-
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.
10x56 SLC vs 8.5x42 EL (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter etc
- Start date
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
"after a while"...Yes! Both of my heavy weights (EL 10X50 SV \ 10x42 L IS) allow me to glass with less hand shake and a very stable view, but for less duration of time before my straps\harness are used to give my arms a break!
Conversely, my lighter optics offer not as steady a view, but a longer duration of glassing time before fatigue sets in.
Ted
RobMorane
Well-known member
My experience exactly Ted.
Etc, if long glassing/scanning, the 56 are arms tiring binos, so as Ted sumerized, frequent rest is needed.
And the longer you use them, the more frequent rest will be required.
Unless you need 56mm for dawn/star gazing,
Make yourself a favor and go lighter, I think you won't regret it (and your arms will thank you).
It's like buying a Pro DSLR camera or go for a
less "fluffy" one (About Fluffy, I'm not talking about Gabriel Iglesias for those you know
Dhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sijAbpgmaXU
Surely the Pro DSLR looks nice (and Pro) , but do you really want to carry a heavy camera around your neck the whole day long?
tenex
reality-based
Didn't you just get a 50mm Ultravid? This might be the comparison you want. The 8 and 10x56 are hard to find here but Gordon has them. ("proudpapa56" here)
Attachments
dries1
Member
10x56
Thanks, I am enjoying the UV 10X50 very much I just wanted to see it next to hulk for a spatial perspective. After getting the 8X42 HD and really liking the size and the great contrast, I lucked out on the 10X50 UVHD+ on a whim, could not be more pleased.
Andy W.
Thanks, I am enjoying the UV 10X50 very much I just wanted to see it next to hulk for a spatial perspective. After getting the 8X42 HD and really liking the size and the great contrast, I lucked out on the 10X50 UVHD+ on a whim, could not be more pleased.
Andy W.
Nice picture! The 56mm Swaro isn't much bigger than the 50mm Leica. The Swaro is only 6 oz. heavier. 1 oz. for each mm of aperture.
Last edited:
Yeah, your probably right. I don't think the Leica would pick a fight with that big Swaro. It would get it's glass kicked.:-O
etc
Well-known member
You are saying 'big' like it's a problem. I want my optics to be expensive and big with more substance to them.
Pound per dollar, it's a better buy. More resolution, more power, more optical excellence.
Yeah, not something you will want to carry hiking in the mountains where every ounce counts.
Pound per dollar, it's a better buy. More resolution, more power, more optical excellence.
Yeah, not something you will want to carry hiking in the mountains where every ounce counts.
tenex
reality-based
It's really big, it's not so much bigger... all of this is so subjective, and relative to specific intended uses. Handheld binos range from around 20 oz to 40 in weight, only a factor of 2. And we're so picky about that! I like the SLC 56 very much, and it's great in low light, but that said, for carrying all day I'll take a 32mm.
Unless you use a harness the weight does get to you if you hike all day with a binocular that big around your neck.
RobMorane
Well-known member
I can understand that you want optics big and expensive, with more "substance" to them.
Aren't we doing just that, for most of us? Buying Alphas?
But if you want more power, and a Big Bino, get the 15x.
For the long glassing sessions, if you don't have big biceps, you should get a monopod or get (or make) a Finnstick.
Last edited:
