• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Binocular replacement/upgrade (1 Viewer)

Adun

Well-known member
Hello, I'm new in this forum, since my wife and I just recently started birding.

I have two inexpensive of binoculars that I got a couple of years ago for astronomy: Celestron UpClose G2 in 7x35 and 10x50 sizes (I paid around US$30 for each)

When we started birding that's what we used. The 7x35 are working well, and my wife is keeping them. I'm however, unhappy with the 10x50 for birding: their true field of view is too small, which makes chasing birds difficult, and the ~50°? apparent field of view is tiny for my tastes (I use 82° AFoV eyepieces for astronomy). I think the eye lens of these upclose is small, making it easy to get blackouts.

So I'm thinking about selling the 10x50 to get something better for birding, with less magnification for easier hand-holding, better optical/pupil ergonomics, with a wider field of view (both real and apparent). Short eye relief is ok (maybe even preferred) since I don't observe with glasses and I'm accustomed to just 12mm eye relief at the astro telescope.

I can't spend much on this, for I'm in South America and between the exchange rate and the international shipping everything becomes expensive for me. To give you an idea of my "market segment", I just got for my birding camera a bridge/superzoom Kodak 401AZ (for $143), and I'm already happy with the results I'm getting after 3 field trips. It's not a pro DSLR but it's got a decent punch with it's 40X IS zoom, and it's great value overall.

So I'm looking for a superb value birding binocular. It's ok if it doesn't have ED glass, and while I want a wide AfoV (ideally 65° or at least 60°), I can still accommodate some field curvature so I don't need the flattest of fields. I probably need a porro to get the better optics, but I'm fine with that. Even an 8x42 will be smaller/lighter than my current 10x50.

My research has led me towards these:

Bushnell 8x42 Legacy ($79), with very wide 65°AFOV and 8.2° TFoV, nitrogen filled, fog/waterproof.

Leupold Yosemite ($89), which from what I've read seems to be one of the top sub-$100 recommendation "first binocular". I'm not looking for a "first binocular" though, and from the specs I don't see what's all the fuzz about.

Bushnell 8x42 Legend. Not as wide, but carrying the promise of no chromatic aberration / color fringing, with it's ED glass, but costs double as much ($165) and the roof + magnesium advantages don't ring enough of a bell for me to feel the cost worth it. Maybe if the optical performance is unbelievable I'd lean more to it, but I highly doubtful it'll raise to Zeiss territory.

And most likely there's a hidden gem I don't know about. So that's where you can help: ¿What would you recommend for my needs, with a high bang per buck between $80 and $165?
 
Last edited:
Go with the Legend M 8X42, you will not regret it.

Andy W.


Hi Andy.

Legend M shows up as "No Longer Available" at B&H. Amazon shows a "Legend Ultra HD M" that at $229 is outside of my budget, and when there's reviews saying it showed "false colour on the limb of Moon" and "stars near the edge was become like seagulls", I don't feel it's performance merits me stretching the budget from $80 to $230

The "Legend L" seems more reasonable (and I can avoid a 30% import tax on items costing under $200). What is the difference between the L and the M?
 
The Legend L is fine, it just does not have additional coatings that the M has. Take a look at the specifications of both the Legend M and the Legend L. I have the M in 8X42, but I have heard the L is good for the price. So if you can save on the import tax, go with the L series.

Andy W.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top