Help me replace my spotting scope with 16 or 20x binos please (1 Viewer)

[DunninLA]

I have the great pleasure of living on a hill about 600' up and half a mile from the ocean overlooking a small city. I can look right out the sliding glass windows up the coast of Southern California and see a few life guard towers along the way. Red Tail hawks and even an eagle once soar over the little canyon under our house.

I bought a Brunton Eterna ED 20-60x80 spotting scope four years ago to enjoy the things we can see every day. The Brunton is awesome. Clear focus from edge to edge, and no chromatic aberrations at all that I can tell. Can see the opera house on Catalina on clear days. Mounted on a Manfrotto tripod and head. Field of view is 98' at 1000 yards.

However, due to wanting a compact 10x bino for archery to check exactly where my arrows hit at 40 yards target at the range, I bought a mid level non-ED 10x42 roof prism bino. Now I find I really like looking at the canyon, hills, ships in the ocean, shoreline, etc. much more through binoculars than through a spotting scope, even though my scope has superior optics at much more magnification... I just don't like looking at things with only one eye.

So I've done quite a bit of internet searching for binoculars of between 16x and 20x that I can mount on that same tripod. I would sell the spotting scope. I do not look at the sky so things important to sky gazers may not be important to me.

I have a few preferences, among them:

- Center Focus (actually this is a requirement)
- 16x to 20x
- FOV at least 200' at 1000 yards
- Eye Relief of 16 or greater, preferably 18, with twisting eye cups, not folding

Under $400 if possible. Three candidates seem to meet all preferences:

- Oberwerk 20x80 Deluxe III triplet objective binoculars at $349, FOV is 180'
- Orion 20x80 ED binoculars at $299 FOV is 168'
- Orion 16x80 ED binos at $299, FOV is 210'

All of these are made at the worlds largest optics factory called United Optics in China, which appears to supply about 80% of the world's binoculars, large and small, as an OEM manufacturer.

I looked at a bunch more that are less suited to me and more to sky watching in that they have individual focus, some have limited FOV, and some have eye relief of only 15 or 15.5.

I am leaning toward the Orion 16x80 due to FOV and ED glass, plus reviews that said the optics are great if the example you get is actually aligned, but I don't have experience with binos for distant observing and thought you birders might know of any other options. second choice the Oberwerk 20x80 b/c it's FOV is greater than the Orion 20x80.

I would have already pulled the trigger on the Orion except that I'm not sure about 16x or 20x, and from a couple of forums it seems like about 1/3 or 2/5 of the units arrive misaligned or with other problem QC in china missed before shipping out. There are few if any QC issues with the Oberwerk.

Thanks for your opinions

 

[PeterPS]

I would go with Oberwerk, or a similar pair of binoculars made by APM. The latter company also makes some fantastic giant binos but those big boys are outside your price range. Another possibility well within your budget is Celestron 25x100 Sky Master.

 

[DunninLA]

I would go with Oberwerk, or a similar pair of binoculars made by APM. The latter company also makes some fantastic giant binos but those big boys are outside your price range. Another possibility well within your budget is Celestron 25x100 Sky Master.

you are right I looked at APM but there were four issues: 1) individual focus, 2) 15mm eye relief, 3) price around $800, 4) folding rubber rather than twist up eyepiece. I think they are suitable only for astronomy. They actually missed 100% of my preferences except for magnification.

Do you recommend Oberwerk over Orion from any personal experience? (since they are made in the same factory, and I think also APM there too)

Regarding the Skymaster 25x100, they ER is only 15, and the FOV is only 156', that is why I eliminated that one from my short list.

 

[dries1]

If you get any of the glass on the aforementioned list in the $300 price range, get some tools and study collimation procedures, or be prepared to go the post office frequently to send or pick up returns. Not too much decent quality with center focus in that price range, most are IF. If you go on the binocular sub-forum on Cloudy Nights they have a wealth of info on the large 20X+ glass.

Andy W.

