Finally compared 15X56 and 12X50 Side-By-Side (2 Viewers)

[adhoc]

Actually, the point of my question was the opposite of those of the others who have taken it up!

It was in regard to the level of detail when hand-held and not when further steadied.

Wishing to get an idea of how each of these instruments will do (in conveying detail) when hand-held by me I sought to know about his own experience. I do know that this varies among users, different users finding different weights being optimum for steadiness (at different xs), but more reports will always give a better idea.

 

[NDhunter]

Actually, the point of my question was the opposite of those of the others who have taken it up!

It was in regard to the level of detail when hand-held and not when further steadied.

Wishing to get an idea of how each of these instruments will do (in conveying detail) when hand-held by me I sought to know about his own experience. I do know that this varies among users, different users finding different weights being optimum for steadiness (at different xs), but more reports will always give a better idea.

It is easy to answer your question, it is easier to hand hold a 12x vs.
a 15x binocular. It's about physics: the extra weight, and the higher power
leads to much more difficulty, for more than a quick glance.

Big binoculars, 15x and higher are very nice and useful, but plan on tripod
mounting. I would think about these similar to a spotting scope.

Jerry

 

[adhoc]

This is not as simple as it seems. Among all the 12x and all the 15x binoculars made, different users, depending on their physiology, find different models easier or harder to hold steady, depending on their ergonomics, i.e. weight*, balance and grip. Thus some user may find some 15x model steadier to hold than some 12x model of comparable optical quality to the extent that the 15x shows him/her more detail despite an image at 15x being more vulnerable to be spoilt by shake than an image at 12x.

*(PS) To some user, within some range or ranges of weight a greater weight may be easier to hold steady.

Personally, to find out which 12x or 15x (among all 12xs and 15xs) will convey most detail to me when hand held, I have been on a lengthy quest involving several/many of them, and have finally narrowed it to these: Alpen Teton 15x50, 795 g and 6.9 in., and Meopta HD 12x50, 1060 g and 6.8 in. One of the former (the model may have just been discontinued) should reach me in a month from now. If it does not do what I hope then it will be the latter. I will also be using this (whichever) with a monopod.

Adhoc

 

[huronbay]

Adhoc:

My wife employs an excellent 15x56 SLC on tripod for night skes. I used it for distance wildlife, handheld. What stood out to me was the level of detail that bino provided with short looks. No question that a tripod brings out its best, but for a quick handheld look they cetainly gave considerably more creature detail than the 8.5x42 that I also carried. It was surprising.

A Canon 15x50 IS replaced it for me.

Personally, the heavier binos are generally steadier for me than the lighter ones. fwiw...

 

[adhoc]

Thanks Huronbay for that info. But I prefer smaller and lighter in binoculars! For me the two models I have named will I think work the best. If I do need to go to 15x56 then at that weight and size there is the Meopta HD which is said to be close to the Swaro. optically but much less expensive. IS is a fine solution, I agree, but at a still bigger weight and size!

 

[NDhunter]

If you don't plan on mounting a big binocular most of the time, then don't get a 15 or 16X.

Get a 12X, it is a very good all around size, and can be hand held.
I have a Nikon SE 12x50, and use it several times a week.

Where I live on the farm, I have some great looks at wildlife, right out my windows,
often past 1 mile.

The SE sits on a shelf, and right now, I have a Zeiss Conquest HD 15x56 on a tripod ready for use.

Jerry

 

[huronbay]

Certainly. (Adhoc post 25)
Not a recommendation, just some info on how the handheld 15x worked for me. And yep, they are a handful. If I used it with a support like my wife does, I would have stayed with it over the Canon.

 

[adhoc]

Thanks Jerry. I will give 15x one last shot (with the binocular below already en route) and if it won't work then go for 12x50. I said: "...to find out which 12x or 15x...will convey most detail to me when hand held, I...have finally narrowed it to these: Alpen Teton 15x50, 795 g and 6.9 in., and Meopta HD 12x50, 1060 g and 6.8 in." After posting that I am thinking of an alternative 12x50 that I had first eliminated, the Leupold BX4-Pro-Guide at 810 g and 6.6 in. For me the Nikon SE will not do as it is a porro and not waterproof. (I have gotten and sold/given away two 12x50s and one 12x42, as they were not good enough optically, unlike the SE.)

 

[dwever]

It sure would be nice to have the OP weigh in on these questions. OP?
I'm lusting after the 15x56 HDs and that prospect is stretching my budget. EL 12x50s probably won't happen.
Oh, and in my opinion, any comparison not using a sturdy tripod or similar stable support is mostly invalid.

Invalid for you. If your time in the field is generally without stable support due to other gear you're lugging such as a 13 lbs. .338 Laupua, then supported performance is not of much concern.

Update, I said goodbye to the 12x50, and the glass I finally settled on was the Swarovski Optik El Range. I did not choose the
Leica Geovid HD-B 3000 ranging binocular because at matched power it was notably less bright than the NVD's in the same power; whereas the Swarovski Optik EL Range (Brightness 91%) seems to be the optical match of the EL optical only line, and so you're getting a fully capable EL binocular with the ranging without optical compromise. Does someone know if my assumption there is correct? Thanks

I've also moved to Alaska since the original post. Still love the Leica NVD as seen in the harness below. It is stunning up here the alpha optics stores keep in regular stock by multiple manufacturers, particularly EL's; never seen anything like it in the lower 48. Sportsman's Warehouse in Fairbanks had every top of the line spotting scope for Swarovski, Zeiss, and Leica, and this in a somewhat isolated city of 32,000.

 

[dries1]

Oh those night sky views in Alaska, a trade off for the cold.

Andy W.