Best Binoculars

[smudger1309]

hi all,    

just signed up to forum and im quite new to binoculars,   i live on the coast and i like to look out to sea from the beach some times see what ships are out there,  also i like looking up to sky for planes and plants etc from my garden,  is there one where you can see the plane numbers or will they go blur,  i have at moment very old pair tasco super zoom 15x-60x27mm when i zoom everything is blur

Garreth

[Linda]

You could look at a telescope from e.g. Skywatcher. They are general reasonable good quality and should not give blurry images. For daytime viewing I would recommend a refractor or a Maksutov on an AZ mount with a prism that turns everything the correct way up and left right in the right place.

Something like these:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-90-az3.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-90-ota.html

A decent pair of binoculars should also show a sharp image. But binos show a more table picture if you put them on a mount. 

I think Tasco is a cheap brand and there is a lot better stuff out there.

There are also shorter refractors, but I think they are less suited for zooming in on details, because of their short focal length.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Zoom binoculars are generally very poor. I started out with decent 10x50 binoculars, and later upgraded to 15x70 for astronomy. The 10x50 (and now my newer 1056) are very good all-round performers, and can still be hand-held easily by most people. The 15x70s are rather heavier, even though the cheaper ones like the Celestron Skymaster and the like are only about 1.4 kgs (and really only 15x63 or so).  My far heftier Helios Apollo 15x70 HDs are about a full kg heavier, but I actually find them easier to hold still (and they are FAR better optically).

Much depends on your budget of course, and there are great tips here:

http://binocularsky.com/binoc_choosing.php

 

[smudger1309]

i had tasco for years found them while cleaning out junk lol,  

i dont think telescope is good for me as i like to see through both eyes like bins not one,    i found these bins SAKURA 20x - 180x 100 ZOOM BINOCULARS W/ NIGHT VISION ?  also ex russian military ones to   also a mount that a tripod?

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

The only practical use for the SAKURA 20x - 180x 100 ZOOM BINOCULARS is as a doorstop. The red coatings are a sure sign of garbage optics (reflecting a lot of red light to mask chromatic aberration most likely. ANyway, they are mos certainly not 100mm binoculars. Avoid at all cost. By contrast, if you can get a pair of (second-hand) Russian binoculars, you can often get great deals. They do not have the wide fields of view of current binoculars, but they can be extremely sharp over their entire FOV

[Linda]

As Michael said, try to find some without the zoom function.

[smudger1309]

thank you i will take a look at them links and i stay clear of zoom,   and first numbers is better so say 10 x 60   is not as good as say 15x80 for example 

[billyharris72]

I'd avoid the Sakura ones you mention like the plague. Any zoom binocular is going to be rubbish (no nice way to put it, they are without exception terrible from my experience and from what I've read). The magnification (at x20, the x180 is just lies, all too common when buying optics online from ebay or even Amazon) is also too high for what you might call your "main" binocular. I'd say the range x7 to x12, with an aperture of 40 - 60mm.

There are good (and excellent) larger binoculars, but you will need to tripod mount them and they won't give the wide fields of view that a 10 x 50 (the "classic" size) will give. Good ones will also set you back several hundred pounds.

If you are looking for a good deal in the 10 x 50 or similar size I'd suggest something like the Nikon Aculon (about £80) or Action (about £150) from Amazon. Really solid manufacturer and a good price. I'd expect them to outperform the similarly priced Celestron offerings (Cometron, UpClose, SkyMaster) by miles.

Hope this helps,

Billy.

[smudger1309]

its only to look at the ships and planes mainly and see what stars and planets some nights,    tripod is ok for me just as long as the bins etc are good 

[Linda]

Planets get a lot more interesting with bigger binoculars, that let in more light than small ones. E.g. Jupiter in a 10x50 is a very small object.

As mentioned in another thread, the planets will be a bit difficult to watch up until 2022 or so, because they will be further away from us.

[smudger1309]

how good are theses three,   

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/371644286437?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/262447077050?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/142016988684?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT     

also i looked at ones billy said but coming up like 6k  20x or 25x 

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

1 minute ago, smudger1309 said:

how good are theses two,   

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/371644286437?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/262447077050?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT       

also i looked at ones billy said but coming up like 6k  20x or 25x 

Not sure about these. A common mistake is to go for high magnification, and it might make sense if you want to see planets, but that is not the strength of binoculars. Planets are best with a telescope, and require magnifications in the order of 100-200 to really bring out detail.  Wide-field and deep sky objects such as the bigger and brighter nebula best with binoculars. These are best seen at lower magnification. The numbers like 10x60 or 15x80 say very little about quality. I would rather use a really good pair of 10x50s than a dud 15x70. My Helios Apollo 15x70 will beat the Celestron Skymaster 25x70 for the quality and clarity of the views. The 15x70 Skymaster would be a better choice (although it is really a 15x63). I had an Omegon-branded clone of these for years and they were a lot of fun to use, but they can lose collimation quickly.

20x50 is a combination you do not often see, and for night-time use they combine a comparatively small aperture with a magnification unsuitable to hand-hold. 10x50 is better, in my view.

[smudger1309]

what about seeing planes from the ground and ships from say a beach or car park ?

