Are two binoculars better than one? (5 Viewers)

[mwhogue]

3. By all means check out a harness. I've never carried a bino around my neck, preferring Bandolier style, but switching to harness changed everything. These are especially nice with scope and tripod as you must fuss, pay attention moving between binos and scope.

Agree 100%.

One other option for the OP's consideration. Carry bins in a suitable case rigged on a second belt which is not run through the belt loops of the pants and thus allows the weight to be shifted 360 degrees on the fly as terrain/balance issues may dictate. This takes the weight completely off neck and shoulders and has the additional advantage of carrying heavier bins lower on your body.

Mike

 

[wllmspd]

8x wide binos and a scope, don’t need anything more. A 10x won’t do much more than 8x when you have the scope around and 8x32 and 10x40 have the same exit pupil so neither is brighter. I have plenty of binos in different sizes, but a decent and robust 8x32 is my main (daytime) tool.

Peter

 

[Peter.home]

Yes, but often times your birding is in different areas. For example, if you know you are going birding in a heavily wooded area or in a tropical rainforest with canopy a 8x42 would be best but if you are birding in more open areas like along the coast where you are trying to see birds at great distances the 10x42 would be best. Maybe you hike long distances in the daytime, where a 8x32 or 10x32 would be preferred because of the light weight, and you don't need the bigger EP. There is a perfect tool for every job.

No offence meant, to any of the replies here, but this isn't a birder talking is it.
It's the binocular enthusiast talking about binoculars as a theoretical birder, in theoretical scenarios for each "class" of binocular.
The tail wagging the dog.

In reality, birding is spent simultaneously looking into shady wooded areas, plus scanning the open sky; fast flitting small birds a couple of metres away in scrub distracting you whilst seeing wildfowl on a distant lake.
If you are setting out thinking you have the perfect pair of binoculars for what lies ahead in your birding day, then I would say you can probably improve your all round skills as a birder / wildlife watcher.

 

[Maljunulo]

No offence meant, to any of the replies here, but this isn't a birder talking is it.
It's the binocular enthusiast talking about binoculars as a theoretical birder, in theoretical scenarios for each "class" of binocular.
The tail wagging the dog.

In reality, birding is spent simultaneously looking into shady wooded areas, plus scanning the open sky; fast flitting small birds a couple of metres away in scrub distracting you whilst seeing wildfowl on a distant lake.
If you are setting out thinking you have the perfect pair of binoculars for what lies ahead in your birding day, then I would say you can probably improve your all round skills as a birder / wildlife watcher.

And that’s a bingo!

 

[jurek]

To sum it all up, I am looking for all of you guys out there who has experience with both more active hiking trips and more passive birding trips and how it works with a single all-round binocular (in my case at 640 grams) versus 2 specialised binoculars.

Having 2 pairs of binoculars makes sense if you have 4 or more eyes.

I have a single pair of 10x42 Zeiss which I carry on long hikes and bicycle rides. If you have a neck pain, you don't need second binoculars, but a chest strap. You can wear it also over the shoulder like a bag when hiking or cycling.

The advice of buying many binoculars comes usually from gear afficionados who spend little or no time actually watching wildlife in the field. I also have a feeling some advocates are optics sellers, who hope to persuade people to buy 2 pairs of inferior binoculars instead of one top pair.

 

[Patudo]

I walk anything between 2-15 km over 1-5 hours (however in completely flat and not challenging terrain). ... when I bought new binoculars, I particularly emphasised that they should be lightweight (also 8x). I tended to get a bit of shoulder pain with my old binoculars (mainly from walking with them, not so much from holding them up to my eyes) and unfortunately I still do (though probably a lot less) to some extent with my new 8x40.

... more sedate ‘Safari’ where most of it is done by car to various birdwatching towers. I would say i do both approximately 50% of the time.

Reading this makes me think your situation would in fact suit having two binoculars - a light and handy 8x30 /32 (something like a Nikon Monarch 8x30 HG maybe) and a 10x42 with more reach. Birding towers suggest a view over marsh or similar open habitat where 10x comes into its own. If you're solely intending to identify static birds (waders etc) 8x binoculars and a scope will do that, but I find a little extra magnification does help even when searching over long distances, and I definitely, after having spent hundreds of hours with both, prefer 10x when following action at distance (ie. if a peregrine suddenly appears and begins hunting waders, or watching hobbies catching dragonflies in autumn or when they are after swallows and martins in summer).

