Jump to content

Narrowband

Binoculars for traveling and astronomy


Steve72

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

With a trip to New Zealand on the horizon, I'm keen to buy some fairly lightweight binos that will easily fit in a daypack, be good for general nature and scenery observing as well as some star gazing (I've never been in the southern hemisphere before so want to take as much in as possible).

I've concluded my 10x50's are just slightly too big and so was thinking about 8x42 or 10x42 roof prisms. I don't want to spend too much as the trip is expensive enough to begin with and so was hoping for something around (but preferably under) £120.

Any suggestions?

My main questions are:

- would 8x/10x 42mm still be a good size for useful astronomy? (I assume 32mm would be too small)

- would 8x be a better option (over the 10x)  for general use due to steadier handheld viewing and wider fov?

- is phase coating (phase correction?) an essential feature to consider in roof prisms? (few binos in my price range seem to have it)

All advice appreciated

thanks

Steve

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 27
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Best all-round binoculars IMO would be 8x42 roof prism binoculars with central focussing knob and phase coating for the roof prisms.

10x gives more image shake. Porro prisms have more bulk. Individual eyepiece focussing is inconvenient for nature observation because that requires frequent refocusing.

The exit pupil of an 8x42mm is 42/8=5.25 mm. Nice for astronomy. Very decent for nature in twilight. Excellent for daytime observing.

As an alternative for 8x42 roof prism binoculars you could consider 7x35 porro prism. Porro prisms need no phase coating and because of that are less expensive for the same performance. 7x35 porro aren't too big either. 

My most frequently used pair is the 8x42 Bresser Everest ED (same as Celestron Granite ED, but almost €100 less expensive). I tried many before I decided on them. The Everest felt more comfortable than many other roof prism binos and they come with a 20 year warranty.

I was surprised that many pricier roof prism models weren't nearly as good.

Check out the bird watcher forums, and go to a place that carries many models to try.  And read this buyer's guide:

http://www.nightskyinfo.com/binoculars-tests/

Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Steve72 said:

I'm keen to buy some fairly lightweight binos that will easily fit in a daypack, be good for general nature and scenery observing as well as some star gazing.......

I'd be taking those 10x50 iMagics, but if your really needing something smaller, what about something like an 8x40?  I favour my Helios  8x40's, their my first for everything, I can then move to higher powers if/when needed.
Both 10x50 and 8x40 will provide the same exit pupil, your target image will/should look exactly the same, however the 8x40's wider field of view gives a little more space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice so far.

my 10x50 iMagics are great binos and I would be happy to have them with me. But from past experience on holidays I have often found myself wishing they were a bit smaller, especially when day trekking. That’s why I’m drawn to the roofs.

These Barr & Stroud Sierra 8x42 seem good for the price. Any thoughts/ experience with them?

https://www.365astronomy.com/Barr-and-Stroud-Sierra-8x42-Binocular.html

 

Also would 8x32 be too small for useful Astronomy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BinocularSky said:

In sub-£120 8x40-ish roofs, I think you'll struggle to beat the Opticron Oregon. See https://www.firstlightoptics.com/all-binoculars/opticron-oregon-4-le-wp-42mm-binoculars.html

Do you know if these are Phase corrected? It's not mentioned so I suspect not, but does that make much difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you like the Imagic 10x50s, and you will know the quality of them, why not just go for the iMagic 8x42s which are just that little bit more compact? 10x50: 173x191x62/834gms.  8x42: 142x180x53/682gms .I have the 10x42 and its a nice binocular. The price is higher than the 10x50, (irritatingly) but that's because the 10x50s are at a special FLO price, so they informed me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Alfian said:

If you like the Imagic 10x50s, and you will know the quality of them, why not just go for the iMagic 8x42s which are just that little bit more compact? 10x50: 173x191x62/834gms.  8x42: 142x180x53/682gms .I have the 10x42 and its a nice binocular. The price is higher than the 10x50, (irritatingly) but that's because the 10x50s are at a special FLO price, so they informed me.

Hi Ian, I take it are you referring to iMagic 8x42 porros? I had considered them but I think my preference at this stage is for the more compact roof design. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use a pair of Bushnell Trophies 8x42... I do take my Apollos when I go to Australia, but a bit heavy for general 'day out' use... Just for a simple grab and go, well made great optics I like my Bushnells :-) Come in a nice little padded bag as well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I bought these https://www.firstlightoptics.com/helios-binoculars/helios-naturesport-plus-8x40-wa-binoculars.html they were much cheaper back then, First Light Optics had them on special summer offer!

