Binoculars?

[Sidharth Kodikal]

Perhaps a bit off the photography topic ...

are there any recommendations on binoculars for birding?

I'm looking for something preferrably light and "mid-ranged" in price (0 - 500 USD).

I don't know much about binoculars and there seem to be enough choices out there to add to my confusion. Any pointers will be appreciated.

Thanks

[James Prudente]

Check this out.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular...5x45-binocular

[Mike Tracy]

I am a Canon guy but love my Nikon Monarch ATB's. 25 year no fault warranty comes in handy as I recently found out due to my breaking them. Nikon repaired them for free, all it cost me was shipping to their svc. center.

[Chris Sloan]

You need to check out http://www.betterviewdesired.com. Best resource out there for this topic.

My only comment is that, in 25 years of birding experience, I can tell you pretty confidently that binoculars are one of those assets where you get what you pay for. The difference in quality between the top end bins (e.g. Swarovski EL, etc.) and the low end is quite simply astounding. If you are going to be a serious birder for a long time, make the investment and buy the top end. It's worth it.

[Shawn P. Carey]

There's Swarovski and everyone else IMO.

I have had Swarovski bins for many years now and they are ALWAYS with me in the field. In fact back in December 2004 at Bosque Tom Vezo burrowed mine for a hour and liked them so much he wanted them. I hook him up with one of my contacts at Swarovski and a week later he had his own pair of 8x30's.

All the guys a bird with which are very hard core "Birders" have Swarovski as do many of the people I know with Mass Audubon. You would hard pressed to find any other binoculars other then Swarovski here' in Massachusetts during the 24 hour Bird-A-Thon in May.

Having said that Nikon and many others make very good binoculars for a lot less money but as Chris said you get what you pay for.

[Chris Sloan]

I own a pair of Swarovskis and love them, but don't know that I'd go so far as to say it is them and then everyone else. Leica, Zeiss, Bausch & Lomb, and Brunton all make excellent top-end binoculars also. It depends on what characteristics you value in terms of field of view, close focus, speed of focus, weight, eye-relief, use with glasses, zoom, etc.

[John Chardine]

I agree, you get what you pay for. Important features to consider are:

1. Short focusing distance.
2. Waterproof, so they don't fog up in damp conditions.
3. Weight- as light as possible is better. The trade off here is light-gathering ability- the bigger the objectives the brighter the binocs but the heavier they are.
4. Magnification- 7-8 x is good for general birding, 10-12x is good for seabird watching.

[Shawn P. Carey]

Like I said IMO.

I've used Leica and Zeiss and they do make VERY GOOD binoculars, however I'll stick with my Swarovski's and I dare say anyone that has them and is using them on a regular basis would not trade them for any other brand. At least the people I know that own them.

[Vivek Khanzode]

It really is a question of how much you want to spend. IF you do NOT want to spend a lot of money, the Monarch ATB from Nikon is quite good and I am happy with it. I have the 8X42 as well as the 10X42. Both are quite good; rugged, fogproof, waterproof and light enough.

The question I try to answer is "Is this good enough FOR ME?". These fit the bill. Some folks may not agree with this, but the higher priced versions are not necessarily THAT much better. Better they are, the question is really are they 10X better in some cases (Leica Ultravids for example) and my answer to that question was NO.

Let us know what you decide on...

-- V

[Chris Sloan]

I have to disagree with John on use of 10x or 12x for seabirding as a general rule. I am a pelagic trip leader for Brian Patteson and a veteran of 80+ pelagic trips. I use 10x bins and so does Patteson, but most pelagophiles go with 8x bins because the larger field of view is a real benefit when you are watching moving birds from a moving platform. For example, Steve Howell, who many would agree is the best pelagic birder on the planet, uses 8x and I promise you he spots and identifies more seabirds with those than anybody else, regardless of magnification.

A lot of it is personal preference. I prefer 10x for everything, but I also have very steady hands and have no issues locating birds with them in the woods. People who do mostly forest birding tend to prefer 7x or 8x because you get a wider field of view and, on average, a little bit more light. I think I've met maybe one person who regularly used more than 10x bins; I think those are more of a novelty and the handshake really is a problem at that length.

[Mike Tracy]

I'm looking for something preferrably light and "mid-ranged" in price (0 - 500 USD).

Apparently he is not interested in a high end pair. Recommending $1,500 binoculars is akin to me telling someone to purchase a 500 f/4 when they aren't in the market for that quality of glass.

[Mark Hopgood]

I have been testing binoculars for an upcoming African Safari and for subsequent use for birds. I will be getting Steiner Merlin 8x42. Seems a good compromise between quality and price.

If any have experience and opinion with these, I'd like to hear.

Thanks

[Shawn P. Carey]

Bought my Swarovski's 8x30's for $600.

Also have the EL's which did cost almost $1200 but I was willing to pay that price because I use either of them all the time.

Like I said Nikon and many other make VERY GOOD binoculars.