I mostly use 10x now, but for most of my birding life I have wanted to have the choice between 8x and 10x, and if I did more "regular" birding would use my 8x binoculars much more. My brother uses his 8.5x42 Swarovski for everything very effectively, but his birding doesn't involve walking 15km, nor does he have shoulder pain.

 

[JosephK]

Reading this makes me think your situation would in fact suit having two binoculars - a light and handy 8x30 /32 (something like a Nikon Monarch 8x30 HG maybe) and a 10x42 with more reach. Birding towers suggest a view over marsh or similar open habitat where 10x comes into its own. If you're solely intending to identify static birds (waders etc) 8x binoculars and a scope will do that, but I find a little extra magnification does help even when searching over long distances, and I definitely, after having spent hundreds of hours with both, prefer 10x when following action at distance (ie. if a peregrine suddenly appears and begins hunting waders, or watching hobbies catching dragonflies in autumn or when they are after swallows and martins in summer).

Thank you patudo. I think you summarized the thoughts that I’m having right now very well.
But I think it would be a shame to sell my almost brand new SFL 840 for a much lower price than I paid. So I’m considering maybe buying a bino pack harness and use this with my 8x40s to see if this would remove the shoulder discomfort on longer hikes.
Does anyone else get shoulder discomfort even when wearing a relatively light pair of binos such as the SFL 40s on half day hikes (albeit with the stock strap) or am I just being a bit delicate? I can’t really figure that out.

 

[mwhogue]

Does anyone else get shoulder discomfort even when wearing a relatively light pair of binos such as the SFL 40s on half day hikes (albeit with the stock strap) or am I just being a bit delicate? I can’t really figure that out.

Yes, either discomfort or at least distraction even on short walks with 30mm bins (and larger) when using OEM/stock straps and after market straps as well. That's why I use various harnesses on almost all bins. IMO it comes down to the anatomy of the neck and shoulders w/r/t whether a harness or a strap will work better for any given user. Some of the more common harness styles do not work for me either and I wind up modifying some of the harnesses I do prefer out of the box for an even more comfortable fit.

Good luck finding the best solution for you and looking forward to reports of your success.

Mike

 

[CharleyBird]

Hello everyone. This is my first post here on the bird forum, but (as always) I've been reading along for quite a while and I love the fact that I have access to such extensive amount of knowledge and discussion on this relatively niche subject and hobby.

I recently (about a month ago) upgraded from my old Vortex Viper 10x42 to a pair of SFL 8x40. Wow they are awesome! However I was recently offered a really big price discount (more or less 50%) on a brand new pair of SF 10x42’s which put me in a bit of a crisis (not for the reasons you may think) so I am really looking for any experience and help.
My birding trips can generally be divided into two categories: an active ‘hike’ and a more sedate ‘Safari’ where most of it is done by car to various birdwatching towers. I would say i do both approximately 50% of the time.


I live right next to Denmark's largest (lowland) forest, which is where most of my ‘active’ birding trips take place. I walk anything between 2-15 km over 1-5 hours (however in completely flat and not challenging terrain).

Therefore, when I bought new binoculars, I particularly emphasised that they should be lightweight (also 8x). I tended to get a bit of shoulder pain with my old binoculars (mainly from walking with them, not so much from holding them up to my eyes) and unfortunately I still do (though probably a lot less) to some extent with my new 8x40.

At the same time, when I'm on safari, I sometimes regret having compromised on the very best binoculars to save a few grams that wouldn't bother me on such trips anyway (and also having 8x which I don’t think is ideal in these areas).
Now I'm in a situation where I've been offered to buy a pair of SF 10x42s at an incredible price.

This has made me consider whether I should swap my SFL 8x40s for the equivalent 8x30s and go for the SF 10x42s as my ‘heavy’ binoculars when I could afford the extra weight. As I see it (which is more or less purely theoretically) the 8x and lower weight of the SFL 8x30’s would be perfect fore my active use (however at the cost of reduced EP) while the 10x and higher optical quality of the SF 10x42’s would be perfect for my birding trips by car to birding towers etc.
Also I want to add that I have just invested in a kowa 88a telescope so I almost feel guilty about even considering buying ANOTHER binocular right now.



To sum it all up, I am looking for all of you guys out there who has experience with both more active hiking trips and more passive birding trips and how it works with a single all-round binocular (in my case at 640 grams) versus 2 specialised binoculars. I would also really appreciate just anyone who has some experience with the binoculars that I’ve mentioned here and especially something similar to the SFL 8x40 for more active use.

Thanks a lot in advance🙏

The answer is yes, two binoculars are better than one:
"In this way you get away from the supposed egg-laying woolly milk pig and instead work with two complementary specialists."

Beyond that I'd hesitate to advise because your discomfort and pain are unique to you.

For me, I dislike both weight around my neck and the misalignment caused by hanging anything off a shoulder. So I carry both bins and bags in bandolier style when walking.

If 'on safari', sat supported in a car/hide/tower, I'd be looking for a lightweight 12x to complement the 8x; this ought to provide a noticeable jump in magnification.

 

[Peter.home]

I think your birding is different in England than it is in the USA. We have many totally different ecosystems here depending on where you go, and that doesn't include travel. I didn't say the binoculars I choose would be perfect, but I do select the format of my binoculars for their intended use. From what I can infer about your knowledge of using different binoculars, I doubt you have much experience birding in different countries or biomes. I guess a 8x42 would work fine if you just birded around your hometown of England, but I personally would definitely select a different binocular if I was looking for Osprey in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming than I would if was looking for Resplendent Quetzals in Monteverde Cloud Forest in Costa Rica. I think you need to enlarge your scope of birding experience because you seem to have very limited knowledge about birding in different ecosystems. For my birding I like a combo of a 8x42 and a 10x42.

This is what I mean. You are taking your different binocular formats, and designing ideal birding experiences for that format. It's not how birding works.
You could end up spending time in Yellowstone in shady forest areas. You could spend a few hours near the Quetzal site looking at Vultures, and presumably Ospreys.

The differences in binocular capability or specs doesn't drive the hobby.
Give me the most unsuitable (decent quality) binoculars for any habitat, and I'll still enjoy seeing loads of birds,
And mammals, and insects, and flora anywhere on the planet.
I very much doubt I'd even think about wishing for different binoculars or multiple pairs of binoculars. Why? Because at the end of the day, the difference between 8x and 12x, x32 or x56, best fov vs average fov for similar priced binoculars, doesn't make that much difference in watching wildlife.
Finding the bird or not finding the bird tends to occupy the mind more.

 

[adhoc]

The thread linked here should be useful, particularly post #15 on.

 

[Peter.home]

The thread linked here should be useful, particularly post #15 on.

There's obviously a long running 2 sides to this. It's good to understand both perspectives / extremes, and leave it there I suspect.
Bogbean talks a lot of sense by the way

 

[ReinierB]

Yes, of course, having one decent pair of binoculars is enough.
But I still think it is nice to have options. If I go walking with my wife and (small) children, I don't want to carry an heavy 42mm. If it's a dark day or at dawn I prefer a larger exit pupil. If I am at a wetland or at the coast I prefer a higher magnification for the more details it will give.
I also cannot put a 32mm or 42mm in my pocket, so having a pocket bin I can carry all the time (and I do) makes sense to me as well. I am not only a birder in the weekend, but every day. It's in my dna. I don't want to miss the first chiffchaff, the first swallow, the interesting bird of prey high in the sky, etc.

So yes, one pair of binoculars should be enough, but I think I would restrict myself in my hobby if I just had one.

• no pocket bin, I would miss a lot of birds
• no 10/12 power, I would sometimes fail to identify birds and I just enjoy higher magnifications more.
• no >4mm exit pupil. I wouldn't get nice views of that badger or nightjar at dawn.

Having good gear, really adds to my hobby as a nature enthousiast / birdwatcher.

 

[Harry Stottle]

Yes, of course, having one decent pair of binoculars is enough.
But I still think it is nice to have options. If I go walking with my wife and (small) children, I don't want to carry an heavy 42mm. If it's a dark day or at dawn I prefer a larger exit pupil. If I am at a wetland or at the coast I prefer a higher magnification for the more details it will give.
I also cannot put a 32mm or 42mm in my pocket, so having a pocket bin I can carry all the time (and I do) makes sense to me as well. I am not only a birder in the weekend, but every day. It's in my dna. I don't want to miss the first chichchaff, the first swallow, the interesting bird of prey high in the sky, etc.

So yes, one pair of binoculars should be enough, but I think I would restrict myself in my hobby if I just had one.

• no pocket bin, I would miss a lot of birds
• no 10/12 power, I would sometimes fail to identify birds and I just enjoy higher magnifications more.
• no >4mm exit pupil. I wouldn't get nice views of that badger or nightjar at dawn.

