[WilsonsWarbler]

I used to think I couldn't hold a 10 steady, but I've been using the Euro HD for a few months now and no issues. The extra magnification does help at times, especially with longer distance birding done in open county during winter. The DOF is actually good as well on this particular 10. I guess both 8x and 10x have their places.

Although I don't have one, I'd tend to agree that a wide FOV 10 is a great all around tool. I was always tempted to try the Minox HG in a 10 as I think it has a 355 foot FOV, or something like that.

[black crow]

As I've mentioned 10 is just a tad too much for me. I stepped down to a 9x and got 371'FOV which almost seems expansive at that power. Along with my 7x that I usually use I really could do without all my other bins. (but only if forced by armed police officers)

[14Goudvink]

Originally Posted by typo

Steve,

Thanks. I've been meaning to try out a couple of stabilisation ideas, but not got round to sourcing thread adaptors. I don't like carrying too much stuff and two binos is OK but I'm looking for a better solution.

David

I get the impression that wearing thick gloves, like lambskin ones, also helps to reduce image shake, especially the 'high-frequency'-vibrations. Maby I should wear gloves in summer too...

[14Goudvink]

Originally Posted by looksharp65

Yes. My idea postulates that the binoculars in question must be of high quality in every respect. Why own two inferior bins instead of one superior?
But why not own two superior bins instead of one?

Your comparison between your Leicas is interesting and makes me wonder whether I should really get a Zen 7x43 (not to mention a Zeiss Night Owl 7x45 ) when I'm so perfectly satisfied with the Fury 6.5x32.

If you really couldn't see more detail with the SE 10x42, you're probably shaking too much to make use of the greater magnification.
Does it really have that much better contrast compared to the Nikon?
It might also be that the Leica resolves better, indicating a possible fault with your Nikon...

//L

Yes, better have two superior bins

My point about the Leica ultravid 8x32/Nikon 10x42 SE is that in murky weather at long range more magnification can be compensated for by better contrast. I have an older SE (008xxxx) and in normal conditions it does show more detail, just as a good ten should compared to a good 8. But of course the comparison should be between a 8 and a 10 of equal contrast.

George

[typo]

Originally Posted by 14Goudvink

I get the impression that wearing thick gloves, like lambskin ones, also helps to reduce image shake, especially the 'high-frequency'-vibrations. Maby I should wear gloves in summer too...

I've been wondering if a more 'fluid' coupling between hands and binos would work. Lambskin gloves might do it. I figured that a damping rod akin to the handing monopod would do it but not the most convenient solution. For me at least weight works. My 12x comes naturally damped at 1.2kg. Balancing a 500g 'bean bag' on top of my light 9x and 10x definitely helps. Maybe the 'frog' design isn't the best choice for the field.

David

[vop]

Originally Posted by typo

I've been wondering if a more 'fluid' coupling between hands and binos would work. Lambskin gloves might do it. I figured that a damping rod akin to the handing monopod would do it but not the most convenient solution. For me at least weight works. My 12x comes naturally damped at 1.2kg. Balancing a 500g 'bean bag' on top of my light 9x and 10x definitely helps. Maybe the 'frog' design isn't the best choice for the field.

David

Just get yourself a steady cam arrangement, and you're set! If you're not bothered with weight...

[typo]

Bolt on gyro stabilisation for binos as well?!

http://www.ken-lab.com/

David

[BrightIdea]

Is that how the canon IS series works?

[typo]

Originally Posted by BrightIdea

Is that how the canon IS series works?

I'm sure others know the exact mechanism, but I believe they actuate an optical element to counteract movement. Probably involves a gyro in there somewhere, but it's the 'view' rather than the whole bino that is stabilised.

David

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by looksharp65

Hi Ed!

Opinions will vary, and I guess that rather than trying to find the single #1 binocular, I like to fool around with different configurations to tweak performance.
That's the lion's share of the OGS (Optics Geek Syndrome), I think.

With all due respect, I doubt that your Swaro will equal or beat the fine-tuned performance that my current set provides.
Can you honestly say that it has the ease and speed of a 6x and the power of a 10x?
My guess is that it is ideal for your purposes. But my birding goes between garden birds at 2 meters and scanning the nature reserve at up to 1000 meters and beyond. ...

