7 x 50 Binocular recommendations.

[Grump Martian]

I was bought a set of 7 x 50 Bushnell Explorer binoculars for my 30th birthday. That was in 1989. I'm sure that they were on the shelf of the shop for several years.They have been my goto astronomy binoculars. I have enjoyed their hand held simplicity along with really bright views. Alas mold has started to grow and coatings damaged. I have had and enjoyed 70 mm binoculars. I still have Opticron HR  8 x 40's and 10 x 50's. But still go to my default 7 x 50's.

I know that my aging eyes and exit pupil distance would say 10 x 50's would be the best choice.

May I ask for any

7 x 50 recommendations and experiences. I think that the Bushnells should now be retired and a modern set bought. Not sure which would be better, porro prism or roof prism though?

The 7 x 50's were a delight to us. Not shaking when hand held.

Thanks in advance.

Edited January 22 by Grump Martian
Spelling

[Stormbringer]

Theres the Nikon Action EX 10x50 or the Opticron I magic 10x50 bins

I have both and find them really good although i find i prefer the Nikons as they seem to have an edge over the I Magics

The I Magics are a bit lighter than the Nikons and maybe easier to handhold 

[bosun21]

Another 👍 for the Opticron Imagic 7x50's. Nice and light and easily hand held.

[jjohnson3803]

I have a pair of surplus WWII-era US Navy 7x50s.  If you can find a pair without mold, etc, I'd get them.  They're a little clunky, but I think they give nicer views than my 10x50 Nikon Aculons or my 15x70 Orions.  (Yes, the Orions have the aperture advantage, but also need a tripod as they're on the heavy side.)

I'd wager the Opticrons mentioned above are a good choice.  I have a pair of baby Opticrons and the optics are quite sharp.

[Robthepiano]

I’ve got a pair of Steiner Skipper or Navigator which I use. I think they are intended for yachting so you just set the focus on something distant and then never alter it. I did have 10x50s but didn’t find it easy to hand hold them. I also have some Bushnell 8x42 Ed and it’s a toss up which to use. They magnify a little more and have just as wide a field of view but you have to focus of course - they’re more for bird watching. 

[Franklin]

Traditional 7x50 porros with their 7mm EP have been the goto handheld astro bino forever, the 7x50 marine binoculars with IF mentioned above are generally very good quality and rugged too. The low magnification and wide fov make them No 1 for handheld astro. With age your maximum EP will shrink (along with other things😁) and so this is why you hear the 10x50 (with an EP of 5mm) recommended. But that extra x3 mag, handheld, can turn your vista into a sea of fireflies rather than pinpoint stars. Stepping away from the older, bulky designs I picked up a pair of 6.5x32ed, IF roofs and I can honestly say that they are the best astro bins, for low-power, widefield, handheld that I've ever looked through. Small, light, massive fov, at x6.5 steady as a rock and IF. Absolutely superb, the Vixens are a bit pricey but I'm sure there are similar models out there for a bit less. Compared to the old porros this is a no-brainer, everyone who looks through my bins say "wow!". I think they retailed for close to £400 but I was lucky and got mine for £150 secondhand. Keepers!

[Second Time Around]

As you said, as you age your maximum pupil size will almost certainly diminish and so you won't benefit from the full 50mm aperture.  This would of course need a pupil size of 50 divided by 7, so over 7mm.  As I'm sure you know, but others might not, that's more typical of a youngster.

The same applies when you're in towns and cities where the extra lights mean that even a young person's pupils are most unlikely to open to 7mm. 

If in either circumstance your pupil size opens to only say 5mm you might as well buy 7x35 binoculars.  These will be smaller and lighter, and also probably have a wider field of view.

Another point to consider is that experiments have shown that magnification is even more important than aperture in seeing faint stars.  This has been discussed at length on the Cloudy Nights binocular forum.

However, as you said, if you go up to 10x50s they'll be harder to hold steady.

Short of buying expensive image stabilised binoculars, a good compromise might be 8x40s or 8x42s.  Strangely enough, many of these will have a wider field of view than 7x50s.  Indeed, in practice, many 10x50s have a wider field of view than 7x50s.

 

 

Edited January 29 by Second Time Around

[NobodyReally]

I can heartily recommend the Bresser Astro & Marine SF 7x50 WP binoculars.   

