8" long and easy to hand hold.

Tie for second, Leica 8x50's and Zeiss 7x42FL, the Leicas for the purity of the view, the Zeiss for the wide fov.

#34 fabietto

fabietto

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2009

Posted 10 March 2010 - 07:56 AM

Zeiss 15x60 B/GAT*.

fabio

#35 Gordon Rayner

Gordon Rayner

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,303
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007

Posted 11 March 2010 - 03:24 AM

Can someone give us a firsthand comparison of the Fuji ED 25 x 150 to the non-ED version? What about the 40 x 150 or the 45 deg inclined EM-SX, compared with the others mentioned ?

#36 Erik D

Erik D

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,067
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Central New Jersey, USA

Posted 11 March 2010 - 07:24 AM

At one time Oberwerk listed all those Fujinon 150 mm models on their web site. I don't know if Kevin B ever had all of them in his shop at the same time, but if anyone can offer first hand impressions of them I'd think Kevin is one. The other person might be Marty at Company 7.

Sometimes the difference between excellent and outstanding optics can be very subtle.

ERik D

#37 Mateyhv

Mateyhv

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 359
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2009
  • Loc: 43°N

Posted 11 March 2010 - 08:24 AM

It's a matter of time Gordon, it's a matter of time and you will know about the 40x ED, and not from me ;)

Matey

#38 Mr. Bill

Mr. Bill

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,791
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Northeastern Cal

Posted 11 March 2010 - 11:16 AM

Can someone give us a firsthand comparison of the Fuji ED 25 x 150 to the non-ED version? What about the 40 x 150 or the 45 deg inclined EM-SX, compared with the others mentioned ?


The only person I can think of would be Markus Ludes of APM.

:cool:

#39 OpalescentNebula

OpalescentNebula

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 360
  • Joined: 11 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Calgary, Alberta, Observing Alberta & British Columbia

Posted 11 March 2010 - 12:13 PM

The best view I have ever seen was looking through Zeiss 15x60 B/GAT* at the night sky. That is what really got me going on binocular observing.
For day viewing the 15x60’s were not quite as bright as the new 10x42’s FL. When looking at an eagle with its chicks on a shoreface about 100 yards away, I felt I could see more detail in the feathers with the 10x42’s.
I’ve never looked through the Nikon ProStar 7x50’s or the Tak 22x60’s. I’m sure from what CNer’s have reviewed that I would put these at the top of my choice as well.
My favorite views today are on a lawn chair looking through the 20x110 Garrett’s with a P-mount. Not as sharp as the Zeiss but more expansive an engaging views.
For quick light tripod (Manfrotto #055) views I like using the 15x70’s Astro Physics Ultra’s.

#40 Joe Ogiba

Joe Ogiba

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,250
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2002
  • Loc: NJ USA

Posted 11 March 2010 - 06:18 PM

Zeiss 15X60's do it for me. No field curvature, outstanding contrast and sharpness, and 15X in an over 4° FOV - sweet!

I guess you are a human tripod since I can't hold 15x binoculars steady enough and my Canon 15x50 IS show me maximum detail from a rock steady view with a bright 4.5° FOV.

#41 RichD

RichD

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,144
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Derbyshire, UK

Posted 11 March 2010 - 06:45 PM

If you're in a lounger type chair with elbows well supported and an adjustable chair back, 15x isn't too much power to handhold. Especially the zeiss bgat with it's shorter barrels, which would be easier to hold than, say, a fujinon 16x70.

Observing this way, i've used 15x binos for hours in total comfort with a very steady view (if done right, the only real movement seen is your heartbeat making the stars move very slightly).

#42 Joe Ogiba

Joe Ogiba

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,250
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2002
  • Loc: NJ USA

Posted 11 March 2010 - 08:11 PM

For astro use I use my mounted astro binoculars (28x110, BT80-45 & RA-88-SA ) most of the time.

#43 Erik D

Erik D

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,067
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Central New Jersey, USA

Posted 11 March 2010 - 10:32 PM

Zeiss 15X60's do it for me. No field curvature, outstanding contrast and sharpness, and 15X in an over 4° FOV - sweet!


I guess you are a human tripod since I can't hold 15x binoculars steady enough and my Canon 15x50 IS show me maximum detail from a rock steady view with a bright 4.5° FOV.



We hear the expression "human tripod" & "rock steady view" mentioned Ad Nauseam in discussions of Quality binocular views. For some of us, Image Stablized view and best quality image are qualitatively different. One may prefer the IS feature above all other attributes in a pair of binocular, but for others, Image Stabilization does NOT = Best Quality Views.

------------------------------

You guys can argue all you want about what is nicer handheld or what's your favorite way to observe, seated, standing braced. That's not an arguement I care to participate in.

When IS is engaged, it provides a more still, less motion induced image, never any doubt about that.

However, when IS is NOT engaged the image quality does not match up to these better binoculars. And finally when IS is engaged, image quality is somewhat degraded from the non-IS image. Under no circumstances did engaging IS improve image quality.

What IS does is make a slightly lower quality image more still.

Some comments above referred to the momentary blur when panning. I noticed this when panning both slow and fast.

