The "serious birder" fallacy

[Robert Ellis]

Magnification is in no way an indication of how serious or skilled a birder one is. To say that serious birders only use 10x is not true. Who is to say what constitutes a serious birder?

I posses multiple college degrees focusing on bilogy and ecology. I have birded seriously for 10 of my 26 years. With one good trip to go I will pass 600 birds on my life list before the year is done. I work with birds, I pass leisure time with birds, I plan trips around birding. I am sure there are those more "serious" me, but surely I am myself a serious birder and ornithologist.

I also use low power binoculars, as do many of our favorite birding authors and representatives. There are also many serious birders who use high powered binoculars and I will not fool myself into thinking I am doing things the ony way they can be done. Magnification is ony of myriad specifications and personal preferences that make up each person's own idea of their preferred binocular.

There is no hard and fast connection between one's skill, dedication, success, and pleasure and the magnification of their binoculars. To each his own, and leave me to mine if you please.

[AlanFrench]

Magnification is in no way an indication of how serious or skilled a birder one is. To say that serious birders only use 10x is not true. Who is to say what constitutes a serious birder?
[SNIP]
There is no hard and fast connection between one's skill, dedication, success, and pleasure and the magnification of their binoculars. To each his own, and leave me to mine if you please.

Robert,

Darn! And I thought my use of 12x binoculars put me up in the stratosphere.

Actually, I agree. This is a hobby - a way we choose to enjoy our free time. I have never understood why so many folks fret about "the right way to do things" or the "perfect and correct choice of equipment." It happens in pretty much any hobby, and I've noticed it a lot in amateur astronomy.

Clear skies, Alan

(They are clear here, and I am in taking a break from some nice views of Mars. A good spotting scope should show a few markings at 60x. Hmmm. Let me see how my little 65mm does.)

[lucznik]

Robert,

I'm a little confused. Most of the posts I read here seem to favor the lower end of the magnification scheme. In fact, the only people I know who consistently favor 10X or higher in their binocylars seem to be hunters. Yet, your post seems to be written as a response to some attack which appears to be nonexistent. Can you please clarify?

[jacquot]

Look around, there is a big debate. I recently bought a great pair of Nikon 10x42 SE's to use for hawk watching, and love them, but they have also had me appreciate my 8x42 Elites that much more. And it is not just the difference in power, but the fast focus, and handling differences, too. I like them both, for different purposes. I look forward to 'knowing' the Nikons better; I doubt they would ever be my all around every day glass. Would another 10x? I don't know....

[Jonathan B.]

Robert,

I'm a little confused. Most of the posts I read here seem to favor the lower end of the magnification scheme. In fact, the only people I know who consistently favor 10X or higher in their binocylars seem to be hunters. Yet, your post seems to be written as a response to some attack which appears to be nonexistent. Can you please clarify?

lucznik,

Robert's comment is a response to a personal attack on him, made in a forum that is now temporarily shut down (by Katy Penland), and from which several mud-slinging posts were removed.

I spend a lot of time birding, and in all the time I have been with other birders, I have never heard a birder state an opinion about the superiority or inferiority of their or another birder's equipment. I have never heard a birder claim to have superior skills. The birders I associate with share information about birds, birding, and related topics.

Whether birding or not, I generally avoid people who have nothing to offer but opinions. Most such people are ill-informed, juvenile, and do not want to learn.

[AlanFrench]

lucznik,

Robert's comment is a response to a personal attack on him, made in a forum that is now temporarily shut down (by Katy Penland), and from which several mud-slinging posts were removed.

I spend a lot of time birding, and in all the time I have been with other birders, I have never heard a birder state an opinion about the superiority of inferiority of their or another birder's equipment. I have never heard a birder claim to have superior skills. The birders I associate with share information about birds, birding, and related topics.

Whether birding or not, I generally avoid people who have nothing to offer but opinions. Most such people are ill-informed, juvenile, and do not want to learn.

I think there is a difference between how people behave in person and how they behave on the various forums on the internet, or perhaps it is simply different populations of people. I do most of my birding by myself or with one other person, so I can't really speak of the birding crowd. I do spend a lot of time with other amateur astronomers. They seem to fit your description of birders, although I have run into some exceptions.

On some forums, things are quite different...

Clear skies, Alan

[xenophobe]

There is no hard and fast connection between one's skill, dedication, success, and pleasure and the magnification of their binoculars.

You can add how big someone's species list is to that as well.

Just because a pizza delivery boy drives more than I do doesn't mean I would would let him tell me how I should order my pizza, or how I should drive.

