Binoculars

LeeRatters

LeeRatters

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,354
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
Yes, not strictly photography but I'm guessing a few owners and users of them on here.

They are for my other half, for birdwatching. In the garden and when out on countryside and woodland walks.

How often they will actually get used is probably another thread.... :ROFLMAO: but she is interested and has been mentioning it for quite a while.

Anyone got any recommendations for me please? I've not got a clue about them! I'm guessing fairly small and reasonably lightweight is a good start. And I'm presuming much like tripod shopping, you only pick 2 out of 3 regarding weight, quality and price....

Thanks
 
Lee

Binoculars in the 8x42 or 10x42 size birders are normally using, makes Leica, Zeiss, Nikon or Sarwoski but they are very pricey (£1k for the Leicas).
Have a look at the Celestron 71332 Nature DX 8x42 Bins .... currently £108 from Amazon, they get reasonable reviews, are light, give 8x magnification and a good price ... ideal for a beginner/casual user.

Hope this helps

​

​

 
On a general point, I've always find that brightness is more important than magnification. That's why I use a pair of 7x50 (Bynolyt Sea Ranger II).

"7" is the magnification and "50" is the diameter of the objective (in camera terms, the aperture). Although the Bynolyts are heavier than some other binoculars, they're gas filled and waterproof (the RNLI has used them for years). They also have a built in compass, which is very useful when out in strange places.

Bynolyt Searanger II 7x50 G9 P1014383.JPG
 
I have a pair of Eyeskey from Amazon, they're about £50 at the moment. 8x42 Gas filled and a reasonable sized object lens so good light capture even in poor conditions. They're Chinese make but don't let that put you off :).
 
I have some Leica Ultravid 8x25 ones and they go almost everywhere with me, but they weren’t cheap, and I carried a cheap pair for many years. It’s probably worth getting something cheaper to start with.

Weight was really important for me, both because I’d be less likely to carry them with me, but also my arms get tired :ROFLMAO:

You could have a look at the RSPB compact ones. https://shopping.rspb.org.uk/binoculars-scopes/birdwatching-binoculars/compact-binoculars/

Things to consider are….
- weight
- waterproof or not?
- price
- ease of use with/without spectacles (eye relief)
- magnification (1st number) and size of objective lens (2nd number). A larger objective lens makes the image brighter, but the binoculars bigger and heavier (generalisation).
- field of view - I chose 8x25 over 10x25 as they gave a slightly wider field of view and were slightly brighter, even though the magnification is a bit less). Also you need steadier hands for more magnification.

More expensive ones tend to show better colours - I think it’s to do with coatings and quality of glass - just like lenses.

I think it’s worth letting your OH try them out if you’re going to spend lots of money. I found some just felt easier to use than others.
 
I have Hawke Endurance ED 8x42.... not cheap but excellent...

However...................................they come out very, very infrequently.
 
I use an old Nikon set 10x50 they are ideal for me on my Dartmoor Photowalks, waterproof good magnification and reasonably lightweight, however, I use them a lot. If oyur other half is only going to use them in the garden and not too frequently there are several online 10x50, 12x50 less than £50 that would suffice (mine were £400). I wouldn't bother with the really snall/cheap ones they aren't any good and would put off someone new to binoculars a bigger set is a much better option.
 
I have a pair of Swarovski 8.5x42 EL SV and my wife has Swarovski 8x42 SLC HD. We’ve had them about 10-years. Both are excellent but have different optics. I prefer the ‘field flattening’ optics in mine (some people don’t like this). She prefers the more conventional pin cushion optics in hers. Mine are currently about £1800, hers about £1200. We’ve taken them all over the place, Scottish highlands in twilight, on safari in Zambia, in the Northern Territory in Australia, at sunset in New Zealand, rain forest in Costa Rica, and more. They have performed brilliantly and continue to reward us with fantastic views even in very low light. We’ve never regretted buying them. Prior to these we had cheap Opticron Oregon, and while these were ok in good light, they were useless in low light.

