10X binoculars necessary (1 Viewer)

I have just returned from a birding trip to Southeastern Airzona. Besides my scope I took a Nikon Premiuer LXl 8X32 and a Pentax DCF SP 10X50. After the first day I stowed by 8X32 and exclusively used my 10X50. My 8X just did not give me enough detail to identify new birds. I used the 10X in all conditions - in the woods and in the desert, and on warblers. The 10X were a huge help with the hummingbirds.

I met birders who had 7X or 8X and a 10X and they were using just the 10X because the lower magnification bins did not give them the detail they wanted.

Back in the midwest an 8X works fine. In fact I can identify most birds without a pair of bins. But with new birds I need all the detail I can get.

I am now planning to order a new pair of 10X bins, either a 10X42 or a 10X32.
A gentleman let me try his 10X32 Zeiss FLs, and they were very nice.

Of course, it is all a personal choice.

By the way, it rained alot in SE Arizona! Was cloudy most the the 8 days I was there, and I rarely saw the sun. But the overcast skies did keep the temperature down. The highs were rarely above the low 80s.

Lew

If you are able to use 10x, do! Otherwise..maybe get a monopod. I have been looking at some 10x that are smaller, 30-34mm. But I want MORE fov if I spend more money. Good luck.

Added: If you think you found the birds with 10x, not lost due to fov, then you have not really lost anything using 10x. If you simply cannot hold it, you are going to ID more at 8x.

BUT, WAIT till the first good 9x shows up!

Tero said:

If you are able to use 10x, do! Otherwise..maybe get a monopod. I have been looking at some 10x that are smaller, 30-34mm. But I want MORE fov if I spend more money. Good luck.

Click to expand...

The high end 10 x 32's that I have either owned or borrowed have all offered very generous fields of view - more, actually than their 10 x 42 siblings. Unfortunately, all have also suffered from extemely shallow depth of field (focus). If you can handle the weight, try the 10 x 42s - for me, its the depth of field and not the extra brightness at dusk which makes the extra weight worth the effort.

Hmm, interesting comments. Though I live "back east" I have been pondering the benefit of 10x bins lately. I have owned several over the past few years but have sold them all at one point or another because of the restricted field of view, shallow depth of field or just the increased difficulty I have had trying to hold them steady.

Yet, I always find myself wondering whether or not there are any birding situations where a 10x bin might truly offer a distinct advantage over an 8x model. The only one that immediately comes to mind is hawk watching...but then I have just been using my 8x's for that and do not seem to have a problem finding and ID'ing birds.

Do I really need a 10x bin for birding?

Aztec Thrush?

Lewie said:

I have just returned from a birding trip to Southeastern Airzona. Besides my scope I took a Nikon Premiuer LXl 8X32 and a Pentax DCF SP 10X50. After the first day I stowed by 8X32 and exclusively used my 10X50. My 8X just did not give me enough detail to identify new birds. I used the 10X in all conditions - in the woods and in the desert, and on warblers. The 10X were a huge help with the hummingbirds.

I met birders who had 7X or 8X and a 10X and they were using just the 10X because the lower magnification bins did not give them the detail they wanted.

Back in the midwest an 8X works fine. In fact I can identify most birds without a pair of bins. But with new birds I need all the detail I can get.

I am now planning to order a new pair of 10X bins, either a 10X42 or a 10X32.
A gentleman let me try his 10X32 Zeiss FLs, and they were very nice.

Of course, it is all a personal choice.

By the way, it rained alot in SE Arizona! Was cloudy most the the 8 days I was there, and I rarely saw the sun. But the overcast skies did keep the temperature down. The highs were rarely above the low 80s.

Lew

Click to expand...

Did you get a chance to see an Aztec Thrush in AZ?

FrankD said:

Hmm, interesting comments. Though I live "back east" I have been pondering the benefit of 10x bins lately. I have owned several over the past few years but have sold them all at one point or another because of the restricted field of view, shallow depth of field or just the increased difficulty I have had trying to hold them steady.

Yet, I always find myself wondering whether or not there are any birding situations where a 10x bin might truly offer a distinct advantage over an 8x model. The only one that immediately comes to mind is hawk watching...but then I have just been using my 8x's for that and do not seem to have a problem finding and ID'ing birds.

Do I really need a 10x bin for birding?

Click to expand...

Frank,

Many hawk watchers, who spend countless hours scanning the sky, use 8X bins. Personally, I alternate between my 7X42 Ultravid and 8X32 SE. Jerry Liguori, author of "Hawks From Every Angle" uses a 7X42.
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=45967
Read the reviews at
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691118256/104-2457791-7622312?v=glance&n=283155

John

tominadel said:

Did you get a chance to see an Aztec Thrush in AZ?

Click to expand...

I was fortunate enough to see the Aztec Thrush. The Thrushes did not seem to be frightened of all the poeple around. I saw one on both a Saturday and a
Sunday. Satruday was kind of tough becasue it was raining, and everyhting was wet. I thank all the birders who helped point out the Thrush to me and others. Persons said that a week earlier there were at least 10 Aztec Thrushes.

I did not get to see the Flame-colored Tanager, however. Did see plenty of hummers, including Blue-throated, magnificent, Lucifer, Berrlline,
Broad-billed, Rufous. Thought I might have seen an Allen's, but they look so much like the Rufous, I do not know. I have never seen so many hummers before. I was so excited when I saw my first Blue-throated and first Magnificent; little did I know that I would see lots of them later in the trip.
I did not see the White-eared (I believe that is the name), but I heard that others had seen quite a few in -- RAmsey canyon I believe.