Have fun.

[Chris Sloan]

Apparently he is not interested in a high end pair. Recommending $1,500 binoculars is akin to me telling someone to purchase a 500 f/4 when they aren't in the market for that quality of glass.

He said "preferably" mid-range, and so I made the comment that if he could afford more and was going to be using them a lot, he should buy a high-end pair.

[Sidharth Kodikal]

Thanks for all the replies.
Yes, I initially wasn't thinking high-end, but if the difference if night and day as some say, I, for one, am prone to being swayed by quality.
Vivek, yes, a very good question to ask oneself :)
I have a feeling the mid-ranged ones will be good enough for me.
I will have to try the Swarovski to see if the price difference will be worth it for me.

Thanks again.

[Cal Walters]

Completely agree with the comments on get what you pay for and I'm a Zeiss fan 8x40s and I love them. They are they type of glasses that when others use them they can not believe binocs can make such a difference. One suggestion, go to a store where you can try different versions side by side and then once you narrow, try all the ones of that type they have - there are slight production variations - so don't just take the pair out of the cabinet - unless you think it is great.

[Alan Lillich]

To John's list I would add:
5. Image stabilization
My wife and I have a pair of Canon 8x25 stabilized binoculars that we like because of the stabilization. B&H lists 7 different models of Canon IS binoculars, the ones we have are $260.

[Kiran Khanzode]

I am a canon guy for cameras, but for binocs, I have these Nikon binocs (Action EX Extreme, 10x 50), they are just great for what I need them for, a large field of view, bright/clear, easily hand-holdable and all-proof.
: paid $135 a year ago.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-7245-Ext...5045428&sr=8-1

[Bill McCrystyn]

Well - your all missing the boat IMO. Not one of you mentioned Pentax. You want relative brightness with good eye relief that matches the big guys, check out Pentax WP, SP, and oh yeah the new ED's as in ED glass. Top glass at real fair prices for porro or roof. Dollar for dollar they blow everyone away. I own a Nikon D300 and a 200-400VR and I wouldn't buy anything but Pentax when it comes to binoculars under $1000. Lighter than most and brighter than most from $200 - $1000.

HINT: Pentax DCF SP 10x50 $915 list going for $599 at B&H. I would take a serious look at the specs and compare.

[John Chardine]

I have to disagree with John on use of 10x or 12x for seabirding as a general rule. I am a pelagic trip leader for Brian Patteson and a veteran of 80+ pelagic trips. I use 10x bins and so does Patteson, but most pelagophiles go with 8x bins because the larger field of view is a real benefit when you are watching moving birds from a moving platform. For example, Steve Howell, who many would agree is the best pelagic birder on the planet, uses 8x and I promise you he spots and identifies more seabirds with those than anybody else, regardless of magnification.

A lot of it is personal preference. I prefer 10x for everything, but I also have very steady hands and have no issues locating birds with them in the woods. People who do mostly forest birding tend to prefer 7x or 8x because you get a wider field of view and, on average, a little bit more light. I think I've met maybe one person who regularly used more than 10x bins; I think those are more of a novelty and the handshake really is a problem at that length.

The main reason for the larger mag. at sea is for ID purposes at large distances. Very standard issue for professional ornithologists like myself. Lately colleagues are finding that the Canon IS bins are very good as well.

[Charles Glatzer]

The Nikon Monarch, Eagle optics, Pentax, etc are fine bins in there own right and offer a better price point.

When comparing the high-end bins it is important to try before you buy! The in hand comfort, eye relief, ease of focus, weight, etc are specific to the individual user. I sold my 8x42, opting for a lighter smaller pair of 8x32 that now always travel with me. FYI- I have the Leica Ultravids and prefer them in hand to the Swarovski equivalent.The new high-end Nikon's are also worth a look. I personally do not like the smaller field of view on the Canon IS bins. This is not a one size fits all. Again, I suggest you try before you buy...regardless of the price point.

I got mine from Jim Zipp at http://www.fatrobin.com/

Best,

Chas

[Phil Battley]

Another good site is www.optics4birding.com. Better View Desired used to be awesome when it was actively updated, but it seems to have been stagnant for a few years now. Nikon Monarchs are very well regarded in your price bracket - I bought the 10x42s for a grad student whose bins were no longer trustworthy, and they seem to perform fine. They have an 8x36 that might be worth a look if you want a lighter pair.

Pete Dunne of Cape May Bird Observatory (who was involved in the design of Swarovski bins) lists his picks in different price brackets here: http://featheredgeoptics.com/Pickoft...on_000.pdf.pdf

If he was updating the list now, I expect that the new Nikon EDG series would top the bill, financially as well as in quality...

