Are BF (optics) Posters Representative of Birders Generally? (1 Viewer)

[perterra]

As you probably recall, I work in wildlife/natural resources/ornithology, and this is very true of most of my colleagues. The occasional SV or yesteryear's alpha (e.g. Zeiss Victory, Leica Trinovid, Nikon Premier) shows up, but most of us are too poor to afford much better.

Justin

Yes sir, I do recall.

It aint a line of work to retire with millions in the bank.

 

[kkokkolis]

I'm not a birder, but you can describe me as a birder wannabe. As with astronomy (I do that since 2009 and have a good selection of optics for that, almost nothing is "Alpha" though) I am not a list freak and I go for highlights and the experience and much armchair work.
I like optics though (all kinds, I use also a Stereomicroscope and a Belomo triplet loupe I EDC) and therefore the Binoculars forum is my favorite. After all I get dizzy with descriptions of North American or other birds I'm not familiar with, I still have a hard time to distinguish shallows from swifts and between the plethora of local warblers. So I don't visit the relative forums and rely on my books, fieldbooks amd Android apps for that matter. But I understand the optic jargon relatively well, so I can read and talk with you.
I saw a nice documentary yesterday about birding in the Central Park (NY). I've been there a couple of times and seen it in dozens of movies, so I am familiar with the flora and fauna of it and I would like to do some birding there next time I visit (love the Cardinal btw). Anyway, the birders in the film, from a semipro old woman to a teenage girls, almost all of them carried Alpha binoculars. Most of them Swarovski, some Zeiss, some Leicas. Only an enthusiastic Afro-American carried a porro I couldn't identify (not a Habicht but it looked solid). So these people like binoculars too and pay for them. My biggest telescope, a 12" Newtonian that shows everything costs 1300 € and my 6" with Goto another 1300 €. With these money combined you get just one Alpha binocular and all these people in the documentary paid for it. Of course in astronomy you have to save money for eyepieces and accessories, whereas in birding you might just get an 8x42 of the upper tier and go in the field. But still you learn from somewhere which one suitss your birding better and this can be done by looking what others use in your club or by lurking or actively participating in a forum like this.

Anyway, it's good to know that as I have better telescopes and eyepieces (but awfully worse skies) than Galileo, Newton and Messier (not to mention Ptolemy and Tycho who had none), my Terras are better than what generations of birders and nature lovers had before and what David Attenborough used during the Life of Birds and such (not to mention that Darwin and Wallace had none). I could never had more genius than them so an enhanced experience is all I go for. And this forum and similar information sites help me with that.

 

[Pinewood]

...
I saw a nice documentary yesterday about birding in the Central Park (NY). I've been there a couple of times and seen it in dozens of movies, so I am familiar with the flora and fauna of it and I would like to do some birding there next time I visit (love the Cardinal btw). Anyway, the birders in the film, from a semipro old woman to a teenage girls, almost all of them carried Alpha binoculars. Most of them Swarovski, some Zeiss, some Leicas. Only an enthusiastic Afro-American carried a porro I couldn't identify (not a Habicht but it looked solid). So these people like binoculars too and pay for them.

Hello Kkokkolis,

As a frequent visitor to Central Park, the documentary may not have representative. Indeed, many Central Park bird watchers use that Alphas. There is lot of money in this city, even if it is concentrated in the hands of a few. I and another BFer frequent the Park and neither of us uses Alphas, exclusively. The other fellow uses a Canon IS 10x42L, and occasionally something else, like an old Zeiss. I usually use a Meopta 6x32 MeoPro, even though I sometimes use a Zeiss 10x32 FL, when I need extra reach.

Happy nature observing,
Arthur :hi:

 

[Maljunulo]

Arthur, you are much braver than I am.

Richard

 

[kkokkolis]

During my last foreign park experience (Madrid Botanical Garden) all I had and used was a Pentax Papilio 6,5x21.

 

[Kammerdiner]

The documentary is called "Birders: The Central Park Effect." Definitely worth a look if you're into birds.

Birding in Central Park, especially in spring, is pretty grand because the migrants get funneled into it (nowhere else to go). I remember warblers practically dripping from the trees one morning. I usually only have a compact with me when I'm in the city.

Mark

 

[dalat]

I just returned from a birding trip to South America with a bunch of Germans.

If i recall propererly, bins used were:
- 3 Leicas (2 Ultravid HD, one Trinovid BN)
- 3 Minox
- 2 Kowa
- 1 Canon IS
- 1 Zeiss (Conquest HD)
- 1 Bushnell
- 1 Nikon (Prostaff)

All enjoyed the birds, there was zero talk about binoculars (quite a bit on the right camera settings though).