My advice would be, avoid cheap ones they are typically ok in good light, but struggle to give good views when conditions are tough. Pay at least £300. The next tier is about £1k and then £2k up to about £3k. Try them all if you can. When you can’t see any difference in optical performance you’ve found the limit for quality that is relevant to you. Then you have to decide what you can afford.

Another thing to consider is how close do they focus. That might sound daft, but we also like to view butterflies and birds when they are close to the hide.

Opticron, do some very good ones at the £300 price point. I would definitely consider the Natura BGA ED 8x42 as a base model
Hawke Frontier 8x42 at £400 would be worth a look too. in fact, there are quite a few offerings in this segment that would be quite rewarding.

Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42 are just excellent binoculars (nearly bought these) at about £1k
Leica Trinovid 8x42 are excellent too at about £800. Really nothing in it

The differences between these mid tier optics from Zeiss and Leica, and their top tier optics (Victory and Ultravid) and the Swarovski that we have, are subtle but definitely there. But, it’s not worth paying the money if you can’t see any benefit.

If mine were lost or stolen, I would try to replace them with the current Swarovski EL 8.5x42. I would not stump up for their new NL Pure 8x42 at £3k.

Good luck, I hope you find some glass that you are able to enjoy for years.
 
Last edited:
On a similar quest a while back, I was pointed towards the Hawke Nature Trek 8x25. Small, light and plenty good enough for our wants/needs. Available from LCE and when I visited, I compared them with their more expensive cousins (still Hawkes) and couldn't see any difference (in January daytime light.)

Here's a link to my thread which might be of help. https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/compact-binoculars.732852/
 
Have a look at Zeiss Terra ED 8x32. My wife had a pair of these and they were very good. My Zeiss Conquest HD were just fractionally better but also heavier.

I'm now using Swarovski NL Pure 10x42 which are stunning. Mrs T has NL Pure 8x32 which are also stunning. Quite luxo but if you've got the budget...
 
FWIW, LCE had a pair of slightly larger Leica binos in and while they were a bit brighter than the Hawkes I ended up with, the extra quality wasn't worth the extra zero on the price tag (to me!)
 
A lot depends on how fussy you are and how serious you're going to be. I have a couple of pocket size "Bins" from charity shops and for casual gazing they do me fine.
 
GeeJay57 said:
Pay at least £300
Click to expand...
Why? You can get loads of excellent binos for a lot less than that. Unless you are going to use them regularly, £300 is an awful lot of money for such a thing. And unnecessary imo, unles you are going to use them a lot, and will be doing so in poor light conditions. For casual use, you can find something perfectly good for £100 or less, especially s/h.

Full disclosure: I first bought a pair of Nikon Prostaff 8x42s, which were excellent, but a little big for travelling with, so I bought a pair of Nikon Monarch 8x30s, which are better optically, so the light loss is negligible. Yes, they were around £300, but we were using them a lot, so it seemed worth it. Really didn't need to spend so much though, the Prostaff 8x30s were significantly cheaper and would have been fine. I bought a second set of the Monarchs and gave the Prostaffs to a friend. The smaller binos get taken out a lot more than the larger ones did, so bear size and weight in mind.

The thing about expensive binoculars is that they are nice to have, but cost a lot (obvs!), and unless you really get into birdwatching etc, aren't great value for money. I've used Swarovskis and Leicas, and as nice as they are, I wouldn't be spending that much because they are way overkill for our needs and interests.

8x30/32 is small and light, but still fine for daytime use. Will you really be wanting them for very dark conditions, in foul weather? 40/42s are brighter, but larger ofc, and 50s are huge. 8x is perfect for general birdwatching, particularly relatively close like gardens, 10x perhaps better for shy species or use in birdwatching hides etc.
 
Last edited:
My wife has a pair of Delta SL2's which, for under £300 are excellent. However, I think they have been replaced by the "Chase ED 10x42" which are about £350 (hers are over 10 years old now). She takes them on our walks, and we often use them as our main binoculars if I'm carrying our scope or the camera and long lens.