 

[DunninLA]

If you get any of the glass on the aforementioned list in the $300 price range, get some tools and study collimation procedures, or be prepared to go the post office frequently to send or pick up returns.

Andy W.

Would that be the case if they are mounted on a tripod and don't really move more than about 10' ever? i was under the assumption that if they are in alignment when they arrive, and I mount them, there is nothing that would knock them out of alignment? (unless I knock the tripod over)

 

[PeterPS]

The Nikon Monarch 5 20x56 is another possibility that might tick more of your boxes. I have never tried them but I owned the smaller Monarch 5 12x42 and they were of reasonable quality. I guess you can find a used 20x56 in your price range.

 

[dries1]

15-20x

Would that be the case if they are mounted on a tripod and don't really move more than about 10' ever? i was under the assumption that if they are in alignment when they arrive, and I mount them, there is nothing that would knock them out of alignment? (unless I knock the tripod over)

Hopefully they will not, but there have been instances where one day they are in collimation the next they are not.

Peter that was a good suggestion on the Nikon, I have heard the 16X56 provides some nice views also. A bit more than $500 used. The $$ will have to be stretched though.

Andy W.

 

[Maljunulo]

Why do you insist on center focus?

It sounds as if most of the time your subject will be at infinity, which I would guess is somewhere around 400' or so with a 16X glass.

 

[jring]

Hi,

cheap and large (70mm aperture and beyond) CF bins usually come with instructions for collimation... which won't really work, at least not for all IPD settings, unless you happen to have specialized equipment. But they often need it - if not when inspected by the seller, then often after they arrive at your place :-(

The higher grade astro big bins all come with IF and are usually angled either 45 or more frequently 90 deg but they certainly can be very nice - even at higher magnification. But you usually look at a 4 digit price tag at least.

Joachim

 

[DunninLA]

Why do you insist on center focus?

It sounds as if most of the time your subject will be at infinity, which I would guess is somewhere around 400' or so with a 16X glass.

I did not know infinity would be so close. On my spotting scope at 20x, I had thought the infinity was out at about 2 miles, but I'll have to experiment with that tomorrow to better understand that concept. So I reallly don't get how it could be 400' as you suggest.

But still, I kind of like to look at everything, so I'll look at houses across the ravine, then at the hotel down below us which is 800', and then on up the coast. But I have the 10x I suppose for that, plus I have the Leupold 6x30 Yosemite coming as well for that.

So I suppose I do not need central focus.

Where would infinity be on 20x80, for example on the APMs mentioned above? or better yet how does one calculate infinity... do you need focal length to figure that out?

 

[DunninLA]

Peter that was a good suggestion on the Nikon, I have heard the 16X56 provides some nice views also.

Andy W.

I was starting to get excited researching these, and might have tried to stretch the budget to $500 for a used pair, but then came across a review that referenced the eye relief:

"Nikon claim high eye relief, but measured from the edge of the cup it is 12-13mm - a lot less than the claimed 16.4mm and too tight for specs wearers. Eye relief is one of the few areas these binoculars really disappoint."

Oh well. Thanks to both of you for the suggestion at any rate.

 

[Blue72]

The Pentax 20x60 are very popular on astronomy forums. They have a narrow field of view but are flat from edge to edge and still have a better FOV compared to most spotting scopes. Plus have a reputation for not needing collimating. Unlike other high powered binoculars

 

[Binastro]

My 20x60 Pentax is of very poor optical quality and has a miserably narrow field.
Another secondhand one is a mess with a serrated edge of field stop.

My Pentax 16x60 is better, but I think not made any more.

My selected Soviet 20x60 is great but short eye relief.
Most later Russian ones are poor.
The 15x50 Soviet one is good but short eye relief.
Same with 16x50 Soviet.
The Minox 15x58 is good but heavy.
The Japanese 20x65 and 20x70 Porroprisms are good but short eye relief.
My 25x70 Celestron is rubbish.
Although the 15x70 Chinese cheapies go out of alignment if one coughs too hard, my 15x70 Quantam is very good.
The old Celestron 20x80 Japanese is excellent but short eye relief.
The Steiner 15x80 (15x77) is quite good.
And so on.

