What are your priorities in binoculars? (1 Viewer)

[has530]

All optics involve compromises be it larger dimensions for lower chromatic abberation, lighter weight for a dimmer image with more difficult eye placement, or even just cost for increased quality. As a buyer and user of binoculars every individual has their own preferences and priorities as to what I'd acceptable. For example some people don't notice or care about chromatic abberation. I on the other hand am quite sensitive and would much rather carry something longer to reduce that abberation. Some other preferences or lack therof for me include:

• I do not care about field flatness (to a degree) I like a wide field but I don't need edge to edge sharpness as i am only looking in the middle and just move the binoculars to center my target if I notice something on the edge
• I do not care about exit pupil size. I regularly use an 8x20 and have no problems with eye placement
• I do care about ease of view ("Einblickverhalten"). Blackouts, eye relief (enough to keep my eyelashes off the lenses), eyecup-face shape compatability. This is a top priority for me.
• I do care about glare. I spend a lot of time by the water looking near the sun at sunset. If a binocular has glare problems it is not very usable most of the time for me
• I don't care about color. I use single coated binoculars for birding every now and then and your eyes get used to a color cast very quickly. If there is enough light I don't care if the image is a little warm

I could go on and on all night but I would like to hear what others opinions are. What optical abberations bother you? What matters most to you when deciding if you like an optic?

 

[William Lewis]

I tend to look for similar things to you I think.

I do not care about field flatness (to a degree) I like a wide field but I don't need edge to edge sharpness as i am only looking in the middle and just move the binoculars to center my target if I notice something on the edge

Same here, as long as significant curvature doesn't start in the middle 70% it's no worries.

I do care about ease of view ("Einblickverhalten"). Blackouts, eye relief (enough to keep my eyelashes off the lenses), eyecup-face shape compatability. This is a top priority for me.

Big time, if it isn't a comfortable view or the shape doesn't facilitate a stable hold I'm out.

I do care about glare. I spend a lot of time by the water looking near the sun at sunset. If a binocular has glare problems it is not very usable most of the time for me

With you on this one, most of my birding is done at dawn and dusk so the low sun is always in play, small crescents are not a problem for me, washed out detail is.

I like high transmission and larger exit pupils as well, personally, just for all condition utility.

Colour cast doesn't bother me too much, I like a bino to keep it's resolution absolute at range.

I'm not a huge fan of sp prisms so only use ak or porro's and like a light and smooth but slow focuser, close focus of 4m is fine, if it's 5 or more meters I tend to miss small birds in close cover.

I don't mind some CA as long as it's not centre field and would always prefer rubber armour, sealed and nitrogen purged bino's for general field use. I like build quality to feel top notch and a diopter that doesn't move.

I won't go above an 8x personally for stability reasons but actually I find the shallower depth of field more of a problem with 10x or 12x than the decreased stability.

Any field of view above 115m at 1000m is fine for my uses. I find rolling ball distracting so would prefer pin cushion distortions instead.

will

 

[Binocollector]

Above all - center sharpness.
For birding - low CA. It's really annoying when seeing a green fringe around a black bird against the sky.
Everything else is further down the list. I have a few flat field binos but they were mostly bought for astronomy where it is more useful.
I like my old porros with a wide FoV but it's no must-have. I also like my 7.5°, 8x32 Canon WP.
Ergonomics is always a factor. What good is the best bino if the eye cups don't fit my face or are annoyingly uncomfy?
On my older binos I am more tolerant when it comes to color 'tint'. But a new one better be as neutral in color as possible.
For me at the moment my new Fujinon HC 8x42 ticks most boxes.
A few other favorites and their main qualities:
Komz 7x30, for the extreme sharpness, well corrected field of view, 3D effect.
Skeleton bino 6x25, for the super wide 11.5° FoV, very solid construction and minimalist design.
Canon 8x32WP, sharpness, low CA, flat field, solid construction are its main attributes.
Bresser "Condor", made by Kamakura, very sharp, very well balanced between wide FoV with still not too extreme pincushion or field curvature.

 

[kimmik]

Reliable
Capable
Enjoyable

 

[beacon hill]

Speaking as a dealer looking from the other side of the table.
Amazing how many customers go for ease of use. Many are using binoculars for the 1st time. So how they
balance in the hands and how easily they can adjust them set them to suit their eyes, regards avoiding blacking
and correct eye relief is top of the list.
Also in many cases they will put a better set to one side because they cant get on with them despite my efforts
to help.

As for more experienced users. There are around 10+ boxes that need ticking. Won`t go through the list.

 

[yarrellii]

This might sound daft, but before going into aberrations and technical specs of any binoculars, for me, first and foremost (and something that actually denies any further point) is usability, ease of use, that lovely Einblickverhalten mentioned by @has530 in his original post. After trying many nice binos my view is as simple as this: if it's uncomfortable, if it doesn't fit me, if I have to "fight with it" in order to use it... I just don't want it, be it a Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica or whatever. As a matter of fact, I've had binos from each and everyone of those brands and in some cases I have rejected them due to this (e.g. Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42, Leica "Retrovid" 7x35, Swarovski 8x30 CL Companion).

