Binoculars, Camera, or both (1 Viewer)

[Chasville]

A few years back I bought my wife a Nikon 10x42 Monarch binoculars.
She loves them.

Before that I had switched from film to digital and set myself up with a Nikon D300 + 50-500 "Bigma".

The bigma has good reach, 500mm, but is a bit dark, (F6.3 at max) and does not have image stabilization. So, hand held pictures tend to have some shake. Caring it around mounted on the tripod is awkward. Will probably get a monopod, but that is still somewhat awkward.

I've been thinking about getting a Canon 15x50 IS binoculars for myself.
I am also thinking about getting a Canon 7D + 100-400 IS lens.

I love taking pictures, but there are times my wife sees stuff with her Monarch's and I don't with my camera, so I just sort of point and shoot, and then find the thing in the image on the computer. Did that with a cuckoo.

So, here's the question(s).
Should I get my own set of Binaculars?

And then there's the next question.
What power is roughly equivalent to an effective 750mm Lens (500*1.5)
And, if I get the 300-800mm "Gigma", what would be the effective power in binoculars to match that?

Or, should I just stay with just using the camera?

Camera people will say "camera"
Bino... people will probably say "binoc's"
Either? Both? Why Both?

 

[Fozzybear]

I found that it was harder to identify birds using my camera compared to binoculars and that sometimes I struggled to focus on the bird to make it out before it disappeared where with binoculars I could snap straight onto it. When on holiday with my brother where he has a camera and I have binoculars I often spot birds that he doesn't (though he hears birds before me often as my hearing is atrocious!).

Carrying camera and binoculars can be a bit of a drag but I found I ended up taking binoculars in preference to a camera just because the experience was much better with them, being able to find and watch birds rather than getting annoyed at not finding stuff. Depends where you go though, if you're in woods then bins are much better, but relaxing in a hide watching waders the difference is not going to be very high!

These days unless I'm going out somewhere special or when I really want to try to get photos I tend to just take bins and a very small camcorder (Panasonic SD90).

 

[GeeJayW]

Both, but I know what you mean. Can be awkward. I have a sling for the bins, which means they stay put and are not hanging off my neck all day. Usually take a monopod, but don't always use it. I'm currently using a Sigma 300 f2.8 on a 50D, with a 1.4x 2.0x TC in my pocket for more reach when needed.

Also like to have the scope. So that's on a tripod, with a Scopac carrier. I have lugged it all, but my better half usually has the scope. Made an iPhone digiscope adaptor yesterday, so will give that a go next time out, though BIF shots will be a tough call...

 

[dalat]

Hi,
I don't know how exactly to translate lense range into binocular power, but I think both big lenses and normal binoculars are in a similar range. Anyway, typical birding binoculars range from 7x to 10x power, so you should look which magnication of these suits you best. If you want to use the bino in combination with your camera, best choose one that is not too heavy. 8x32 is light and probably of most allround usability.

I am a birder, not a photographer. But from being out together with photographers, I learned that bird watching and bird photography are two worlds appart. You can't really have both at the same time.

Of course it's good for a photographer to have a bin to watch birds if he got his shots or if light is too bad for photos or whatever. And a birder can take a cam to take record shots or nice shots of birds that are IDed and keep staying around... But I think its better to decide on what to focus on, otherwise it may be frustrating...

 

[typo]

I've read in a few places that dividing the focal length by 50 gives an approximate magnification for a 35mm sensor. So that 750mm would be 15x. The apparent magnification with a smaller sensor would be higher I think.

David

P.S. Not sure about this but I think the sensor on a Canon 7D is 1.6x smaller than the 35mm standard, so that 750mm would end up as a 24x.

 

[Troubador]

Hi,
I don't know how exactly to translate lense range into binocular power, but I think both big lenses and normal binoculars are in a similar range. Anyway, typical birding binoculars range from 7x to 10x power, so you should look which magnication of these suits you best. If you want to use the bino in combination with your camera, best choose one that is not too heavy. 8x32 is light and probably of most allround usability.

I am a birder, not a photographer. But from being out together with photographers, I learned that bird watching and bird photography are two worlds appart. You can't really have both at the same time.

Of course it's good for a photographer to have a bin to watch birds if he got his shots or if light is too bad for photos or whatever. And a birder can take a cam to take record shots or nice shots of birds that are IDed and keep staying around... But I think its better to decide on what to focus on, otherwise it may be frustrating...

