| Pages:
1
2 |
Bruce R Leech
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6796
Registered: 9-20-2004
Location: Ensenada formerly Mulege
Member Is Offline
Mood: A lot cooler than Mulege
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by oldhippie
| Quote: | Originally posted by Bruce R Leech
| Quote: | Originally posted by oldhippie
I had a friend that had a huge pair of binoculars, she, no I'm kidding, he, had to use a tripod because they were so heavy. 
Binocs will give you the widest field of view.
[Edited on 9-9-2007 by oldhippie] |
Binocs don't do anything to give the wider field of view. they only give you stereo vision and double the cost. get a good wild Field spotting scope
and stay under 15X. get the largest mm of prime lens that you can afford 100mm or up. |
Thanks Bruce, you're right. But stereo vision is how depth perception is achieved, or am I wrong again?
Maybe a refractor with a binocular eyepiece? |
you are 100 % right on that one and 2 scops are always better than one. not because you can see more but because it is a lot more comfortable gazing
in stereo
Bruce R Leech
Ensenada
 |
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
Stereo vision can be a good thing when spotting around the beach. Depth can be a good thing.
10x power binocs CAN be hand held, if you're even moderately steady. I have a pair of 10x50 Bausch and Lomb binos for bird spotting that only ran me
about 130.00 US. Razor sharp. On land, they're fine. Spotting scopes are a hassle for things moving as fast as billfish or schoolers like tuna or
dodos.
Much easier to follow fast-moving quarry with binos. Especially if they see you oogling and beat a retreat. 
Uh, which kinda prey are we talking here.................???
|
|
|
oxxo
Banned
Posts: 2347
Registered: 5-17-2006
Location: Wherever I am, I'm there
Member Is Offline
Mood: If I was feeling any better, I'd be twins!
|
|
I have a pair of Canon IS 8x25. That is what I was using this morning. But they just don't have enough umph.
I am aware of the Canon and Fuginon stabilized 15x. The problem is that they eat batteries like crazy and they are heavy. I want to be able to study
something for several minutes, where I can be comfortable with a tripod.
The next time I return to CA I will stop by the Oceanside store. Thanks.
|
|
|
oldjack
Nomad
Posts: 350
Registered: 1-26-2006
Location: Los Barriles
Member Is Offline
Mood: retired
|
|
Try 'sa pair of the binoculars from Big Five Sporting goods store.... they have a sale every month on 10x50's that are only about $20!!!!!... they are
really pretty good... I have a very expensive pair of binoculars that I paid nearly $1k... they are better but.... for $20 I can let the kids play
with them and my guests are always pleased with the ability to watch off-shore or gaze at the mountains... they are great for looking at the full
moons also... have someone pick up a pair and try them.... $20 might be just the right price point.. Big Five stores are all over the West shouldn't
be a problem finding one...........
|
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by oxxo
I have a pair of Canon IS 8x25. That is what I was using this morning. But they just don't have enough umph.
I am aware of the Canon and Fuginon stabilized 15x. The problem is that they eat batteries like crazy and they are heavy. I want to be able to study
something for several minutes, where I can be comfortable with a tripod.
The next time I return to CA I will stop by the Oceanside store. Thanks. |
If the prices for those IS units havent deterred you, I wouldnt worry about the battery consumption. Costco to the rescue on the batteries.
|
|
|
tripledigitken
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4848
Registered: 9-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
I have the Nikon 10 by 42 ATB Monarch model. I am very happy with them. They are around $300. When I researched them that price range seemed to
provide the most bang for the buck. It is easy to spend over $1000 on binoculars!
With regards to "field of view". The second number in the binoc's description relates to FOV, the first is the magnicfication.
If you multiply the mag. (10) by the second number (42) you get the field of view (420), which is 420' of view at 1000 yards distance.
ie a 8 by 25 binocular will yield 200' at 1000 yds.
8 x42 to 10 x 50 are about as powerfull you can view unstabilized.
Before I purchased the nikon binoc I had a $100 pair made by Pentax. The new pair are worlds better than the old, both in terms of low light and
clarity.
Hope this helps anyone purchasing binoculars.
Ken
[Edited on 9-10-2007 by tripledigitken]
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18407
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by tripledigitken
I have the Nikon 10 by 42 ATB Monarch model. I am very happy with them. They are around $300. When I researched them that price range seemed to
provide the most bang for the buck. It is easy to spend over $1000 on binoculars!
With regards to "field of view". The second number in the binoc's description relates to FOV, the first is the magnicfication.
If you multiply the mag. (10) by the second number (42) you get the field of view (420), which is 420' of view at 1000 yards distance.
ie a 8 by 25 binocular will yield 200' at 1000 yds.
8 x42 to 10 x 50 are about as powerfull you can view unstabilized.
Before I purchased the nikon binoc I had a $100 pair made by Pentax. The new pair are worlds better than the old, both in terms of low light and
clarity.
Hope this helps anyone purchasing binoculars.
Ken
[Edited on 9-10-2007 by tripledigitken] |
actually, that is not how you calculate field of view. FOV is not really related to the second number, which is the lens diameter -- lens diameter
typically determines how bright an image you get, large diameters better in low light.
there are so many variables for binocs, but one of the most important is exit pupil diameter -- the larger the exit pupil diameter, the easier to view
without vigneting (for some reason, you pay significantly for larger exit diameter)
|
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
The Chiva has got it right here.
|
|
|
cbuzzetti
Nomad
Posts: 193
Registered: 5-22-2006
Location: Atascadero, Ca
Member Is Offline
Mood: Lookin for a vacation
|
|
Just a little side note about telescopes. They will invert the view. They are
designed that way. Don't know why.
A spotting scope is what you want for land based viewing.
Binocs with tripod mount will be the most portable.
I need a new pair of binocs so I am off to Big5. $20 sounds just right for me.
BajaBuzz
|
|
|
tripledigitken
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4848
Registered: 9-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
I stand corrected on the calculation of field of view. It is more complicated than the "rule of thumb" I had mentioned.
(magnification times lens diameter yields field of view)
Thanks goat for correcting me!
Your humble binocular reviewer,
Ken
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
