-
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.
If you own one pair of glasses ... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter eronald
- Start date
On the other hand, a variety of binos increases the likelihood of experiencing binos with different capabilities and learning more about what binos can do and how they work. You might discover the joy of a wide field of view, or the fascination of using ultra-short close focusing, or how a change in the balance or handling can make extended observation more comfortable, or how a better placement of the focus wheel can get you views of close and fast-flying birds.
There are risks associated with extra binos but there are also the possibilities of new insights, new experiences, new pleasures.
Lee
There are risks associated with extra binos but there are also the possibilities of new insights, new experiences, new pleasures.
Lee
I have several from high end alpha's to classic vintage Japanese binoculars , and enjoy each and every one of them.
Each binocular is different , but all of them give pleasure in different ways , they say that variety is the spice of life LOL.
The only "lemon" that I have is a compact 10 x 26 Steiner which is actually quite dreadful , I keep this one to remind me that I actually don't need any more binoculars LOL.
But yes , the more you have the more you keep looking for that non-existant "perfect" binocular.
Cheers.
Each binocular is different , but all of them give pleasure in different ways , they say that variety is the spice of life LOL.
The only "lemon" that I have is a compact 10 x 26 Steiner which is actually quite dreadful , I keep this one to remind me that I actually don't need any more binoculars LOL.
But yes , the more you have the more you keep looking for that non-existant "perfect" binocular.
Cheers.
I think it makes sense to have multiple binoculars because it gives you flexibility for different viewing scenario's. I have an 8x32 SV for close up birding and a 10x32 SV for longer distance birding. I have three Habicht's 8x30W, 10x40 and the 7x42 and the Nikon 8x30 E2 for different distances and lower light situations where the high transmission of the porro is an advantage and when I want the advantage of the 3D view of the porro like in tall timber where it helps you define and pick out birds and animals from the backround. The porro gives you a different kind of view with more stereoscopy and they are lighter and brighter compared to an equivalent roof prism. I have five compacts to pick from when I want something that is easy to carry. A Swarovski CL-P 8x25, Zeiss Victory 8x25, Leica Trinovid 8x20, the tiny Nikon Mikron 7x15 reverse porro for pocket use and the Nikon 4x10 DCF roof prism for museums, opera and indoor concerts. You don't need all these different binoculars but it makes it nice to have different ones to pick from.
Attachments
Last edited:
tenex
reality-based
Exactly. Furthermore, I suspect that this is a broad trait, probably doing likewise with many other things in life. Wanting to have and choose just the right tool for each task, rather than making one serve all somehow, as someone else would be glad to do.
Of course there is a danger of acquiring more gear than necessary, for all the possible scenarios. The urge can be hard to resist, especially without curiosity as to what it's about.
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
It's a product of an abundance of riches.
Both personally (time and money) and the available products.
What else are the well to do "to do" but collect things? |;|
I'm thinking in much of the world this question doesn't come up.
Both personally (time and money) and the available products.
What else are the well to do "to do" but collect things? |;|
I'm thinking in much of the world this question doesn't come up.
Last edited:
As with everything else, the desire for a little more requires firstly interest, then research, then knowledge.
With binoculars, the need for more FoV, less CA, less astigmatism etc. requires the knowledge of what these things are, and that they exist at all - hence the research/knowledge, subsequent comparisons etc.
Then the bug is implanted, and off you go......a whole empire of industries, marketing and even forums rely on it!
With binoculars, the need for more FoV, less CA, less astigmatism etc. requires the knowledge of what these things are, and that they exist at all - hence the research/knowledge, subsequent comparisons etc.
Then the bug is implanted, and off you go......a whole empire of industries, marketing and even forums rely on it!
Super Dave
Well-known member
Right, this is probably the wrong place to ask about only one. For me, a minimum would be the Swaro 8x25 for travel and the Canon Image Stabilized 14x for home use. Figure out your primary need / interest and take it from there. Good luck.
Hey I agree!
For me at least, there are a couple of things going on to own more than one binocular. For one as tenex mentioned, it's owning the correct tool for the job at hand. Just as there are shovels, hammers, screwdrivers, etc for different jobs some binoculars are better in some situations and circumstances than others. One binocular will DO it all but it won't be the best. Two extremes would be an 8X25 for travel and a 15X56 for astronomy. Neither would be good binoculars at all for the others use yet they are very good at their intended task. So lets's add ONE more, say a 8X42. For the most part that fills the gap pretty good. Only thing is say you like to do a lot of birding along the coast or in some of the western states so you add a 10X42....and so on. So that's how it kinda starts.