[smudger1309]

sorry to be a pain and post lots links  

how is ths sky master this one is 15x 70 http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/162092960973?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

here is the helios 15x70 http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/222141773825?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT,   they maiy to see planes fly over my house and ships from shore but now im intresed in star glazing things to,  magic what a forum can do lol

Garreth

[YKSE]

I'd suggest taking some minutes to read through the link Michael has posted, and go for the recommendations there, it's THE most time and cost saving way forward, IMHO.

[Ricochet]

I would hazard a guess that both of those binoculars are the same beneath the branding. I used to have a pair of the 25x70 Celestrons and quite frankly they were awful. I think that for the level of detail you're after you're going to need to look for binoculars or a spotting scope with ED glass which will push the price up quite considerably over the options you've linked to so far. As for reading the numbers off planes as they fly overhead I'm not sure that will be possible with any scope or binoculars if you're talking about jets at cruising height as the atmosphere will get in the way. You might be better off reposting this question on a plane spotting forum and find out what equipment everyone else uses. 

[smudger1309]

hi

yeah i will repost this on aviation site,  im just new to bins,   whats spotting scope and ed glass ?   isnt that like telescope?

[Putaendo Patrick]

I would recommend trying to visit a shop and trying out different models at different magnifications and prices (even if you finally buy cheaper online). Some binoculars may be more or less comfortable for you.

As said, avoid zooms and any binoculars with bright coloured optical coatings. There are two basic types of binocular designs, Porro prisms and Roof prisms. Under about 150 pounds, Porro prisms will usually be better quality. The type of glass is also important: Bak7 is good but Bak4 is better. ED glass is usually found only on more expensive binoculars.

Magnification: remember anything over x12 (just possibly x15) will need some sort of tripod support. Higher magnification generally also means a smaller field of view, which can make tracking a moving object such as a plane more difficult. Seeing detail also depends on distance - plane spotters tend to hang out near airports.

High power, wide aperture binoculars can be very expensive if you want top quality. Some of the less expensive models in this category tend to go out of alignment - personally I would avoid some of the cheaper Celestron 15x70 and 20x80s etc.

Although you don't need a big astronomical telescope for what you want to do, if you want to push magnification, you might look at spotting scopes. These also give right way up views compared to many astronomical telescopes.

Of the three latest ebay binoculars: 1. avoid the Nikon, it a zoom, 2. avoid the Celestron for alignment problems, 3. the TEHYOH might be rather interesting if you can get it cheap (perhaps 25 - 30 pounds maximum), some vintage Japanese optics can be very good indeed. However, buying unseen on ebay is always a gamble so be careful.

[Ricochet]

A spotting scope is a type of telescope that is generally used for nature viewing. I know you said binoculars but decent spotting scopes have the advantage that they tend to have the option of interchangeable eyepieces and decent zooms where as a decent binocular will tend to have a single fixed magnification so that multiple magnifications require multiple pairs of binoculars. 

ED stands for extra low dispersion. Whenever you use a lens to focus light the different wavelengths bend at slightly different angles and so you might be able to see the colours split and at high magnifications the overlaps will cause the image to blur. If ED glass is used then the colour splitting should be reduced and you should get crisper images. 

[LukeSkywatcher]

"Planets get a lot more interesting with bigger binoculars, that let in more light than small ones".

I can only speak from personal experience on this. I have owned a few pair of 10x50 bins and i own a pair of 20x90 bins and i have to admit that i find very little difference in the view between 10x50 and 20x90 when observing planets. Aperture is great (allows more light) but you are limited by magnification. Ive yet to see any image of a planet say with 90mm bins that comes even anywhere close to the view a 90mm scope offers.

[Dave In Vermont]

16 hours ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Zoom binoculars are generally very poor. I started out with decent 10x50 binoculars, and later upgraded to 15x70 for astronomy. The 10x50 (and now my newer 1056) are very good all-round performers, and can still be hand-held easily by most people. The 15x70s are rather heavier, even though the cheaper ones like the Celestron Skymaster and the like are only about 1.4 kgs (and really only 15x63 or so).  My far heftier Helios Apollo 15x70 HDs are about a full kg heavier, but I actually find them easier to hold still (and they are FAR better optically).

Much depends on your budget of course, and there are great tips here:

http://binocularsky.com/binoc_choosing.php

 

Your post compelled me to get my digital-calipers, which I checked for accuracy by comparing to a several hundred $$$ set of manual ones, and measure my Celestron SkyMaster 15 X 70's. The lens measured at 69.95mm and to 70.1mm - depending on the trueness of the rubber-housing.

Perhaps you had a bad batch? Who knows?

Dave

[Putaendo Patrick]

Dave - I think the problem is not the size of the lenses, but rather internal stopping down, including light baffles and undersized prisms, which mean that less than the aperture is actually reaching the eyepiece. Check out http://binocularsky.com/binoc_aperture.php

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

38 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

Your post compelled me to get my digital-calipers, which I checked for accuracy by comparing to a several hundred $$$ set of manual ones, and measure my Celestron SkyMaster 15 X 70's. The lens measured at 69.95mm and to 70.1mm - depending on the trueness of the rubber-housing.

Perhaps you had a bad batch? Who knows?

Dave

The lens may measure 70mm but the internal baffling cuts down the effective aperture to 63mm. The internal baffles act as an aperture stop

 

[Dave In Vermont]

That's interesting. Measuring from the baffle.

Thanks!

Dave

[smudger1309]

i been told pair of cannon is 10x30 but that not going to go much in to sky plus i need a 2nd morgatage lol