birding-aus

Low light bins

To: Tim Dolby <>
Subject: Low light bins
From: Carl Clifford <>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 17:48:09 +1100
Tim,

I think you are using a rather a broad brush here. I use a pair of Pentax 10x50 DCF ED and manage to carry them all day with no problem, despite an arthritic neck and back. I use a harness to carry them and sometimes even use a double harness to carry a DSLR with a tele lens no problem. My Pentax 10x50 are not much bigger than my old 8x42 Pentax. They weigh in at 855g which compared to say Swarovski's top line 8x32 which is 832g or Leica Ultravid 8x40 at 790g, are not much of a load. The Pentax are also within a few millimetres in size of the Leicas and actually smaller than the Swaros

I also have a pair of Pentax 8x32 DCF EDs, which I thought were the bee's knees, but I am not even sure where they are as it is so long since I used them. The 10x50s have become my first choice.

Binocular technology is advancing fairly rapidly, with some manufacturers greatly reducing size and weight of their bins, so one can not dismiss all big bins out of hand. Prospective buyers need to compare the various sizes to see which suits them the best, not just rely on others opinions. I did, which is why I have the bins I have.

Cheers,

carl Clifford


On 08/03/2011, at 3:46 PM, Tim Dolby wrote:

Hi Michael,

In my opinion for decent 'birding' i.e. walking around with a pair of binos birdwatching, there are only two - possibly three - real options for binoculars, regardless of conditions:

. 10 x 40 (or 42) - good magnification, so requires a little precision and practice i.e. to see birds in flight, so can sometimes be awkward in forests / closed bush - but perfect for open environ and most birding conditions. Any reasonable pair will work o.k. in gloomy light.

. 8 x 40 (or 42) - smaller in size than above and has less magnification, but perfect for forest conditions i.e. to see birds in flight through trees. Good for close range. Any reasonable pair will work o.k. in gloomy light.

Any larger than this, such as x 50 etc, size becomes just too awkward and cumbersome (even creating neck problems) for birding. There are of course exceptions to the rule. Some people just like them, enjoying the extra contrast and image brightness with the top-end binos (such as Leica), or have a strong neck, such as rugby playing birders. Larger binoculars can also be worthwhile if they are linked to a specific task, such as birding from a wetland bird-hide.

Personally (apart from 10 x 40 or 8 x 40) I'm also quite partial to 8 x 32 - small, compact, easy to use, and they're great for casual stroll in the bush, particularly your own patch, where you know most of the birds, so exact feature identification is not that important. However I'd only recommend a good pair.

In essence when buying a pair of binoculars, purchasing a pair of x 50 because they're slightly better when glooming ignores a dozen other aspects of binoculars when birding, such as size, weight, focus, ease of use, accessibility and even aesthetics (for example do you really want to walk around with a large and silly looking pair of binos around your neck).

Cheers,

Tim Dolby




-----Original Message-----
From: ] On Behalf Of Michael Hunter
Sent: Tuesday, 8 March 2011 1:02 PM
To: 
Subject: Low light bins

Hi All,

While on the subject of binoculars, I am wondering whether 10 x 42 is the best magnification x lens diameter combination for gloomy forest conditions or other low light situations where the quarry is not more than about 30m away from the observer, and magnification is not the major requirement.

Would optically equivalent (in quality) 7 x 50 give better light sensitivity and colour discrimination than say 10 x 42 or 10 x 50 ?

Close focus distance and rapid focus also relevant, as well as waterproofness in rainy humid conditions if not for scuba diving.

                                                Any suggestions?

                                                                       Cheers

                                                                                
 Michael
===============================

To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 

http://birding-aus.org
===============================
This email, including any attachment, is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. It is confidential and may contain personal information or be subject to legal professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient any use, disclosure, reproduction or storage of it is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender via return email and delete it from your system immediately. Victoria University does not warrant that this email is free from viruses or defects and accepts no liability for any damage caused by such viruses or defects.
===============================

To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 

http://birding-aus.org
===============================

===============================

To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 

http://birding-aus.org
===============================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU