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

Oberwerk - Two Options

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 buzznightyear

buzznightyear

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2012

Posted 11 August 2020 - 01:10 PM

Looking to pick up my first binoculars - looking to choose between Oberwerk 9x60, or 10x50 Deluxe.  Any guidance on these two or should I look to get the 10x50 Ultras?

 

Thanks for the help!


  • Cali likes this

#2 Cestus

Cestus

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 310
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 11 August 2020 - 01:12 PM

Those are as big as most can hand hold. Check the stats on their fov. You can also ask Kevin at Oberwerk what he recommends based on what you are looking to see.


  • Foss likes this

#3 Cali

Cali

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,860
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Bay Area

Posted 11 August 2020 - 01:42 PM

Looking to pick up my first binoculars - looking to choose between Oberwerk 9x60, or 10x50 Deluxe.  Any guidance on these two or should I look to get the 10x50 Ultras?

 

Thanks for the help!

Here is the Oberwerk product comparison chart which may be of help. You're going to get more binocular with the 10x50 Deluxe. At 2.5lbs it should be fine for a hand held. The Ultras clock in at 3.5lbs and that for most is too much. 

 

- Cal


Edited by Cali, 11 August 2020 - 02:40 PM.


#4 JimV

JimV

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 575
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2013
  • Loc: Austin, TX

Posted 11 August 2020 - 03:50 PM

Second the 10x50 Deluxe.  You won't like 3.5 lbs as your first bino.

The 9x60 has a narrow field of view like looking through a soda straw.


  • Rich V. likes this

#5 Cali

Cali

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,860
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Bay Area

Posted 12 August 2020 - 02:08 AM

 

The 9x60 has a narrow field of view like looking through a soda straw.

No way JimV. I have the Obie 12x60LWs and they are ... mighty fine. The recent tail of comet Neowise looked like a trail of snow.

 

And those aren't the only Obies I own.

 

The 8x40 Mariner is Way Too Cool for cruizing constellations and learning star hopping. The 20x80LWs are the best binocular for my money.

 

Just say'in.

 

- Cal


Edited by Cali, 12 August 2020 - 02:24 AM.

  • BRCoz and Rainguy like this

#6 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,718
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 12 August 2020 - 02:18 AM

Yes way, the 9x60 and 12x60 have virtually the same FOV, that makes a substantial difference in AFOV.
  • sonny.barile and Cali like this

#7 Cali

Cali

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,860
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Bay Area

Posted 12 August 2020 - 03:03 AM

I wouldn't think twice about the Obie 10x50 Deluxe for my first binocular.

 

- Cal


Edited by Cali, 12 August 2020 - 03:07 AM.


#8 Cali

Cali

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,860
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Bay Area

Posted 12 August 2020 - 03:15 AM

Yes way, the 9x60 and 12x60 have virtually the same FOV, that makes a substantial difference in AFOV.

Mark

 

All I can tell you is what I Saw looking through the Obie 12x60LWs. The tail of comet Neowise is probably the coolest thing I've ever seen.

 

Crystal Clear at that.

 

37.5485° N, 121.9886° W  - during the Wee Hours.

 

- Cal


Edited by Cali, 12 August 2020 - 03:46 AM.


#9 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,718
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 12 August 2020 - 06:48 AM

All good and well, but that does not mean that the previous poster who said the 9x60 is like looking through a straw, was wrong. He was merely exaggerating a bit. Your 12x60 is irrelevant in this matter.

#10 Cali

Cali

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,860
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Bay Area

Posted 12 August 2020 - 09:15 AM

All good and well, but that does not mean that the previous poster who said the 9x60 is like looking through a straw, was wrong. He was merely exaggerating a bit. Your 12x60 is irrelevant in this matter.

Irrelevant? Oh, okay ....

 

- Cal



#11 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,718
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 12 August 2020 - 10:31 AM

Look, I'm sure they are mighty fine, and that's a valuable impression to share, but not as a rebuttal on the narrow AFOV of the 9x60 that the OP is considering. That's all I wanted to say.
  • sonny.barile and Cali like this

#12 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,716
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 12 August 2020 - 11:29 AM

For hand holding, at least for me, the 10x50 is about the most I can handle without too much shaking.  I am looking at the Oberwerk 11x56 as another option since they don’t weigh too much more than the 10x50 I own.

 

Bill



#13 Rich V.

Rich V.

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,264
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada

Posted 12 August 2020 - 11:42 AM

Look, I'm sure they are mighty fine, and that's a valuable impression to share, but not as a rebuttal on the narrow AFOV of the 9x60 that the OP is considering. That's all I wanted to say.

The difference between the 49.5° AFOV in the 9x60 and the 65° AFOV of the 10x50 Dlx should be quite striking, IMO.  The 9x view would clearly seem much more restrictive to nearly anyone in a side by side comparison.

 

I'd also suggest the build quality of the 10x50 Dlx will be clearly better than the LW model as well.

 

Rich 


  • Jon Isaacs likes this

#14 dapalmer

dapalmer

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 370
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2016
  • Loc: Jackson, MO

Posted 19 August 2020 - 11:57 AM

The difference between the 49.5° AFOV in the 9x60 and the 65° AFOV of the 10x50 Dlx should be quite striking, IMO.  The 9x view would clearly seem much more restrictive to nearly anyone in a side by side comparison.

