Please introduce an entry level binocular

T

tony.1911

Regular
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Location
Alberta
I am looking to get a binocular recently. I found in the market the prices vary dramatically - from $50 to thousands. what are the bad thing for cheap ones and good things for expensive ones? from the parameters I can hardly tell.

I am guessing: N x L means N times magnificent and L mm objective lens. Is this correct?

How much will the coating impact the quality when you use it?

Looking for expert to give me some suggestions.

Thanks in advance! :cool:
 
Shopping for bins can give anyone a headace.
Bigger lenses and better coatings give brighter clearer images.
Until you compare a 200.00 bins to 2000.00 bins you won't believe the diff.
That said you can buy some pretty good 200.00 binoculars and 600.00 bins should do for everything but reading the newspaper at midnight.
Check out Cameraland at the top of the screen .Compare as many different bins as
you can at the local gunshop,outside if possible.
If you are near Edmonton P&D has been pretty helpfull when I was shopping.
 
jeff270 said:
Shopping for bins can give anyone a headace.
Bigger lenses and better coatings give brighter clearer images.
Until you compare a 200.00 bins to 2000.00 bins you won't believe the diff.
That said you can buy some pretty good 200.00 binoculars and 600.00 bins should do for everything but reading the newspaper at midnight.
Check out Cameraland at the top of the screen .Compare as many different bins as
you can at the local gunshop,outside if possible.
If you are near Edmonton P&D has been pretty helpfull when I was shopping.
Click to expand...

Thanks for reply. I will take a look in P&D the other day.
 
I have 4 pair. Big ones and little ones, coated less coated.
The one I get the most use out of is the Nikon Prostaff 12-25x42mm waterproof(compact). Ive seen them @ SAIL in the optics area, probably a 200 dollar bino. I hunt coyotes so small and light are a plus. They are a good compromise and Jeff270 is correct about price and quality. If you hunt open country a larger, quality optic is better.

If you can, spend time in an optics store near sunset/dark and try all their binos then pick the best you can afford.
 
skypilot said:
I have 4 pair. Big ones and little ones, coated less coated.
The one I get the most use out of is the Nikon Prostaff 12-25x42mm waterproof(compact). Ive seen them @ SAIL in the optics area, probably a 200 dollar bino. I hunt coyotes so small and light are a plus. They are a good compromise and Jeff270 is correct about price and quality. If you hunt open country a larger, quality optic is better.

If you can, spend time in an optics store near sunset/dark and try all their binos then pick the best you can afford.
Click to expand...

That sounds a good idea
 
Jump on the learning curve!

Here is an invaluble link, even though the evaluation took place several years ago: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html


My advice is to try out lots, and set your sights on a decent 'mid priced' set of binos as you starting point. Don't waste your money on the cheap ones - that's probably the best piece of learned knowledge I can give besides the link... Also, little ones might be easy to carry, but they tradeoff light gathering qualities. The large lens diameter divided by the power should be at least 4, otherwise the mechanics are not going to bring in the optimal about of light...
 
I would not recommend the really cheap ones. They will often be slightly fuzzy (looks great in a brightly lit store), and the optics may not be perfectly aligned (so you end up seeing two images slightly apart). Not aligned will make for bad viewing and headaches if you use them a lot in a day.
In my experience, a pair around $200, waterproof,will give you reasonable quality. Once you use them for a while you can decide if you need to step up in price and quality. I have had good luck with Bushnell 7x50 waterproof, Nikon 8x25 waterproof.
The $50 pairs are a waste of money. Going past 8x to the 10x is often not as useful due to the ability to see in dim light, and the difficulty in holding them steady.
 
All the advice here has been really good.

I would only ever buy binoculars I have looked through and handled. Which is funny because I've bought guns online that I've never touched. But I've spent as much on my binoculars as I have on some of my guns.

Binoculars work on a rule of diminsihing returns. So the first few price jumps reward you with a big increase in quality.
The jump from an $80 set to a $250 set is 300% better image.
But that starts to slack off as you get higher up the scale.
A $2600 set are only marginally better than a $1400 set. They're definitely better glass still, but only a little but for a big price jump.

I operate on the idea of "buy right the first time"

I would always wait another season, and add another $200 on top of what you think you need. I'd hate to be upgrading in 2 years.

Glass never goes bad. Once you've got it, your good to go.
 
My buddy has a set of $400 Leupolds that are pretty good. I have a set of $2000+ Swaro's that are at least 50% better. Is it worth it? I almost bought a pair of $1200 Bruntons when I bought mine. They were neck and neck with a tiny edge to the Swaro's. Try as many as you can get your hands on and I wouldn't be afraid to buy used. I tried out a set of Leicas that to my eye, didn't look so good and they cost more than my swarovskis. Every set of eyeballs is different and ymmv.
 
west250 said:
Jump on the learning curve!

Here is an invaluble link, even though the evaluation took place several years ago: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html


My advice is to try out lots, and set your sights on a decent 'mid priced' set of binos as you starting point. Don't waste your money on the cheap ones - that's probably the best piece of learned knowledge I can give besides the link... Also, little ones might be easy to carry, but they tradeoff light gathering qualities. The large lens diameter divided by the power should be at least 4, otherwise the mechanics are not going to bring in the optimal about of light...
Click to expand...

+1
bird watching websites are the place to window shop bins
but nothing beats trying them out in person
 
west250 said:
Jump on the learning curve!

