Are two binoculars better than one? (1 Viewer)

[Scott98]

Are two binoculars better than one? Yes, of course

Now I saw this in your first post, and to me, it's the only line that matters:

Now I'm in a situation where I've been offered to buy a pair of SF 10x42s at an incredible price.

In English I would call this a no-brainer. The 10x42 SF are significantly better than either of the binoculars you own. For me, I would move my 2 bino collection to the 10x42 SF and the 8x40 SFL without hesitation. The Viper just can't play in this league, that will be readily apparent once you have the SF's. And the SF's are so ridiculously high in price, it's very rare to get a chance to buy them for less money.

I would consider the 8x40's and the 10x42 to be the perfect combination. Low power and high power, with an extra edge of portabliiyy and lightness for the 8x40's. DO NOT sell the 8x40 SFL to buy 8x30 SFL. Personally I did not like that bino at all, it's so small and light than I can't hold it steady. 30mm is small aperture. Those are a portable specialist for backpacking or some other use where you need to carry a tiny optic IMO.

Just for perspective, my primary two birding binos are 7x42 EDG for low power and 8x42 SF for high. So it's not unusual to have two binoculars that are close to the same size and magnfication.

 

[Peter.home]

Are two binoculars better than one? Yes, of course

Now I saw this in your first post, and to me, it's the only line that matters:



In English I would call this a no-brainer. The 10x42 SF are significantly better than either of the binoculars you own. For me, I would move my 2 bino collection to the 10x42 SF and the 8x40 SFL without hesitation. The Viper just can't play in this league, that will be readily apparent once you have the SF's. And the SF's are so ridiculously high in price, it's very rare to get a chance to buy them for less money.

I would consider the 8x40's and the 10x42 to be the perfect combination. Low power and high power, with an extra edge of portabliiyy and lightness for the 8x40's. DO NOT sell the 8x40 SFL to buy 8x30 SFL. Personally I did not like that bino at all, it's so small and light than I can't hold it steady. 30mm is small aperture. Those are a portable specialist for backpacking or some other use where you need to carry a tiny optic IMO.

Just for perspective, my primary two birding binos are 7x42 EDG for low power and 8x42 SF for high. So it's not unusual to have two binoculars that are close to the same size and magnfication.

I do agree with you on the 8x30 SFL. They were really small in the hand when I tried a pair.

So, you can see my posts earlier, I don't get this 2 pairs of binoculars for birding.
I'd be happy with either the 7x42 or 8x42, or a 10x40 subject to weight.
Maybe if I ask the question the other way round... What is so bad about the 8x42SF that means you need to consider another pair (7x42EDG) when you go birding?

 

[dorubird]

Having only 2 pairs of binoculars I will chose:
First one I clearly opt for the SF Victory 10x42. It is the most comfortable binoculars I have tested. It has a body with "consistency" when held in hands. It sticks to eyes by itself, thanks to the superb ergonomics, and I feel it is a 10x only in resolution, not for the imagine shaking. So the first pair of binoculars is undoubtedly this one! The biggest proof that it is the first choice and the best binocular for me is the test of passing of time. This SF10x42 is my oldest set of binoculars, which has remained "faithful" to me for so many years. I was had many different binoculars in my kit, but this one remained!
View attachment 1577321


But for choice of the SECOND pairs, the choice would be more complicated because I have three options (suitors), each with his own advantages:

Mainly the fight is between Nikon MonarchHG 8x30 vs Swarovski Habicht 7x42.
Nikon MHG 8X30 has the advantage of versatility. It has a very large visual field of view (8.3°), with acceptable clarity even up to the edges. It is more comfortable for glasses, and it has a good quality image with pleasant colors. MHG has good short close focus (~1.7m)! Mechanical quality olso superb. But the most important thing of MHG 8x30 is that these qualities are sealed in an extremely small and light body (450g), which is not much bigger than an 8x25 bino.
View attachment 1577322