So from this small sample, I conclude: no, BF optics posters are not representative of birders generally

 

[Hermann]

I conclude: no, BF optics posters are not representative of birders generally

Thank God they aren't.

If they were like at least some of the posters here, the suicide rate among optics designers would undoubtedly soar.

Hermann

 

[kkokkolis]

So, Germans avoid Swarovskis?
And they spend all that money to travel down under but only 4/12 from the Big Three and only 2/12 from the Alpha tier.
All this consumer pressure now is under new context for me.

 

[dalat]

and only 2/12 from the Alpha tier.

And one of those is mine, so it's rather 1/11. Curious, isn't it? Regular BF optics readers would rather expect a ratio of 20 Swaro's among 12 guys on such a trip, with perhaps a few more Leicas and Zeisses as spare bins.

 

[kkokkolis]

Most pairs are from the mid tier and 2 are from the lowest, if I get it right.
That's understandable according to the "μέτρον ἄριστον" (Métron áriston= Moderation is best) dogma. It seems that those are the best buys.

I'm going for a Zeiss Conquest myself.

Were did I read that most birders (US birders I assume) use Nikon Monarchs (with 5>7)?

 

[justabirdwatcher]

I just returned from a birding trip to South America with a bunch of Germans.

If i recall propererly, bins used were:
- 3 Leicas (2 Ultravid HD, one Trinovid BN)
- 3 Minox
- 2 Kowa
- 1 Canon IS
- 1 Zeiss (Conquest HD)
- 1 Bushnell
- 1 Nikon (Prostaff)

All enjoyed the birds, there was zero talk about binoculars (quite a bit on the right camera settings though).

So from this small sample, I conclude: no, BF optics posters are not representative of birders generally

Mirrors my experience as well. I've spent over 25 years participating in Christmas Bird Counts in several places in the US, and I see all kinds of binocs among these very dedicated birders, and hear zero talk of optics during these counts too.

 

[Maljunulo]

Mirrors my experience as well. I've spent over 25 years participating in Christmas Bird Counts in several places in the US, and I see all kinds of binocs among these very dedicated birders, and hear zero talk of optics during these counts too.

It's been my experience in life that the more one knows about a subject, the more interesting it becomes.

Also, in general, (with conspicuous exceptions) folks do not discuss subjects about which they know very little or nothing.

 

[brocknroller]

As you probably recall, I work in wildlife/natural resources/ornithology, and this is very true of most of my colleagues. The occasional SV or yesteryear's alpha (e.g. Zeiss Victory, Leica Trinovid, Nikon Premier) shows up, but most of us are too poor to afford much better.

Justin

Justin,

I hope Lee reads your post since he thinks that most American birders, and it would follow, wildlife experts, own $2K+ alpha binoculars or at least attend optics shows to try them the all.

Lee tells us that at the recent UK Bird Fair he saw dozens upon dozens upon dozens of people who call themselves birders carry their alpha roofs around their necks all day comparing their $2000+ bins to the other binoculars at the fair. That includes him, though I don't know if he brought his Zeiss HT or SF.

Good to hear from the real world for a change. Thanks for your post and the important work you do.

Brock

 

[perterra]

Justin,

I hope Lee reads your post since he thinks that most American birders, and it would follow, wildlife experts, own $2K+ alpha binoculars or at least attend optics shows to try them the all.

Lee tells us that at the recent UK Bird Fair he saw dozens upon dozens upon dozens of people who call themselves birders carry their alpha roofs around their necks all day comparing their $2000+ bins to the other binoculars at the fair. That includes him, though I don't know if he brought his Zeiss HT or SF.

Good to hear from the real world for a change. Thanks for your post and the important work you do.

Brock

I think you may be putting words in Lees mouth Brock. Going to a birding fair is a lot different than going to the local preserve where you see well off birders interspersed with school buses full of intercity and disadvantaged kids all mingling with the local naturalist volunteers.

At the local audubon center, you see more REI branded porros than anything, that's because they have about a hundred pair for general public loaners, the naturalist volunteers who don't have a pair are loaned Monarch 5's from the back office. They have about a dozen pair of those as well.

Depending on where you go, it changes. At the John Bunker Sands wetland center, I saw a whole lot of Swaro. But then I saw a lot of German cars in the parking lot. Most of the cowboys (real cowboys, it's still a working ranch) who sat in on the classes I attended and did a walk thru with my group carried Leupolds.


Every place is different

 

[justabirdwatcher]

It's been my experience in life that the more one knows about a subject, the more interesting it becomes.

Also, in general, (with conspicuous exceptions) folks do not discuss subjects about which they know very little or nothing.

True enough. I've often been very surprised at how little even many of the most dedicated birders I meet, know about binoculars.

