Travelling spotting scopes vs. Image Stabilised (IS) binoculars (1 Viewer)

[DRodrigues]

Reading atc vs. stc I remembered to share my experience: - I was thinking of getting a STC56 to combine with my STX115, to get wider FOVs for more easily localise marked ducks and then resight these with the X115. After many years using 15x56 binoculars, I opted instead for a Canon 18x50 IS since would get wider FOV and AFOV than with the STC at 17x, would be using both eyes, wouldn't need an extra tripod (or a double bar to mount the scopes in parallel...), and wouldn't had to carry more a device. I know that my birding is different from most users but nowadays, when travelling, I usually will not carry the spotting scope and will only take the IS binocular!
So if you are considering to purchase a travelling spotting scope, consider to get instead a IS binocular >=15x! Besides not having to carry a tripod, you also only will carry a binocular...
This recommendation applies until I will read a positive review of Kite 60 IS 17-35x - I state already that I would prefer a binocular version of it!...🦆

 

[Hermann]

Reading atc vs. stc I remembered to share my experience: - I was thinking of getting a STC56 to combine with my STX115, to get wider FOVs for more easily localise marked ducks and then resight these with the X115. After many years using 15x56 binoculars, I opted instead for a Canon 18x50 IS since would get wider FOV and AFOV than with the STC at 17x, would be using both eyes, wouldn't need an extra tripod (or a double bar to mount the scopes in parallel...), and wouldn't had to carry more a device.

Seems like the best solution for you and the way you bird.

I know that my birding is different from most users but nowadays, when travelling, I usually will not carry the spotting scope and will only take the IS binocular!
So if you are considering to purchase a travelling spotting scope, consider to get instead a IS binocular >=15x! Besides not having to carry a tripod, you also only will carry a binocular...

Well, no. Not really. Taking only an 18x50 IS would not work for me because 18x isn't enough for my style of birding, I need to have quick and easy access to higher magnifications. I prefer to use a small travelling scope, in my case a Nikon ED50 in combination with a good monopod, a Monostat. With the Monostat I can use magnifications up to ~35x no problem.

Also, I couldn't live with an 18x50 IS as my only binocular, simply because the magnification is too high for close-up stuff. Not enough depth of field when you're working some bushes or when birding in dense woodland. That's actually the reason why I never got a Zeiss 20x60S - it would have neither replaced my low-power binoculars nor a scope. To me it's neither fish nor flesh.

Hermann

 

[Montereyman]

The most image magnification I can hand hold is a 12x binocular. With image stabilization I can use a 16x binocular with no difficulty. At 16x the need for a scope is much reduced and I am far more mobile with the binoculars than with a scope mounted on a tripod.

The binoculars also work well when on a boat and that is an important consideration for pelagics.

 

[fazalmajid]

I have to admit my scope usage went down significantly after I got the Sig-Sauer Zulu6 HDX 20x42. The stabilization on those is phenomenal.

FWIW. Kite Optics is releasing a new IS scope:

Kite APC 60 17-35x WA stabilised spotting scope

I've often wondered what a small image-stabilised spotting scope would be like for birding. It would be pleasant not to have to lug around a tripod all of the time! Well, it seems we're about to find out with the imminent arrival of a new Kite 17-35x60 stabilised 'scope. Other than the zoom...

www.birdforum.net

It looks quite chunky but may be an option for those who need more than 18-20x magnification while still retaining the freedom of no tripod.

 

[DRodrigues]

... I never got a Zeiss 20x60S ...

Many years ago, I looked through a Zeiss 20x60 and didn't liked - not eye-glass friendly and too short AFOV for the price. Now a updated version of it might be interesting!...

 

[DRodrigues]

The most image magnification I can hand hold is a 12x binocular. With image stabilization I can use a 16x binocular with no difficulty. At 16x the need for a scope is much reduced and I am far more mobile with the binoculars than with a scope mounted on a tripod.
...

And the practical difference in terms of resolution within an hand-held 12x and a IS 16x is much higher than the difference in magnification may suggest!

 

[DRodrigues]

I have to admit my scope usage went down significantly after I got the Sig-Sauer Zulu6 HDX 20x42. ...

Doing duck and flamingo counts by car, nowadays I rarely need to mount the scope since the 18x50 IS allows me to identify birds and count them on 99% of the situations, even at high distances!...
I went to the Canon due to the AFOVs and aperture.

 

[Montereyman]

If I was a hunter glassing to spot prey the AFOV might be important. In my own use though I will spot a bird without the binos and then use the binos to get a closer view and this is true for birds in flight as well. I do this with my 10x25 binos as well as the 16x42 IS ones.

The new Sig Sauer HDX ones use a single AA battery that lasts for up to 12 months. No need to carry spare batteries in the field or on trips.

 

[Hermann]

And the practical difference in terms of resolution within an hand-held 12x and a IS 16x is much higher than the difference in magnification may suggest!

Yep. According to Vukobratovich (1989) the efficiency of a 12x binocular drops to a bit more than 60% handheld, i.e. you see about as much as with a 7.5x binocular mounted. Holger Merlitz (2023) writes: " ... the majority of observers regard binoculars of 12x or above utterly useless for handheld applications." (p. 150). I agree.

Hermann

 

[Montereyman]

I have no problems with my 12x50 binoculars but went up a notch in quality as imperfections are more apparent with this level of image magnification. I tried a 15x pair but returned them and so found my own magnification boundary.

Technology improves and old rule of thumb observations like those of Vukobratavich no longer apply. With image stabilization with cameras the increase allows shutter speeds 4-5 times as slow without camera motion blur showing in the images. This translates to being able to hand hold binoculars that are much higher in magnification as well. I have no problems at all with my 16x Sig Sauer with image stabilization (on land as I have not tried them on a boat).

 

[Hermann]

Technology improves and old rule of thumb observations like those of Vukobratavich no longer apply.

Vukobratovich only refers to conventional, non-stabilized binoculars. There are quite a few empirical studies that support his calculations, going back to 1944.

With image stabilization with cameras the increase allows shutter speeds 4-5 times as slow without camera motion blur showing in the images. This translates to being able to hand hold binoculars that are much higher in magnification as well. I have no problems at all with my 16x Sig Sauer with image stabilization (on land as I have not tried them on a boat).

Image stabilization is a game changer.

Hermann

 

[etudiant]

I find it useful to catch a glimpse of a target bird through my Nikon ED50 straight scope at much more than 15x.
It may be that some details are missed, but the overall impression is what matters.

Obviously I'd be delighted if the Nikon had IS, sadly no sign of that thus far.

 

[chill6x6]

I like the 7x/8x binocular around my neck AND a spotting scope on a tripod route. I like to have my hands free for the most part to access Sibley/Kaufman, phone, and binoculars for birds my scope isn't viewing. I have an SLC 15X56 and really don't think I could make the change to one IS 15X or greater as my one birding tool to replace two tools. I've now gotten into the habit of taking a backpack with a lightweight scope/tripod AND binoculars on my chest. Of course it's nice to have insect repellent, water, multi-tool along for the ride...

My lightest outfit..

 

[dwatsonbirder]

Still happy with the ED50 then Chuck?

 

[chill6x6]

Still happy with the ED50 then Chuck?

YEAH! I like it! I wish it had a little more ER but for a compact scope it's great! The three compact scopes I tried really were all good. But for sure the ED50 wins on everything concerning "compact" without a lot of sacrifices.