• 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.

Help me narrow my bino choices (1 Viewer)

vkalia

vkalia

Robin stroker
I'm hoping you guys can help me narrow down my bino choices - I realize that the ultimate choice will be my own, but right now, there are too many choices.

First the backgroud - I have a pair of Bushnell midrange binos which are great for viewing mammals. However, I find it hard to distinguish the finer details when it comes to sorting out LBJs and other smaller birds. Also, due to a sports injury, I am more or less blind in one eye. So I really do want a high-quality pair of binoculars.

Budget is not a constraint for the right pair of binoculars. However, I dont want to spend more just for the brand and for a marginal/hard-to-notice difference in quality (as a photographer, I am well aware of how *that* works....).

To make my choices harder, there are very few decent binos above $200 available in India, where I live currently.

So, on to my questions:

1/ Is there such a significant difference in binos in the $700-900 range and the binos in the $1200-1400 range? In other words, would a Zeiss Victory T* or Leica Trinovid be that much better in quality than, say, a pair of Vortex Stokes DLS? Or,for that matter, is the Leica Ultravid noticeably better than a pair of Leica Trinovids? Essentially, I am trying to get a sense of how different the quality

2/ My current binos are 8x42s. Recently, I had a chance to try a pair of 12x50s, and I really liked the greater magnification of these binos. Give my eye problem, greater magnification comes handy in identifying birdies. The smaller field of view isnt a problem (I shoot with a 500/4 and stacked TCs, so I know all about measly small fields of view).

So I am leaning towards a pair of 10x42s as a good balance between magnification and exit pupil size. What do you guys think?

Thanks,
Vandit
 
I would leave the 12's well alone. Stick to the 10's or 8's and you should be OK. Have you thought about buying a second hand pair? there are lots of great bargains out there. Sorry I can't go into more detail but there are lots of threads on the site re bins...search binoculars, Leica, Zeiss, etc. My ancient 10x Zeiss are still wonderful.
 
vkalia said:
I'm hoping you guys can help me narrow down my bino choices - I realize that the ultimate choice will be my own, but right now, there are too many choices.

First the backgroud - I have a pair of Bushnell midrange binos which are great for viewing mammals. However, I find it hard to distinguish the finer details when it comes to sorting out LBJs and other smaller birds. Also, due to a sports injury, I am more or less blind in one eye. So I really do want a high-quality pair of binoculars.

Budget is not a constraint for the right pair of binoculars. However, I dont want to spend more just for the brand and for a marginal/hard-to-notice difference in quality (as a photographer, I am well aware of how *that* works....).

To make my choices harder, there are very few decent binos above $200






available in India, where I live currently.

So, on to my questions:

1/ Is there such a significant difference in binos in the $700-900 range and the binos in the $1200-1400 range? In other words, would a Zeiss Victory T* or Leica Trinovid be that much better in quality than, say, a pair of Vortex Stokes DLS? Or,for that matter, is the Leica Ultravid noticeably better than a pair of Leica Trinovids? Essentially, I am trying to get a sense of how different the quality

2/ My current binos are 8x42s. Recently, I had a chance to try a pair of 12x50s, and I really liked the greater magnification of these binos. Give my eye problem, greater magnification comes handy in identifying birdies. The smaller field of view isnt a problem (I shoot with a 500/4 and stacked TCs, so I know all about measly small fields of view).

So I am leaning towards a pair of 10x42s as a good balance between magnification and exit pupil size. What do you guys think?

Thanks,
Vandit
Click to expand...



Yes, there is a big difference between the top end binoculars. If you can afford it get your 10x42 in the Leica BN or Ultravid. To my eyes they are the best.

Dennis
 
Thanks guys. Based on my research, I have identified the Zeiss Victory FL 10x42 as my candidate in the top-end bracket. It has gotten a lot of top-notch reviews, is very highly rated by a bunch of online reviews.