Swarovski Habicht 7x42, on the other hand, is from another story. It's a pair of binoculars with personality. Habicht likes to torture you and then reward you with a unique experience. From the moment you hold it in your hand torture begin...It has a bony structure, spartan to the touch. The focus requires force to rotate (but mine softens over time). The AFOV is a spartan one of only 46°, similar to an astronomical orthoscopic eyepiece. But paradoxaly with this small 6.5° field of view, the magic of these binoculars begins. The beauty is that, being very small, you can easily spot it immediately to the edge of the fieldstop, with both eyes without effort. This magic is amplified by the exemplary stability and large depth field of 7x, fantastic clarity of the image. And, in the world of binoculars, Habicht has the best transmission of light at all wavelengths. To this recipe of magic, is added like a salt and pepper, the three-dimensionality specific of a porro binos . The body has the classic porro beauty and is sealed for water.
View attachment 1577323
SO it's hard to choose between versatility and magic. Sometimes I need versatility, and sometimes I feel need for magic. It depends a lot on my mood and concrete situations. When I want relaxation and a unique experience, I choose Habicht 7x42.
But more often I see myself in situations like expeditions, animal photography, or other action situations, where I choose versatility of Nikon MHG 8x30 over the Habicht magic. Because MHG 8x30 it is so compact and does not burden my luggage much, and I do not feel its presence around my neck that much, and that without feeling that it lacks optical and mechanical qualities.
View attachment 1577326

But what about the third option, and more precisely what is it? I can put it in my backpack or pocket and forget about it there. It is the binocular carried everywhere, but used the least, due to the fact that it is the binocular for emergencies and unforeseen situations. It is a design object, just as it is good for a pair of binoculars carried everywhere, to make you happy when you look at it as an object itself. This does not mean that it does not have real optical and mechanical qualities such as image definition, contrast, superb colors and last but not least, the most comfortable focus system in the world of pocket binoculars, thanks to the oversized focus wheel comparared to binocular scale. So the third option for second pair of binoculars it is Leica Ultravid 8x20. But, being extremely small, I don't count it anymore... because with or without UV 8x20 in my backpack I don't feel the difference. So UV it is out of the race because it'll stay in my backpack anyway It's so small, and it's like a mechanical/optical jewel. It is a keeper in any situations! Maybe the fact that I no longer count the Ultravid 8x20 in the race, it has this special and privileged status, that means that these small binoculars are actually my seeking second choice?!
View attachment 1577325

However, if someone forces me to choose only two: As I said, clearly and easily, instantly, the first choice will be Zeiss SF 10x42. But the second choice will be very difficult to make. Maybe Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 due to its usefulness and convenience in use. But then I will immediately miss the magic of Habicht 7x42, or the gem of Ultravid 8x20. I'd be happy with any of these three bino, to make the team with Zeiss SF, appreciating each one's unique qualities. So I'll flip a coin

 

[SanderBird82]

Are two binoculars better than one? Yes, of course

Now I saw this in your first post, and to me, it's the only line that matters:



In English I would call this a no-brainer. The 10x42 SF are significantly better than either of the binoculars you own. For me, I would move my 2 bino collection to the 10x42 SF and the 8x40 SFL without hesitation. The Viper just can't play in this league, that will be readily apparent once you have the SF's. And the SF's are so ridiculously high in price, it's very rare to get a chance to buy them for less money.

I would consider the 8x40's and the 10x42 to be the perfect combination. Low power and high power, with an extra edge of portabliiyy and lightness for the 8x40's. DO NOT sell the 8x40 SFL to buy 8x30 SFL. Personally I did not like that bino at all, it's so small and light than I can't hold it steady. 30mm is small aperture. Those are a portable specialist for backpacking or some other use where you need to carry a tiny optic IMO.

Just for perspective, my primary two birding binos are 7x42 EDG for low power and 8x42 SF for high. So it's not unusual to have two binoculars that are close to the same size and magnfication.

8x40 and 10x42 are too close for the money i.m.o.

7x42 and 8x42 are almost same. Why would you have both so close to each other?

 

[Patudo]

Now I saw this in your first post, and to me, it's the only line that matters:

Now I'm in a situation where I've been offered to buy a pair of SF 10x42s at an incredible price.

I don't really agree with this - you should try to figure out what fits your needs and then look at what you can afford, and if a great binocular suited to your birding comes up cheap, that's a bonus. Admittedly, I've been guilty myself of buying binoculars just because they were a screaming bargain, which with the benefit of hindsight, I wouldn't have done so again. I appreciate that buying for buying's sake can be fun. But I do recommend giving some thought before buying.

 

[Peter.home]

That's not the case with every user. The last couple of weekends the birds in my area have been in the air a lot, flying out to the far reaches of their territory, chasing intruders away and so on. I want - no, need - to find them as efficiently as possible and stay with them as long as possible. Now, and also later in the year when the hobbies arrive and start doing much the same thing, is when I rely heavily on big mag - 10x and 12x. I have proven to myself, from having tried different mags from 7x to 12x, that a far distant circling bird stands out much better in high mag and you can follow it further and see detail better - and even though you can see what most folks would consider a long way with 8x and even 7x, a tiny target is much easier to lose. I mean at times they diminish into a dot even with 12x, what chance would I have of following them that far with 7x?

There are birds that fly off, too far to identify. Presumably three-quarters of birds in flight do that. In fact they all do ultimately! But a dot at 8x is still a dot at 12x.
To me, as a birder, I'd be thinking binoculars and a scope. Give yourself a proper difference in magnification.
And, appreciating that "jizz" , shape, behaviour, experience is a better identification tool than more pairs of binoculars.

If people want multiple, (or 6 pairs of binoculars, I'm not even going there by the way), that's fine, but using birding to justify it doesn't make any sense to me. I'll shut up going on about it now though!

(Thought for the day: If all birders bought 2 or 3 pairs of expensive binoculars that is actually a good thing for me, as it will free up spaces for me on birding trips, where others can no longer afford to go!.)

 

[limonabe]

I suppose that for some people, binoculars facilitate looking at birds while for others, looking at birds is just one more reason to use binoculars. It's all good either way, of course.

 

[Maljunulo]

If they “diminish to a dot” I either look for a closer bird, or find something else to look at.

(leaves, tree bark, flying insects, and so on)

 

[Patudo]

To me, as a birder, I'd be thinking binoculars and a scope. Give yourself a proper difference in magnification.

Well ... how would you reckon a scope would help on a day like this? Or is that not birding?

Admittedly I was using 8x on that occasion, but would now use 10x - it's one of those experiences that convinced me higher magnification was desirable.

And almost all my birding takes place within an hour's drive (and mostly not much more than half an hour's walk or travel by public transport) from my doorstep. I have, in all fairness, enjoyed birding on visits abroad, but feel fortunate that I can find all the satisfaction and enjoyment I desire from my birding without having to jump on a plane.

 

[Scott98]

I do agree with you on the 8x30 SFL. They were really small in the hand when I tried a pair.

So, you can see my posts earlier, I don't get this 2 pairs of binoculars for birding.
I'd be happy with either the 7x42 or 8x42, or a 10x40 subject to weight.
Maybe if I ask the question the other way round... What is so bad about the 8x42SF that means you need to consider another pair (7x42EDG) when you go birding?

Good question! I do like the 8x42 SF but the eye placement is tricky compared to the 7x42 EDG. On bright sunny days I get a lot of blackouts panning around following birds.

I prefer lower power much of the time (woods) for greater depth of field. More than most birders. I tried 10x42 but it seemed like too much power. I just don't like the smaller depth of field of higher power, it feels claustrophobic for near to medium distance viewing. Too much fussing with the focuser to get it right. At 7x more of the scene is in focus.

Recently I added some cheaper older 12x50 porros (SE) and I like them as a specialist for viewing of seabirds out on the water. The wide porros are easier to hold steady than narrow roofs for me. I wouldn't want to use 10x or 12x for most of the birding I do. The New England area is mostly dense forest.

 

[Larsjen]

10x42 / 8x30 / scope. Provides all the reach and size and weight flexibility I need.

 

[Peter.home]

Well ... how would you reckon a scope would help on a day like this? Or is that not birding?

I'm not sure where this is heading, but sounded like a great afternoon, and more importantly, no doubt, to some degree, helped you thru the worst of 2020.

I'm sure a scope would have come in handy if any of the Hobbies were circling, for scanning the reservoir banks for waders, or even sifting thru the hirundines on the off chance of something really unexpected.

 

[Peter.home]

Good question! I do like the 8x42 SF but the eye placement is tricky compared to the 7x42 EDG. On bright sunny days I get a lot of blackouts panning around following birds.

I prefer lower power much of the time (woods) for greater depth of field. More than most birders. I tried 10x42 but it seemed like too much power. I just don't like the smaller depth of field of higher power, it feels claustrophobic for near to medium distance viewing. Too much fussing with the focuser to get it right. At 7x more of the scene is in focus.

