ecl@mtgzz.UUCP (e.c.leeper) (08/03/85)
I asked for recommendations on binoculars to take on a trip to South America (Amazon and Galapagos), to be used primarily for viewing wildlife, small, lightweight, resistant to water damage, and not too uncomfortable for people who wear glasses to use. Thanks to all who responded--I have a much better idea of what to look for, etc. The responses I got (some editing for conciseness): ========================================================================== >From: ulysses!smb (Steven Bellovin) Nikon binoculars are excellent. I just acquired a pair of 7x50s to use on Halley's Comet this winter; they're nice, but *heavy*. The smaller Nikons should be excellent for daytime use. Dunno about Bausch&Lomb, but cheap binoculars, I've found, give me a headache. Btw, when evaluating them, pay especial attention to how close/how far apart the two eyepieces can be set. Look also for a separate additional focus for one eye; that lets you omit your glasses (if that's a concern). ========================================================================== >From: ihnp4!uw-beaver!furuta (Richard Furuta) We have had absolutely no luck getting replacement parts for a pair of Nikon binoculars. We initially didn't want anything fancy---just a replacement set of eyecaps. Subsequently, we also needed a replacement bracket (the original broke). Writing to the Nikon distributor for the U.S. resulted in no response at all. We've written several times and to several different addresses. I don't think I'd recommend them because of the difficulty in getting hold of them if you want to. ========================================================================== >From grigg!ark Thu Jul 18 11:24 EDT 1985 remote from research I have a pair of Nikon 7x26 compact binoculars. They are wonderful. The field is extremely wide, and the image is very crisp, though soft at the edges (not a problem because the field is so wide). They are light and compact. I paid $200 for them six years ago but foreign exchange has driven the price down to about $150. If you want REAL compact, consider the Leitz 8x20BC, available for under $200. When folded up, it's about the size of a pack of cigarettes. The image is extremely crisp, but the exit pupil is small so you have to be careful how you use them and they're not too useful, say, from a moving car. I would definitely prefer the Nikons for night use because of the extra light gathering; I would probably prefer a pair of 7x50 even more if I could get someone else to carry them. ========================================================================== >FROM: seb@mtgzz.ATT.UUCP (s.e.badian) Well, as far as binoculars go I'm not a great one to ask. I bought my binoculars when I was poor(stil in high school) so they are not high-qual equipment. But I can give you a few pointers on buying binoculars in general. For bird-watching I would say go for a 7x35 or 8x40. 8x40 give you better detail, but cut down your field and don't work as well in low light. (They may or may not be a big consideration for you. For a bird-watcher who wants to make a definite identification low light may mean the difference between a 99% sure guess or a wild-asses guess.) I have a pair of 8x40 since I like the detail better. I used to own 7x35 and found I was getting a good enough picture of the birds. Get coated lenses. They cut down on glare and also protect against scratches. When you look through the binoculars make sure there are no rainbows. Means cheap lenses and you're getting weird diffraction patterns. I have never looked into wide angle lenses but I hear they are not worth it. Personally, I would find them annoying since I can't focus on a huge area all at once anyway. I don't know that anyone can. When looking at things far away you generally can't take in the whole scene in one glance anyway. I think wide angle binoculars have their biggest fans in sporting types. A nice feature that I have on my binoculars is a second focus. The dial is marked 0 in the middle with a few notches on either side and a + and - on either end. This focus is to compensate for you own eyesight. You focus with the main focus on something close by. Then you move the secondary focus until the picture becomes clear. ========================================================================== >From mam Thu Jul 18 12:59:32 1985 remote from charm Try Nikon Lightweights. Fairly expensive (list), but very good and light. They look a bit like Trinovids, but are cheaper. BTW, a way to test binox is to look into the eyepieces from 2' away. If you see a full circle of light, the optics are designed for maximum light throughput. If the circle has a brighter square in the middle, then there are apertures which cut out some of the light, and the binox are not as good. Try this test with real cheapies and known good ones and you'll see