-
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.
Decent High Powered Binoculars (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter fikey
- Start date
It may be worth just trying your current 10x42 on a tripod. The targets you are interested in seeing (deer, elk, eagles etc) are pretty big; your ability to see at long distance is often constrained by atmospheric conditions (heat haze, visibility etc) that mean that high magnification is less useful that it may appear; and last but definitely not least, the difference that a totally stable view makes, even in 10x, is eye-opening.
Folks get really carried away with "power" (magnification) but without commensurate resolving power, magnification is useless.
A bigger blob does not show more than a smaller blob.
Resolution (sometimes called "clarity") costs money.
I personally find binoculars on a tripod incredibly awkward, and almost defeating the whole purpose of a small, light, portable optic, which enables the use of both eyes.
To each his own.
A bigger blob does not show more than a smaller blob.
Resolution (sometimes called "clarity") costs money.
I personally find binoculars on a tripod incredibly awkward, and almost defeating the whole purpose of a small, light, portable optic, which enables the use of both eyes.
To each his own.
These might be worth a try;
Nikon Action Extreme 16x50 ATB | Nikon Binoculars
Action Extreme 16x50 ATB binoculars provide impeccable magnification for all your outdoor needs. Shop visionary Nikon full-size binoculars!
www.nikonusa.com
Hi fikey.
For someone not used to buying secondhand binoculars maybe stick to new.
The reason I suggested a new Vortex 20x56 is I think they have a no fault warranty in the U.S., but I am not sure of this.
This may cover collimation issues.
Normally, makers don't cover collimation problems even when the build quality of their binocular is awful.
The lower priced Chinese 15x70 and probably 20x80 have numerous complaints that they don't keep collimation, either new or after a short time.
However, the better Quantam 15x70 in the U.K. seems better made.
The local astro society may be a source of a good Japanese 20x80 from the 1970s or 1980s from a fairly expert seller.
Same with the Soviet/Russian 20x60.
A few of my friends have been using Japanese 15x80s and 20x80s for 45 years almost daily.
It is possible they have dropped them once and had the recollimated, but maybe not.
I used a specially made Soviet 20x60 daily for 15 years until it got out of collimation.
I never had it fixed as I use a Canon 18x50 IS now, but this outside your budget.
If you wear glasses with binoculars then good eye relief is needed.
If you get tired using a scope, have you tried switching eyes or do you have some problems with eye muscles that makes the eyes tired.
My old eyes now have this problem.
If you want a good binocular, then an APM 70mm with different eyepiece sets may be ideal, but much more than your budget.
Do you have a local store that stocks large new or secondhand binoculars?
Regards,
B.
For someone not used to buying secondhand binoculars maybe stick to new.
The reason I suggested a new Vortex 20x56 is I think they have a no fault warranty in the U.S., but I am not sure of this.
This may cover collimation issues.
Normally, makers don't cover collimation problems even when the build quality of their binocular is awful.
The lower priced Chinese 15x70 and probably 20x80 have numerous complaints that they don't keep collimation, either new or after a short time.
However, the better Quantam 15x70 in the U.K. seems better made.
The local astro society may be a source of a good Japanese 20x80 from the 1970s or 1980s from a fairly expert seller.
Same with the Soviet/Russian 20x60.
A few of my friends have been using Japanese 15x80s and 20x80s for 45 years almost daily.
It is possible they have dropped them once and had the recollimated, but maybe not.
I used a specially made Soviet 20x60 daily for 15 years until it got out of collimation.
I never had it fixed as I use a Canon 18x50 IS now, but this outside your budget.
If you wear glasses with binoculars then good eye relief is needed.
If you get tired using a scope, have you tried switching eyes or do you have some problems with eye muscles that makes the eyes tired.
My old eyes now have this problem.
If you want a good binocular, then an APM 70mm with different eyepiece sets may be ideal, but much more than your budget.
Do you have a local store that stocks large new or secondhand binoculars?
Regards,
B.
Post #24 seems sensible.
As to higher magnification 20x80 binoculars, any half decent well made binocular using traditional polishing, not high speed polishing can easily resolve well.
My 1975 Japanese Celestron 20x80, best of three, handled a 7x binocular behind it to read a hotel sign at eleven miles.
The image did not break down at 140x, although 80x or 100x would have given the same results.
The 30x80 Japanese c.1980 binocular, best of three also resolves well, but has minimal eye relief.
Even my Yukon 30x50 folded refractor binocular resolves 6.5 arcsecond double stars and equals or maybe betters the Zeiss 20x60S.
I don't like using binoculars on tripods, but here we have a specific goal. To see distant wild life up to 5 miles away.
For this a higher powered tripod mounted binocular is needed or an image stabilized binocular of higher power.
Better still a good astro scope, but here this seems to be a problem.
One could use a binoviewer on a scope, but the price is beyond the budget.
Resolution or clarity does not cost much money.
A £50 Japanese 80mm f/15 refractor including mount can be used easily at 150x if it is up to the normal standard.
Same for a £50 Skywatcher 90mm Maksutov Cassegrain.
Both prices secondhand.
Regards,
B.
As to higher magnification 20x80 binoculars, any half decent well made binocular using traditional polishing, not high speed polishing can easily resolve well.
My 1975 Japanese Celestron 20x80, best of three, handled a 7x binocular behind it to read a hotel sign at eleven miles.
The image did not break down at 140x, although 80x or 100x would have given the same results.
The 30x80 Japanese c.1980 binocular, best of three also resolves well, but has minimal eye relief.
Even my Yukon 30x50 folded refractor binocular resolves 6.5 arcsecond double stars and equals or maybe betters the Zeiss 20x60S.