Having good gear, really adds to my hobby as a nature enthousiast / birdwatcher.

I entirely agree with you.
However, my wife will tell you that the money I have wasted on several binoculars would obviously have been much better spent on frocks and jewellery for her.

 

[Paultricounty]

I entirely agree with you.
However, my wife will tell you that the money I have wasted on several binoculars would obviously have been much better spent on frocks and jewellry for her.

My wife said the money would’ve been better spent renovating the kitchen.

 

[tehri]

My wife said the money would’ve been better spent renovating the kitchen.

Paul, in that case I suggest you visit this site : Large Down by the Lake
You choose one or more wallpapers, renovate the kitchen, even the bedroom, and she will be really happy and won't even mind buying yourself a new pair of binoculars !! 🤪

 

[tenex]

The discussion has as usual gone off into how many binoculars to have, what's best etc. Whether you want to be tempted by SF vs SFL is entirely up to you; I wouldn't. But if your shoulder hurts even with SFL, what you really need is a solution for that. Try a harness, or if you hike with any sort of daypack, it's possible to attach a bin to its straps with bits of strap/cord and clips, instead of a neck strap -- someone has posted a very nice arrangement here that you may find by searching. Or find a solution for your shoulder pain with some therapy (trigger point, structural integration, etc). Good luck!

 

[looksharp65]

@JosephK Greetings from the other side of the pond, Varberg Halland here ☺️
I've made quite an optics journey, like may of us gearheads here. I used my old man's Zeiss 10x40 but wanted something more compact and got myself a Minox HG 8x32. Not much later, I started arguing that a set of a 6,5x32 and a 10x32, both brought when going out, would cover exactly everything. I never really got along with the Minox and I think it was the backwards focus direction that made both major focus shifts and small adjustments very annoying.
I even dismissed all 8x binoculars

Then the Nikon E II 8x30 entered and I found that it could resolve all the detail my Zeiss FL 10x32 could.
There's many advantages with keeping magnification low as long as you use them at relatively moderate distances and (importantly) have good eyesight with or without the help of spectacles or contacts.
In my opinion, the small step between 8x and 10x isn't meaningful enough to have one of each, but YMMV. About 150% magnification difference makes more sense to me. Again, YMMV.

My birding is always by bike, and I now usually use a small Kite Lynx HD 8x30, the Nikon E II 8x30 or a Meopta 8x32 easily accessible while cycling, often around my neck. They are all light enough for this. When I reach a stop somewhere along the coast (I know you too have vast flatlands in Jutland), I pick out my 12x50 from my backpack and use it for scanning. If it's in the forest, the 12x50 lies idle at home.
It would probably be impossible for me to convince anyone that a 12x50 should be a cornerstone in any birder's equipment, but its reach is really awesome although a good 8x isn't bad.

Right now, I rotate between six binoculars that are all nice, and I can justify owning each of them. So if you like the SF 10x42, by all means buy it.
Don't rush selling the small one though, it will come in literally handy in the future. Having two isn't a sin.
EDIT: I believe you should keep the 8x40 rather than swapping it. If you had been in the position of not already owning it, I'd have recommended a small 8x30 or 8x32 but the 8x40 has its own merits that, together with the resale loss, are reason enough to keep it.

//L

 

[Patudo]

Because at the end of the day, the difference between 8x and 12x, x32 or x56, best fov vs average fov for similar priced binoculars, doesn't make that much difference in watching wildlife.
Finding the bird or not finding the bird tends to occupy the mind more.

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?

The amazing thing is that their eyesight must at times exceed what we can see with binoculars. On Sunday the female near me went spiralling up in a power-climb for at least a few hundred feet, took about 15 seconds to get her bearings and then went zooming away to the northeast. I had the 12x50B braced and was almost as steady as I could be, yet she kept going at pace till she simply disappeared. I never at any point saw what she was after. Just imagine what vision they must possess.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Vultures can spot a three-foot carcass from 4 miles away. Vultures are also the highest flying birds reaching 37,000 feet, and they have the strongest gastric acid of any animal with a pH of just over 0, it's stronger than battery acid and 100 times stronger than ours. A Peregrine Falcon's eye are 8 times better than ours. They can spot a tiny prey more than a mile away, and they have protective eyelids that act as goggles that cover their eyes when they are diving at 180 mph.