what I mean. ========================================================================== >From wucs!br Fri Jul 19 13:48:16 1985 remote from ihnp4 The best kind of binoculars are the non-prismatic type. These instruments use higher quality lenses to achieve equal power in a smaller, more durable package. Non-prismatic binoculars will last longer and produce less eye strain when used for long periods. Unfortunately, these binoculars are much more expensive. I have used Leitz armored (these have a tough, rubber coating) which run about $400 and have been very satisfied. For a cheaper alternative you should look at Japanese non-prismatics - I think minolta makes some of these. Finally, remember that the higher the power of the binoculars, the more tiring they will be to look through since they must be held very steady. ========================================================================== >From: ihnp4!amdahl!canopus (Alpha Carinae) If you can get them, I would recommend Tasco 7x35's. They can usually be found in dept. stores, usually for under a $100.00. The Tasco 7x50's would be better, because they have a wider field of view and greater light grasp (especially useful if looking into areas of *relative* darkness), but they are a bit bigger and heavier. As a second choice I'd pick the Bushnell's 7x35 (7x50 if you don't mind the extra weight). ========================================================================== >From: John Hofbauer <clyde!watmath!utcsri!utcsri!hofbauer> I bought the Leitz Black Compact Armoured 10x25 binoculars from 47th street camera last October for around $170. These would fit your specifications very well except for the eyeglasses but what I do is simply take off the eyeglasses and view directly. The binocs will nicely compensate for any aberrations in your eyeballs. I have cataracts (removed) so I'm pushing the limits of this technique. Interestingly enough the Leitz compact bincos focus the closest of any I've tried when I do this. When it comes to optical glass, whether camera lenses or binocs, there is Leitz and everybody else. To say they are superb is an understatement. You'll never want to look through any other glass after experiencing these. They are covered in black hard rubber. Hermetically sealed against moisture, I believe, but not waterproof. And they fold up into a package little bigger than a package of cigarettes...well a big package anyway. ========================================================================== >From: vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!decvax!dartvax!eduardo I bought a pair of Nikon C.F. 7 x 20 binoculars at the end of june. I paid $75 at a local camera shop. I highly recommend them though I'm sure you can find a lower price in the city. I'm satisfied with my purchase; they're small, light, and easy to use. ========================================================================== >From: vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekig5!tekigm2!eshelman I used Bushnell Ultralight binoculars with thumb focus (they call it Quick focus or something) in the Galapagos and they worked quite well for me. Nikons are good binoculars and also somewhat smaller and also somewhat more expensive. I prefer the standard size binocs as they usually have a larger field of view (mine are 7x30), and they also have better light gather properties for use at dawn and dusk. 7 or 8 power is the best as holding more powerful binoculars steady enough to see anything can be a problem. ========================================================================== >From: topaz!harvard!bu-cs!ccrsl (Robert S. Lewis Jr.) I just bought a pair of 7X35 Nikons. The optical quality is every bit as good as the optical quality of Nikon cameras. I think Swift and Bushnell are noticeably poorer in quality -- the image is less sharp and the lens coating is less effective at reducing glare. The only complaint I have with my Nikons is that the width of field is smaller than what I am accustomed to. When I bought my binoculars I seriously thought about getting a magnification stronger than 7X. Stronger magnification is especially useful with sea and shorebirds. The problem is finding a binocular with powerful magnification and sufficient brightness. Zeiss makes an 8X56 binocular which I think is ideal, but it is out of my price range. Leitz makes an 8X40 which is rumoured to be nice but expensive. Swift makes an 8.5X42 which has decent optics, is moderately priced, but is on the heavy side. You might also be interested in some light (and waterproofed) 7X42's made by Leitz and by Zeiss. These will be brighter than 7X35's, but like all Leitz and Zeiss binoculars, they are also quite expensive. Magnifications over 8X tend to get either heavy or dark or both: some people, however, are quite fond of 10X40's. Then there are all those tiny, compact models -- I didn't look at