Here is an invaluble link, even though the evaluation took place several years ago: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html


My advice is to try out lots, and set your sights on a decent 'mid priced' set of binos as you starting point. Don't waste your money on the cheap ones - that's probably the best piece of learned knowledge I can give besides the link... Also, little ones might be easy to carry, but they tradeoff light gathering qualities. The large lens diameter divided by the power should be at least 4, otherwise the mechanics are not going to bring in the optimal about of light...
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot I will study your link…
 
Al-Sway said:
I would not recommend the really cheap ones. They will often be slightly fuzzy (looks great in a brightly lit store), and the optics may not be perfectly aligned (so you end up seeing two images slightly apart). Not aligned will make for bad viewing and headaches if you use them a lot in a day.
In my experience, a pair around $200, waterproof,will give you reasonable quality. Once you use them for a while you can decide if you need to step up in price and quality. I have had good luck with Bushnell 7x50 waterproof, Nikon 8x25 waterproof.
The $50 pairs are a waste of money. Going past 8x to the 10x is often not as useful due to the ability to see in dim light, and the difficulty in holding them steady.
Click to expand...

Very useful tips for $50ish binos. Thanks for reply.
 
TV-PressPass said:
All the advice here has been really good.

I would only ever buy binoculars I have looked through and handled. Which is funny because I've bought guns online that I've never touched. But I've spent as much on my binoculars as I have on some of my guns.

Binoculars work on a rule of diminsihing returns. So the first few price jumps reward you with a big increase in quality.
The jump from an $80 set to a $250 set is 300% better image.
But that starts to slack off as you get higher up the scale.
A $2600 set are only marginally better than a $1400 set. They're definitely better glass still, but only a little but for a big price jump.

I operate on the idea of "buy right the first time"

I would always wait another season, and add another $200 on top of what you think you need. I'd hate to be upgrading in 2 years.

Glass never goes bad. Once you've got it, your good to go.
Click to expand...

Thanks for reply! Will take a look!
 
cath8r said:
My buddy has a set of $400 Leupolds that are pretty good. I have a set of $2000+ Swaro's that are at least 50% better. Is it worth it? I almost bought a pair of $1200 Bruntons when I bought mine. They were neck and neck with a tiny edge to the Swaro's. Try as many as you can get your hands on and I wouldn't be afraid to buy used. I tried out a set of Leicas that to my eye, didn't look so good and they cost more than my swarovskis. Every set of eyeballs is different and ymmv.
Click to expand...

Thanks for reply. After briefly read replies above, I tend to start my entry level binos with a budget around $200.
 
tony.1911 said:
Thanks for reply. After briefly read replies above, I tend to start my entry level binos with a budget around $200.
Click to expand...

That would be entry level binoculars, unless you can find a good used pair in the EE or fleabay. Nikon Monarch's in 8x42 aren't bad, but you may have to spend a little more than your budget for them unless you can find a used pair. You can also get a little more for your money if you look at porro prism's over the roof prism's like the Monarchs.
 
cath8r said:
My buddy has a set of $400 Leupolds that are pretty good. I have a set of $2000+ Swaro's that are at least 50% better. Is it worth it? I almost bought a pair of $1200 Bruntons when I bought mine. They were neck and neck with a tiny edge to the Swaro's. Try as many as you can get your hands on and I wouldn't be afraid to buy used. I tried out a set of Leicas that to my eye, didn't look so good and they cost more than my swarovskis. Every set of eyeballs is different and ymmv.
Click to expand...

Not to be a smart ass, but by what measure do you determine that they are 50% better? I only own a mid range binocular but I have compared them with others right up to Swarovski. What I see is the law of diminishing returns at work. As someone earlier mentioned, at the low end the improvement is huge for another $200 but above an arbitrary price point of say $600 the improvement in resolution and brightness goes up in much smaller increments. Even tho the $400 Leupold is probably at the low end of decent glass, I would doubt that the Swarovski is actually 50% better as measured by objective testing methods. Significantly better? Of course but I'm skeptical about 50%.
 
The Bushnell Legend 8 x42 is a good mid range binocular. The old model is currently being cleared out at an entry level price.

ht tp://www.canadaknives.com/product_info.php?products_id=547&osCsid=5dee5695fcb5a5b3087305c8cc81de44
 
I haven't read this article yet, but it looks like a recent review of mid priced binos:

http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2011midpricebins/index.html

Everyone's eyes and expectations are different which is why the advice of 'trying as many as you can' is so good. If the purchaser has narrowed his set down to one, try 3 or 4 of the same model (ask the vendor to open up the boxes and let you try them). Just because the demo pair looks good doesn't mean that the ones you take home in the sealed box are just as good, there are variances in production that affect the quality. Like one of the above posters said, sometimes the images don't line up between the two sides (a very common occurrence on low to mid priced binos), which make them difficult to look through for extended periods - which of course is important when glassing for your prey... Higher end manufacturers have better quality control which is one of the reasons they cost so much more..
 
To 7.62:

The problem is that binoculars aren't objective. They're using your eyes, so what you see is what you see.

There are things I look for: brightness, clarity, depth of field, color rendition, low light performance, mirage, stability, field of view.

But there's no numerical value to describe that.

I own a set of swaros, and they do feel twice as good as my old $400 units!

To the OP, legends aren't bad, monarchs are okay (new series) and I would look at the Vortex Diamondbacks too.
 
TV-PressPass said:
To 7.62:

The problem is that binoculars aren't objective. They're using your eyes, so what you see is what you see.

There are things I look for: brightness, clarity, depth of field, color rendition, low light performance, mirage, stability, field of view.

But there's no numerical value to describe that.

I own a set of swaros, and they do feel twice as good as my old $400 units!

To the OP, legends aren't bad, monarchs are okay (new series) and I would look at the Vortex Diamondbacks too.
Click to expand...

Looks like the birders are pushing these: Vanguard Endeavor ED 8x42...

Might have to go and look through a few pairs and see if I can improve on the Monarchs. Good glass is like fine rifles or quality cars; they're just better, there is a difference
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom