Is that the only thing?:-CDennis,
One thing I like about you is that you can laugh at your self, that is a good character to have. By the way how are those 56s going.
A. W.
Yup. I let the Canon 10x42 IS-L and the Swaro SLC HD 8x56 fight it out and the big Swaro just killed the Canon for veiling glare, CA, on-axis sharpness and especially low light performance. I buried it on Ebay. It was a quick and painless death. I guess it wasn't fair the Canon being a lightweight and the Swaro a heavyweight. I find at 8x I don't need IS and the big Swaro was the first binocular I have tried that beat the view of the Canon. Even the 10x50 SV couldn't do it.
I think you are better off with 8x and a good spotter. Spot them with the 8x and then move in for a close up with the spotter. For birding 8x is it.
That's a good point. Definitely don't want to carry a scope on long mountain hikes.There are places where carrying (and using) a scope doesn't make much sense. Try one of the migration hotspots with lots of bushes and so on for instance. You need to make the ID very quickly, and often you just don't have the time to use your scope. If you don't the bird may well be gone for good. That's where a 10x works better for me. Or on long hikes in the mountains where I don't want to carry a scope and a tripod all the time.
Hermann
Try the 8.5x42 Swarovski el, you may find it does the lot.
I keep getting tempted with 10x, but have yet to pull the trigger, so have primarily a stable of 8x bins, with a few 7's, and a 6. I also have a well used pair of 15 x 50 IS Canon's that generally only come out at night..
My regular bird outing rig is an 8x bin, supplemented/augmented with a bridge camera, a Nikon p610 super zoom, which I use as a digital spotting scope when I cannot ID a distant bird with my bins. The camera weighs less than my binoculars. The image quality of extended viewing resides in the binoculars, not in the camera, btw. In that regard, a good scope would be a far superior instrument, but for a lightweight setup with a great range of useful, image stabilized magnification, it is effective. Plus its a darn good camera, if one is close enough to the bird!
I may still get a 10x, but with the camera, I'm getting roughly 25x optical magnification at the extreme end (zoom ratio is 60x), which a 10x bin doesn't really cover. I expect it will enhance viewing pleasure of closer objects a lot more than the distant ones, as odd as that may sound. Research is needed...
-Bill
That is a very nice photo Bill! But, even if you can look at it on the small screen right then, or even later in large scale on the computer, you aren't seeing it in realtime in binoculars, so if you can use 10x without too much shake, then they are worth it to have and see through, in my opinion for that in the moment sensation. I don't know how you work it out in practical terms, except to carry one or the other, and just enjoy what you have at the time for the view they provide-that makes the most sense to me. Others do carry more than one bin, but that's not my idea of lightweight travel! I'm carrying enough just with me on my feet and back, than adding excess to the load.
Sure, many are younger and stronger here, and don't mind carrying more along the way. And if that is so, then the more the merrier, and I hope you do find a 10x you love as well. Do you wear glasses, Bill?
Bruce commented recently in another post that people are going birdwatching with ONLY cameras, and looking at the digital screen after the shot to see what they saw! Digital over analogue! I can't imagine this, nor do I ever want to be there. I'm fine for in the moment reality! Sure, I'll bring a camera, but that's only for birds that stand still for more than 20 seconds! Or other flora and fauna I come across.
Reservoirs where it is totally flat viewing up to a quarter of a mile away I,ve observed wildfowl or Identified them through a spotting scope 47x60 magnification or flocks of birds out in the open as long as the birds stationary enough and clear to see a spotting scope is second to none In some circumstances, but overall I much prefer useing a 8x30 Minocular yes you may lose out to magnification That is If you can hold them steady enough in such Environments, but what the 8x loses there you,ll be pleasantly surprised what it gains in others If your fully focused and ready a 8x will capture most detail at a given time and for a few ounces or more in weight I think that price is worth haveing.There are places where carrying (and using) a scope doesn't make much sense. Try one of the migration hotspots with lots of bushes and so on for instance. You need to make the ID very quickly, and often you just don't have the time to use your scope. If you don't the bird may well be gone for good. That's where a 10x works better for me. Or on long hikes in the mountains where I don't want to carry a scope and a tripod all the time.
Hermann
Yes its made life a lot easier, cheaper, and convenient too Came just right for me, all the big hasselblad cameras and their Ilk where did they end up.I say with digital replacing film, (I was sort of apprehensive at first), but now such good resolution in small mid size/priced cameras, snap away. Most of the time I capture multiple pics, but about 10-15% are keepers and it does not cost me anything save the HD memory chip, which can hold 8 gigs.
Andy W.