//L

Actually, I can and do use my single 8x42 (yes, it's a Swaro SLC HD) for both very near (6 ft.) and very far (1500 yd.) birding, and can easily identify species for bird counts. No point getting into telescope uses over longer distances, because I don't have any, i.e., uses or telescopes, but I will admit that compacts have their place for travel. Unfortunately, even small exit pupils no longer allow me to use them without glasses, so I've had to forgo my old pocket Swaros for 8x20 Leicas. If they had made the damned eye relief just 2mm longer it wouldn't have been necessary, but at least the Leica has a usable 16mm (the 10x25 doesn't). One nice part about retaining 8x, though, is the easy skill transfer between the two instruments. So, I don't take two when one will do.

Regards,
Ed

[NDhunter]

Ed:

I agree with you here, and that is 8X is a great choice for an overall pick for magnification.

Others sizes are good too, but there really is only one size that fits all. I am thinking a
survey of users, and a survey of sales of binoculars would confirm.

The OP mentioned compromise, and so it is.

Jerry

[looksharp65]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Actually, I can and do use my single 8x42 (yes, it's a Swaro SLC HD) for both very near (6 ft.) and very far (1500 yd.) birding, and can easily identify species for bird counts. No point getting into telescope uses over longer distances, because I don't have any, i.e., uses or telescopes, but I will admit that compacts have their place for travel. Unfortunately, even small exit pupils no longer allow me to use them without glasses, so I've had to forgo my old pocket Swaros for 8x20 Leicas. If they had made the damned eye relief just 2mm longer it wouldn't have been necessary, but at least the Leica has a usable 16mm (the 10x25 doesn't). One nice part about retaining 8x, though, is the easy skill transfer between the two instruments. So, I don't take two when one will do.

Regards,
Ed

Hear, hear! But if it's that glorious, don't you at least need a spare sample?

Speaking of Leica Trinovid 8x20, I can get one for about $150, and it's new!
But I fear it's too small for my hands, and I'm more than happy with my Excursion 8x28 that has the smallest size I can use, solid build and very large FOV. Should I jump on the Leica train? (the single thing that makes me doubt the most is its bright yellow color. )

[14Goudvink]

Originally Posted by elkcub

One nice part about retaining 8x, though, is the easy skill transfer between the two instruments.

Regards,
Ed

This I found interesting. When I switch from one bin to another, it takes a bit of getting used to. Part of this is due to different handling (ergonomics, focus, etc.). What sometimes throws me off balance for a quick ID is apparent bird size. Especially when looking at birds far off in the sky. With my most used eight I know if that bird far off is larger or smaller than a reference, say a crow. When I take the seven or the ten I need to check twice. When I use the seven or ten for prolonged periods it's no problem, it is the swithing between powers that causes confusion.

Just a thought. Each his own, sometimes I am happy with just one bin, other times I take two.

George

[henry link]

George,

I know what you mean. I have exactly the same difficulty determining the true size of a bird when I change from my usual binocular to another of a different magnification or even when changing from roof to Porro of the same magnification since the apparent size of objects changes with objective spacing.

Henry

[hinnark]

Originally Posted by elkcub

So, I don't take two when one will do.

That's the charm of binoculars like Leica Duovid or Leupold Switch/Power. You always have two bins at once. Now variable magnification paired with image stabilisation - that would be like in binoculars' heaven. For me that would be real innovation and advancement.

Steve

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by looksharp65

Hear, hear! But if it's that glorious, don't you at least need a spare sample?

Speaking of Leica Trinovid 8x20, I can get one for about $150, and it's new!
But I fear it's too small for my hands, and I'm more than happy with my Excursion 8x28 that has the smallest size I can use, solid build and very large FOV. Should I jump on the Leica train? (the single thing that makes me doubt the most is its bright yellow color. )

Look sharp, LS. The trinny has only 14mm ER, the same as the 8x20 SLC. The Utravid is the only top brand with 16mm. But it will cost about 5x more for that 2mm improvement.

The most important issue for manufacturers to address in the 21st Century is EYE RELIEF, without sacrificing FOV of course.

Ed

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by hinnark

That's the charm of binoculars like Leica Duovid or Leupold Switch/Power. You always have two bins at once. Now variable magnification paired with image stabilisation - that would be like in binoculars' heaven. For me that would be real innovation and advancement.