I have used the Canon 18x50 IS for over 15 years, and it is great but maybe not enough eye relief.

 

[Blue72]

My 20x60 Pentax is of very poor optical quality and has a miserably narrow field.
Another secondhand one is a mess with a serrated edge of field stop.

My Pentax 16x60 is better, but I think not made any more.

My selected Soviet 20x60 is great but short eye relief.
Most later Russian ones are poor.
The 15x50 Soviet one is good but short eye relief.
Same with 16x50 Soviet.
The Minox 15x58 is good but heavy.
The Japanese 20x65 and 20x70 Porroprisms are good but short eye relief.
My 25x70 Celestron is rubbish.
Although the 15x70 Chinese cheapies go out of alignment if one coughs too hard, my 15x70 Quantam is very good.
The old Celestron 20x80 Japanese is excellent but short eye relief.
The Steiner 15x80 (15x77) is quite good.
And so on.

I have used the Canon 18x50 IS for over 15 years, and it is great but maybe not enough eye relief.

People do bitch about the FOV, but if you treat as a two eye spotting scope it’s not that bad especially since it’s a flat field

Most people are pleased with the optical quality for the price range.

For less then $200 it’s worth a try for the original poster to try....especially if your concerned about collimating

 

[Maljunulo]

I did not know infinity would be so close. On my spotting scope at 20x, I had thought the infinity was out at about 2 miles, but I'll have to experiment with that tomorrow to better understand that concept. So I reallly don't get how it could be 400' as you suggest.

But still, I kind of like to look at everything, so I'll look at houses across the ravine, then at the hotel down below us which is 800', and then on up the coast. But I have the 10x I suppose for that, plus I have the Leupold 6x30 Yosemite coming as well for that.

So I suppose I do not need central focus.

Where would infinity be on 20x80, for example on the APMs mentioned above? or better yet how does one calculate infinity... do you need focal length to figure that out?

The crude test which is used by us ignorant folk is to focus on a star, which can be presumed to be at infinity, then the next day see how close something has to be to be out of focus when you have made no subsequent adjustment.

It depends, to a certain extent, on your powers of accommodation.

Note that I a) used the word "guess" and b) underlined it.

 

[wllmspd]

I’ve just taken delivery of an APM 70, 45degree for “two-eyed spotting”, mainly from bird hides and the like. The stock eye pieces (22x) are pretty wide and flat field with reasonable eye relief. IF, have to see how I get on with that. You can always get other Astro eyepieces for other magnifications for quite reasonable amounts that will give wide and well corrected fields. I plan to run at 30x mainly as I do with my 66mm spotter. The 82mm would allow a bit more power but is bigger and heavier, making it more of a pain to carry about.

Peter

 

[DunninLA]

Thank you all for your suggestions.

For whatever reason, binoculars of the 15/16x magnification ALL, without exception, have inadequate USABLE eye relief for spectacle wearers. If I had known this up front, I would not have wasted everybody's time.

What would have helped is an industry standard definition of Eye Relief as a measure starting at the rim of the eyepiece at its lowest setting. The current definition is useless.

So I found that the:

-BA8 chassis 15x70s are all not usable for eyeglass wearers, with usable ER of only 12mm. Even those with very thin and close to eyes eyeglasses need 15mm of usable ER. Most need 17mm. At least Garrett appears to have actually published this in their specs of their version of the BA8 (12 usable/17 total)

-Nikon Monarch 5 16x56 likewise, with usable ER of 12mm out of their published 16.4, due to the hollowed out conical nature of their eyepieces.

I'm down to checking out two possiblities:

- Nikon Action 16x50 to see how exactly their eyepieces are constructed to see how much of their published ER is usable.