Opinions seems split between this and the Leica Ultravid - but the Zeiss is $150 cheaper and my experience with camera glass has taught me that if differences between 2 lenses are hard to identify, then it is best to save the money and go for the cheaper lens.

I recently came across the BVD site, where they have the Nikon Superior E as their reference 10x42 bino. At about half the price, that's a very appealing bino. How reliable are their reviews?

Cheers,
Vandit
 
Here is another review
http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/nikon_superior.html

Be aware thatsome people never like porros, some like porros and roofs much the same, a large number prefer roofs for some reason (even poor ones) over porros, and a small number like porros only. There is a definite difference to me, porros verses roofs. I may be getting rid of my only porros, Nikon Action Ex. I still have small reverse porros, 9x25.
 
The BVD reviews, although some of them are now dated, are quite accurate and certainly not as curt and dismissive as the short one given on the 10 x 42 Superior E in the birdwatching dot com link given above without any analysis. If you require a waterproof binocular then get one of the top roof prisms by Leica, Swaro, Zeiss or Nikon. If you want the best possible view from a 10 x 42 then get the Nikon Superior E Porro prism. I have one I bought 2nd hand in mint condition and I saved $200.00. I am always amazed when I use them. They have a sweet spot that must cover 98% of the view and their sharpness and brightness is unexcelled.
Cordially,
Bob
 
After a lot of reading - pretty much all of today - I am starting to narrow down my choices to 3:

1/ Canon 10x42L IS, which has gotten great reviews everywhere
2/ Zeiss Victory 10x42 T* FL
3/ A cheaper optic (Pentax DCF SP or similar)

Were the Nikon SEs waterproof, I'd have gotten them in a heartbeat and forgotten about everything else. But waterproof I do need.

I have to admit - without comparing the Zeiss to a less expensive bino, I am having a hard time ponying up $1600 for it. I am more of a bird photographer and less of a birder, so that is another reason why I am not willing to pay a significant premium for only a marginal improvement (although, as I said in my initial post, I am happy to pay what it takes for a really good pair of birding glasses).

So if the Pentax helps me identify the same details in a bird that the Zeiss would, I see no reason to pay extra for the Zeiss. That money can pay for my upgrade to the 1D Mk3 instead :)

So, I want to ask you guys your opinion - at what point do you think that the "law of diminishing returns" sets in with waterproof roof 10x42 binos? In other words, at what price point do I get a quality which - while it may be a step down from the $1800 binos - is good enough to let me identify all the subtle details of a bird.

Thanks again.

Vandit
 
There are a lot of features, some individual preferences, some obvious. Some cheap models get everything right, except the optics are somewhat less than ideal. Some expensive models get the optics right but put in less than ideal eye cups, with glare from back light. So you are better off handling some of these in your own hand to make up your mind. If mail order, ask for exchanege policy before you buy.
 
vkalia said:
After a lot of reading - pretty much all of today - I am starting to narrow down my choices to 3:

1/ Canon 10x42L IS, which has gotten great reviews everywhere
2/ Zeiss Victory 10x42 T* FL
3/ A cheaper optic (Pentax DCF SP or similar)

Were the Nikon SEs waterproof, I'd have gotten them in a heartbeat and forgotten about everything else. But waterproof I do need.

I have to admit - without comparing the Zeiss to a less expensive bino, I am having a hard time ponying up $1600 for it. I am more of a bird photographer and less of a birder, so that is another reason why I am not willing to pay a significant premium for only a marginal improvement (although, as I said in my initial post, I am happy to pay what it takes for a really good pair of birding glasses).

So if the Pentax helps me identify the same details in a bird that the Zeiss would, I see no reason to pay extra for the Zeiss. That money can pay for my upgrade to the 1D Mk3 instead :)

So, I want to ask you guys your opinion - at what point do you think that the "law of diminishing returns" sets in with waterproof roof 10x42 binos? In other words, at what price point do I get a quality which - while it may be a step down from the $1800 binos - is good enough to let me identify all the subtle details of a bird.

