A head rest should not be needed on any 8X binocular. You should be able to handhold a binocular in this size.
Jerry
BINGO!
A head rest should not be needed on any 8X binocular. You should be able to handhold a binocular in this size.
Jerry
A head rest should not be needed on any 8X binocular. You should be able to handhold a binocular in this size.
Jerry
Very true. Most people can probably hand hold at 8x but I notice I am shaking a bit and as you get older you shake more and Canon does make an 8x25 IS for that very reason. I think the need for a head rest varies from person to person and only you can be the judge if you need one.The issue of whether one ‘needs’ assistance in holding an 8x binocular is a slippery one
Firstly, not all 8x binoculars are equal: at the extremes, an 8x20 verses an 8x56
Since this forum has a wide variety of readers, there will be individuals with various physical restrictions, either congenital or as the result of various insults (to use that great medical term)
e.g. see Stan’s comments in post #7
While I have no difficulty with the detail that I obtain holding an 8x42 binocular without any assistance, if I do make the use of an aid or rest the image does pleasingly reveal more detail
And an aid such as the FRP may either allow someone to see the same level of detail more easily, or for a longer period than otherwise, as Loddar indicates
John
The issue of whether one ‘needs’ assistance in holding an 8x binocular is a slippery one
Firstly, not all 8x binoculars are equal: at the extremes, an 8x20 verses an 8x56
Since this forum has a wide variety of readers, there will be individuals with various physical restrictions, either congenital or as the result of various insults (to use that great medical term)
e.g. see Stan’s comments in post #7
While I have no difficulty with the detail that I obtain holding an 8x42 binocular without any assistance, if I do make the use of an aid or rest the image does pleasingly reveal more detail
And an aid such as the FRP may either allow someone to see the same level of detail more easily, or for a longer period than otherwise, as Loddar indicates
John
John:
You are reaching out too far. A headrest is not needed in 8X, don't try to make it a want.
Jerry
Benefits or otherwise of the head rest aside and with no intention of being obtuse, if you do feel your viewing enjoyment would benefit from greater stability but deployment of a tripod is impracticable, get yourself an extended hiking pole or cut a hazel stick that is equal to your height and use this to steady your bins. I assure you it works and to such an extent you will not go back to unsupported use of binoculars.
A head rest should not be needed on any 8X binocular. You should be able to handhold a binocular in this size.
Jerry
Leaving IS binoculars aside for a moment, ANY support will help you stabilize your binoculars. Extended hiking poles work very well, as do hazel sticks and the like. A lightweight monopod also works very well indeed. I really like using an extended hiking pole myself for that purpose, especially in difficult terrain where I use a hiking pole anyway.
I'm sure ALL these solutions give you more stability than the headrest. They are not quite as flexible as the headrest though. And they invariably weigh more.
As an aside: Those who claim you don't "need" any support for 8x binoculars may want to try how great the difference in resolution between handheld vs. supported really is. Efficiency of a handheld 8x binocular is usually quoted as something like 60-65%, cf. e.g. Vubratovich 1989, Yoder/Vubratovich 2011 and Brunnckow et. al. 1944. That's NOT a lot and another argument for IS binoculars. Unfortunately those currently on the market aren't really ideal for a variety of reasons.
Hermann
Peter. Thanks, for your opinion and feedback.Thank you, John, your posts are always full of useful info.
Regarding the FRP, from the comments that I have seen so far, the head rest seems to be useful mainly for those people who suffer from significant hand tremor, but for most people it is of rather limited use, at least for NL 8x and 10x.
Thank you, John, your posts are always full of useful info.
Regarding the FRP, from the comments that I have seen so far, the head rest seems to be useful mainly for those people who suffer from significant hand tremor, but for most people it is of rather limited use, at least for NL 8x and 10x.
Peter,
You suggest that the FPR is mainly for people who suffer from significant hand tremor but you don't say on which scale "significant" is based.
The human arm and hand combination is a very poor steadying frame for binoculars and that applies to many, if not most people, not just those who have visible shake. My own is very minor visually, but is sufficient to make the use of non-stabilised binoculars, even down to 7x. of little value to me.
My work as a topographical surveyor meant that for much of my working life I used surveying and photogrammetry optics to obtain precise measurements. In the case of the former the instrument was mounted on a heavy, and I do mean heavy, usually wooden tripod and in the latter the instrument was set up on a ridgid bench. Without the stability that this provided, the accuracy of the resulting measurements would have been in doubt.
When I bought my first binoculars it was quite obvious that the image was not as stable at the one through my working optics. This was simply the fact that the human body could never provide the motion free support the my instrument support did. This is well demonstrated when you try to hold binoculars steady in a high wind or when your arm muscles ache after a long viewing session.
Image stabilised binoculars now provide me with an stable image close to the one I saw when working and at the other end of the scale my age related tremor has increased the shake to the point where non-stabilized binoculars are now unusable. In between those two ends of my scale there are many people with varying amounts of shake from whatever cause.
This brings me back to the NL FRP both on this thread and the Swarovski NL 8x42 First Impressions thread.
Comments are made on both threads about the FRP from it makes no difference to the view, to it does provide improved image stabilisation, so why the difference. Nobody seems to have made reference to the differing comments but there must be a reason for this anomaly.
I suggested in earlier post #7 that:
"It seems to me that asking someone else to describe the benefits of the Swarovski head brace would not be of much value unless you know the severity of that person's shake as well as your own".
I don't know how you measure it but I think it would help if you can find out if you have little or no shake. If you look through a stabilized binocular and there very little or no difference to the image stability when you press the stabilize button you have minimal shake. If that is the case you should see no difference between the NL with or without the FRP and therefore say that it doesn't work, but you could be wrong because you have no shake to carry out the test when the FRP is fitted. It would be helpful if someone who does not see any difference with the FRP fitted could carry out the above test. This would at least give some basis for some of the results. Piergiovanni, who made the no effect comment in #616 of Swarovski NL 8x42 First Impressions, would be an idea person to carry the test if he reads this.
At the other end of the argument, anyone who sees a difference with or without the FRP will at least achieve a correct answer but any comparison for another person could be compromised by varying degrees of shake between the two people. As is often said - try before you buy.
Stan