How much binocular weight can you press? (1 Viewer)

As I contemplated a pair of Docter 8x56 Nobilems, I wondered if the 47 oz. weight would be too heavy. It's smaller predecessor, the CZJ 8x50 Octarem didn't seem burdensome at 45 oz. due to its excellent weight distribution. In fact, it seemed easier to hold than the 36 oz. Nikon 10x42 LX roof, with its more centralized weight.

As Ringo would say, "It's all relative, you know". The 29 oz. 804 Aududon normally doesn't seem that heavy for me to hold (only around my neck), but it can at times feel a bit hefty after using the 23 oz. 7x36 ED2, which feels like a "featherweight" due to its open bridge design.

The pre-SV El, another middle weight contender like the Audubon, felt lighter to hold than I had expected when I first hefted it, because I could wrap my hands completely around the barrels and support the bin from below, from the sides, and from above.

I concluded that ergonomics and the type of binoculars both play an important role in "felt" vs. actual weight.

How much weight can you comfortably hold with bins?

Closed bridged roofs? ______
Open bridged roofs? ______
Porros? ______

I can say this much, I can't hold as heavy a pair of binoculars as Arnold's mother, Aurelia:

http://www.thefader.com/ys_assets2/0005/5970/binoculars.jpg

Brock

Hello Brock,

I cannot answer your questions as posed because of a lack of experience, as I have had only one open bridge binocular, that featherweight.

However, I have a little trouble with an 8x50 Leica BA, a roof glass and no trouble with a Zeiss 7x50 Porro.

Aurelia is working with a Porro II binocular which usually has great ergonomics. Both the Royal Navy and German Navy favoured that configuration.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :egghead:

Brock - For some reason I find roofs seemingly weighing more than porros of the same weight if that makes sense. I believe your singling out ergonomics as one of the important elements in actual versus felt weight is valid. Like you I have very large hands so the 7x50 Zeiss porro fits nicely. So does my Zeiss 15x60 BGT, but I must be resting my elbows on my knees with my rear end firmly on the ground for handling that kind of weight comfortably. And I believe a certain amount of mass is essential for steady viewing. My Nikon 10 x 70 is simply too heavy to hold with any degree of comfort with all that mass hanging in front. The binocular weight really becomes an issue with me when the binocular is slung around my neck. Then anything over 25 ounces is too heavy. I'm also a die hard porro fan.

Got shakes?

I can answer for one of each.

Closed bridge roofs-
Swaro SLC 7x42 950 g. I have never had any arm or hand discomfort even using them all day. They are very well balanced and easy to hold.
But on the neck, they're a pain. I tried them with a neck strap when I first got them. I couldn't last more than an hour, or two at most. Since then they've been on a harness every time.

Open bridge roofs-
Vortex Razor 8x42- 900g. I sold these because I thought they were too heavy. That was before I discovered harnesses. I probably should of kept them and used a harness. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Very comfortable to hold. Well balanced. I never had a problem holding them all day long but they hurt my neck. They were fine in the winter with several fleece collars to cushion them but in the summer, with just a shirt collar or teeshirt, they were too much.

Porro-
Bushnell Legend 8x42- 900g. Not so comfortable to hold as the SLC because of the large porro shape rather than the weight. I have small hands so roofs are more comfortable. I use these on a harness too. Although they're the lightest they feel the heaviest.

In terms of holding the bins, I actually like heavy weight bins. The weight adds steadiness. Especially in windy conditions.
This is a recent discovery. I used to d oa lot of backpacking so I always considered low weight to be very important. I looked for it in binoculars without really thinking about it. The low weight is good, heavy is bad mantra had become second nature to me.
But with bins, I have done a u turn. heavy is good so long as the weight is balanced and I have a harness.

I don't think I'd want to go over 1 kg because I do a fair bit of walking while birding so I have to consider the weight. If i was sat in a hide all the time, I could probably use a heavier bin quite happily. I am considering this as i have jus tstarted volunteering on a local reserve so will be in one place all day much of the time. Perhaps some high mag bins for using in the hide instead of a scope?

I can share that my Inpro 9x63 at 54.5oz inclusive of strap become uncomfortable to carry on a 3 hour walk. Gave them a couple of chances for birding as, in dull light they're quite nice to use, but even with a suitable nice strap attached to carry over the shoulder, still found 1545g or 3lb 6.5oz too heavy to carry.
Not to heavy to hold for a short while to observe, but simply not pleasant to lug around for 3 hours.
Surprise eh?