Hi Chasville

As a nature lover who regularly totes camera and two lenses, as well as bins, monoc and hand lens, and occasional tripod or monopod, I have to agree with Dalat. You can't do photo or bins justice by trying to do both. I decide in advance which is going to be most important on the day and concentrate on that.

Over the years I have come to favour the bins more and more because its challenging enough trying to get a good photo but when the frustration of never having properly got a look at whatever due to stalking or fiddling with camera is added into the mix for me it ended up too much. So these days I prefer to ensure I get a good look to store in my memory and in my notebook. If I can get some sort of photo as well its a bonus.

But trying to do both to a good standard I end up doing neither justice.

Lee

 

[Binastro]

The resolution of a compact camera with 6x optical and 4x digital zoom is about the same as a 10x binocular.
The compact goes in a jacket pocket.
It must have an optical viewfinder.
However, it is extremely difficult to photograph say a magpie as it flies in a deliberately erratic way.
I have however got fine photos of a magpie gliding down an angled roof using ground effect to achieve effortless lift.
I frequently get photos of birds I have not seen or some I do see.
There is one photo of a bird that looks exactly like a B2 Stealth bomber side view, a very streamlined aircraft with the bird looking the same.

I often photograph bees and other insects that I certainly have not seen.

I think with binoculars one would see more and get many more sightings than using a camera.
But I frequently take photos of birds and other flying objects and review them 3 seconds later.

I think you need both camera and a binocular, but of course you may miss something because you are using the wrong instrument.

I am not a very keen birdwatcher, but I do know quite a few.
Also we get bats which are mainly seen without optical help.
At night owls are mainly a binocular sight, but I have got some owl photos.
Some very sensitive high ISO cameras would do a lot better.

 

[Chasville]

That was taken with my Nikon D300 + 18-200mm zoom lens (accidentally left the bigma at home). Taken at Lake Mattamuskeet in NC. in a race/mill pond. Binoculars would not get that shot. Of course, it is a lucky shot as well. So, about missing stuff with my camera. It happens, but, oh well. I usually still see what I missed.

But, every now and then I do borrow the Monarch's I got my wife.
So, from that perspective, I should have my own.

The reason I prefer pictures is because I reach a level of concentration that shuts out the rest of the world, and a reset happens. My job, computers, is generally very analytical, and political, and I need to be able to shut it off.

I also appreciate that sometimes, I just want to look.
I've been reading a lot here and some elsewhere, and have ruled out a lot of bino's for a number of reasons. One that I am beginning to consider are zoom binoculars. I wish there was a 7x-14x zoom stablized binocular that had excellent FOV. Or maybe 7x-21x.

 

[typo]

There are the Sony digital binoculars.
http://www.sony.co.uk/hub/binoculars

I think one or two people here had a quick look and realised that electronic viewfinders can't match the view through a regular binocular, but I don't think I seen a report on it's function as a camera or HD camcorder.

David

 

[iveljay]

There was a sort of review of the Sony binoculars last night on the Gadget show. I don't think I learnt a lot other than stabilised Canon binoculars are much better at stabilising the image.
My experience with Sony Camcorders is that they take excellent video but I only use their still capability in an emergency, and use a stills camera for stills work. The stills sensor is about 6 megapixels.
The few on-line reviews they indicate that it handles like a bulky video camera, I may be doing it a disservice but my personal feeling is that I would wait for a Mk 2 version.

However reviewers award it 4 stars so it may be worth tracking down a demo at a lrge Sony store.

Otherwise I do what a lot of others are doing I either take one or two pairs of decent binoculars: say 7x & 12x; or a heavy camera set up and 8x20 folders.

 

[eitanaltman]

Chasville -- I think you are thinking about this all wrong. Binoculars and cameras are different tools for different jobs. If you want to WATCH birds, you needs binoculars. Period. Cameras take pictures but they aren't good tools for watching, observing, etc. Taking a photo of something that you see moving and then going home and looking at it on your computer to figure out the ID is NOT birdwatching.

If you want to supplement the camera with some binoculars, your goal shouldn't be to match the effective magnification of the camera lens. Remember you won't be looking through a tiny EVF, so if the goal is to watch/study the birds, even an 8x binocular will provide a more pleasing experience than a camera at 15x effective magnification. And utilizing binoculars can be an effective supplement to photography, allowing you to find the birds more easily and deciding what you want to photograph.

