Strathspey 10x50 Binoculars

[Naemeth]

Has anyone used these? How are they for astronomy?

The 10x50s I'm referring to are the £30.99 ones, not the Waterproof ones.

[BinocularSky]

I used to have a set of 6 of them when I ran a school astronomy club. They were adequate for the purpose. However, they were not true 10x50s; internal stopping makes them more like about 10x43s (this is true of a great many budget binoculars). If you are on a tight budget, they are acceptable, but for less than twice the price you can get a step-up in quality.

[Naemeth]

I used to have a set of 6 of them when I ran a school astronomy club. They were adequate for the purpose. However, they were not true 10x50s; internal stopping makes them more like about 10x43s (this is true of a great many budget binoculars). If you are on a tight budget, they are acceptable, but for less than twice the price you can get a step-up in quality.

Would you recommend the Waterproof ones then?

I'm trying to find some that are a step up from my current ones (which seem to be out of collimation and they have the horrible orange objectives!), but they do need to have good eye relief for my glasses.

Thanks for the help .

[rory]

the marine 10x50 had some good reports in the past. but they are something like £80 plus. so depends on your budget.

[Naemeth]

the marine 10x50 had some good reports in the past. but they are something like £80 plus. so depends on your budget.

Probably around £50, but I suppose I could stretch to £70 odd, not £80 though .

[rory]

from my limited experience and reading, if you spend £50-60 theres little difference between those and say a £25-30 pair. sort of no mans land. thats why most either just punt on £20 bins that come into aldi or lidl now and then ,or jump up to the £100 mark for the noticable differences.

of course im talking new buys here, second hand im sure you can get nice bins for £50.

no doubt someone will put right what ive said soon enough,but thats my reconing.

[BinocularSky]

Would you recommend the Waterproof ones then?

Yes!

the marine 10x50 had some good reports in the past. but they are something like £80 plus.

Around £110 nowadays. I got one when they were £60 and it was worth it. Pretty robust. Lives in my van as a "get abused anywhere" binocular.

Probably around £50, but I suppose I could stretch to £70 odd, not £80 though .

That's the waterproof and the marine out, then. Olympus DPS-1 or Helios Fieldmaster ar your best bets, probably. I'd opt for the Oly. Yes, they "only" have BK7 prisms, but that really isn't as big a deal as people make out, and there are things that are much more important in budget-end-of-the-market binoculars.

[Catweazel]

I have the 15x70 celestrons, and find them ok visually, but just too heavy to be hand held. I have been looking for a decent pair of 10x50's but have never been able to make my mind up which way to go. I will probably just go for the Lidl option, although I have never seen any binoculars in my local Lidl store

@tetenterre, interesting what you say about the Bak-7 bins, from all my reading and research, there tends to me a bit of a "you must have Bak-4 prisms" mantra on most forums, so yours is a refreshing insight

[Naemeth]

Tetenterre, have you any experience with the Olympus binoculars with glasses? I feel 12mm may be too short as I need to wear glasses. In addition, do you know the eye relief of the Helios Fieldmasters, or would I be better off contacting a retailer?

[BinocularSky]

@tetenterre, interesting what you say about the Bak-7 bins, from all my reading and research, there tends to me a bit of a "you must have Bak-4 prisms" mantra on most forums, so yours is a refreshing insight

Firstly, don't confuse BaK7 and BK7 -- very different glass! For reasons why isn't that important to have BaK4 stamped on teh cover-plate, see here.

Tetenterre, have you any experience with the Olympus binoculars with glasses? I feel 12mm may be too short as I need to wear glasses.

No, I don't observe with glasses on, but 12mm is marginal -- depends how deep-set your eyes are.

In addition, do you know the eye relief of the Helios Fieldmasters, or would I be better off contacting a retailer?

Sorry, didn't measure it when I tried one out. From (fallible) memory, it seemed quite long; I didn't need to screw the eye-cups into my eye-sockets. But you would be better off checking with a retailer to be certain.

[Catweazel]

Firstly, don't confuse BaK7 and BK7 -- very different glass! For reasons why isn't that important to have BaK4 stamped on teh cover-plate, see here.

Thanks for that, very informative! I might take a look at the Olympus DPS-1.

[GaryM]

HI, I wrapped up some Helios FieldMaster 10x50 for the Wife earlier today. The retail specs do not give a measurement but I can verify that it is long.The rubber cups are substantial and should offer sufficient relief for glasses when folded down.

[Naemeth]

HI, I wrapped up some Helios FieldMaster 10x50 for the Wife earlier today. The retail specs do not give a measurement but I can verify that it is long.The rubber cups are substantial and should offer sufficient relief for glasses when folded down.

Thanks for that Gary, I think I might order them in the New Year .

[MAN or ASTROMAN]

I've received my Olympus DPS1's,and tried them out in less than perfect seeing.First light review to follow. MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[Catweazel]

Just to add to this topic, I wondered if 10x50 was an optimal size for any reason? I saw what look like a nice pair of 8x40 DPSI bins for £40 on Amazon, and, on the basis that I already have 15x70's, wondered whether these would be too low mag/fov for astronomy?

[Naemeth]

Just to add to this topic, I wondered if 10x50 was an optimal size for any reason? I saw what look like a nice pair of 8x40 DPSI bins for £40 on Amazon, and, on the basis that I already have 15x70's, wondered whether these would be too low mag/fov for astronomy?

I hadn't considered 8x40s for some reason, 10x50s just seem a good compromise between magnification and ability to hand hold.

[rory]

i think lower magnification is okay, x7 or x8. but i think 50mm aperture is considered minimum for light gathering.

[MAN or ASTROMAN]

I suppose that it comes down to optical quality,and hence money(!!).I would imagine that a GOOD 8x40 (or42) will outdo a cheapo 10x50.Read Olly's thread about using his 8x42's.Mind you,he is based in the south of France,where the seeing must be far better than murky ' Blighty'!

[BinocularSky]

If it's a genuine 8x40, there is no reason not to use it. (Note that a lot of the budget stuff hawked as "10x50" is actually around "10x42".) I use my genuine 10x42 a lot for hand-held observing.