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

Binocular advice - 82 mm vs 100 mm

  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#26 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,060
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 23 July 2021 - 08:52 AM

10 inches longer, was that a typo? If that isn't substantially longer, I don't know what is.

#27 DPT

DPT

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2006

Posted 23 July 2021 - 09:47 AM

The Oberwerk site states the Series 5000 head/tripod combo as being rated for binoculars up to 16 pounds.  Sounds like it should work for the OB 25x100 Deluxes as they are listed at 10 pounds.


  • Fiske likes this

#28 edwincjones

edwincjones

    Close Enough

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,895
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004

Posted 23 July 2021 - 10:22 AM

i think the old saying

"the best telescope is the one you use the most"

applies to binoculars, and all optics.

 The big, heavy, complex tasks

are used less than the small, light, portable tasks.

My spotting scope rest while I use the IS more,

telescopes rest while I use the binoculars.

 

my best argument for the 82mm binos over 100mms

 

edj


Edited by edwincjones, 23 July 2021 - 10:23 AM.

  • ianatcn and MT4 like this

#29 Fiske

Fiske

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,650
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004
  • Loc: Kansas (Kansas City area) / USA

Posted 23 July 2021 - 02:37 PM

10 inches longer, was that a typo? If that isn't substantially longer, I don't know what is.

I'll just tell you that I own both the 82XL and the 100XL and handling the 100 is a lot more equivalent to the 82 than I thought it would be. I imagined the 100 would require a more substantial mount. It does not. And that it would be more cumbersome to set up. It is not. Compared with a telescope, either instrument is a lot closer to grab and go.

 

Fiske


Edited by Fiske, 23 July 2021 - 02:40 PM.

  • MT4 likes this

#30 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 762
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 23 July 2021 - 03:09 PM

i think the old saying

"the best telescope is the one you use the most"

applies to binoculars, and all optics.

 The big, heavy, complex tasks

are used less than the small, light, portable tasks.

My spotting scope rest while I use the IS more,

telescopes rest while I use the binoculars.

 

my best argument for the 82mm binos over 100mms

 

edj

Yes, I have found that for a lot of these "what should I get" astronomy questions there are often multiple right answers!  It just depends on what criteria is most important to the person buying the item.  Different things are important to different people.  Personally, I do tend to favor smaller, lighter things that I would use more over bigger heavier things that I won't use as much...  What is too small or too big (or heavy) varies from individual to individual.  Sometimes you may not really know for yourself until after you get something and then see how much you end-up using it after a period of time.  I have a fairly good idea what works for me but that may not apply for others.


  • oldmanrick, ECP M42 and MT4 like this

#31 oldmanrick

oldmanrick

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 866
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2015
  • Loc: Western Montana, USA

Posted 23 July 2021 - 06:48 PM

Yes, I have found that for a lot of these "what should I get" astronomy questions there are often multiple right answers!  It just depends on what criteria is most important to the person buying the item.  Different things are important to different people.  Personally, I do tend to favor smaller, lighter things that I would use more over bigger heavier things that I won't use as much...  What is too small or too big (or heavy) varies from individual to individual.  Sometimes you may not really know for yourself until after you get something and then see how much you end-up using it after a period of time.  I have a fairly good idea what works for me but that may not apply for others.

I am one who has a great desire to try new equipment that I think should perform better than what I have, but really don't have the budget to be able to try, or the first hand knowledge to know whether every new desirable piece of equipment that comes along will be something that will work as expected.  I went through a lot of "should I get it or not" personal questioning exercises prior to ordering the APM 150 BT.  What I thought was a "good deal" on one showed up, and I made a quick decision to pull the trigger.  I have not regretted it for a second. 

 

Even though that piece of equipment may not have lived up to all of the expectations I had, it is good enough that I don't foresee the day that it won't be a major part of my arsenal.  Prior to ordering, I had figured out that I could build a wheeled dolly for it, and store it in my shop intact, so the weight and size problem was diminished to almost nothing.  I had the cash at the time to buy it and the mount was included.  I also would need a very good tripod, but could cover that in my budget.  

 

Now it's all together and being used more than any of my other astro instruments, except for the image stabilized hand-held binoculars which are used everyday for viewing wildlife, birds, interesting aircraft, etc.

 

I know it was a big investment, but when there is a burning desire, I've always said that "when there is a will there is a way".

 

Rick


  • Fiske, ianatcn, jprideaux and 1 other like this

#32 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,060
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 24 July 2021 - 04:43 AM

I'll just tell you that I own both the 82XL and the 100XL and handling the 100 is a lot more equivalent to the 82 than I thought it would be. I imagined the 100 would require a more substantial mount. It does not. And that it would be more cumbersome to set up. It is not. Compared with a telescope, either instrument is a lot closer to grab and go.

