• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Why are 10X50 roof bins not more popular? (1 Viewer)

collinvue

collinvue

Active member
+

First, thanks for all the helpful information here in birdforum, the passion and knowledge is vast.
Been doing lots of reading & educating myself on bins and have a question:

Why are 10X50 roof bins not more popular?
Is it a size factor? weight?

~ I do alot of kayaking and realize the importance of a light paddle,
but the number of paddle strokes in a given day may be thousands.

The question simply comes from what I'v learned here;
regarding light gathering, exit pupil size & field of view ect..

thanks again
 
Last edited:
1. Cost - manufacturers tend to charge a premium for 10x and larger apertures.
2. Stability - 7x is just plain easier to hold stable for most people. The most popular magnification seems to be 8x right now. Those with nerves to hold 10x stable should count themselves lucky. However, that first 5 minutes is far easier to hold 10x steady than an entire day in the field. I'm sure Paddle Arms wouldn't help the situation.
3. Weight - Why get a heavy binocular when a lighter one will do. 8x32 is one of the most convenient formats out there. The 7x35 bins from back in the day were the common format for a reason. Now 7x36 roof prisms are gaining momentum with offerings from several companies.

If I could only have one bin, it would be 8x42, if I wanted to go light, it would be 8x32.
 
If I had my choice to buy a 10x42 and a 10x50 I'd go with the 50mm.
Brighter and only a little heavier.

My ideal group to cover all needs would be:
6x32 / 7x42 / 10x50

Cheers
 
Last edited:
I don't why has to be the case. But 10x50 always has narrower FOV (big minus for me), longer minimal focus distance, and much heavier.
 
All of the 10x50 roof binoculars I've looked at have a narrower field of view than the alternatives (including, I think, porro 10x50s). They're also heavier and frequently have a poorer close focus (again my recollection is that porros are better in the last respect. Personally, I also think the extra weight at the front (due to those 50mm lenses) tends to spoil the balance of such binoculars. Picking bins is always a trade off better various factors - weight, brightness, FoV, etc. However, I think the improved optical quality of modern binoculars means lighter handier 40/42mm perorm satisfactorily well into the dusk,
 
Falcon and John,

I'm not sure about the "always narrower" statement being default for a 10x50 FOV. Not really true.

In fact, all the top end 10x50's (SLC's, Zeiss FL, Meopta, Leica Ultravids) have the same or wider FOV than their 10x42 sibling.

And for close focus... I'd be using these for shorebirds, ducks, etc... so a 12ft close focus wouldn't hurt.

Cheers
 
a lot of birders and butterflies watchers want to have close focus less than 6 ft. I don't think 50mm glasses can deliver that. But for distant viewing, 50mm should give better resolution and brighter field.
 
oleaf said:
Falcon and John,

I'm not sure about the "always narrower" statement being default for a 10x50 FOV. Not really true.

In fact, all the top end 10x50's (SLC's, Zeiss FL, Meopta, Leica Ultravids) have the same or wider FOV than their 10x42 sibling.
Click to expand...
Point taken although I was careful to add the caveat that I was referring to binoculars I'd actually looked through. However, an admittedly superficial glance at a couple of sites does seem to suggest that, at the lower end of the market, 50mm tend to have a less generous FoV. In short I suggest it's something to check when comparing 10x50s and 10x40s. I'd stick by my feeling that 50mm roofs can feel somewhat unwieldy to many folks
 
+

I can appreciate all views simply because there is no wrong answer..hopefully.
There are members who swear 7X36 is all they would ever need, then another says 10X42 works well for them.

Yes, 10X50 is on the larger side,...
but also, there seems to be half steps {like 8.5X45} gaining ground.

Would the next logical full step be 10X50?

There can be alot to take in when learning optics, I hope I'm not missing the big picture
(pun slightly intended ;))
 
John Cantelo said:
Point taken although I was careful to add the caveat that I was referring to binoculars I'd actually looked through. However, an admittedly superficial glance at a couple of sites does seem to suggest that, at the lower end of the market, 50mm tend to have a less generous FoV. In short I suggest it's something to check when comparing 10x50s and 10x40s. I'd stick by my feeling that 50mm roofs can feel somewhat unwieldy to many folks
Click to expand...

I think you are right on the 50mm roof, and that is why a 10x50 Porro can
be easier to handle, easier to set IPD and those big barrels to hold steady.
 
Seems most are pointing out the bad things about 10x50's. There's lots of good things about 50's if you use them for their intended purpose. Chasing warblers is not one of them although I'm sure some do.
 
edwincjones said:
10x50 binoculars get very high praise on the astronomy side for handheld observing edj
Click to expand...

Yes. That is what i like that size for, though now my usual one for that is a Nikon 12x50 SE. 10x50 is also kind of the standard size for folks that monitor comets, etc. as far as a binocular goes. But alot of those users use porros.

I know a number of hawk migration counters who prefer the 10x50 roofs. I have had a chance to look through the Leica versions (non-HD or whatever) at a migration sight, and they are awfully nice.
 
+

After spinning myself in circles on deciding what bins to get,
chose a pair of ED2 @ 10x...very impressive indeed!
Outside of old hand-me-downs, these are my first binoculars.

The quality of glass really does magic for accuracy of view at big distances,
on a crisp/clear winter day, the image is spectacular.
I live on a bit of a hill, the higher magnification works very well for viewing wildlife in my area.

~ Yes this thread was about 50mm objectives, I still believe there is a place for them as the big guns of roof bins.

Happy viewing & New Year to everyone
 
I have had several 10x42s. They are usually steady enough at 22-28oz weight. I also use 8x42, it gives you the same ergonomic feel.

10x50s also are fewer models. There are som 12x pairs, nobody is much impressed with these in the under 1000 dollar category. They would best work on a tripod.
 
kristoffer said:
My neck would die after a day of birding with a pair of 10x50s.
Click to expand...

To me, 50mm is just tad too big for me hold comfortably. But, I was watching the "Sentinel" movie the other night. Those secret service agents all handheld some 60-70mm binoculars siingle-handed on top of roof top. I felt muscle strain already. ;)
 
NWBirder said:
To me, 50mm is just tad too big for me hold comfortably. But, I was watching the "Sentinel" movie the other night. Those secret service agents all handheld some 60-70mm binoculars siingle-handed on top of roof top. I felt muscle strain already. ;)
Click to expand...

Only in the Movies!:-O
Bob
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

I
Analysis Paralysis- Please help me choose!
2 3
Replies
42
Views
2K
Patudo
P
has530
4 Compacts Briefly Reviewed, Vintage Vs. Modern Head to Head
Replies
7
Views
3K
Bino Steve
B
dwatsonbirder
Compact comparisons: Low end vs high end
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Rg548
R
etc
New Leica Ultravid HD Plus 12x50 - compared with Swarovski EL 12x50 and Zeiss 10x54 HT
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
ReinierB
R
looksharp65
EDG 7x42 and Meostar B1.1 8x32 head to head
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
Scott98
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top