- BA10 variants (80mm objective) (two of which are on my shortlist above) to likewise see how much of their ER of 18 is actually usable.

As an aside, I find it odd that published ER is not usable. That is a stat critical mostly to eyeglass wearers. And the vast majority of eyeglass wearers have astigmatism. Isn't the existing ER nomenclature sort of like Mercedes publishing 400 brake horse power, but then you find out only 250 HP is usable since the RPM is limited to 5000 by the computer. Go figure.

Beyond the ER issue, I have read that glare is a big issue with these giant binoculars, which were really not designed for daytime use, which is my purpose. I am trying to replace a spotting scope for something similar in binocular design.

 

[dries1]

In this configuration which is not as populated with lower formats, (7X - 10X), in general, you get what you pay for. I would try to stretch the budget if possible and look at the APM models because of the eye relief issue..... the feeling of getting a cheap deal gone wrong will linger. Take your time with further evaluation.

Andy W.

 

[DunninLA]

In this configuration which is not as populated with lower formats, (7X - 10X), in general, you get what you pay for. I would try to stretch the budget if possible and look at the APM models because of the eye relief issue..... the feeling of getting a cheap deal gone wrong will linger. Take your time with further evaluation.

Andy W.

Andy, thanks for the advice.

Here's what I've decided to do. Because the Nikon 16x50 is only $190, I am going to keep the 20-60 spotting scope and also buy the Nikons. It is not often I want to zoom in that tight, but you know, when you see something interesting you just have to zoom in tight to get a better look. I was trying to kill two birds with one (oops, bad metaphor here), well anyway, no 16 or 20x binocular will do what the scope at say 40x can do, especially considering the ED glass and the sharp focus all the way to the perimeter... and zero CA.

So i will have:

Leupold 6x30 yosemite FOV 420
Olympus 10x42 EXWP I FOV 348 (I need the compactness to wear around my neck at the archery range)
Nikon Action 16x50 FOV 188
Brunton ED 20-60x80 FOV 98 @20x spotting scope mounted on Manfrotto 3021 Pro with 128LP head.

A may need to get a monopod or cheap tripod for the nikons which weigh very little. Even when I sit in a deck chair and brace my elbows, I get some image shake from the Olympus, which is fine most of the time but sometimes when I want to see tiny detail that little shake bothers me ...seems it's mostly my heartbeat shaking my torso which shakes my arms.

I bought the Leupolds last week when I bought the Olympus (which I needed for the range), thinking I'd want that wider FOV at home on the deck, and they haven't arrived, so I'm not sure if I'll need to keep them. But honestly for $90 I'm sure I'll just keep them.

So my quest to replace the spotting scope is over, and only cost me $190. Very happy camper here. I think I've got all ranges of magnification covered.

 

[Patudo]

You sir are a lucky fellow to have such a view before you. I would keep the scope, as you'll no doubt find distant/small objects through your binoculars you'll want to identify (is that dark spot on a building or a cliff a peregrine???), and the 40x+ magnification will really help with that.

I think I would go with 15x for a tripod-mounted binocular for its greater field of view - also the larger the magnification the more any issues will be magnified. I'm not sure how available they are in your area, but as Binastro mentions the old Eastern Bloc binoculars - 15x50 ZOMZ and similar - might give you the best optical quality for a budget if you can find them (try before you buy is even more important in this case). Just recently someone here posted about his favourable impression of a 12x40 of this type. Eye relief is admittedly short, but I find the main value of longer eye relief that allows the use of glasses/spectacles is in being able to quickly get on to targets initially acquired by eye (or the reverse, when fast-moving targets get too close and action can be missed in the few seconds it takes to put on your glasses). For distant viewing I'm happy to dispense with glasses and put short eye relief binoculars straight to my eyes, which has the valuable bonus of offering a most immersive and enjoyable view. But if you have significant astigmatism you'll need your glasses.

Edit: I just saw your latest post. Let us know how you get along with the Actions.