I have shown more than one 10+ year veteran birder how to properly use their own optics. Some have thanked me and some have just been embarrassed they didn't know their eyecups worked that way, or why, or how to adjust their diopters. I'm not talking inner city disadvantaged kids here either, and this isn't just one locale. It's more common than folks here may think.

Most CBC participants I encounter (probably going on 500+ by now) are carrying mid-level binocs, with easily as many $100-200 pairs as $1000-2000 pairs in the groups.

Over the past five years, Vortex and Bushnell and Nikon have far outnumbered the Swaro/Leica/Zeiss. And that's even for the 20-30 year veteran birders.

Mid-priced binocs have become so good that it really takes someone very interested in optics, someone who is looking for brand recognition, or someone with very good and sensitive eyes, to even realize the difference between a Vortex Viper HD and a Swaro.

And that's good for all of us.

 

[ceasar]

Lots of well educated people know nothing about binoculars or how to use them.

A few years back I met a couple on the deck at the Cape May Point Bird Observatory. I noticed that he was using a Canon IS 10x42 L. I asked him how he liked it and he was really pleased with it. He told me that he had just purchased it. (I got to try it out and compare it with my Nikon 10x32 EDG.) He told me that his wife did not like it at all. She said she couldn't see things well when using it. I noticed that he wore glasses and used it with the eye cups down and I also noticed that his wife did not wear glasses so I showed him how to extend the eye cups on it for her. After that she loved the binocular!

So did I! It is the only time I ever used an IS binocular!

This guy is a Doctor and well known in his field. He even has his own web site. When he bought the binocular nobody bothered to explain to him how it should be used and apparently he never looked at the instructions that came with it.

Bob

 

[jremmons]

Over the past five years, Vortex and Bushnell and Nikon have far outnumbered the Swaro/Leica/Zeiss. And that's even for the 20-30 year veteran birders.

Mid-priced binocs have become so good that it really takes someone very interested in optics, someone who is looking for brand recognition, or someone with very good and sensitive eyes, to even realize the difference between a Vortex Viper HD and a Swaro.

And that's good for all of us.

Honestly this is the big thing for me. I have no problem with people who buy alpha quality binoculars, no matter their skill level nor reason for purchase. But for me, the quality you can get at the 400-600 & 800-1200$ price ranges are so high that it ia difficult for me, as someone who uses binoculars near daily for both personal and professional use, to even justify looking above that, even if I did have infinite disposable income.

 

[Kammerdiner]

At a family reunion I picked up my sister's binos and looked through them. These are good ones and she's used them for years. But somehow the diopter had gotten pegged to one side.

I said, "Can you actually see through these?"

I moved the diopter to zero (close enough I figured; we both wear glasses) and handed them to her to look through.

"Oh," she said. "I was wondering why they weren't as clear as they used to be."

So I showed her how the diopter works.

It's up to us binonerds to help the viewing public, so do your part!

As for alphas, I've been trading between the 8x42 Prime and the 8.5 SV for well over a year now. I've had the SV for almost five years I guess and won the Prime last year. But if I had had the Prime first, and compared it to the SV as a possible purchase . . . well, I might have said let's go to Cape Cod for the week instead.

Which is not to say I don't prefer the SV for various reasons, and I have no intention of selling it off, but the truth is the Prime and other mid-priced stuff, these days, is plenty good enough for my purposes. Which is why I wonder why so many folks get so wound up with this issue. How hard is it NOT to buy an alpha?? Not very if you ask me.

I don't think the same holds for scopes, but that's another story.

Mark

 

[Pileatus]

At a family reunion I picked up my sister's binos and looked through them. These are good ones and she's used them for years. But somehow the diopter had gotten pegged to one side.

I said, "Can you actually see through these?"

I moved the diopter to zero (close enough I figured; we both wear glasses) and handed them to her to look through.

"Oh," she said. "I was wondering why they weren't as clear as they used to be."

So I showed her how the diopter works.

It's up to us binonerds to help the viewing public, so do your part!

As for alphas, I've been trading between the 8x42 Prime and the 8.5 SV for well over a year now. I've had the SV for almost five years I guess and won the Prime last year. But if I had had the Prime first, and compared it to the SV as a possible purchase . . . well, I might have said let's go to Cape Cod for the week instead.

Which is not to say I don't prefer the SV for various reasons, and I have no intention of selling it off, but the truth is the Prime and other mid-priced stuff, these days, is plenty good enough for my purposes. Which is why I wonder why so many folks get so wound up with this issue. How hard is it NOT to buy an alpha?? Not very if you ask me.

I don't think the same holds for scopes, but that's another story.

Mark

I use an alpha because of my deep respect for fast-moving raptors and I think it's an insult to observe them with anything less than a prestige binocular.
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Binoculars-Vintage-Prestige-with-Peach-Case-/221847328134?hash=item33a7219586