Recently I added some cheaper older 12x50 porros (SE) and I like them as a specialist for viewing of seabirds out on the water. The wide porros are easier to hold steady than narrow roofs for me. I wouldn't want to use 10x or 12x for most of the birding I do. The New England area is mostly dense forest.

8x42 SF for sale?

 

[looksharp65]

If people want multiple, (or 6 pairs of binoculars, I'm not even going there by the way), that's fine, but using birding to justify it doesn't make any sense to me. I'll shut up going on about it now though!

Didn't expect this type of pointy comment in here of all places, but now I feel the urge to explain how I use all my binoculars, and yes, I'm a birder.

One is a bit out of collimation and I can use it but not sell it, otherwise I'd have done that.
It lives at my workplace, from where I often do some birding at lunchbreak.

Another is clearly superior in its reach in a way small magnification differences can't offer, it's the 12x.

One small is good only with spectacles, not contacts, because of small diameter eyecups. On the other hand it's spectacularly good then.

Another is the opposite - impossible to use with glasses, and I usually use contacts because of my excessive tearflow. It is not waterproof but has the most exquisite image of all my bins.

Next; the little workhorse takes the heaviest load because it's good with contacts and is waterproof.

Last one has superior light-gathering ability and is also suitable in the winter because I can keep my wrap-style sunglasses on thanks to its excessive eye relief. The sunglasses help relieving the tearflow issue.

Of course I could get rid of most of these, for example by buying an SFL 8x40 but I can't see why I should, when it all works so well for my needs. I also want to mention that none of the above were bought new, all are second hand.

//L

 

[Maljunulo]

Sounds like you had better keep them all with you at all times, in order to always be able to quickly select the appropriate one.

 

[forent]

Yes, I need two pairs of binoculars for my nature observations. As I don't like redundant things, I have chosen a combination that covers as many different aspects as possible.

• When I go out during the day in reasonably good light, the Zeiss Victory Pocket 10x25 is always with me: so small and light that I hardly notice it in between, but it offers me high magnification, a good field of view, amazingly good ergonomics with and without glasses and, last but not least, very high optical quality. Of course there are optically superior devices, but for me the tiny Zeiss - in contrast to other compact binoculars - is completely satisfactory.
• At dawn and dusk, in bad weather, at the bird feeder or even on days when I'm a bit shaky, my beloved Leica Trinovid 8x42 BA is with me since 1993. Once again, there are of course optically superior devices in this world, but for me the old Leica is completely satisfactory.
• The two binoculars are so different that it's always easy for me to make a choice: the ultra-comfortable Zeiss usually suits me, but occasionally it has to be the weightier Leica. However, the two alone would not be enough for me; a very good spotting scope with a sturdy tripod (in my case: Meopta Meostar S2 20-70x82 HD + Leofoto LS-364C) is simply a must for me when I visit specific observation sites.

In the past I had additional devices - larger and more powerful binoculars, a monocular, a compact spotting scope etc - but in the end they all seemed somehow superfluous and redundant. So I sold them.

Of course, this is just the result of my personal optimization, based on my own needs and tastes. It can turn out completely differently for others and there are probably people who actually need to own half a dozen different alpha 8x32s and 10x42s for good reasons...

 

[Rg548]

Didn't expect this type of pointy comment in here of all places, but now I feel the urge to explain how I use all my binoculars, and yes, I'm a birder.

One is a bit out of collimation and I can use it but not sell it, otherwise I'd have done that.
It lives at my workplace, from where I often do some birding at lunchbreak.

Another is clearly superior in its reach in a way small magnification differences can't offer, it's the 12x.

One small is good only with spectacles, not contacts, because of small diameter eyecups. On the other hand it's spectacularly good then.

Another is the opposite - impossible to use with glasses, and I usually use contacts because of my excessive tearflow. It is not waterproof but has the most exquisite image of all my bins.

Next; the little workhorse takes the heaviest load because it's good with contacts and is waterproof.

Last one has superior light-gathering ability and is also suitable in the winter because I can keep my wrap-style sunglasses on thanks to its excessive eye relief. The sunglasses help relieving the tearflow issue.

Of course I could get rid of most of these, for example by buying an SFL 8x40 but I can't see why I should, when it all works so well for my needs. I also want to mention that none of the above were bought new, all are second hand.

//L

You shouldn't feel the need to justify what you have, or choose.