Steve

Why not go all the way and finally innovate zoom binoculars that work?

Ed

[looksharp65]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Look sharp, LS. The trinny has only 14mm ER, the same as the 8x20 SLC. The Utravid is the only top brand with 16mm. But it will cost about 5x more for that 2mm improvement.

Yes, thankfully someone else bought it anyway. I'm doing very well with the Nikon Mikron 6x15 and the Excursion 8x28, so why buy another binocular that's too small for my hands? Last Saturday I saw a White-tailed Sea-eagle soaring above the marketplace, right above hundreds of people and merchants. I had brought the Mikrons!

Originally Posted by elkcub

The most important issue for manufacturers to address in the 21st Century is EYE RELIEF, without sacrificing FOV of course.

Ed

Yes, but it's also about fine-tuning the eye relief so it's not too large.
Happens now and then...

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by 14Goudvink

This I found interesting. When I switch from one bin to another, it takes a bit of getting used to. Part of this is due to different handling (ergonomics, focus, etc.). What sometimes throws me off balance for a quick ID is apparent bird size. Especially when looking at birds far off in the sky. With my most used eight I know if that bird far off is larger or smaller than a reference, say a crow. When I take the seven or the ten I need to check twice. When I use the seven or ten for prolonged periods it's no problem, it is the swithing between powers that causes confusion.

Just a thought. Each his own, sometimes I am happy with just one bin, other times I take two.
George

Exactly. Size is a key element for bird ID, and switching power adds adaptation time and uncertainty. That would be a real problem with a zoom, incidentally, if they could actually be produced. One or two finite states are probably better than continuous confusion, always wondering what the power is. (So, you're right Steve. )

Now that I finally have a roof with an amazing view and wide range of logarithmic focus, the very thought of reduced image quality and adapting to linear control is scary. What I conclude from this is that the more ideal the experience with a single instrument the more resistance there will be to switch to another.

Ed

[hinnark]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Why not go all the way and finally innovate zoom binoculars that work?

Ed

Yes, I thought of this as well. On the other hand what needs absolutely be avoided in building binoculars is to represent both eyes two images that are different from each other. Most users of binoculars don't have an idea that one of the greatest challenges in building binoculars with central focussing is the mechanical problem to synchronize the movement of the focussing elements at both barrels in the needed precise way. This is one of the typical weaknesses of Chinese bins, BTW. Only few manufactorers indeed are really able to manage this challenge in perfection. Fortunately this focussing difference isn't that easy noticable at first glance for the user. With real zoom binoculars you catch new serious problems with the mechanics and a difference in magnification is much more noticable than a difference in focussing. From this point of view the decision of Leica and Leupold to choose two given magnifications makes sense IMO.

Lars, I hope this isn't too much off topic...

Steve

[elkcub]

Steve,

It seems like we're in full accord on this one, for both mechanical and psychological reasons. (see my post #69)

Ed

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by looksharp65

...
Yes, but it's also about fine-tuning the eye relief so it's not too large.
Happens now and then...

Okay, it won't be easy.

Ed

[John Russell]

Originally Posted by elkcub

If they had made the damned eye relief just 2mm longer it wouldn't have been necessary, but at least the Leica has a usable 16mm (the 10x25 doesn't).

Ed,

Perhaps I misunderstood you but both 8x20 and 10x25 Ultravids are quoted with 15 mm eye relief.
It would have surprised me if they had differed, as the logical solution would be for them to have the same eyepieces, and for the 10x25 to have a 25% longer objective focal length than the 8x20.

John

[hinnark]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Steve,

It seems like we're in full accord on this one, for both mechanical and psychological reasons. (see my post #69)

Ed

Oh yes, I see. BTW, while focussed at the birds, it really happens from time to time to me in the field that I forget which magnification is chosen.
But that indicates that I manage to hold the 12x magnification as steady as the 7x. OK, only particularly comforting to know...

Steve

[looksharp65]

Originally Posted by hinnark

Lars, I hope this isn't too much off topic...

Steve

Not at all, and I admit I recognize the problem of IDing the bird at an actual distance with different magnifications. But I'm notoriously dysfunctional in that area regardless of the binoculars I use - the problem is there even with the naked eye. My visual system is very prone to adapt so I guess it's some kind of hypermobility of the extra-ocular muscles .