 

I'd also suggest the build quality of the 10x50 Dlx will be clearly better than the LW model as well.

 

Rich 

Would you mind explaining this to me. When I use astronomytools.com FOV calculator in binocular mode, the difference between these two binoculars fov seems negligible to me. Perhaps the tool is not telling what I think. And maybe it is my viewing habits, but I tend to want more detail and find a wider view a little distracting.  I rarely look at the edge of the field with binoculars as I just move my head and hands.  Hence my confusion. I would expect more aperture to prevail.

 

To be clear, I am not arguing but rather trying to learn. Perhaps my viewing technique is not correct and I unquestionably do not know the best way to get the most out of binocular observing.  I have not been viewing very long, so take that into account.

 

FWIW, the soda straw comment seems very exaggerated to me. The binoculars I currently own will not provide anything remotely close to the FOV of either of these. I live with a 38o AFOV due to using binos that I already own, but never felt restricted or like I was looking through a straw. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't appreciate the difference, just that I might not know what I'm missing. I suppose ignorance is bliss, but a better understanding would help as I consider purchasing a new pair of binoculars specifically for star gazing.  It all seems a bit counter-intuitive.



#15 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 86,825
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 19 August 2020 - 12:19 PM

Doug:

 

The True Fields of View of the two binoculars are similar but the apparent fields are very different. I see you have a 24 mm 68 degree eyepiece. Have you ever looked through a 32 mm Plossl? It's a very similar comparison.

 

The greater magnification with the wider AFoV shows more, everything is bigger and stars show more contrast. I find a 65 degree field of view is about optimal for binoculars, wide enough provide sufficient peripheral vision when looking straight ahead.

 

There's no right or wrong but generally increased magnification shows more than increased aperture.

 

Jon


  • Rich V. and dapalmer like this

#16 Rich V.

Rich V.

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,264
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada

Posted 19 August 2020 - 01:52 PM

Doug, like Jon points out, apparent FOV (AFOV) is the product of magnification and the true field of view (TFOV or FOV) so we can relate to the terms used.  AFOV is the angle of view as the eye sees in the bino; it's similar to looking through a window at a distant mountain.  How close you stand to the window determines how much of the mountain you can see.  Many of us prefer standing closer to the window so we can get more in the view.  wink.gif

 

Let's take the case of two different 10x binoculars that I have to keep the image scale constant. One has a 5° FOV and the other a 7° FOV.  Using the simple AFOV calculation of mag x FOV, the former has a 50° AFOV and the latter a 70° AFOV.  The 5° bino only shows half the area of sky as the 7° bino.  IMO, that's a big difference in what is framed between the two.  From my point of view, I much prefer the wider binocular's presentation.

 

Rich


  • Jon Isaacs, BRCoz and dapalmer like this

#17 dapalmer

dapalmer

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 370
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2016
  • Loc: Jackson, MO

Posted 19 August 2020 - 08:16 PM

If the question had been between the 10x50 deluxe and the 12x60 (instead of the 9x60) would the answer be any different?   Would the increase in both magnitude and aperture on the 12x60s (AFOV 68.4o) still be less preferred to the 10x50s based on quality (or something else), or would the 12x60s now be a better choice?

 

I'm guessing the point of too much magnification for hand held might factor into this one, correct? What if a monopod was available?

 

Note: I am not trying to hi-jack the thread, I'm just trying to learn some things about binoculars.


Edited by dapalmer, 19 August 2020 - 08:23 PM.


#18 39.1N84.5W

39.1N84.5W

    He asked for it

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,209
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2006
  • Loc: cincinnati

Posted 20 August 2020 - 10:25 PM

I found the stars to be soft in the 9x60... and the star field overall to be average in contrast. Pass.

#19 Binojunky

Binojunky

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,794
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2010

Posted 21 August 2020 - 09:24 AM

I have the 10x50 deluxe, happy with it, eye relief is just borderline for me as the eyepiece has a hard fixed centre so you just need to screw the soft rubber outer one just proud to avoid scratching you glasses, also the focus knob is a bit on the stiff side, but for the money its a solid instrument, Dave.


Edited by Binojunky, 21 August 2020 - 09:25 AM.

  • Cali likes this

#20 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 18,687
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 21 August 2020 - 11:10 AM

Second the 10x50 Deluxe.  You won't like 3.5 lbs as your first bino.

The 9x60 has a narrow field of view like looking through a soda straw.

According to the spec sheets, the 9x60 LW have a 50-degree apparent field of view, compared to 65 degrees for the 10x50 Deluxe. Not a huge difference, at least not for me. For the record, a soda straw's field of view is typically around 3 degrees.

 

On the other hand, 10x will surely show more than 9x, even given the disparity of aperture. And since the 10x binoculars also have a (slightly) larger true field of view, what's not to like about them?


  • jcj380 and Cali like this

#21 Rich V.

Rich V.

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,264
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada

Posted 21 August 2020 - 12:24 PM

In the above comparison of a 5° vs 6.5° FOV, while not seeming to be a huge difference at first glance, we're talking about a 69% difference in the amount of sky seen between these two binoculars, a factor of 5² vs 6.5².  That, to me, seems to be a substantial difference between the two views.

 

Rich




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