I also feel ownership and use in the field is the best way to speak at least half-way intelligently about a binoculars particular characteristics. In this day of "internet specialists," I'm not about to take anyones opinion about anything that hasn't owned it. Too often some take others findings and consider it their own. I'm just not that person. So if I'm curious about something of course I read about it best I can and then if the binocular appeals to me I'll buy it. So now I can form an opinion about it's focus adjustment, FOV, weight, handling, image characteristics, etc. I can't tell you how many times I've read both negative and positive opinions about optics and I had a completely different opinion after ownership. I can't tell you how many times I've taken a binocular out of the box and had one opinion immediately and changed my opinion with use in the field.
So I have to admit...one binocular is by FAR the most economic way to go BUT the knowledge and experience gained by owning and using several binoculars is certainly a fun way to go!
I've been working too much!
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
I like that.
But, 3 bins is what you need, maybe.
Pocket something or others
A 32 or 42mm birding bin
And a large bin for night sky and long distance terrestrial
This last one is the one first to be deleted.
Multiple copies of 32 or 42 or 50mm bins is just being bourgeois.
Though I'm guilty.
Great thread.
To respond to the OP, I like to have a pair with me whenever possible so this makes my choice of "you can only have one" easy - the Zeiss pocket 8x25.
I agree with others that an equally interesting question is how to most efficiently cover the broadest range of uses with two or three. My three picks of the bins I own would be:
1. 8x25 Victory Pocket as the pocket/compact;
2. UV HD+ 7x42, or EDG 7x42, or SV 8.5x42 as the general use (really hard to pick one in this category);
3. Canon 12x36 IS III for the magnification and stable image without need for a tripod.
If two is the limit I would eliminate category 2 as the Canon could reasonably serve the general use category as well.
Mike
To respond to the OP, I like to have a pair with me whenever possible so this makes my choice of "you can only have one" easy - the Zeiss pocket 8x25.
I agree with others that an equally interesting question is how to most efficiently cover the broadest range of uses with two or three. My three picks of the bins I own would be:
1. 8x25 Victory Pocket as the pocket/compact;
2. UV HD+ 7x42, or EDG 7x42, or SV 8.5x42 as the general use (really hard to pick one in this category);
3. Canon 12x36 IS III for the magnification and stable image without need for a tripod.
If two is the limit I would eliminate category 2 as the Canon could reasonably serve the general use category as well.
Mike
I own the Pocket 8x25 and UV HD 7x42, and find myself using the Pocket less while the UV gets taken along more.
No blaming the Pocket, which certainly punches above its weight - but if a Pocket were a 42, then the 42s would be taken off the market.
This is why I wrote this post. Those who are *not* intent on collecting -I do like collecting but not always - may want to buy ONE very good pair of glasses carefully, to carry with when needed, and then just stop. Because having two or more may effectively obsolete all but one.
Edmund
PS This is not to dissuade anyone from getting "sedentary" instruments to keep in a blind etc. I am talking about owning one glass to carry.
Last edited:
I am presently resisting acquiring Victory Pockets, having just bought some EL 8.5x42 which are, frankly, astonishing.
The main reason I would want the Pocket is for international travel for non-birding trips where having binoculars is often useful in general, but lugging the large (and valuable) ones around might not be useful.
I have a pair of Canon 15x50 IS as well which are pretty good, although optically not quite the equal of the Swarovski (more CA for starters) but that IS view is something to behold, I have to say.
The main reason I would want the Pocket is for international travel for non-birding trips where having binoculars is often useful in general, but lugging the large (and valuable) ones around might not be useful.
I have a pair of Canon 15x50 IS as well which are pretty good, although optically not quite the equal of the Swarovski (more CA for starters) but that IS view is something to behold, I have to say.
David in NC
Well-known member
One of my favorite firearms articles in the HISTORY of firearms writing was an article in the late 1970s or early 1980s by Charles "Skeeter" Skelton. Skelton was a famous gunwriter (as well as Marine/Texas Sheriff/lawman/ranch owner/gun aficionado) and wrote a fictional article about a visit to another old (fictional) friend's ranch where they broached the subject of "if you could only have ONE firearm". The justification was only for discussion but it could have been from loss, or some new radical gun law. The fictional friend was an old crusty rancher and they spent the entire day debating this and at one point the old man said "I have thought about this all day and I can NOT narrow it down below FOUR guns, and DAMNED if I'd let anybody talk me into any less!"
I can see a parallel here... 3
I can see a parallel here... 3