Thanks again.

Vandit
Click to expand...

Hi Vandit,

Did you read "New 8x25 Canon IS 8x25 Binoculars have HARD focus!" in the Canon Sub-Forum of Binoculars.

This is what Dennis replied to Kimmo...


Originally Posted by kabsetz

[Dennis,

It would be interesting to read a comparison between the 8x25 IS and your full-size 8x42 Zeiss.

Kimmo]



The Zeiss is slightly better optically but I don't think any of the Canons and I have had several gives up much to the Zeiss's and Swarovski's. The edge sharpness of the Canon's is probably the best I have seen in any binoculars. Even better than the Zeiss. The IS sytem more than makes up for the lesser optics in what you can actually see because of all the shaking most people do. The IS system is even a big advantage on the 8x25 even though most people say they can hold an 8x25 steady. I can't! I am shaking all over even at 8X magnifications.
You know you probably get 5% better optics with the $1000+ binoculars and you really have to ask yourself if it is worth it. I don't think any more that I will spend more than $400.00 on binoculars. I think the best values in binoculars now are in the mid price ranges.

Dennis



The only thing i can add, is that i have the Canon IS 10x30 and the image stabilization makes a HUGE difference, in my opinion they are SUPERB.

The Canon IS 10x42L are better in every way.

Good Luck with your final choice. :t:
 
Noooooooooooo... not another choice!!!

Back to my earlier question - how much of an improvement will I see moving from a Pentax DCF SP type of bino to a Zeiss/Leica.

From the photo world, I know that Zeica no longer have the same quality advantage over top Canikon glass - atleast nothing that matters in the real world. The big boys have a lot more R&D and economies of scale, and it shows in the results. And Pentax has always made top-notch glass for less than Canikon. So that does predispose me to think that I will get very close to the optical quality of the Top Guns with this bino.

I imagine that in a direct comparison, the Zeica will indeed be better (I hope, anyway), but for practical birding purposes in the real world, how much of a disadvantage will I have when it comes to identifying birds? In other words, will the Zeiss/Leica help me identify more birds/see markings more clearly, or will they simply "enhance my viewing pleasure"?

If the latter, I'll save my money and get the cheaper optic. If the former, then I'll get the pricier ones.

Things like eyepiece relief are not a problem for me - I wear contacts all the time. My requirements are top optics (in real world terms, not in test chart terms), light, waterproof roofs.

My goal is to bring this list down to 1, and then decide between that and the Canon - or both. There will be times when I can see myself wanting one and not the other.

Vandit
 
Update, in case anyone wants to know - I ended up ordering a Pentax DCF SP 10x43.

My big problem was investing $1400+ in a pair of binoculars I didnt have a chance to hold and try for myself. The Pentax is a lot more reasonable, and will keep me going till I have a chance to compare it to the Leica/Zeiss/Swarovski glass. If the top guns are appreciably better, I will upgrade as well.

And now, the quest for a pair of 8x32... time to hit the Search button a few times.

Thanks for the help, all.

Vandit
 
Now that you have the 10x, the main goal is to get wide fov with the 8x32, at least 390 feet if fov is given in feet. There are in fact a few models. But not as many as there are in 8x42. The 8x42 will also be handy in some situations, but not as handy as 8x32. Good luck. Leupold 8x32 roofs, was it Katmai...was too narrow for me. Perhaps the 8x30 Yosemite.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 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

W
looking for Bino Rec
Replies
16
Views
1K
Trinovid
T
S
Hello from Singapore, Binocular help
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
Chris Pringle
C
P
Feedback wanted on possible choices
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Dyrlege
D
Troubador
Troubador's life with Binoculars
Replies
9
Views
2K
Maljunulo
M
C
Newbie
Replies
12
Views
700
[email protected]
D

Users who are viewing this thread

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