driftwoody
Trail Wise!
Take the path closer to the edge, especially if less traveled
Posts: 14,505 
|
Post by driftwoody on Feb 24, 2021 16:28:40 GMT -8
I remember this thread from 2017, and reading it again rekindled my interest in acquiring binoculars. Though inclined to spend more for quality, I rarely feel the need for binoculars on my treks. I do not scout for off trail routes in the mountain west, and viewing panoramic scenery without an optical device is fine for me. My internet search led me to the Pentax 8.5x21 binoculars below, more focused on sights closer at hand -- as close as a half meter for insects & flowers but also very good for birding. I would actually make use of these, possibly on hikes but definitely more often as Mrs. Driftwoody and I sit on the deck looking out at our expansive back yard with bird houses feeders. BH Photo birder review I've never bought binoculars but I may very well buy the 6.5x21 version of these, which are preferred in most reviews. By no means is this the best choice for bringing details up close from mountain vistas, but this modest Pentax will get a lot of backyard use for birds and up close examination of the smaller life in our garden. Rarely when backpacking have I wished for binoculars at hand. I actually have a freebie (cheap) Bushnell 8x32 that I've carried on occasion, and it's pretty much been dead weight. When I do remember to pull 'em out it's no more than a brief novelty. Perhaps I'd appreciate much higher quality, but I won't spend $$$ to find out. YMMV |
|
|
|
Post by tomqvaxy on Feb 24, 2021 17:37:34 GMT -8
on my "read this" list for the weekend (rain forecast) - thanks for the link. |
|
|
|
Post by tomqvaxy on Feb 24, 2021 17:45:40 GMT -8
it's no more than a brief novelty i don't think it will be more than that for me, either. much like a camera, which i believe takes you out of the moment so the moment can be captured (i know, very George Carlin!), binoculars will be just another justification to the outside world why i walk about. i live on the coast. if you drive a vehicle with a fishing pole or surfboard strapped on, no one gives you a second glance. but a van without outward signs of identification, parked in the same place, will have the neighbors talking over the back fence in minutes. so, just to simply walk raises eyebrows. but if you are a birder, well, that carries some clout. i wonder if a butterfly net would yield the same response? must look into that next season . . . . |
|
BigLoad
Trail Wise!
Pancakes!
Posts: 12,048
|
Post by BigLoad on Feb 24, 2021 18:03:31 GMT -8
They're handy for scoping out ruins. A little magnification has spared me a lot of wasted energy. Every dark spot in the cliffs is not a door/window.
|
|
franco
Trail Wise!
Posts: 2,297
|
Post by franco on Feb 24, 2021 19:34:04 GMT -8
I think 24 is the smallest I'd go for 8x. It's not just the field view, but also the light. What I actually carry when I'm seriously looking is 8x32, since I'm often looking into shaded areas. The quality of the glass "can" trump objective size. My Leica 8x20 Ultravid's are a LOT brighter than most average 8x25's. Once again, good glass hurts it costs so much. For my regular binoculars I use an 8x32 Leica Ultravid, but in most light conditions it's impressive how well the 8x20's compared to the 8x32's. The often forgotten detail is "all other things being the same" so an 8x25 will indeed give a brighter view than an 8x20 if in the same series. So not only the two need to be from the same brand but in the same category. Most brands have different price points so this needs to be taken into consideration. |
|
|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Feb 25, 2021 6:27:21 GMT -8
The often forgotten detail is "all other things being the same" so an 8x25 will indeed give a brighter view than an 8x20 if in the same series. So not only the two need to be from the same brand but in the same category. Most brands have different price points so this needs to be taken into consideration. Uh yeah, that's self evident. But very few Co's make both an 8x20 and 8x25. In equivalent builds, Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski don't.
Aside, this is a backpacking forum where ounces matter. While I'd prefer a 7x20 or 22, I'll still take an 8x20 for weight/size over something with a larger objective. All binoculars are a compromise weighted in one direction or another, and this is especially true of anything with less than a 30mm objective. In my experience, true, all-around bins start at 30mm.
|
|
franco
Trail Wise!
Posts: 2,297
|
Post by franco on Feb 25, 2021 13:41:37 GMT -8
Uh yeah, that's self evident. But very few Co's make both an 8x20 and 8x25. In equivalent builds, Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski don't.