I prefer high magnification over lower ones. Just my personal preference using my eyes and my comfort factor as judge...

edit: That sounds like a personal attack after reading it... No jab at you Robert.... it's more aimed at that other person, but I think I'm intelligent enough and my eyesight (unaided visual acuity lol) good enough to determine what is best to me.

[Robert Ellis]

I understand that it was not a jab. I added my "specs" becuase that is how some are convinced one is serious. I also know a very serious birder who birds the same park year round, nearly every day, to record what is there. The park maybe sees 250 species if it is lucky. More than "seriousness" my list may show my "field experience" and can show to those who do not know me that I know what I am talking about, no armchair birder here.

[ceasar]

I think there is a difference between how people behave in person and how they behave on the various forums on the internet, or perhaps it is simply different populations of people. I do most of my birding by myself or with one other person, so I can't really speak of the birding crowd. I do spend a lot of time with other amateur astronomers. They seem to fit your description of birders, although I have run into some exceptions.

On some forums, things are quite different...

Clear skies, Alan
Glad to know there is another amateur astronomer here!

As for our disagreements, many are inadverdent and they could be avoided simply by re-reading what we said before we post it and then re-writing it where necessary. What we are involved in is really not conversation. It's more like an exchange of ideas and opinions.

Ditto on the clear skies. (Not to mention "clear thoughts.")

Bob

[Curtis Croulet]

Glad to know there is another amateur astronomer here!

Here's another one.

[Jos Stratford]

What a waste of time thread :)

The end answer is use whichever binocular you are happy with - if you want to use 5x or 20x, only you should care. No binocular, be it top range Leica 10x42 or bargain base 8x50 or whatever is anything other than a tool. It is the person behind them that is either serious or not, skilled or not, cares in the slightest what other people think or not.

So, anyone with a hang-up over someone else's bins, better you go out and use your won a bit more :)

PS1. use 10x42 myself, but occasionally take a pair of compacts out with me on what is clearly my less serious days

PS2. also, if you've got a hang-up about someone not appreciating if you are or are not serious, don't worry about starting a thread on it, but also go out and do some birding!

[the bird]

The end answer is use whichever binocular you are happy with - if you want to use 5x or 20x, only you should care. No binocular, be it top range Leica 10x42 or bargain base 8x50 or whatever is anything other than a tool. It is the person behind them that is either serious or not, skilled or not, cares in the slightest what other people think or not.



Jos I totally and utterly agree!!!!


Mr Ellis - if anyone believes they are a more serious birder just because of the bins or scope or boots or jacket they have, then they are seriously fooling themselves. In this instance get face to face with these people, turn round, bend over, pull your pants down, show them your backside and tell 'em to kiss it!!!


Birding is about appreciation of the natural world, not some piece of "jewelery" that you hang around your neck or carry on your shoulder, etc.


Keep birding,


John.

[iporali]

Darn! And I thought my use of 12x binoculars put me up in the stratosphere.
Or when I got my first binoculars (16x50 Zuihos) I shouldn't have felt envy of my buddy's 8-20x50 Zooms...? ;)

Ilkka

[Tannin]

So .... which binoculars are recommended for properly serious backside viewing?

[the bird]

So .... which binoculars are recommended for properly serious backside viewing?



bins with very close focusing!!!

[Blackstart]

So .... which binoculars are recommended for properly serious backside viewing?
Ones with ass-pherical lenses, of course.

-Adam

[postcardcv]

So .... which binoculars are recommended for properly serious backside viewing?

ones with a wide FOV ;)

[Sandy Martin]

It is a very brave man that calls himself an ornithologist, even the real thing shy away from that description of themselves.

[London Birder]

It is a very brave man that calls himself an ornithologist, even the real thing shy away from that description of themselves.

:clap:

[Robert Ellis]

Pardon me, but I am paid to be a bird expert and study birds, why not an ornithologist? I did not go through school to be called "that bird guy."

[Tim Allwood]

Magnification is in no way an indication of how serious or skilled a birder one is. .

oh yes it is!

real dudes use over 10 x

dudes use 10 x

birders use 8 x

top birders use 7 x

well..... there's a teeny bit of truth in it! :D

[Jos Stratford]

Off to buy myself the latest 1x bins, reckon that'll make me the cream of the crop :)

[the bird]

oh yes it is!

real dudes use over 10 x

dudes use 10 x

birders use 8 x

top birders use 7 x

well..... there's a teeny bit of truth in it! :D


Tim - you saying I a dude - used 10x since I was about 10 years old and I don't wear any of the clothing associated with being a dude. Also I've laughed at dudes all my life.