Buy Delta Optical Binoculars Online - Free UK Delivery - Binocular Base

Buy Delta Optical Binoculars Online With Free UK Delivery Would you like to buy Delta Optical binoculars at an amazing price, with free home delivery in the UK? Excellent! We’ve got the perfect range for you to choose from. Delta Optical produce some of the highest quality binocs on the market...
binocularbase.com binocularbase.com
 
My wife has these (canon 10x42L IS WP) for when we're out and about taking pictures or just plain ambling around.
They are far from cheap but, the view through them is incredible and the image stabilisation works like a charm.
In fact, I would not recommend non-stabilised binos to anyone of my age.


10%20x%2042L%20IS%20WP%20Angle2_tcm14-935542.jpg
 
Abdichoudxyz said:
Why? You can get loads of excellent binos for a lot less than that. Unless you are going to use them regularly, £300 is an awful lot of money for such a thing. And unnecessary imo, unles you are going to use them a lot, and will be doing so in poor light conditions. For casual use, you can find something perfectly good for £100 or less, especially s/h.

Full disclosure: I first bought a pair of Nikon Prostaff 8x42s, which were excellent, but a little big for travelling with, so I bought a pair of Nikon Monarch 8x30s, which are better optically, so the light loss is negligible. Yes, they were around £300, but we were using them a lot, so it seemed worth it. Really didn't need to spend so much though, the Prostaff 8x30s were significantly cheaper and would have been fine. I bought a second set of the Monarchs and gave the Prostaffs to a friend. The smaller binos get taken out a lot more than the larger ones did, so bear size and weight in mind.

The thing about expensive binoculars is that they are nice to have, but cost a lot (obvs!), and unless you really get into birdwatching etc, aren't great value for money. I've used Swarovskis and Leicas, and as nice as they are, I wouldn't be spending that much because they are way overkill for our needs and interests.

8x30/32 is small and light, but still fine for daytime use. Will you really be wanting them for very dark conditions, in foul weather? 40/42s are brighter, but larger ofc, and 50s are huge. 8x is perfect for general birdwatching, particularly relatively close like gardens, 10x perhaps better for shy species or use in birdwatching hides etc.
Click to expand...
Why? Because that’s my opinion.

I prefer to have binoculars with me that deliver great views even in challenging conditions rather than wishing I had better pair with me instead. You clearly have a different opinion and preference.
 
A popular size option is 8x32, light enough to carry all day but still capable of an easy view. Easy as in not too demanding when putting them to your eyes. The width adjustment (eyepiece spacing) must be increasingly more accurate as the exit pupil becomes smaller. The exit pupil diameter is given by dividing the objective lens size by the magnification, ie 32/8 etc). Small binoculars with say 10x mag give an accordingly smaller exit pupil and can be very fussy to adjust and hold to the eyes properly. The bigger binoculars can give exit pupils larger than the eye's pupil in good light, and can accommodate a larger pupil as it opens more in lower light (which is less as we get older). Another small problem is in holding them steady. The higher the mag, the more movement is seen as we tremble/sway, worse as we get older (I know). It can get to the point where I can see more, more easily in my 8x or 7x than I can with my 10x.

8x is a very popular magnification for good reasons.

As has been said, it's worth visiting somewhere to try them, even to just learn about them.

One more point... wife and I discovered that we like watching bugs/butterflies etc. This needs a relatively close focus, some binoculars' closes focus might be 3m+ rather than 1.5m-2m.
 
Last edited:
Crotal Bell said:
A lot depends on how fussy you are and how serious you're going to be. I have a couple of pocket size "Bins" from charity shops and for casual gazing they do me fine.
Click to expand...

Yes. They sometimes crop up at charity shops. An ex of mine picked up a very nice pair for £10. I've had the same pair for 50 years now and although the case is showing its age the bins aren't showing any issue.
 
woof woof said:
Yes. They sometimes crop up at charity shops. An ex of mine picked up a very nice pair for £10. I've had the same pair for 50 years now and although the case is showing its age the bins aren't showing any issue.
Click to expand...
Funny you should say that about same pair for 50 years, my dad bought me a pair, must have been about 1979, took them out last year and had fun using them again.
 