I've never bought 7x50s before, as I found the magnification of 10x50s to be more satisfying than that of the 8x56s I've got (another pair of Bresser's, with pin-sharp stars and immovable focus).  In addition, I've had a look through a couple of 7x50s owned by other skywatchers and didn't see(!) what all the fuss over 7x50s was all about. However, as I've just moved to a coastal location (with a BortIe 4 (almost 3) sky), I was after a pair of wide-angle binoculars for general daylight use.  Oddly, 7x50s seemed rare on the ground, with 8x42s dominating the offerings.  Then I found the above-mentioned Bresser 7x50s, with individual focus eyepieces and a nice discount, so I thought, "You only live once ... unless there's a defibrillator nearby ... and it's got both 'Marine' and 'Astro' in the name, so what the heck." and purchased them.

First light was a field a couple of hundred yards away with some sheep in it.  I was mightily surprised by the brightness, clarity and size of the image, and thought I'd bought a pair of 10x50s by mistake.  First astronomical light was under a crystal clear sky, and I was blown away(*) by the sights as I scanned the usual winter suspects.  The binoculars easily showed a few Messiers that I normally have to use a 15x70 for, with the added bonus of the rock-steady views that a 7x50 allows due to reduced hand-tremor magnification (not that I have much anyway).   Sadly, the clouds suddenly noticed I was enjoying myself and took immediate corrective action before I could try bagging a few more fainter DSOs.

The wide FOV was something I thought about, as I'm 68 and have well-aged eyes, but any related viewing deficits weren't apparent.

---------------------------

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/275218535871?hash=item40144d95bf:g:2tEAAOSwoPFljS31

---------------------------

(*) Literally, as the wind was gusting over 40 knots.

[NobodyReally]

2 hours ago, NobodyReally said:

I can heartily recommend the Bresser Astro & Marine SF 7x50 WP binoculars.   

I've never bought 7x50s before, as I found the magnification of 10x50s to be more satisfying than that of the 8x56s I've got (another pair of Bresser's, with pin-sharp stars and immovable focus).  In addition, I've had a look through a couple of 7x50s owned by other skywatchers and didn't see(!) what all the fuss over 7x50s was all about. However, as I've just moved to a coastal location (with a BortIe 4 (almost 3) sky), I was after a pair of wide-angle binoculars for general daylight use.  Oddly, 7x50s seemed rare on the ground, with 8x42s dominating the offerings.  Then I found the above-mentioned Bresser 7x50s, with individual focus eyepieces and a nice discount, so I thought, "You only live once ... unless there's a defibrillator nearby ... and it's got both 'Marine' and 'Astro' in the name, so what the heck." and purchased them.

First light was a field a couple of hundred yards away with some sheep in it.  I was mightily surprised by the brightness, clarity and size of the image, and thought I'd bought a pair of 10x50s by mistake.  First astronomical light was under a crystal clear sky, and I was blown away(*) by the sights as I scanned the usual winter suspects.  The binoculars easily showed a few Messiers that I normally have to use a 15x70 for, with the added bonus of the rock-steady views that a 7x50 allows due to reduced hand-tremor magnification (not that I have much anyway).   Sadly, the clouds suddenly noticed I was enjoying myself and took immediate corrective action before I could try bagging a few more fainter DSOs.

The wide FOV was something I thought about, as I'm 68 and have well-aged eyes, but any related viewing deficits weren't apparent.

---------------------------

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/275218535871?hash=item40144d95bf:g:2tEAAOSwoPFljS31

---------------------------

(*) Literally, as the wind was gusting over 40 knots.

 

After I wrote this, the skies cleared, and the above still holds true after another quick viewing.

[ollypenrice]

I'm five years older than you and am no longer feel comfortable with 10x, unstabilized. This applies to a lovely little pair of Leica 10x25s as well, unfortunately. I see more, and more enjoyably, with 7x or 8x. I've settled on 8x42 but would urge you not to be talked into 10x, especially with an eye on the future.

Standard wisdom says porros are cheaper to make so you get more optical quality for your buck. However, I think individual deals will possibly outweigh that.

My Leica 8x42 came second hand from Clifton Cameras, who described them as 'good for their age' (8 years.)  In truth they were indistinguishable from new, some of the accessories never having been opened at all. They are just lovely to use, in the hand and at the eye.

Olly

[ONIKKINEN]

I like my Nikon Aculon 7x50 binoculars, can recommend them. Not too heavy for handheld use, at least for me.