The 10X32 Zeiss FL I tried while watching humers -- I thought gave good depth of field.

chartwell99 said:

for me, its the depth of field and not the extra brightness at dusk which makes the extra weight worth the effort.

Click to expand...

Same here, 10x42 because of depth of field.

I swich binoculars seasonally or depending on where i go birdwatching.
Forests or dense foliage- 8x32
Open terain and winter - 10x42.

Luca said:

I swich binoculars seasonally or depending on where i go birdwatching.
Forests or dense foliage- 8x32
Open terain and winter - 10x42.

Click to expand...

Same here sort of...

trekking in forests I'll have 6x30 Fujinons w/8x30 Hensoldt DFs in a belt pouch or the same 6x30/8x30s with a 7x50 Fujinon monocular that mounts on a monopod if the forest is really dark and dense.

But for viewing our back pasture from our biggest viewing platform 500 ft away we use 10x50 Zeiss Dekarems with a super wide 73 degree AFOV or even Yukon 12x50 WAs. The blackbirds nest in the marsh areas at the back of this pasture and the males sit on top of 3-4 foot tall curly dock stalks overlooking the nests. The density of the nests every 3 or 4 feet apart means there is no trekking allowed through that area during nesting season. Long distance viewing is all that is allowed. The platform is pretty sturdy so quite a few people use scopes. A wide angle 10x/12x allows birders to view the "action" as all the males stay busy gettinjg food for the females & fledglings or fussing with each other.

When we visited Las Vegas at Christmastime this past year, we took a variety of binoculars. I used the CZJ 10x50s effectively and another friend had the 10x40 Swaro Habichts that were also great. The terrain in the desert southwest of the USA can make it difficult to approach birds and there always seems to be a huge rock available to brace against for a less shakey view. I find that super wide angle 10x binoculars are much more usable because even if the view shakes a bit because the object can be kept in the FOV. The 10x30 Leupold reverse porros have a wide-ish field of view and they are very handy. I have a pair I use in winter when the footing is less stable on snow. They are bulletproof and usable w/one hand.

2 oldies but goodies are the old high-end Nikon 10x35 and the Mercury 10x35 model 116 porros, both with a nice wide view, magnesium body and traditional shape that is easy to hold. The optics are very sharp too. As much as I don't care for roof prism binoculars, the 10x42 Discovery Channel Ultimate Precision phase-coated, waterproog (notro filled) roofers are super quality and reasonably priced normally at $149. But when I got 3 pairs for $222 total, w/shipping-handling incl., I began to carry them where I or others might damage more expensive bins.

The desert has always seemed like a mean place to me. I lived 10 years in the California and Nevada deserts and they can chew up binoculars. I've been amazed at how a seemingly innocent wind on an otherwise beautiful day can whip up enough sand to permanently scratch my objectives, while helping ultra-fine grit to invade the joints and twist-up eyecups. So I took the ranch's 3 prs of Discovery 10x42s through Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona to Las Vegas and everyone enjoyed the views through them too. A 10x binocular is great for use in wide open areas or places where the birds roost on a cliff face, or if you see them on the other side of a steep canyon/gully. A wider field of view, (all the bins I mentioned have 6+ degree fields of view, and most have 7 degree FOV) allows a birder to stand ... in a light breeze ... since most of the ground will be hard and firm, and still hold an object in view in spite of slight shaking.

Jerry Liguori, author of "Hawks From Every Angle" uses a 7X42

Click to expand...

I have that book but did not know that info. Thank you for sharing your thoughts John. Time to head up to the Knob soon.

chartwell99 said:

The high end 10 x 32's that I have either owned or borrowed have all offered very generous fields of view - more, actually than their 10 x 42 siblings. Unfortunately, all have also suffered from extemely shallow depth of field (focus). If you can handle the weight, try the 10 x 42s - for me, its the depth of field and not the extra brightness at dusk which makes the extra weight worth the effort.

Click to expand...

Hi Tom,

Up to a point, I enjoyed my 10x42 SLC's for shorebirding, but then had to concede that the 10x50 Kestrel-Audubon had clear advantages when it came to wide-field stereo viewing, low-light birding, and precision focusing (the SLC is almost too fast). Still, I was rather surprised that the 8.5x44 804ED showed them both up for long distance viewing. Since the standard 804 did not, it may be that the use of ED glass for longitudinal CA correction makes the critical difference. (I've fallen into the trap of single sample, biased thinking, but still don't believe that much in explanations based on sample variations.) So to me the 8x vs. 10x debate makes sense when all else is equal; however, I would suggest that a well corrected 8x may actually perform better than a 10x, even for high-end products.

Ed

I was out looking at our visiting Swallow-tailed Kite. I saw essentially the same amount of detail with 8x and 10x roofs. With birds that size, brightness may be the important issue so you can see shades and colors if possible. A dark silhouette is more difficult.

Depth of field OK at 10x42 and 8x32. The 10x is the better binocular, but there were no problems at 8x either. I guess if I was to switch to mostly 8x, I would go with 8x42. I have these because they are compact. Less weight, less likely to be suspicious as carry on lugage on air lines.