I don't like using binoculars on tripods, but here we have a specific goal. To see distant wild life up to 5 miles away.
For this a higher powered tripod mounted binocular is needed or an image stabilized binocular of higher power.
Better still a good astro scope, but here this seems to be a problem.
One could use a binoviewer on a scope, but the price is beyond the budget.
Resolution or clarity does not cost much money.
A £50 Japanese 80mm f/15 refractor including mount can be used easily at 150x if it is up to the normal standard.
Same for a £50 Skywatcher 90mm Maksutov Cassegrain.
Both prices secondhand.
Regards,
B.
Last edited:
beacon hill
Well-known member
That reminded me of a guy who came to one of our optics weekends.
He had a £20 BK7 set of 20x50s and wanted to look at close up detail 2 miles away.
Let him look through a much higher sepc set of 7x50s.
He agreed that he could pick out more detail with the 7x.
BUT - His made things look bigger.
I had to admit defeat
beacon hill
Well-known member
They were on a tripod . Always have one ready
The 20x50 must have been a pretty awful sample.
A friend handed me a low priced Japanese 20x50 in the 1970s and the increase in faintest star visible was amazing compared to a 7x50.
However, my two Pentax 20x60s are optically junk, although others find their samples good.
They should never have left the factory, and gone straight to landfill.
Regards,
B.
A friend handed me a low priced Japanese 20x50 in the 1970s and the increase in faintest star visible was amazing compared to a 7x50.
However, my two Pentax 20x60s are optically junk, although others find their samples good.
They should never have left the factory, and gone straight to landfill.
Regards,
B.
No. I live in a quite rural area.
I know the feeling.
Hi fikey,
Perhaps try the Nikon 16x50ATB in post #24.
I cannot find the Vortex 20x56, although there is a 15x56 or 16x56.
Is the Vortex warranty very good?
I do have an older 16x50 Nikon and it is reasonably good.
Usually the Nikon 16x50s include a free tripod adapter.
One should check.
Regards,
B.
Perhaps try the Nikon 16x50ATB in post #24.
I cannot find the Vortex 20x56, although there is a 15x56 or 16x56.
Is the Vortex warranty very good?
I do have an older 16x50 Nikon and it is reasonably good.
Usually the Nikon 16x50s include a free tripod adapter.
One should check.
Regards,
B.
Last edited:
There is an RFT or richest field scope, usually a short focus scope of about 5 inch aperture that shows the greatest number of stars.
They have CA, but that is not much of a problem at night.
My 123mm Jaegers refractor is such a scope and was used at 16x to 145x magnification, but normally at 80x.
It has a 3 inch wide drawtube.
There are now some commercial 3 inch fitting eyepieces, but I used large ex gov. eyepieces for 16x with a 4.7 degree field.
Regards,
B.
They have CA, but that is not much of a problem at night.
My 123mm Jaegers refractor is such a scope and was used at 16x to 145x magnification, but normally at 80x.
It has a 3 inch wide drawtube.
There are now some commercial 3 inch fitting eyepieces, but I used large ex gov. eyepieces for 16x with a 4.7 degree field.
Regards,
B.
In nearly every case I have found that a well made binocular of higher magnification resolves better than a lower magnification binocular despite wide price differences, where the lower magnification binocular is more or much more expensive.
My Komz 12x45 binocular clearly and always outresolves the Nikon 10x35 EII hand held.
I was surprised that a very well worn Fujinon 14x40 IS binocular easily outresolved the Canon 10x42L IS.
The Canon 18x50 IS outresolves the Canon 10x42L IS.
The Canon 10x30 IS first model IS off equals the Komz 12x45.
With higher magnification more bracing may be needed.
My low price Ultraview Japanese 12x50 binocular, best of six, resolves just as well as the Leica Ultravid 12x50.
On the other hand my VisionKing 5x25 has one side with such dreadful optics that at 5x it is just awful regarding resolution compared to the Foton 5x25.
It is unfortunate that nowadays rubbish optics are common.
Pre 1980 I don't think this happened.
Sample variation seems nowadays to have a much wider variation than in the past.
There were differences in Soviet binoculars between export and home market where the latter were sometimes worse.
The main downside of higher magnification is smaller fields and more problems hand holding.
Regards,
B.
My Komz 12x45 binocular clearly and always outresolves the Nikon 10x35 EII hand held.
I was surprised that a very well worn Fujinon 14x40 IS binocular easily outresolved the Canon 10x42L IS.
The Canon 18x50 IS outresolves the Canon 10x42L IS.
The Canon 10x30 IS first model IS off equals the Komz 12x45.
With higher magnification more bracing may be needed.
My low price Ultraview Japanese 12x50 binocular, best of six, resolves just as well as the Leica Ultravid 12x50.
On the other hand my VisionKing 5x25 has one side with such dreadful optics that at 5x it is just awful regarding resolution compared to the Foton 5x25.
It is unfortunate that nowadays rubbish optics are common.
Pre 1980 I don't think this happened.
Sample variation seems nowadays to have a much wider variation than in the past.
There were differences in Soviet binoculars between export and home market where the latter were sometimes worse.
The main downside of higher magnification is smaller fields and more problems hand holding.
Regards,
B.
Last edited:
I take it Binastro means Kenko UltraVIEW porro. Curious, I just did an internet search for "ultraview 12x50 price". In the search results the 4th is from a shop in the UK where that model is GBP 24 ("Sale Price", but the website says it's sold out). The 5th is somehow for a Leica Ultravid-HD+ from a well-known online retailer where that is USD 2560. Price ratio 1:83+.
Similar threads