Yes to you, but I would have not bothered to point it out if it was a universal self evidence.
Selling cameras and binoculars is what I did for a living so , I do know that many shop with numbers in their head.(yes, yes I know YOU don't)
In other words, they hear that a Nikon 8x 25 (whatever) is a great bino and end up getting an 8x25 from a different brand or another 8x25 from the same brand but not the one that was recommended.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomqvaxy on Feb 25, 2021 15:43:18 GMT -8
in my brief participation in this forum, there's only one thing i've found evident; everything else is up for grabs!
|
|
|
|
Post by trinity on Feb 25, 2021 18:14:53 GMT -8
But very few Co's make both an 8x20 and 8x25. In equivalent builds, Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski don't. True, but these various companies have lines that are probably of similar quality glass but with different objective lens diameters. For example, The Swarovski Pocket CL 8x25 is probably comparable in optical quality to the Leica 8x20 Ultravid BR. So, aside from ergonomic differences, it still comes down to the compromise you allude to between weight and light gathering/field of view. |
|
rangewalker
Trail Wise!
Agitate, organize and educate.
Posts: 1,027
|
Post by rangewalker on Feb 25, 2021 20:22:34 GMT -8
The first binoculars I was assigned as a child were a pair of German Zeis 6x20's, 1918. Family lore was they were taken from a Uboat crew. At seven I was convinced they were why Germany lost the war. Hiking and walking I carry a pair of Vortex Diamondback 10x32 compacts. Very dense, not lightweight, but still compact. About $240 US. I LOVE them because of the large rear objective and decent diopter that works well with my poor corrected vision. to get the same size and ease of use like in a Zeiss, I am looking at $1000. They are superiors to the Steiner 8x30s I carried for years. They are fidley with a very narrow aperture but they work. To most of the pointed back and forth in this thread...meh, too much testosterone and posturing. Vortex in action: gas and glass though my road pair were forgotten that day. 
My brother and I with my first bino's  |
|
|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Feb 26, 2021 6:09:47 GMT -8
True, but these various companies have lines that are probably of similar quality glass but with different objective lens diameters. For example, The Swarovski Pocket CL 8x25 is probably comparable in optical quality to the Leica 8x20 Ultravid BR. So, aside from ergonomic differences, it still comes down to the compromise you allude to between weight and light gathering/field of view. While probably true, the larger truth is that with glass this quality, you'll only see the difference in light transmission ("brightness" - there is no such thing as "light gathering") right at the first and last couple minutes of daylight. And then the difference will be academic. There just isn't that much real world difference between 20mm and 25mm... both have small exit pupils. My wish is that either of these were in 7x rather than 8x, but 7x just doesn't sell. I'm looking forward to trying the Swarovski 8x25. I've heard good things about it. Between it and the Leica 8x20, since both have essentially the same FOV, I suspect the best feature of the Swaro over the smaller Leica will probably be its better eye relief (17mm vs. 15mm). At this level of binocular its a matter of grading diamonds, and these are probably the two finest of their type. |
|
|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Feb 26, 2021 6:11:04 GMT -8
My brother and I with my first bino's That picture is just as good as it gets! |
|
|
|
Post by Outdoor Union on Feb 26, 2021 8:23:07 GMT -8
I’m thinking 10x25 compacts. Highish quality. Zeis, Leica, Swarovski. Little late on this. Take a look at the brand Vortex. Lifetime warranty, not questions asked. If you are looking to backpack with them, I would recommend a bino harness. Carry the weight on your chest vs your back. |
|
|
|
Post by bobcat on Mar 14, 2021 17:37:56 GMT -8
I like Vortex brand too! My wildlife binocs and astronomy binocs are a now-discontinued 10x56 ED Vulture model. I see they’ve put the 10x56 under another model name. Made for hunters, they seem to be able to take what I dish out in terms of rough handling. I have done an amazing amount of astronomy with them! I also have a Vortex spotting scope for birding. But for backpacking I elected to go with smaller, lighter and less expensive Nikon.
|
|
BigLoad
Trail Wise!
Pancakes!
Posts: 12,048
|
Post by BigLoad on Mar 14, 2021 18:16:17 GMT -8
My wildlife binocs and astronomy binocs are a now-discontinued 10x56 ED Vulture model. Those must weigh a ton! |
|