TIM - I FEEL HURT!!!

(If you ever see anyone in a bright lemon yellow jacket while you're out birding - thats gonna be from now on)


John.

[Tim Allwood]

Off to buy myself the latest 1x bins, reckon that'll make me the cream of the crop :)

nah, that's a bit too much for me mate...

stick to the eyes

cheaper too

[pduxon]

oh yes it is!

real dudes use over 10 x

dudes use 10 x

birders use 8 x

top birders use 7 x

well..... there's a teeny bit of truth in it! :D

out of curiosity Mr A which mag do you use perchance
8-P

[Tim Allwood]

out of curiosity Mr A which mag do you use perchance
8-P

20 x 50

saves on a scope at least

Tim

[Adey Baker]

oh yes it is!

real dudes use over 10 x

dudes use 10 x

birders use 8 x

top birders use 7 x

well..... there's a teeny bit of truth in it! :D

I was beginning to think I'd turned into a Dude when I cut down on twitching and bought a 'Country Innovation' fleece jacket - now it's confirmed, I can eat a hearty breakfast whilst checking on the rain before deciding whether to go out birding... ;)

[postcardcv]

birders use 8 x

top birders use 7 x


Cool so my recent change in binoculars have moved me from 'bird' to 'top birder'... :loveme:

[medinabrit]

i would presume that most birders use low power binos because of the shake factor in the higher power bins .i also feel pretty sure that if most birders ever tried the canon IS binos they might decide to go bigger .,please dont go telling me about the superiority of the high end stuff . i have some of them .but find the IS BINOS are the most suitable for most viewing .hope i have not ruffled any ones feathers . this is just my humble opinion.
brian

[the bird]

everybody keeps mentioning the shakes when dealing with 10x's or higher - is this forum full of very nervous people, very stressed people, very old people (100 years +) or am I totally missing something here???

I'm mean granted if they were 15 x 60's or some such mag I could understand but I use 10x42's never had a problem keeping them steady.

(But I do have the arm muscles of Arnie - err - no I don't)

:eek!:

[Jonathan B.]

everybody keeps mentioning the shakes when dealing with 10x's or higher - is this forum full of very nervous people, very stressed people, very old people (100 years +) or am I totally missing something here???

I think those are what they call "twitchers"--people who shake so much from infirmity that they can't hold anything steady. The really serious ones use 10x bins and brace them against something.

[the bird]

I think those are what they call "twitchers"--people who shake so much from infirmity that they can't hold anything steady. The really serious ones use 10x bins and brace them against something.


nice and very true

[Alexis Powell]

To Jos and others who consider Robert's point a waste of time,

Robert's defense of the use of <10x binos is a useful contribution to this forum beyond just defending his own practice. There are others on this forum who have disparaged the use of <10x binos and who have advised neophyte bino buyers to consider nothing less. Those of us who sing the praises of <10x binos more often than not face an uphill battle convincing relatively inexperienced birders/bino users to consider <10x binos. Naive buyers often assume that the more powerful, the better (though they don't always think bigger is better, which is why there are so many companies that offer over-powered or zoom compacts). Beginning birders are often dismayed at how small birds are, even when viewed through 10x binos, because they are wanting a view that is directly comparable to the pictures in their fieldguide. They don't realize how much the ability of experienced birders to identify distant birds (very frequently without even using binos!) is based on profound brain "rewiring", which occurs (unconsciously) through experience/training, integrating countless hours of visual experience with hundreds/thousands of species (their form, from countless angles and different types of lighting, AND their behavior), learning (unconsciously) to actually look for tiny details in tiny distant objects (details that are there for anyone, who looks, to see!), integrating knowledge of what the possibilities for identification are in a given location, habitat, season...and supplemented by the ability to identify most species by ear (and not just by song, but often by call, flight note, "chip" note or other vocalizations that many beginners are not attentive to). RATHER, beginners often quickly conclude that the experienced birders have super-human vision, that their own vision is lacking, and that they need all the help they can get in the form of higher bino magnification.

Contributing to the 10x bias, at least in the US, was the overwhelming popularity of a particular model, the Zeiss 10x40 Classic, among many "serious" birders during the late 1980s and early 90s. This model was popular for many reasons apart from its magnification, but the contrast of the 10x power to the 7x35 configuration that was previously so familiar, led many to believe that power was the primary reason for the model's popularity. So it was a bit shocking when so many prominant birders/birding popularizers (Pete Dunne, David Sibley, the Stokes, the Porters to name a few) adopted the Zeiss 7x42 Classic as their preferred glass when it came on the market.