Cheers, Phil

[Ed Cordes]

Well I have been using a pair of Vortex Vipers I got from fellow photographer Jim Zipp. The are just over $500 and, to me, are the perfect compromise of avoiding the uber expensive high end models, but still having high end optics and build quality. Jim sells all the modles mentioned above. Check out his webistee and email him with questions. The service is great! http://www.fatrobin.com/

BTW, I bought the 8 X 42 as a good point of useable hand held magnification, field of view and brightness with reasonable weight.

[Joe Milmoe]

Hi Sidharth,

I was in the same boat as you...in the market for mid grade specs.

Like Phil- following reccomendations from several friends- I went with the Nikon Monarch 10x42.

Got them for $250 off ebay, and I find them to be perfect.

[D. Robert Franz]

I too went with the Nikon Monarch 10x42... Great optics for the price or around $299 US.

[Bill McCrystyn]

As Phil said www.optics4birding.com is in fact one of the most credible reviewers out there. In glass under $1000 they found Pentax, Vortex and Bushnell at the various price points to be best. While Nikon Monarchs are the "most popular" the name carries them but the specifications and preformance don't. Look at the specs if you can't handle them first hand - you'll know what to get.

[Brian Ivener]

I am with Ed on this one. I have a pair of Vortex Fury 10x42 and the are perfect. Lifetime warranty. B&H had a $50 gift card and Vortex had a $50 rebate. Made them VERY affordable.

[Jim Buescher]

My eyes are set pretty close together and I tried a number of binoculars (some top-end ones included) that did not adjust to my interpupillary distance (distance between eyes). Another good reason to try before you buy.

[Jim Zipp]

The best advice I've seen posted here is to try them first if you can. Most binoculars will work for most people but there is usually one that stands out from the rest for any individual when they are compared side by side.

Going by your first post, (light, compact, middle of the road and under $500) I'd recommend trying the 8x32 Vortex Vipers which are smaller and lighter than typical 8x42's with only a slight compromise in light gathering and fits your budget. Actually even the 42mm Viper like Ed got is very light for a full size binocular with no compromise and still fits into your budget. Another is the Vortex 8x32 Fury that is about $300 plus currenty has a $50 rebate. The Nikon Monarchs that have been mentioned are also a very popular quality optic.

All of the binoculars mentioned are available in 10x as well if you prefer. No right or wrong there... just personal preference. 8x typically offers a brighter view (under low lighting conditions), wider field of view and a "steadier" view while the 10x in the same model has the leg up in more magnification. Always a compromise somewhere!:confused:

Like Chas above, I love the Leica 8x32 as the ultimate lightweight "smaller" binocular with no compromising in image quality.;) The downside is that they are also close to 4 times your target price range. I also own and use the Swarovski 8x32 EL's which also offer a stunning view but a little bulkier than the Leica's. Unfortunately the prices Shawn mentioned he paid for his Swarovski's is a thing of the past and have increased approx 50% over the last 10 years.:(

Now for the upside. Unlike camera lenses (outside of the ultra high end bins) today you can get a far better binocular for the same price than you could 10-15 years ago. Almost all are now waterproof, internal focusing roof prisms and most carry lifetime warranty's that even cover drops etc as long as you buy from a trusted authorized dealer.

If you have any specific questions feel free to ask here, PM or email me any time.:)

Jim

[Dave Brown]

Hey,

I'm a birder first and photographer second.I use Swift Audubon 8.5X 42's. I'm pretty sure they fall right into your price range. I've had them for 4 years- they've been in a car accident,been dropped and still perform flawlessly. I've also used the Swaro EL's and the new Leica Ultravids.If money is not an option,this is the way to go. Since I spent all my money on a 80mm HD Swaro Scope, Canon 30D and 300f4 for documenting rare birds a few years ago,there was no cash left for high priced bins.

Other brands mentioned such as the Pentax DCF are also excellent. My fiance uses the Nikon Monarch 8X 42's.They are really light and have excellent close focus and worth a look. You might want to also check out the Vortex bins. I've heard good things and they are also within your price range.

Also mentioned above,make sure whatever bins you get are nitrogen purgued,making them fog proof. This is critical if your birding in wet or humid conditions.There is nothing worse than missing a good look at a lofe bird because your bins are fogged.

Good luck and enjoy your new bins!!

Dave Brown

[Sidharth Kodikal]

Thanks for all the replies. Excellent information!

I will try as many as I can hands-on from the recommended ones before I buy.

Thanks!

[gary rouleau]

Leica are super, which goes along with the price.

cheers

[Stephen Feingold]

The Nov/Dec issue of WildBird magazine has a nice article on testing binoculars.
If you decide on a 10x binocular, also compare the Canon IS products. No matter
how superior the binoculars are, they are worthless if you cannot hold them super steady.

[Mack Hicks]

I have a set of Minox 10 by 43's that are excellent. The lens are made in the same factory as either Leica or Zeiss, senior moment. The Cornell Ornithology website has an excellent review, but it is a couple of years old. I like the added magnification versus the field of view, but I don't have binocular vision anyway.

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publica...Age_Binos.html is the link.