Cant fault them, always with me at the scope, just as good during the day, but its that field of view that impresses me, over 8°.
Your  not going to pick out planetary features, but the amount of sky you see is very good.

Their my most and regularly used binocular, I even mount them on my 222?

To be honest, I almost replaced them whilst assessing the Strathspey 10x50 and 7x50 marine mil-spec binoculars! The 7x50's are  just as good as the 10x50's, I almost ended up keeping them, due to some additional properties/benefits and discount? plus the thought, Mrs Charic may like them, but I opted in the end  to stay closer to a 5mm exit pupil, and of course the wider view. The marines at present are more than twice what I paid for my Helios.
  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Steve72 said:

Do you know if these are Phase corrected? It's not mentioned so I suspect not, but does that make much difference?

The Oregon 4 series is not phase corrected. Phase correction improves contrast and resolution. It is also possible that you might see a single diffraction line on stars in a non-phase corrected binocular.

The next model up in the Opticron range, the T4 Trailfinder is phase correction coated but at £149 SRP is outside your budget unfortunately.

HTH

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bigger binoculars for travelling can be held steady by mounting them on a monopod or some other simple support. I made a triangular aluminium frame, from a discarded Zimmer frame, with bicycle handlebar grips on the bottom and the bins mounted on top.

The CELESTRON 15X70's can be held quite steadily on this frame. The frame can easily fit in with luggage and at hardly any extra weight.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for the suggestion Merlin, it sounds interesting. But from a luggage point of view, I need to keep the weight to a minimum and when out and about I only want a small daypack, so I'm really keen on small handheld bins. Also, I don't quite think I'm ready for carrying/pushing a Zimmer around! I might leave that option for another few years!:icon_biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm getting close to a decision.

It could be a toss-up between Barr and Stroud Sierra 8x42  and Helios NitroSport 8x42.  Both seem quite similar in Spec and I could get either for under £80 which suits my pocket.

Does anyone have experience with either and could help make the decision?

 

S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Steve72 said:

It could be a toss-up between Barr and Stroud Sierra 8x42  and Helios NitroSport 8x42. 

On paper the Barr and Stroud with their phase coating look better. More contrast, more colour saturation.

The Helios have an open hinge. A few of your fingers can curls around the tubes which gives a better grip. In practice it makes little difference: both types hold better when you hold them upside down. Plenty of room for your fingers then. (Unless you have very thick fingers. You want to fit eight of them between the tubes.)

You also need sufficient range in eyepiece distance adjustment,  and eye relief is important if you or someone you want to share the binoculars with must wear glasses.

What do the birdwatcher forums say about these models? What feels better to your hands, open or closed hinge, upside down or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Merlin said:

Bigger binoculars for travelling can be held steady by mounting them on a monopod or some other simple support. I made a triangular aluminium frame, from a discarded Zimmer frame, with bicycle handlebar grips on the bottom and the bins mounted on top.

The CELESTRON 15X70's can be held quite steadily on this frame. The frame can easily fit in with luggage and at hardly any extra weight.

 

...what mount would you use out of interest?  An obvious candidate like the ravelli pistol grip weighs around 750grams or so, which adds a lot when travelling..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ruud said:

On paper the Barr and Stroud with their phase coating look better. More contrast, more colour saturation.

The Helios have an open hinge. A few of your fingers can curls around the tubes which gives a better grip. In practice it makes little difference: both types hold better when you hold them upside down. Plenty of room for your fingers then. (Unless you have very thick fingers. You want to fit eight of them between the tubes.)

You also need sufficient range in eyepiece distance adjustment,  and eye relief is important if you or someone you want to share the binoculars with must wear glasses.

What do the birdwatcher forums say about these models? What feels better to your hands, open or closed hinge, upside down or not?

Hi Ruud, Both models have phase coasting (which I wanted) and generally have similar specs. The Helios have silver coated mirrors which aren't mentioned on the B&S Sierra so I assume they are probably aluminum (not sure how much difference that would really make).  Other than that the main difference seems to be hinge design. Although fairly close in weight the B&S are slightly smaller and seem to be a bit more rugged which for me gives them a slight a slight edge. I'm going to pop into Jessops tomorrow to have a hands on comparison of similar designs  to see what I prefer. 

I've tried looking through my binoculars upside down but I keep falling over!:hello2:

The few reviews I found rate them both quite highly for their given low price range.

 

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.