 

Fiske

So are you confirming that the 100XL are 10 inches longer than the 82XL?



#33 Fiske

Fiske

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,650
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004
  • Loc: Kansas (Kansas City area) / USA

Posted 24 July 2021 - 05:37 AM

So are you confirming that the 100XL are 10 inches longer than the 82XL?

Actually, it is NOT 10 inches longer. smile.gif

 

Inspired by your question I measured both instruments to confirm the precise lengths/widths. The 82XL is 16.75 inches long by 9.25 inches wide (42.54x23.5 cm) and the 100XL is 20.25 inches long by 9.75 inches wide (51.43x24.76 cm). So about 3.5 inches longer and 0.5 inch wider (8.9/1.27 cm). The measurements were taken with the dew shields retracted.

 

I took a picture of the two instruments side by side but it is not well focused so I'll take another one and post it here. 

 

The difference in handling between them is not substantial. I had imagined the 100XL would be dramatically bigger than the 82, but it isn't. Larger for sure, but not enough to make much difference in mounting or use.  

 

Given the aperture and performance, the 100XL-SD is pleasingly compact and light.

 

Fiske


Edited by Fiske, 24 July 2021 - 07:13 AM.

  • Mark9473 likes this

#34 Fiske

Fiske

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,650
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004
  • Loc: Kansas (Kansas City area) / USA

Posted 24 July 2021 - 08:28 AM

med_gallery_2707_15761_183833.jpg


  • Mark9473, sonny.barile, jprideaux and 3 others like this

#35 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,060
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 24 July 2021 - 09:04 AM

That's a sweet-looking pair!
  • Fiske likes this

#36 Fiske

Fiske

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,650
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004
  • Loc: Kansas (Kansas City area) / USA

Posted 24 July 2021 - 09:54 AM

hamsterdance.gif hamsterdance.gif


  • sonny.barile likes this

#37 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 762
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 24 July 2021 - 02:24 PM

hamsterdance.gif hamsterdance.gif

Yes, very nice pair of binoculars there!

They should be really nice when you can drive to a dark site. 

 

Good luck in getting your new Manfrotto 117B tripod soon. That will pair nice with the BT100.


  • Fiske likes this

#38 sonny.barile

sonny.barile

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,630
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2010
  • Loc: In the class 8/9 glow.....somewhere between the city and the stadiums.

Posted 24 July 2021 - 02:50 PM

The difference in price between the Oberwerk 100XL-ED and -SD is about $450. It was certainly worth the extra to me, particularly considering lunar views. The better color correction will make a difference for planets also, I expect. A BT is not the primary choice necessarily for planetary observation, but I am guessing the 100XL will still provide enjoyable views of Saturn and Jupiter.

 

Regarding your doctor's diagnosis, in my experience an effective treatment option is to buy more binoculars. grin.gif

 

Fiske

for years I chased planetary image scale and resolution with an 8 inch f10 telescope. It was frustrating. Plenty of nights I stared at Jupiter waiting for a fleeting moment of good seeing. I now prefer the 80x planetary views I get with the 100 BT. It’s bright, clear with good background sky contrast, and the view has stability. Makes everything look like diamonds on black velvet. I’m enjoying it more. 


Edited by sonny.barile, 24 July 2021 - 02:52 PM.

  • Fiske, jprideaux and WWTech like this

#39 Fiske

Fiske

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,650
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004
  • Loc: Kansas (Kansas City area) / USA

Posted 24 July 2021 - 03:10 PM

Yes, very nice pair of binoculars there!

They should be really nice when you can drive to a dark site. 

 

Good luck in getting your new Manfrotto 117B tripod soon. That will pair nice with the BT100.

Thanks, JP. When that tripod arrives, I'll get both the 82 and 100XL set up to see how they compliment each other. Planning to do lower mag wider field views with the 82 and higher mag narrow field views with the 100XL. A one-two BT double team. grin.gif

 

for years I chased planetary image scale and resolution with an 8 inch f10 telescope. It was frustrating. Plenty of nights I stared at Jupiter waiting for a fleeting moment of good seeing. I now prefer the 80x planetary views I get with the 100 BT. It’s bright, clear with good background sky contrast, and the view has stability. Makes everything look like diamonds on black velvet. I’m enjoying it more. 

Understood about planetary image scale, Sonny. And agreed. My version of that was discovering how sensitive to seeing conditions a 22-inch Dob actually is. lol.gif

 

Will be fun to do the first BT/Big Dob observing session, though. wink.gif

 

Fiske


  • sonny.barile, jprideaux and MT4 like this


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