On the other hand, tempted by a few reviews and comment on the pleasure of carrying lightweight, smaller bins, I've been trying out a few 8x32 (or thereabouts) models. Both new Zeiss, older leica, new Minox, new Nikon and a few cheapies. Yes the Zeiss FL's were the best, but I didn't like the lack of weight! Would I get used to it? Possibly,but for the moment gonna stick with 42 + objectives.

My next bin is likely to be the Swaro 15x56. At 1340g/47oz they aren't tidlers, but felt really comfortable...for me.

It's the real lightwts I have trouble with. Weight (i.e., inertia damping) makes for a steadier hold. I find I can hold my 45oz 15x50 IS (with 2 alky batts) steadier (without the IS on, which I hardly ever use anymore) than the 32oz 12x50SE.

John Dracon said:

Brock - For some reason I find roofs seemingly weighing more than porros of the same weight if that makes sense. I believe your singling out ergonomics as one of the important elements in actual versus felt weight is valid.

> snip <

I'm also a die hard porro fan.

Click to expand...

John, I brought this up recently in another thread. The Vortex Viper 8x32 at 20.4 ounces felt no lighter than my 804R Audubon porros at 29.5 ounces. "Go figyah." As a side note, the 19 ounce series of inexpensive porros definitely feel light!

I may need to create a bumper sticker "I (heart symbol) Porros"

I agree with Spyglass, I have the identical package as his 15x50 IS in an 18x50 IS.
The weight of 1220 g. including batteries, helps steadying the image. With IS on I can keep the 18x50's more steady than 7x bins of the non-stabilized kind.
The second best thing of IS, though, is when you keep them to your eyes and with prolonged viewing you feel your arms getting tired, the increasing trembling of your arm muscles doesn't do anything to the steadiness! The image remains rock solid and you can ignore the pain for a while.
Carrying them around the neck is an entirely different matter; then they can get really tiresome and a harness is mandatory. I normally put them in a bag slung across the body, for quick access. I prefer the Zeiss Dialyt 10x40 of 710 g. around my neck, for immediate use, and the 18x50 IS's for back-up in situations when I require a bit more magnification. I nearly always carry a little stool too, which fits in the same bag, so I can sit down and rest my elbows on my knees when I use the 18x50's.
In a hide, especially when it's crowded, the 18x50's are particularly handy, more so than a scope and tripod. Even when resting your elbows on the shelf, the image is more steady than with high mag ordinary bins used this way, and wonderfully comfortable.

I agree with the notion that heavier bins give steadier views than lightweight bins. For this reason I have not bought a top end compact but prefer to carry the 10x40 Dialyts anywhere.

Choosing which owling/nighttime bin is a process I'm still involved in. As I'm likely to walk around several miles with big aperture, around 1 kg. is max.

Best regards,

Ronald

With roofs I prefer the weight to be under 900 grams, ideally in the range of 600 to 800 grams. No real difference between open and closed bridge roofs, I like both equally. Unfortunately this means the Zeiss 8x56 FL doesn't work for me, even though I really, really like the optics. Lighter roofs can be a problem, the compacts are really too light for me to use for extended periods of time. Can't get them steady.

With short porros like the Zeiss West 8x50B or the Hensoldt Fero-D 17 the higher weight doesn't really bother me, and the Fero D-17 (which is similar to the Zeiss 7x50B, but with even thicker, heavier armouring) is *really* heavy (~1450 grams). I can hold them quite easily over extended periods of time, the ergonomics are just about perfect for me.

Carrying binoculars around my neck, well that's a different matter. I don't like harnesses, and any binocular over ~900 grams is to heavy for me.

Hermann

I agree with Hermann, harnesses don´t work for me either. Too restrictive, especially turning towards the side, etc. For this reason, I´ve just traded away the most stunning optics I´ve ever owned (if even for a short while), Canon IS 10x42 L. I can understand that a 15x50 or 18x50 IS might be worth carrying in a shoulder bag, to replace a scope, while carrying lighter binos around the neck. Unfortunately the 10x42L doesn´t replace a scope, and there´s little point toting both 8x and 10x. So sadly, it had to go.
Maybe I´m getting old and feeble, but even a pair of 8x30´s around my neck for extended periods gets tiresome after an hour; I can feel the strain across my shoulders and in my upper verterbrae. When I carry my SV 8.5x42, I tend to hold them off my chest with one hand, and carry them over the shoulder as much as possible.
If Canon, or anyone, ever brought out an 8x bino with IS and premium glass, weighing about the same as the current IS 10x30, I´d go for it.

Poor old enfeebled Sancho!

My imagination had us lined up for a Harley cruising road trip to Lost Creek.

But now I have a mental image of me pushing you around in a bath chair!

A bath chair with a Kowa Highlander mounted on the front of course. :-O