I'm not even a birder... I just like nature, and whatever it brings at any one time. I also just like quality optics, and enjoy looking through them at all sorts of things.... animals, planes, ships, landscapes...whatever. I would never be trying to identify a dot of a bird in the sky 1km away.... not interested. Some are, and that's their thing... it's all good.
I only have 2 bins, one big, one small.
Some people on here have loads.....

I have a mate who has 9 bikes all lined up in his garage.... one best, one for training, one for bad weather, one for travel etc etc..... I think he's nuts.... but he's happy.
Another mate has countless watches.... they all tell the same time... go figure.
I genuinely don't care what other people think, as long as I'm not upsetting them.

Enjoy your bins, absorb people's advice on optics, but what you choose to have/buy is no one elses' business.

 

[looksharp65]

Sounds like you had better keep them all with you at all times, in order to always be able to quickly select the appropriate one.

On the contrary. Sometimes I take a small one together with the 12x50, but often only one 8x30ish.
The one I pick is picked on the base of weather and the type of visual correction I use that day so it's an informed decision and this means I'm always content with today's pick.

//L

 

[Peter.home]

You shouldn't feel the need to justify what you have, or choose.

I'm not even a birder... I just like nature, and whatever it brings at any one time. I also just like quality optics, and enjoy looking through them at all sorts of things.... animals, planes, ships, landscapes...whatever. I would never be trying to identify a dot of a bird in the sky 1km away.... not interested. Some are, and that's their thing... it's all good.
I only have 2 bins, one big, one small.
Some people on here have loads.....

I have a mate who has 9 bikes all lined up in his garage.... one best, one for training, one for bad weather, one for travel etc etc..... I think he's nuts.... but he's happy.
Another mate has countless watches.... they all tell the same time... go figure.
I genuinely don't care what other people think, as long as I'm not upsetting them.

Enjoy your bins, absorb people's advice on optics, but what you choose to have/buy is no one elses' business.

In fairness, I don't think anyone is asking him to justify what he's got, or telling him he can't buy whatever he wants. His business as you say. I did say I wasn't going anywhere near that.

I can get the need for 2 pairs due to accessibility or disability reasons. That's a good point, although even then, there may be better solutions than different pairs of binoculars.

But when it comes to newcomers asking advice, in my opinion, this route of 2 pairs better than one, perming from
you need a lightweight pair,
you need a low mag pair,
you need a high mag pair,
you need a low light pair,
You need a pair that fits in your pocket
You need extra wide field of view pair for birding is wrong.

You are steering them away from improving their birding, and turning them into binocular collectors.

I do remember days when some birders did have 2 pairs round their neck... 1 for birds, 1 for insects! But those days are long gone with many good quality binoculars having a decent close focus.

Original poster.. sorry, I get the feeling I have completely hijacked, derailed your thread. Hope you got what you needed in between all these posts!

 

[Isthatascratch?]

Sounds like you had better keep them all with you at all times, in order to always be able to quickly select the appropriate one.

In fairness, I don't think anyone is asking him to justify what he's got, or telling him he can't buy whatever he wants. His business as you say. I did say I wasn't going anywhere near that.

I can get the need for 2 pairs due to accessibility or disability reasons. That's a good point, although even then, there may be better solutions than different pairs of binoculars.

But when it comes to newcomers asking advice, in my opinion, this route of 2 pairs better than one, perming from
you need a lightweight pair,
you need a low mag pair,
you need a high mag pair,
you need a low light pair,
You need a pair that fits in your pocket
You need extra wide field of view pair for birding is wrong.

You are steering them away from improving their birding, and turning them into binocular collectors.

I do remember days when some birders did have 2 pairs round their neck... 1 for birds, 1 for insects! But those days are long gone with many good quality binoculars having a decent close focus.

Original poster.. sorry, I get the feeling I have completely hijacked, derailed your thread. Hope you got what you needed in between all these posts!
[/QUOTE

I feel I have reached a similar conclusion…8x42, 10x42 and 12x50…Swarovski Bread and Leica Noctivid filling!! With A couple of Habichts for snacks!!!

My sandwich changed as the Leica was excellent but heavy…so my bloody sandwich has got bigger..now Swarovski Bread 8x42, two 10 x Swarovski fillings and the 12x50 Swarovski top… I’ll get fatter but it has saved me money!!! … I still have the same snacks !!!