So if you are actually interesting in WATCHING the birds, and not just taking pictures of them, get a pair of binoculars. Since your priority is obviously the photography side, that means you should get a light, compact pair of binoculars so you don't bulk up too much. If you don't want to spend a lot, get a pair of Sightron 8x32 "Blue Sky" (under $200, only 17oz) or Vortex Viper 6x32 ($275 at Eagle Optics). At the mid-range price point ($500ish) go for a Vortex Viper HD 8x32 (21oz) or a second-hand "near alpha" pair like Meopta Meostar 8x32 or Swaro 8x30 WB. At around $1000 you can get a second-hand "alpha" like a Zeiss 8x32 FL or Leica Ultravid 8x32.

This isn't a competition between the two. They have different roles and are entirely complementary.

 

[Chasville]

Thank you all for the discussion. It is helpful. Providing me with some perspective clarification. You've given some things to think about.

A few posts back someone had mentioned a 50:1 conversion of mm to "x" magnification. That makes sense. Looking through the view finder of my D300 is approximately similar to the relative object sizes of my wife's 10x42's. The sensor pseudo "magnificant" isn't relevant in that context.

Yes it is true that photography and "watching" are two different things. It's a common feature of my life. In college the math prof's said I thought too much like an engineer, and the engineering profs said I thought too much like a mathematician. I'm never fully in any one camp. I'm an eclectic that enjoys aspects of many things, and always in more detail than the average person, but not as much as a true enthusiast.

I guess I need to think more about what I want, or would want, to use the binoculars for. After all, "form follows function".

 

[Chasville]

Just had an experience. Lunch with my wife. Saw something. Went and got her binoculars. It was just a mourning dove with ruffled feathers preening itself. Then I realized, given the above discussion, that yes, I do want binoculars. Yes, I do want image stablised binoculars. But which ones? 10x42 or 15x50? Again, thinking about the comments above, and about what I really want/need them for. I think I will still go with the 15x50's.

When I'm out, I take my camera, with the intent on taking pictures, but at times, it's handy to have the binoculars to just see or identify something. The camera + big lens doesn't always do an adequate job for that purpose. At home, many times I just want to see. Otherwise, I have already gotten my camera and set up specifically to take pictures.

So, the answer is both.
Two different purposes, essentially.
Two different functions.

 

[chirundu]

Hi Chasville,

Good to see that you are well on the way towards making your decision, but if I could also add my two cents as I have often had a similar dilemma.

I really enjoy bird photography, and I spend a lot of time enjoying it, especially when I am back in the bush. But there are also times when it is enjoyable to just watch rather than worrying about how close you can get to the bird without frightening it away and how to take the best photograph.

I think the general consensus from most of the answers above is correct, especially that of eitanaltman who basically states that they are very different tools and should be treated as such.

When I go out birding, I definitely have in mind what I am aiming to do:

Just Birding
If I just want to relax and enjoy watching birds, I take my dedicated birding binoculars, which usually means a full sized 8x42. This for me in most situations provides the best compromise between magnification & field of view. As well as size & weight verses light gathering ability. This can change if I am birding in wide open areas like at a lake or the coast and I'm observing larger more predictable birds over larger distances, I may take a 10x42.

I do however still take a camera with me... because you just never know! - But it is a small compact camera, with a powerful zoom - but the important bit is that it fits in my pocket and is there if needed, but otherwise does not impact on my enjoyment of using my bins to watch birds.


Photography
However if my main intention is photography, then I take my "proper" camera, with telephoto lenses and tripod and that is what I focus on.

But I also almost always also take binoculars with me as well, for a number of reasons:

You sometimes need them for identification, which can also help you in deciding if you need to spend the time stalking it to get as close as possible for the best shot, or there will also be many times when the bird in question is not suitable for photography either because it is too far away, partly hidden in a thick canopy or because you already have a hundred better photos of the particular species back at home and so it is nice just to be able to enjoy it with a pair of bins.

So over the years I have experimented with a number of different combinations:

1) Compacts
When I was working as a guide, I would take a good pair of compacts with me (something like an 8 or 10x28) that I could easily fold away into my pocket. This means that when not needed they were completely out of the way and would not get caught up in my gear. However here my focus was more on large mammals and not birds and so the limiting factors of small bins were not that critical (FOV and brightness)

2) Full Sized Bins
An option that I have found works really well is to use a really good harness and one that keeps the binoculars securely strapped to your chest and out of the way unless you need them - my personal favorite is the "LockDown Optics Deployment System" from S4Gear which is far superior than standard bin harnesses - I have written a review on them which is in the accessories section of my Binocular site if you are interested.

