Any 15/16x binocular fans here (1 Viewer)

[RobMorane]

I think Rob is young, strong, maybe a buddhist, and doesn't drink coffee |;|

:-O It's more like the total opposite, I'm 46 and drink 5 coffees in the morning :-O

I'm just a nature watcher. My main goal is to see, not identify so the need of stability is less important for me than for birders.

I tried to use a finnstick, but when you have to change the focus often, like with the 15x56, it's annoying.
I do carry a monopod though, but have to say I don't use it often, for the same reason than the finnstick.
But with a spike, it's a good walking stick in the Mountains.

Don't get me wrong, if I can put my elbows on a table or on my knees, or my back against a tree, I will do it. But I guess I'm used to heavy Binos (and packs).

For the laugh, I found out this one the other day, I think most of us can relate to it
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NaX7i1Q7-Rw

 

[RobMorane]

Something often disregarded is the importance of how well a model of Binos is balanced, especially with 56mm,
Where the weight is usually at the front.
When I tried them, I found the SLC 56 better balanced than the Zeiss Conquest 56.

 

[Hermann]

Wonder how the Canon 15x50 IS would fare in this decision tree.

The amount of detail you'd get with the 15x50 would be so much higher than with any handheld 15x50/56, the Canon would kill it. Heck, even the lowly Canon 12x36 would kill it. And even if you'd put the conventional 15x50/56 on the monopod, the Canon 15x50 and possibly even the 12x36 would kill it.

And I say this as someone who's still got pretty steady hands. A shame the diopter adjustment of ALL the Canons is only +/- 3 diopters. And that's not enough for me, otherwise I would have switched long ago.

Hermann

 

[Blue72]

The amount of detail you'd get with the 15x50 would be so much higher than with any handheld 15x50/56, the Canon would kill it. Heck, even the lowly Canon 12x36 would kill it. And even if you'd put the conventional 15x50/56 on the monopod, the Canon 15x50 and possibly even the 12x36 would kill it.

And I say this as someone who's still got pretty steady hands. A shame the diopter adjustment of ALL the Canons is only +/- 3 diopters. And that's not enough for me, otherwise I would have switched long ago.

Hermann

I have been told on astronomy forums that a 15x or 12x on a monopod is steadier then the IS canon

Can’t say from experience though

 

[james holdsworth]

I'm currently using my 15x56 hand-held for general birding, just to get a sense of whats possible and whats not. I find I can hold the 15x stable enough for most birding, the movements I get are mostly pulse through my hands.

Wide field and well balanced mass go a long way to reducing the effects of shake and tremor.

 

[etudiant]

I have been told on astronomy forums that a 15x or 12x on a monopod is steadier then the IS canon

Can’t say from experience though

It is not so for me.
Even on a monopod, stuff wiggles side to side.
The Canon freezes those wiggles and clarifies the view.
Admittedly I don't do astronomy, as Manhattan is not a good site for viewing the heavens, but for observing nature, the Canon IS sets the pace imho.

It does beg the question as to why Canon has not extended its superb IS capabilities into the scope market.
I'd love to buy a low power IS scope. It could be hand held or even monopod supported. Both would be OK, as for most birding needs, a view is sufficient, a protracted view is a luxury.

 

[Pinewood]

I have been told on astronomy forums that a 15x or 12x on a monopod is steadier then the IS canon

Can’t say from experience though

Hello Dd, if I may call you that,

I have found that a 15x is not suitable on a monopod, but I cannot compare that experience with an IS binocular. My 15x is firmly attached to a tripod for use. I have found a monopod, with a tilt head, works nicely with a 12x. One needs a fairly tall monopod to look well above the horizon.
My one experience, looking at a red headed woodpecker, almost directly overhead, with a 10x42 Canon was positive.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:

 

[Binastro]

It was rumoured that penguins on the Falklands Isles fell over when following aircraft passing overhead, and couldn't get up afterwards.