So:
1. (with the power to end the list here): usability, ease of use, comfort, whatever you want to call it. The fact that you forget you are using them: be it for perfect eyecups, perfect focus wheel, perfect armour. A pet peeve of mine are narrow eyecups, which have ruined many an otherwise excellent bino for me.

Then it depends on the intended use of the binoculars. To me, a daily bino means walking and using it in many circumstances, and this means weight is a consideration. For example, at the moment I'm enjoying a 7x42 Meopta Meostar which is lovely, but I think it's just too heavy to use it regularly on my walks. For other uses, obviously weight and size are less of an issue.
2. Weight (if its a daily bino).
3. Sharpness. I think some of the binos I enjoy more have this in common
4. Lack of distractions.
I know this might sound vague, but it refers to issues that I can tolerate to the point where they don't distract me. Namely:
CA; I can live with some, but if it's really present, it can spoil the view (the only exception I make with this is the Canon IS 12x36, that has an awful lot of it, but in reward you get so much detail).
Blurred edges. I don't mind blurred edges, if and when they're not a "doughnut" of blur. I remember I found the 7x33 Celestron Granite really distracting. The sweet spot was not terribly small, but the transition to "complete blur" was really abrupt and distracting.
5. Repairability and warranty. The more binoculars I've had, the more I care about the fact that they can be repaired down the line, and also that they're backed by a brand that honours their warranty. Be it by replacing it right away (like Vortex, for example; although this is my less favourite option) or brands that manufacture their own devices and have the facilities to work on them should anything fail.

Not so important.
6. Huge field of view. I mean, I like a +8º 8x, but I don't mind it being 7,5º. But super wide field of view is not on top of my list.
7. Flat field. Oddly enough, my go-to binos are the Swarovski EL 8x32, but I really like them as a "package", as a "whole", not particularly for their field flatteners.
8. Brand. I'm no fan boy, and I don't keep "brand loyalty". Yes, I tend to like some brands better than others, but when using binoculars it's all about the one I'm using, and if it's a Opticron that it's serving me great, then I'm as happy as when I'm using a Swarovski. But if I come a cross some binoculars that just don't work for me, I simply don't care about the badge (yes, point 5 is important, but not the "sticker" itself. If I could, I would do like I do with clothes, and remove every label and brand logo if possible).

Not important at all.
Country of origin (I mean, provided people who made it got a decent wage and working conditions). So, I could't care less if a Leica is made in Portugal, a Zeiss made in Japan or if binoculars X, Z or Y are made in China and the Philippines. If I get the level of craftsmanship and quality for the price range, I'm happy. And I've been very happy with made in Germany binoculars (and also suffered terrible faults in quality control), but also extremely happy with made in China binoculars.

 

[Will K]

For me, in no particular order...

IMPORTANT
1. Bright image
2. High edge-to-edge clarity
3. Wide AFOV
4. Good build quality
5. Good ergonomics / ease of use
6. Flat field (NL style is best)
7. Good warranty
8. True colours (low CA)
9. Good eye relief
10. Design (attractiveness of bino as object)

NOT IMPORTANT
... I honestly can't think of anything relevant that wouldn't impact my experience somehow or other.

 

[mfunnell]

It wasn’t my #1 priority, initially, but it became so:

An optically excellent binocular, comfortable for me to use in most circumstances, which packed away small enough that I’d mostly have them with me.

For me, that ended up as Zeiss 8x32 FLs.

Beyond that, my priorities have been: something better for specific purposes (eg. Papillos for close-ups; 10x56 FLs for stargazing; Nikon E IIs for Porro-prism 3D-effect goodness) or just for fun - or to find out what they’re like, just to find out.

…Mike

 

[Troubador]

Reliable
Capable
Enjoyable

Exactly.

I am not concerned with how close the instrument comes, or does not come, to optical perfection, but I do want to know whether one can make useful and enjoyable nature observations without any handling or optical short-comings getting in the way and causing distractions.

 

[Conndomat]

Hi,

everything else is more important to me than size/compactness and an extreme close-up focus, everything at 3-4m. enough in 99,9% of the cases. I like to use binoculars from about 5mm. EP for me is more comfortable to watch as a result. If possible, the binoculars should not be bright green, yellow, orange or any other strange color. Otherwise it must be at least 16mm. EP for position because of the use of eye-glasses, being well made and of course having good optics, but that goes without saying.

Andreas

 

[[email protected]]

For me, from most important to least...

1. Large AFOV (The bigger the better)
2. Flat field with tack sharp edges (The sharper the better)
3. On-axis sharpness
4. Good ergonomics and ease of use with no blackouts (Eye cups are long enough for ER)
5. Good build quality with a smooth focuser
6. Brightness with high transmission
7. Reasonably lightweight for the aperture (No 8x56's for me anymore)
8. Low glare
9. True colors (No green, yellow or red tints)
10. Low CA
11. Repairability, warranty, reputation and resale
12. Country of origin and I prefer MIA, MIG, or MIJ (No MIC)
13. Good accessories including case, strap, objective covers and rain guard
14. It must say Swarovski on it

 

[Foss]

8x30/32, lightweight and smaller dimensions with harness so I feel like I'm wearing them versus carrying them (if that make sense).
Bright and sharp to the edges or nearly.
Ease of use.
High quality.
So I most often carry my CL 8x30 or FL 8x32.