As for myself, I much prefer <10x binos, despite :) the fact that I am, according to my friends, a "serious" birder in the extreme, a bino fancier of insane proportions, and am even some sort of ornithologist (I am a doctoral student, studying avian systematics and evolution)! I fully acknowledge the legitimacy of 10x binos for birding (some of my best friends use them! :), particularly for those who do much viewing of birds at long distances, or whose birding style is the type I call "rifle" viewing (meaning that they almost always find the bird with their eyes first, then use binos to look at it, then put binos back down to look for next). I'm more often a birder of brush, woods, and wetlands, and I'm a "scanner"--I frequently use my binos to scan brush/foliage, and after I find one bird I often scan around it for others. For me, the tiny difference in magnification between 7 or 8x and 10x is insignificant next to the tradeoff in field-of-view and depth-of-field, both of which are so useful to me for finding birds, and getting on them quickly and comfortably. I see the same issue/debate with scopes. I use a Nikon 78mm Fieldscope ED with wide-angle 30x eyepiece. For me, 30x is often the limit of useful magnification under field conditions, and the field of view is **HUGE** compared to any zoom (even the Zeiss). I can't bear to scan, which is what I do much of the time when using a scope, with zooms because of their narrow field. Yes, I have fixed 50 and 75x eyepieces, and even the 25-75x zoom, but I use them extremely rarely.

I have a "collection" of 25+ binos, most of them of fairly recent vintage and of premium quality. I obviously haven't been limited in my choice of what I use for birding by what I could (past tense, since now that I'm back in school I don't have the income I once did) buy, and what I buy has been driven primarily by my birding preferences/experience. My only 10x are a Nikon 10x42 Venturer LX/HG (which I bought just because I thought I ought to have a premium 10x roof, and to use for hawk, shorebird, and gull watching--I picked this model for its long eye-relief and awesome image quality--but I've ended up using it only rarely, even when hawk, shorebird, and gull watching!) and a Leica 10x25 Trinovid (which seemed to work better for me than the 8x model, though I now use a Zeiss 8x20 Victory). My overall favorite bino for birding isthe Swarovski 8.5x42 EL (and not because of its extra 0.5x !!!).
--AP

[iporali]

Q: Define a "serious birder".
A: A birder, who takes the power of his/her bins too seriously.

Ilkka

[James Eaton]

This is a brilliant thread! Tim, you've made me believe that once again I can call myself a birder, having previously been told I am not due to my inferior size compared to the rest, I have a paltry 8x32.

Do you also have to be rich to be able to have the distinction of being called a 'serious birder', I know a number of people who observe birds for not just as a living, but also as a hobby, yet then simply can't afford to buy a pair of Swarovski's, Leicas or Zeiss, what are these people? Dare I say amateurs? like the rest of us?!

Its all down to personal preference on what optics are best suited for yourself,stop worrying about how good you look. You may have a pair of Leicas, but the wax jacket, flat cap and wellington boots just don't pull it off!

PS - Lighten boyz!

[Tim Allwood]

seriously now

if u do bird a lot it prob involves rainforest at some point. So u want excellent light gathering etc. Hence people doing this use 7 or 8.

been paid to work with birds, edited journals etc but am i an ornithologist? Nah.

[postcardcv]

posts seem to be appearing and disappearing on this thread...

I thing that tav is just trying to wind people up, I find it hard to believe that anyone could really think that you need a specific optical set up to be a serious/proper birder.

[the bird]

posts seem to be appearing and disappearing on this thread...

I thing that tav is just trying to wind people up, I find it hard to believe that anyone could really think that you need a specific optical set up to be a serious/proper birder.


I hope he is trying wind us up... but you never know there are a lot of stupid sods out there!!!

[Andy Bright]

posts seem to be appearing and disappearing on this thread...

I thing that tav is just trying to wind people up, I find it hard to believe that anyone could really think that you need a specific optical set up to be a serious/proper birder.
It's getting rather silly with troll type posts. I think we'd be better off closing this one. It hasn't served any real purpose other than stating the bleedin' obvious ;)
So if we could wind this up quickly, it would be appreciated.

Andy.

[matt green]

anyone remember russ abbots tv commercial for classic cigars,the one with the huuuuge binoculars.thats serious!

matt

[dbradnum]

So if we could wind this up quickly, it would be appreciated.

Andy.
That's easy - as far as I can see, Jos said all that needed saying in post 11 !