The advantage of this is when you do use your bins you have the best view without the major compromises of a compact.

The dis-advantage with this option you still have to carry the weight of a full sized bin and all your photo gear wherever you go.

3) Mid-Sized Bins - or should I say sub-Mid-Sized bins!
This for me is a recent development as most of my birding and bird photography is done in a hot or at least very warm climate, so I don't usually wear a big coat that has large pockets which could possibly carry your traditional 8 or 10x32s

However I recently had the chance to test and review the Swarovski CL 8x30 (the full review is on my site), which is a little smaller than most normal mids and which can fit into my lighter jacket pocket or indeed some really large shirt pockets and so this for me has now become an option.

Indeed I am back in the bush or "on safari" in less than a month and so will be taking a pair with me and will be writing about how I get on with them in exactly this context as I will also be doing a lot of bird photography.

With this option you get the benefit of a really light and quite small bin that easily outperforms any compact, yet is not totally outgunned by full sized bins. The down side is that bins like these are not cheap and I do think you need to get a really good quality bin for this option to work as it is the quality of the coatings and the glass that enables them to very nearly match mid range 42mm bins.

15x50?
I am not sure what type of birding you do and there is no doubt that you are getting plenty of firepower with a 15x50, but I would have a few reservations:

I would just be worried how wide their field of view is (or how narrow it is) as it may make finding and following some birds, especially small erratic ones at closer distances quite difficult. It may even be nearly as difficult as doing it with your camera.

And whilst you are opting for Image stabilization, which will help at 15x, these bins will be very heavy and probably not that much fun to hold up to your eyes for long periods of time.

But having said that there are many scenarios where they may be perfect - as you said at your house or in a hide overlooking a wide open area like a lake or something then these may be brilliant.

Anyway I hope that some of this is worth reading and possible even a little helpful - if you have any further questions please feel free to ask.

 

[brocknroller]

Just read about the Sony Bino Camera. It seems to be a good tool for surveillance and perhaps even birding photography, but alas electronic gizmos including IS bins come with short warranty periods compared to the lifetime warranties of a lot of binoculars, so when it fizzles, you got to reach deep to get it fixed or to buy a replacement. So keep that in mind when thinking about buying IS bins.

You buy a top tier brand optical bin such as Nikon, Swarovski, Leica or Zeiss, and it will last a lifetime, and if something does go haywire, you can get if repaired under warranty, a year, five years, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years from now. You only get one or two year warranties with electronics.

I think the first thing you need to do is find out more about how to photograph birds. There's a section on BF about that and here's an online resource:

http://www.naturephotographers.net/birdphotography.html

Perhaps the camera you have is good enough for your purposes or perhaps not if you want to get more serious about the hobby. So find that out first.

As to the binoculars. I wouldn't drop a load on one of the more expensive (and heavy) IS bins to start out with. IS bins help with shakes but they are not for everybody. Some people experience "swimming" (image seems to float about the field of view, which makes some people nauseous, Ive experienced this myself with one 10x30 IS sample that wasn't up to par with mine), and also "artifacts" - streaking, primarily.

I was watching swallows chase bugs over a field, and if you've ever watched swallows you know they can turn on a dime and change directions and zig zag as fast as a UFO. While trying to follow them with my IS bins, they suddenly streaked into lines like a camera set for long exposure.

They also feel very different in the hand than regular binoculars. So if you're sure that's what you want, I'd recommend starting with the 10x30 IS model. It has a better stabilization rating than the other high power models, it's much more reasonably priced, and it's lightweight. Easy to carry it along with a camera.

Binoculars will help you locate birds so you can take photos of them. They have larger fields of view than cameras and using two eyes increases contrast and gives you a stereo view that is more natural looking than a camera lens.

So a small bin with a camera is a good combo for the nature watcher/photographer.

The 10x30 IS only has 3mm exit pupils, which can you leave you wanting for more on a dim, overcast day and in the dog days of winter. But except for the 10x42 model, all the IS bins have around a 3mm exit pupil. Depending on your age, your pupils may open much wider.

But for most days, it will work fine as long as you aren't sensitive to the "swimming" and "artifacts" and you get a good sample (they are not all created equal).

Once you've tried an IS bin, you will know if you like them enough to spend more money on the top model (10x42 IS L) or a higher magnification model (12x, 15x or 18x). Remember as you go up in magnification, you get a narrower field of view, which makes it harder to find birds.

Brock