 

[Harrier22]

I observe both day and night and so Binoculars must have:
Tack-sharp images at least 80% of the FOV
ED glass for precise colors
FMC
Precise focus- no fiddling back & forth to find it.
Feel good in the hands

My GPO Passion ED 8x42 ticks all these boxes

 

[Prestdj]

always been a 8x42 fan for 30+ years

for me the biggest factors are

handling and how they feel in the hand
easy to use focus knob
weight and feel, i like a solid feeling binocular
sharpness
field of view
low light performance

and the strap! but this is the only thing i can change......my meostars came with no strap (ebay buy) tried to get a meopta strap but no luck, so got a black rapid bino strap good but too stretchy but always liked to distinct look of the kahles / waldkauz strap and cover, so after a few emails back and forth to austria it arrived last week. im hppy with them

 

[edwincjones]

Speaking as a dealer looking from the other side of the table.
Amazing how many customers go for ease of use. Many are using binoculars for the 1st time. So how they
balance in the hands and how easily they can adjust them set them to suit their eyes, regards avoiding blacking
and correct eye relief is top of the list.
.........

I guess I am more like a newby

-ability to see better
-confort
-enjoyment

edj

 

[tehri]

ED glass for precise colors

These GPOs are good little binoculars, not very expensive, but far enough having ' precise colors ' compared to their big Alpha competitors !

(just my point of view !)

 

[Maljunulo]

The image.

 

[A2GG]

sufficient eye relief, must be easy to use wearing eyeglasses
light weight
compact size
good ergonomics
high resolution with nice colors. the colors and overall image must make me happy.
good build quality
smooth focus, somewhat quick (can't be too slow)
IPD range should start at 57mm at least, ideally 54mm like some Zeiss binos
No ugly binos, aesthetic design must be pleasing or at least acceptable to me

 

[kimmik]

From my observations, here are the possible tradeoffs that occur with each desired criteria, which one could look for and strike a balance. Thanks Dennis for the list:

1. Large AFOV (The bigger the better)
Eye relief, spherical aberration of exit pupil, hue shift in spectral extremes (reds and blues), weight and size

2. Flat field with tack sharp edges (The sharper the better)
globe effect, wavy distortion, blur at 70% field

3. On-axis sharpness
off axis sharpness

4. Good ergonomics and ease of use with no blackouts (Eye cups are long enough for ER)
shorter eye relief usually less blackouts, but maybe not glasses friendly

6. Brightness with high transmission
colour inaccuracy in spectral extremes (hue shift or dullness in reds and blues)

7. Low glare
tighter baffles, more vignette, less global brightness/throughput

8. True colors (No green, yellow or red tints)
neutral white balance can be tricked, causing colour inaccuracy (like fluorescent lighting, bright but less pleasing colours)

9. Low CA
maybe higher other aberrations, best to check for all of them.

10. Repairability, warranty, reputation and resale
cost

11. Country of origin and I prefer MIA, MIG, or MIJ (No MIC)
papilio and some other interesting binos are MIC

13. It must say Swarovski on it
all swaros feel similar, lacks variety if restricting yourself to one brand. Different brands have different strengths and personality.

 

[Hermann]

• I do not care about field flatness (to a degree) I like a wide field but I don't need edge to edge sharpness as i am only looking in the middle and just move the binoculars to center my target if I notice something on the edge

Same here. I like a largish sweetspot though. Flat fields only work for me if the binoculars don't have any weird distortions (rolling ball, moustache shaped distortions and so on).

• I do not care about exit pupil size. I regularly use an 8x20 and have no problems with eye placement

I'm different, I prefer large exit pupils. The smallest I can live with for serious birding is ~4mm.

• I do care about ease of view ("Einblickverhalten"). Blackouts, eye relief (enough to keep my eyelashes off the lenses), eyecup-face shape compatability. This is a top priority for me.

Yes, but the Einblickverhalten depends of course very much on your personal preferences. An example: A lot of people complained about the kidney beaning of the Nikon SEs. I never ever even saw it. But sure, the Einblickverhalten has got to work for me.

• I do care about glare. I spend a lot of time by the water looking near the sun at sunset. If a binocular has glare problems it is not very usable most of the time for me

Glare is one of my pet peeves. And it's a problem not just when birding near water. Try watching birds against a darkish background with a bright, white sky with high clouds ... Veiling glare, and veiling glare is a killer.

• I don't care about color. I use single coated binoculars for birding every now and then and your eyes get used to a color cast very quickly. If there is enough light I don't care if the image is a little warm

Slight colour casts don't bother me. Still, I prefer neutral colours (Habicht!) with high transmission any day.

What matters most to me are resolution, contrast and transmission, in that order. Ergonomics comes second, there's a lot you can get used to.

And nowadays I also want a stabilizer ...

Hermann