The RAF say this wasn't true and were anyway not liable.

I do have to be careful photographing things flying overhead.

 

[tenex]

The rumor is ridiculous, presumably based on popular ignorance of the fact that penguins have necks. They're accustomed to tracking predatory skuas etc that fly overhead all the time, not to mention perfectly capable of getting up from horizontal. One wonders how human society can function with people operating at this level. (Not very well, based on recent events in my own country.) That of course is not to say that penguins aren't adversely affected by low-level flights of jet fighters; I would be myself. I believe the RAF has modified its practices as the bizarre Falklands War fades into memory.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

TENEX, POST 28,
Yes, I have used the binocular eyepiece for the Swarovski ATX telescopes and I have tested it as well, the results can be found on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[CharleyBird]

So which 15x56/54 is the best?
The Swaro SLC, Leica geovid, Zeiss...?

I'm about to spring for a pair and reviews are few and far between

 

[JerryLogan]

So which 15x56/54 is the best?
The Swaro SLC, Leica geovid, Zeiss...?

I'm about to spring for a pair and reviews are few and far between

I think it’s generally agreed that the most recent Swarovski SLC15x56 are the best - and also the most expensive. Others are almost as good but $800 to $1000 less expensive. Also note that image stabilized binoculars are recommended by some who believe that they may not offer as pleasing a view but they reveal more detail than hand held standard binoculars.

http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/Swaro15x56SLCHD.htm

Good luck!

Jerry

 

[CharleyBird]

Thanks, that's a nice read, and together with a review that compared Swaro with Leica, guess it's Swaro that'll be getting my business.
I've tried the older SLC model and the view was...impressive.

 

[JerryLogan]

Thanks, that's a nice read, and together with a review that compared Swaro with Leica, guess it's Swaro that'll be getting my business.
I've tried the older SLC model and the view was...impressive.

I’ve never regretted the extra expense. Eyes still feel good after a full day of tripod mounted whale or shorebird watching.

 

[tenex]

So which 15x56/54 is the best?
The Swaro SLC, Leica geovid, Zeiss...?
I'm about to spring for a pair and reviews are few and far between

Among non-rangefinders, I'd say (as most do) that the SLC is the "best". I have the 10x56 and have also tried the 15x, which I'll probably want also. It's a really lovely design, optically and mechanically.

 

[tenex]

Yes, I have used the binocular eyepiece for the Swarovski ATX telescopes and I have tested it as well, the results can be found on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor.

Thanks. Unfortunately, whenever I click on any link to that site (either posted here or found through Google) I get a "403 Forbidden" error, a situation I've never encountered elsewhere in decades online. Perhaps you could summarize your result briefly here? I'm very curious how the view compares to a good 15x binocular.

 

[JerryLogan]

Thanks. Unfortunately, whenever I click on any link to that site (either posted here or found through Google) I get a "403 Forbidden" error, a situation I've never encountered elsewhere in decades online. Perhaps you could summarize your result briefly here? I'm very curious how the view compares to a good 15x binocular.

Try this:

https://www.houseofoutdoor.com/wp-c...ar-ATX-telescope-system-16-september-2017.pdf

 

[Binastro]

403 Forbidden.

 

[etudiant]

403 Forbidden.

The link downloads the PDF for me without a problem.
Do you use a particularly stringent filter software?

 

[tenex]

403 Forbidden.

I get that too (again) if I click to load it in Firefox. But what about a right-click to just download the PDF?...

Try this:
https://www.houseofoutdoor.com/wp-c...ar-ATX-telescope-system-16-september-2017.pdf

Nice idea, but all I get is a token 1 KB file that Adobe Reader can't read. Somehow the site refuses to allow a download either.

The link downloads the PDF for me without a problem.
Do you use a particularly stringent filter software?

Well, you were probably allowed to access the site anyway. I appear not to be. A 403 error is produced by the site itself refusing to allow access, not my security settings. I can't guess why; you would have to ask its webmaster.