these, but a friend has something like a 9X25 Nikon which is quite sharp, delightfully small, but a little dark. ========================================================================== >From: ihnp4!hpfcla!ajs I have a very small, light, inexpensive pair of Bushnells (7x15?, 7.1 degree field). They work wonderfully for hiking/backpacking/travelling and really improve the view. $35 or so at your local LaBelle's or equivalent. ========================================================================== >From: Richard Newman-Wolfe <ihnp4!seismo!rochester!nemo> While I have had a pair of Bushnell binocs for several years now, and have enjoyed trouble-free life with them, a friend of mine went to get his wife a pair for bird-watching recently and I went along. (He ended up getting somebody's "Audibon" model - very popular with the bird crowd) Mine have two features that were called suspect by the guy at the store, namely a zoom from 7X to 15X and a focusing lever (instead of the more common dial). Obviously, zoom optics must have moving parts and may therefore become misaligned. There were two objections to the lever focus. One was that it is impossible to do with one hand, while it is possible to rotate the dial with one hand. The other was that the mechanism for the lever to work is based on a sort of cam, namely a grooved bolt inside the focusing mechanism that is moved forward and backwards by a pin sticking out from the lever. This will develop play after a while, which will make focusing more difficult. Like I said, though, I have had no problem with mine over four years of light use, and I still enjoy the advantages of these features. Namely, the lever makes it easy to focus in a hurry (overshoot and come back) and the zoom is really nice for spotting a bird (etc) on low mag, then zooming in on it for a closer look. I have also enjoyed this when star-gazing. The only other thing I can think of to look for in a good pair of binocs (besides top quality coated optics) is the f rating. This is a sort of measure of the light-gathering ability of the optics, and will be a limiting factor on what you will see well. The ones with better light gathering ability are necessarily larger (they will have a 'jog' in the light path so the objective lenses are further apart than the occulars, and the objectives will also be bigger for the same power of magnification). The smaller, more portable binoculars simply can't have the same performance here. From experience, the size makes very little difference unless you are dealing with pocket-sized opera glasses (forget it) or really huge glasses. A good idea is to get a 7X pair for looking around and a spotting scope for the serious stuff. Each should run around $200 +- $30 (at least around here). ========================================================================== >From: vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!mike Mom just sent me a pair of binoculars from sears. They're roof prisim design so very small. They fold up even smaller, and are quite light. Optical quality seems good to my untrained eye, and they only cost $47. It is impossible to see through them with glasses on and I think that this will be true of anything but very large heavy binoculars. ========================================================================== >From: ihnp4!ihnss!jtkrist (Jim Krist) I've had a Bushnell Custom 7x35 Binoculars for over ten years and have no complaints. I use them for birding and going to the opera. They aren't particularly small or lightweight, but seem to take heavy use well. I haven't used other Bushnells in a couple of years, but I really did (*not*) like their compact model or their lower priced lines. I'd avoid their insta-focus or whatever-they-call-it feature and stick with the basic, high end model. If you want a good compact set of glasses, consider the Leitz trinovids. They're wonderfully clear and bright, but about twice as expensive as the price range you suggested. ========================================================================== >From: mike@hpfcla.UUCP (mike mcnelly) I have the Nikon 10x? binoculars. They are excellent. ========================================================================== >From: decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcc6!ix1037 (Christopher Latham) My father recently bought some binoculars made by Nikon and they are by for the best that I have ever used. They are sharper than any I have used before. Here in the San Diego area he was able to get the pair that he bought for about $90. They are good for use by glasses wearers because they have a eye cup that will fold back out of the way. My father had this in mind particularly when he went looking for binoculars since he must wear glasses and he is quite satisfied with these binoculars. Evelyn C. Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!ecl