-
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.
Most overrated feature for binoculars? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter lvn600
- Start date
DavidP
Well-known member
RogerO'T said:
I would have thought that was one of the most under rated features, I like to see as much of the world as possible.
One of the most over rated in my opinion would be water proofness , but then i am living in southern california and it seems like a long time ago the last rain storm.
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Thumb depressions
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood
I had a binocular with them and I could not understand why the casing was thickened to have depressions, which I did not use. Maybe it is just a marketing ploy to differentiate a product.lvn600 said:
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood
Last edited:
FrankD
Well-known member
Sure, go ahead, get all of the "water resistant" porro guys even more fired up about their purchases.
:bounce:
How about the texture of the binocular casing? I find the shape of the binocular and placement of the various features much more important to comfort and grip.
Last edited:
So far I'll go with the thumb depressions/ridges. I really hate the Ultravid ridges.
I consider waterproofness to be one of the more important attributes.
I consider waterproofness to be one of the more important attributes.
DavidP
Well-known member
Bill Atwood said:
I'm sure thats right if you're living in Illinois or other more normal places. Out here on the edge of the desert even when it does rain it tends to come in short heavy downpours when you'd be unlikely to be out anyway. I think its about 4 months since it rained here at the moment. By the way I'd take the more consistent year round rainfall anyday.
Actually not so much for midwest weather, but for birding in the tropics. Want to see some wailing and nashing of teeth? Watch someone with fogged up bins on a multi thousand dollar trip where they should get 100-200 lifers.
Its not pretty. Actually sometimes it is funny...folks trying to dry out their bins on a truck's defroster in mid 90 temps.
I also presume waterproofing also means dustproofing.
Its not pretty. Actually sometimes it is funny...folks trying to dry out their bins on a truck's defroster in mid 90 temps.
I also presume waterproofing also means dustproofing.
Curtis Croulet
Well-known member
RobConnel said:
Not in my usage. If binoculars were to be used only for birds, then 10 ft might be adequate, and some birders might indeed have no interest in anything without feathers. But in my world binoculars are also used for insects, reptiles and sometimes even for vegetation, for when I don't want to get down on my hands and knees. That Leica considers 10 ft to be "close" is laughable.
xenophobe
Well-known member
Close focus is overrated. I have my 12x50 BN Trinovids, and the sacrifice you get by making a close focus is a really tempermental near-infinite focus, which I'm really finding to be a PITA. The only saving grace to it is the really nice depth of view that makes up for it.
Just as is Swarovski, Zeiss and Nikon responsible for many of their models with a close focus of 10ft or higher? *shrug* Or are you just slamming one manufacturer for one specific product?
Perhaps you should be using the Brunton Epoch which will focus at 2'7".
Curtis Croulet said:
Just as is Swarovski, Zeiss and Nikon responsible for many of their models with a close focus of 10ft or higher? *shrug* Or are you just slamming one manufacturer for one specific product?
Perhaps you should be using the Brunton Epoch which will focus at 2'7".
Atomic Chicken
Registered with the D.O.E.
Greetings!
For me, it's pretty much EVERY add-on accessory. I don't care about ANY of it... just give me the best optics for the money in a plain bubble-wrap lined cardboard box and I'll be happy. Carry cases, neck straps, cleaning cloths, etc. etc. etc. are all just fluff that you can buy as aftermarket items... I would rather they put the $$$ toward giving me the best optics possible.
Oh yeah... I don't care much for thumb indents either!
Best wishes,
Bawko
For me, it's pretty much EVERY add-on accessory. I don't care about ANY of it... just give me the best optics for the money in a plain bubble-wrap lined cardboard box and I'll be happy. Carry cases, neck straps, cleaning cloths, etc. etc. etc. are all just fluff that you can buy as aftermarket items... I would rather they put the $$$ toward giving me the best optics possible.
Oh yeah... I don't care much for thumb indents either!
Best wishes,
Bawko
Adey Baker
Member
The badge/logo - it doesn't add to the binoculars performance in any way!
Kevin
Registered User (not drugs)
How about price tags of over £200 !!
I tried a pair of Opticons for £160 and a £1000 pair of Swarovski - call me blind, or just plain dumb, but I couldn't see any significant difference. Something to do with the law of diminishing returns?
How does having superb optics at this price level make sense, surely most of us can't hold the binoculars sufficiantly steady to see the benefit?
I bought the Opticon
Bring forth the wrath - I hear it coming already
Kevin
I tried a pair of Opticons for £160 and a £1000 pair of Swarovski - call me blind, or just plain dumb, but I couldn't see any significant difference. Something to do with the law of diminishing returns?
How does having superb optics at this price level make sense, surely most of us can't hold the binoculars sufficiantly steady to see the benefit?
I bought the Opticon
Bring forth the wrath - I hear it coming already
Kevin
Kevin said:
It is true that in side my side testing there is often very little visable difference between £200 bins and £1000 ones. The difference only really shows in extreme viewing conditions - dusk and dawn, rainy, dull days.
It's probably true to say that 90% of the time the £200 bins will perform as well as the £1000 - but it's that other 10% of the time that people pay the money for. One of the things that amazes me about my Leica's is that in failing light I get a brighter image looking through them then I get with just my eyes - they are stunning.
If you're not going to be watching at dawn or dusk, or in miserable weather than save yourself ~£800 and get the cheaper bins. But if you're going to be watching in extreme conditions get the £1000 one, you'll soon be convinced that it was money well spent.
postcardcv said:
I second this.... found a Nightjar on top of a post while down in Devon (Little Haldon Heath) on my holidays, well in to dusk - very poor light - and my Leicas performance were out of this world - extremely detailed viewing (did help that it was perched only 10 metres maximum away from me and my girlfriend.
Amazing
The Bird