I use mine about twice a year. They've been largely replaced by digital cameras and their digital zooms. They are lovely things to have and use though.
 
GeeJay57 said:
Why? Because that’s my opinion.

I prefer to have binoculars with me that deliver great views even in challenging conditions rather than wishing I had better pair with me instead. You clearly have a different opinion and preference.
Click to expand...
That's fine, but I think if giving advice to someone who may be new to it all, advising them to spend such a large sum of money might not be ideal. And it's really not necessary.

From my own experience; the Monarchs are very nice, but I think we'd be happy with less expensive binoculars. We like to have them for 'casual' spotting, and for travelling, but I really don't think we 'needed' £300 binoculars. The £80-150 kind of price range is very competitive, loads of choice there. And plenty that will be perfectly satisfactory to the vast majority of people really.
 
Abdichoudxyz said:
That's fine, but I think if giving advice to someone who may be new to it all, advising them to spend such a large sum of money might not be ideal. And it's really not necessary.

From my own experience; the Monarchs are very nice, but I think we'd be happy with less expensive binoculars. We like to have them for 'casual' spotting, and for travelling, but I really don't think we 'needed' £300 binoculars. The £80-150 kind of price range is very competitive, loads of choice there. And plenty that will be perfectly satisfactory to the vast majority of people really.
Click to expand...
Look… I’ve given my advice and reasons for doing so. If the OP has any further queries that I feel equipped to respond to, I will. However, I am done debating my advice to them, with you.
 
woof woof said:
They sometimes crop up at charity shops
Click to expand...
We get a lot of binocs at our charity shop in varying conditions. I have a big box to go through every week that I never get around to because of other stuff (mostly cameras and other techy stuff that needs checking to see if it works). Well worth going second hand especially if you're dipping the toe in.
 
GeeJay57 said:
Look… I’ve given my advice and reasons for doing so. If the OP has any further queries that I feel equipped to respond to, I will. However, I am done debating my advice to them, with you.
Click to expand...
Jeeze some people are touchy on here!

Giving 'advice 'is fine; just accept that other people might have differing opinions. Which is also fine. I'm challenging the assertion that you have to 'pay at least £300', because I feel it's poor advice to give to those new to birdwatching. Such 'advice' can actually put people off, if the 'entry' cost is higher than they are comfortable with. This isn't YOU buying something, this is an important consideration. I use cameras and equipment costing thousands; I'd never 'advise' someone to spend similar if they were a newcomer. Try to appreciate this.
 
GeeJay57 said:
Look… I’ve given my advice and reasons for doing so.
Click to expand...
While I would (and did) give different advice, I can see nothing to fault in what you wrote.

The point of a forum, in a case like this, is for various members to give their opinions, so that the questioner gets varied responses and can chose what's appropriate. There is never one correct answer to an open question, such as Lee has posted.
 
There seems to be a good selection at Ffordes.

I've bought lenses off them in the past and they're often amongst the first places I look.
 
Bit of a trek up to (?)Inverness for me! However, we do have Mifsuds down the road in Brixham.
 
In Summer, Brixham can be 2 1/2 hours from here, despite it being just over 30 miles away...
 
Nod said:
In Summer, Brixham can be 2 1/2 hours from here, despite it being just over 30 miles away...
Click to expand...
Ah!

The joys of the Torquay Road in Grockletime... ;)
 
If people ask me I always tell them to check the Hawk range, there is a good selection at different price points. I got some Nature 8x42 for my wife as she didn’t want to spend too much but I was impressed with them for the money.
 
We sold binoculars where I worked in my last job so I looked through everything we had (apart from Swarovski!) and ended up with Steiner Ranger Pro 8x42. I think they retailed around £500 but I got them at trade. :cool:

Bushnell is another make worth considering.
 
Love my Nikon 8x30 EII porros. Gigantic 8.2 Deg FOV, and incredibly sharp. I'm using them more for astronomy than birding these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top