Starting with binoculars?

[Dark Vader]

From that link I would go with the 10x50 and avoid zoom binoculars at all costs.

Andy

 

Edited May 4, 2021 by Dark Vader

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

1 hour ago, JTDUK said:

Thanks for all the responses on this guys. Planisphere is on its way and I think I managed to identify Polaris the other night, so it's all go.

However, I've been looking at binoculars and found these:

https://smile.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-Aculon-A211-12-Binocular/dp/B00BC1BXPW/ref=sr_1_9?crid=R215IPE8AV2R&dchild=1&keywords=nikon+binoculars&qid=1620164741&sprefix=nikon+bino%2Caps%2C207&sr=8-9

It says they are available in 10 - 22 x 50....

So does that mean these are a good buy, as they offer differing zoom levels, or are they still likely to be too heavy?  I know I am missing something here... or someone would have suggested zoom binoculars already!

Cheers

The prevailing advice is don't use zoom binoculars.

These are recommended:

https://www.opticron.co.uk/our-products/binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-10x50

 

[Stu1smartcookie]

Definitely avoid zoom binoculars ... and , if you can, get a bracket to mount them on a tripod . Holding binos steady for a length of time can be  a pain  sometimes . 

 

Just seen an ad for a guy selling some 20x 80 binos with a tripod on Facebook selling site , £140 collection from Grimsby ( not bad  ) 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Stu1smartcookie

[Nyctimene]

Binoculars are complementary to telescopes - very easy to set up as a grab-and-go instrument (tripod recommended), giving great views of large star fields, with intuitive orientation (naked-eye view). A decent pair will serve you a lifetime. I started five decades ago with a 8x30 Hertel+Reuss (German brand-almost Zeiss quality), and had a lot of fun with it. It accompanied me on a journey to a Indian Ocean island four decades later - Scorpius overhead is a gorgeous view in binoculars. The wide field view is one of the great advantages of binos; and I would not sacrifice it for larger magnifications - at least as a beginner. Given your light - polluted  red zone site, I'd stick with a 8x40 or 10x50 size (same exit pupil of 5 mm); avoid zooms at any rate (small field of view; optical quality unreliable). A great way to start observing. Later on, a scope will follow as it's companion - high magnifications, larger aperture , showing more details...... enjoy the journey!

Stephan

[MiladyB]

On 05/05/2021 at 00:17, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

The prevailing advice is don't use zoom binoculars.

These are recommended:

https://www.opticron.co.uk/our-products/binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-10x50

 

These are what I've got. They're really nice - not too heavy, and good eye relief so they're suitable for glasses wearers.

[Dave61]

As has been said, binoculars are a great starting point in your journey to sky watching plus a great way to learn your way round the night sky.

[PEMS]

I would agree with Stephan when he says "Binoculars are complementary to telescopes". They are not the same and deliver a different aspect.

Nice for ease of use and looking around the sky, think I have 3 sets somewhere. If however you want detail, even planetary then you will need more in the magnification then a normal binocular supplies. Always a difficult thing to answer. I suppose my fear is that someone will spend £80 on a binocular and immediatly want say 50x to see even minimal banding of Jupiter. And that £80 may have been better used on even a basic 80mm achro which would display Jupiter.

Also a lightweight set and even low power set is often the best. I suspect many of us have had binoculars around before a scope. So they have always been around. My first set(s) were not for any astronomy at all but another sport that required them - Archery. When shooting a FITA or a York you need them.

[etsatlo]

Apologies if reviving an old thread but I found myself in exactly your situation a few years back.

I might be controversial here but I would disagree with what people have said regarding binoculars over a telescope.

I followed the advice and purchased some 10x50 binocs when first starting and whilst they show you more than the naked eye, all the really show you is more points of light.

Now I'm not being facetious but if you take a moment and think about why you are interested in astronomy, I reckon (at least personally) it's to see things that you can't ordinarily see i.e. rings of Saturn, the bands of Jupiter, the craters and ridges of the lunar surface, split beautifully coloured double-stars.

Those aren't visible through binoculars. You can see the 4 largest moons of Jupiter but not much else. I know that you can see deep sky objects like M31 (Andromeda Galaxy) in binoculars and it can be impressive, but for me, beyond that it's just isn't particularaly exciting.

Now if your main interest is to learn the constellation then by all means binoculars can be great. But if I'm honest, a telescope offers the 'astronomy' most people are after.

On the topic of binoculars, whilst 10x50s are useful, they can get heavy and your shoulders and neck will soon feel it. I've recently purchased a pair of lightweight 8x32 and they are far more comfortable so you'll actually spend more time observing and less time massaging the back of your neck!

Hope that proves useful or informative and like I say I realise it goes against the grain!

All the best.

[skyhog]

35 minutes ago, etsatlo said:

Apologies if reviving an old thread but I found myself in exactly your situation a few years back.

I might be controversial here but I would disagree with what people have said regarding binoculars over a telescope.

I followed the advice and purchased some 10x50 binocs when first starting and whilst they show you more than the naked eye, all the really show you is more points of light.

Now I'm not being facetious but if you take a moment and think about why you are interested in astronomy, I reckon (at least personally) it's to see things that you can't ordinarily see i.e. rings of Saturn, the bands of Jupiter, the craters and ridges of the lunar surface, split beautifully coloured double-stars.

Those aren't visible through binoculars. You can see the 4 largest moons of Jupiter but not much else. I know that you can see deep sky objects like M31 (Andromeda Galaxy) in binoculars and it can be impressive, but for me, beyond that it's just isn't particularaly exciting.

Now if your main interest is to learn the constellation then by all means binoculars can be great. But if I'm honest, a telescope offers the 'astronomy' most people are after.

On the topic of binoculars, whilst 10x50s are useful, they can get heavy and your shoulders and neck will soon feel it. I've recently purchased a pair of lightweight 8x32 and they are far more comfortable so you'll actually spend more time observing and less time massaging the back of your neck!

Hope that proves useful or informative and like I say I realise it goes against the grain!

All the best.

To be honest I'd have to disagree, I have an observatory mounted 12inch sct, various other scopes and wouldn't be without my binoculars. You are right that they will never show you the objects you have mentioned but their strength is in other areas. They were the first things to pick up last year when neowise made its appearance as one example. I think the other big positive is that you don't upgrade from binoculars when you get a scope. They are useful for the rest of your observing life... 

[Stu1smartcookie]

47 minutes ago, etsatlo said:

Apologies if reviving an old thread but I found myself in exactly your situation a few years back.

I might be controversial here but I would disagree with what people have said regarding binoculars over a telescope.

I followed the advice and purchased some 10x50 binocs when first starting and whilst they show you more than the naked eye, all the really show you is more points of light.

Now I'm not being facetious but if you take a moment and think about why you are interested in astronomy, I reckon (at least personally) it's to see things that you can't ordinarily see i.e. rings of Saturn, the bands of Jupiter, the craters and ridges of the lunar surface, split beautifully coloured double-stars.

Those aren't visible through binoculars. You can see the 4 largest moons of Jupiter but not much else. I know that you can see deep sky objects like M31 (Andromeda Galaxy) in binoculars and it can be impressive, but for me, beyond that it's just isn't particularaly exciting.

Now if your main interest is to learn the constellation then by all means binoculars can be great. But if I'm honest, a telescope offers the 'astronomy' most people are after.

On the topic of binoculars, whilst 10x50s are useful, they can get heavy and your shoulders and neck will soon feel it. I've recently purchased a pair of lightweight 8x32 and they are far more comfortable so you'll actually spend more time observing and less time massaging the back of your neck!

Hope that proves useful or informative and like I say I realise it goes against the grain!

All the best.

Opening a can of worms here !!!. If as you write , people want to buy and use telescopes to view saturns rings and jupiter ie things that can be magnified enough to show detail , why haven't we all bought 16" dobsonians, after all if you want the best , surely a large telescope is the only way to go ????.. No , binos have their place .. they are great at scanning the sky .. getting used to where targets are located and , as Skyhog wrote , they were a fantastic tool for viewing neowise . So , perhaps, after all  that 4" scope  isn't worth the money ? After all it won't show views that you get from a light bucket . At that rate we will all just be looking at mags with glossy photos taken by hubble.  As for Binos just showing "points of light" ... if anyone out there has any desire to see stars other than just points of light , then they will be sorely disappointed . 

I've basically played devils advocat to your points above ... to be honest i have no desire to own a pair of binos ... i like the idea of scopes . But , most people know what they will see when using Binos  ... a 50mm or 70mm objective with , say a 10 x magnification . 

lol , you certainly did go "against the grain " but all points of view have their worth and if anything this stimulates the discussion , and lets face it anytime we can talk about astronomy is time well spent  .

Stu

[etsatlo]

12 minutes ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

Opening a can of worms here !!!. If as you write , people want to buy and use telescopes to view saturns rings and jupiter ie things that can be magnified enough to show detail , why haven't we all bought 16" dobsonians, after all if you want the best , surely a large telescope is the only way to go ????.. No , binos have their place .. they are great at scanning the sky .. getting used to where targets are located and , as Skyhog wrote , they were a fantastic tool for viewing neowise . So , perhaps, after all  that 4" scope  isn't worth the money ? After all it won't show views that you get from a light bucket . At that rate we will all just be looking at mags with glossy photos taken by hubble.  As for Binos just showing "points of light" ... if anyone out there has any desire to see stars other than just points of light , then they will be sorely disappointed . 

I've basically played devils advocat to your points above ... to be honest i have no desire to own a pair of binos ... i like the idea of scopes . But , most people know what they will see when using Binos  ... a 50mm or 70mm objective with , say a 10 x magnification . 

lol , you certainly did go "against the grain " but all points of view have their worth and if anything this stimulates the discussion , and lets face it anytime we can talk about astronomy is time well spent  .

Stu

Can of worms indeed!

I've found my Mak 102 to be able to show the objects I listed so no need to go full blown observatory just yet!

I would argue that most people aren't quite sure what to expect from starting with binocs so potentially like me will find themselves slightly underwhelmed.

However binoculars alongside a telescope are a great companion. 

All the best

[skyhog]

14 minutes ago, etsatlo said:

Can of worms indeed!

I've found my Mak 102 to be able to show the objects I listed so no need to go full blown observatory just yet!

I would argue that most people aren't quite sure what to expect from starting with binocs so potentially like me will find themselves slightly underwhelmed.

However binoculars alongside a telescope are a great companion. 

All the best

I actually think what you wrote is true in the main. And I also feel very unsure about suggesting binoculars to newbies for the reasons you cite. I suppose the issue is one of apples and oranges. They can't be compared in any meaningful way. I have a little pair of binos that always go in my suit case, wouldn't be without them... 

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

9 hours ago, etsatlo said:

Can of worms indeed!

I've found my Mak 102 to be able to show the objects I listed so no need to go full blown observatory just yet!

I would argue that most people aren't quite sure what to expect from starting with binocs so potentially like me will find themselves slightly underwhelmed.

However binoculars alongside a telescope are a great companion. 

All the best

For camping trips I have a Mak 102 and 10x50 binoculars. Invariably the Mak stays in the car boot/tent while I take in breathtaking starfields, open clusters and many deep sky objects with the binoculars. Under dark skies binoculars offer the user a magnificent view not available to the naked eye, while being compact, lightweight and easy to use compared to a telescope, finder, eyepieces and mount.

The binoculars can be used for hours on end without aches if one is positioned comfortably on a recliner, decent camping chair or even lying on the ground with my head propped on a bergen/rucksack. Both instruments have their uses but since buying binoculars for astronomy I wouldn't be without them.

A really good pair of 10x50 binoculars, a good observers guide and a red torch costs around £120. Not much outlay for someone interested in trying astronomy.

Each to their own I suppose but I'd always recommend trying binoculars first.