I already mentioned the difficulty in achieving precise focus. That's with IS turned off. I also noticed it far more difficult to achieve focus with IS turned on. In fact, I could never achieve best focus with IS turned on.

edz
:shocked:
----------------------------------
In extended side-by-side test sessions I found that I can see more detail with a pair of low cost 20X80 LWs braced than I can with a pair of 18X50 IS costing $1K or more, mounted, braced, IS on, IS off. Some DSOs can only be seen with higher magnification and larger aperture of my 20X80 binocular. Activating the IS feature does not make up for the 50 mm aperture, nor does it improve image quality.

My Mayauchi Saturn III 100mm F7.5 is mounted on a tripod rated for 40 lb load and a Manfrotto 516 fluid head. I can sense very slight image jitter when I have my hands on the dual pan handles at 54X. For me that does not detract from the superior quality of the image.

ERik D

#44 John F

John F

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,008
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2004
  • Loc: Pacific Northwest

Posted 11 March 2010 - 11:13 PM

Rich

To say that the 15x60 Zeiss B/GAT would be easier to hand hold than a 16x70 Fujinon may be true, but it also sounds like something someone might say if they wanted to **** the Zeiss 15x60s with faint praise.

I've had a pair of the B/GATs for 7 years now and have found them to be one of the very worst binoculars to try to hand hold of any that I've ever used. However, I expected that that would be the case before I got them so I almost always use mine with a mount and when used that way they are a joy to use. If I could only have two binoculars the Zeiss 15x60 B/GATs would be one of them and the 8.5x42 Swarovski ELs (and especially the newer Swarovision generation) would be the other.

What I especially like about those two binoculars in not only their optical quality but also their all-around versatility.

John Finnan

#45 gwsudiro

gwsudiro

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 243
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2009
  • Loc: Solo, Central Java, Indonesia

Posted 12 March 2010 - 02:05 AM

hi! ^_^

for me & for now, I think Swaro EL 10x42 (the achro, not the ED Swarovision) is the best I've ever looked through...

but as I remembered, Celestron Outland LX 10x50 porro was strong performer on astro..maybe I got the good one...^_^

best regards

Galih

#46 RichD

RichD

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,144
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Derbyshire, UK

Posted 12 March 2010 - 03:42 AM

Hi John,

Interesting that you find the zeiss 15x60 so bad to handhold as I've heard a few people say that it is good in that regard.

What is it that makes it poor to hand hold?

#47 Joe Ogiba

Joe Ogiba

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,250
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2002
  • Loc: NJ USA

Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:37 AM

Hi John,

Interesting that you find the zeiss 15x60 so bad to handhold as I've heard a few people say that it is good in that regard.

What is it that makes it poor to hand hold?

15x

#48 RichD

RichD

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,144
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Derbyshire, UK

Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:40 AM

Lol, from John's post it sounded like he was referring to ergonomics rather than sheer magnification, if I was wrong John forgive my misunderstanding!

#49 Joe Ogiba

Joe Ogiba

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,250
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2002
  • Loc: NJ USA

Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:43 AM

We hear the expression "human tripod" & "rock steady view" mentioned Ad Nauseam in discussions of Quality binocular views. For some of us, Image Stablized view and best quality image are qualitatively different. One may prefer the IS feature above all other attributes in a pair of binocular, but for others, Image Stabilization does NOT = Best Quality Views.


Right, Canon L series optics are junk. :roflmao:

#50 Erik D

Erik D

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,067
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Central New Jersey, USA

Posted 12 March 2010 - 10:43 AM

Right, Canon L series optics are junk. :roflmao:

----------------------------------------------------
Re: Canon IS L 10x42 compared
09/29/09 10:14 AM

I'm left wondering here whether the redirect (changing the subject from the pertinent discussion), and the persistent laughing is just a way of trying to make more noise than the facts presented in the information above?

Prior to this, I'm not aware that anyone has ever posted in these forums, or published in a review, any measured information regarding these binoculars. We have however read accolades from a number of people, such as, these are the best, these are outstanding, this glass is superior, etc.

These binoculars have problems similar to many others, and in fact, in some cases have issues that others don't have. They have a neat feature, IS, and reading many of the reviews previously posted, it becomes obvious that little testing was done and lots is said about the uniqness of the IS feature. In fact if it weren't for the IS feature often discussed, there is little of substance available on these binoculars.

I won't dissuade people from purchasing an IS binocular if that's what you want to invest in, but that feature alone does not make this optically premium. In fact from what I've found, there are numerous other avenues to persue for better optical performance.

For an aperture reduced to 10x38 binocular that does not have the resolution of some other models, even some far less costly models, I would say, at $1500 these are grossly overpriced and the buyer is purchasing a feature, not optical quality.

Perhaps it's time we present our readers with actual performance measures on these binoculars and stop relying on "greatest thing since sliced bread" reports.

In the mean time let those who choose to laugh so loud in hopes of drowning out the facts keep on laughing. You can't laugh away reality.
When it comes down to the facts, others will know what they need to make an informed decision.

Hopefully you will get the information you need from reading reviews like Kimmo's or from information posted here, and not from a "sliced bread" report.

edz
--------------------------------------------

Anything else NEW to enlighten us?


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics