Most immersive view possible through your glasses? (1 Viewer)

[Akhil O]

Hi everyone!

I've successfully converted my wonderful wife into a birder, and now am looking for a second pair of binoculars. She really likes the Opticron Aurora 10x42 we have.

I'm looking for something that has a huge AFOV even through glasses, great glare resistance, and center sharpness and contrast. The one thing I'm ok to sacrifice is edge sharpness, I want to prioritize ease of use (eye placement, natural comfortable view).

My hands aren't the most stable, so I really liked the concept of NL pure headrest, but I'm wary of the glare I've read of.

I've never used 8x bins, only 10x, not sure if that changes things much? I'm open to try basically any format, and weight under 30oz is not an issue.

Also, I'd like to not spend too much. I was hoping $1500 used, stretching a bit for lifetimers. I can't see anything except an NL pure 10x42 in local stores.

Any suggestions please? Thanks!

 

[Maljunulo]

You say "weight .... is not an issue". It will be someday.

After years of using 10X and claiming that "I never wished for a smaller image" I have switched.

Wider field, less focus-fiddling, steadier image, and so in.

Rather than set your requirements, I would see what is available in my price range and pick one. There may be some compromises involved.

Good luck, and let us know how it is going.

 

[Akhil O]

Thank you! I do see your point, although I'm just over 30 and have a few good years to use it!

Which of these will have the widest AFOV?
8x32 / 8x42 / 10x32 / 10x42

 

[grackle314]

If you are adding a single pair to be a second to the Opticron Aurora 10x42, consider the second also be a 10x so simultaneous observers can converse readily about same level of detail. Or consider the second be something like the Swarovski Curio 7x21 which might get carried a lot and shared when the 10x stays home, or taking the pair together and swapping as desired when both of you are observing.

As for wide apparent field-of-view, AFOV, while wearing glasses, there is some variation in AFOV for a given binocular depending on the glasses and face structure. A lot of new binoculars are designed to work with glasses pretty well, still trying the pair by the intended user is best step for testing AFOV.

Sacrificing edge sharpness is a common binocular trait since the eye tends to center the view on the desired object. Edge sharpness costs money but also has an aesthetic appeal.

Ease of eye placement includes having an exit pupil larger than the eye pupil. For a 10x used during the day, 10x42 would be quicker placement than 10x32, especially for people without years of binocular usage. If using in very low light levels, a 5 mm exit pupil could be beneficial if your eyes dilate that much (mine don't now in old age). The 10x42 also will have a weight advantage over a 10x32 by being heavier. A heavier binocular is more stable for seconds-long to tens-of-seconds long viewing in this range of weights.

While you may hear about issues some people find detracting from binocular performance, do be aware that negative anecdotal statements tend to be offered much more often than positive. For example, the NL Pure 10x42 may be the best-selling top quality binocular today. There are a lot of satisfied users with the NL series. I've used the NL Pure 10x42 with forehead rest (really helpful for me) a few years now and have no issue with glare for the daily birding I do. One might expect to hear more negative comments about items with large user population coupled with high price, but the large user population exists for a reason.

Test any binocular for yourself, our observations and opinions are individual. Binoculars are a bit like pizza, everyone has their favorite and their disliked ingredients. There are a lot of very good choices across a wide range of prices. Pick slowly, don't rush it. Increasing price tends to mean increasing qualities, but do know that doubling the price does not double the binocular quality in most people's minds.

 

[MiddleRiver]

Immersiveness:
As a glasses wearer I find that aside from FOV, the actual size of the eyepieces matters. If I'm looking through a peephole, even with a big FOV, it feels constrained. So, for instance, my Noctivids with 406'/1000yd - which have a huge 26mm dia 'window' at the aft end - feel much more immersive than my older FL's even tho the latter have a wider FOV at 420'/1000yd. And yes, I had the eyecup's adjusted on both so that I could see a hard field-stop edge.

Steadiness:
I actually find that weight steadies my view (no suprised that people with tremors are taught to use weighted eating utensils). Again, the NV's are heaaavy, which works great for reducing hand-shake. But I'm just not willing to use them as my everyday birding bins, simply because I hate the weight around my neck (yes I know about harnesses and own pouches etc. but they don't work for me for other reasons I won't elaborate here). So my current favorites are the little 8x30 SFL's which are a good compromise of IQ, weight, immersiveness, FOV, etc. I also have kept the 8x40SFL's and think they are superb.

8vs10:
As has been mentioned lots elsewhere, if you can use 10 and have bins with suitable FOV for your needs, that's great. If I'm hiking and winded, tired etc., the 10's were just too shaky. I've owned several and sold them all.

Specific to eyeglasses:
Not all frames fit the same. You may want to shop for frames, binos-in-hand! It does make a difference ;-)

 

[Conndomat]

Hello,

If you are thinking about an NL and want to use it with glasses, my first question would be whether you are farsighted or nearsighted?

Due to the convex lens shape, the NL might not be the best choice for those with far-sightedness.

Andreas

 

[wllmspd]

For NL like performance there are some new “banner cloud” 8x42, 10x, 12x binoculars that you’ll find on these forums and cloudynights. Initial scepticism seems to have moved to acceptance that they are very good optically of course they’re new so no-one is sure how they’ll age and servicing is unknown compared to other more recognised brands.
Any wider and you’ll need deeper pockets for a Nikon WX (and a tripod), or a binoscope and wide field eyepieces.

Peter

 

[Sky2goflying]

Nikon EDG 7X42 Binoculars with original bag, paper and box, mint | eBay

Nikon EDG 7X42 binoculars, 7560B, SN 000110. In mint condition.

www.ebay.com

Leica Ultravid 10x42 HD Binoculars with New Harness - Very Good Condition | eBay

Leica Ultravid 10 x 42 HD binoculars. Black color. Made in Germany. These are top rated binoculars for hunting, birding, wild-life viewing, etc. High Definition HD glass. Very good condition overall.

www.ebay.com

Leica Ultravid 10x42 HD Binoculars with New Harness - Very Good Condition | eBay

Leica Ultravid 10 x 42 HD binoculars. Black color. Made in Germany. These are top rated binoculars for hunting, birding, wild-life viewing, etc. High Definition HD glass. Very good condition overall.

www.ebay.com

Leica Ultravid HD 7x42 Binoculars with Case and Harness - Excellent Condition | eBay

Leica Ultravid 7 x 42 HD binoculars. Black color. Made in Germany. These are top rated binoculars for birding, hunting, wild-life viewing, etc. High Definition HD glass. Excellent condition overall.

www.ebay.com

Swarovski Binoculars 7x42b (Green) | eBay

Swarovski Binoculars 7x42b (Green) - Binoculars are in excellent condition. No scratches on lenses. Exterior is in great condition. Light wear on rubber eye pieces.

www.ebay.com

For inmersive view I would choose a 7x42
All of these are amazing.
Take your pick

 

[Akhil O]

Thanks for the responses! Since Ive never tried something with a larger exit pupil, I'm getting very tempted to. I feel like I have to fiddle too much to get to exact position.

I'm nearsighted, Andreas! Good tip, I never knew that could be an issue.

After all the reading I'm guessing it has to be 8x42/7x42 or 10x50/56. Tempting to see a 10x56 in the sale section...

 

[agus_m]

Nikon EDG 7X42 Binoculars with original bag, paper and box, mint | eBay

Nikon EDG 7X42 binoculars, 7560B, SN 000110. In mint condition.

www.ebay.com

Leica Ultravid 10x42 HD Binoculars with New Harness - Very Good Condition | eBay

Leica Ultravid 10 x 42 HD binoculars. Black color. Made in Germany. These are top rated binoculars for hunting, birding, wild-life viewing, etc. High Definition HD glass. Very good condition overall.

www.ebay.com

Leica Ultravid 10x42 HD Binoculars with New Harness - Very Good Condition | eBay

Leica Ultravid 10 x 42 HD binoculars. Black color. Made in Germany. These are top rated binoculars for hunting, birding, wild-life viewing, etc. High Definition HD glass. Very good condition overall.

www.ebay.com

Leica Ultravid HD 7x42 Binoculars with Case and Harness - Excellent Condition | eBay

Leica Ultravid 7 x 42 HD binoculars. Black color. Made in Germany. These are top rated binoculars for birding, hunting, wild-life viewing, etc. High Definition HD glass. Excellent condition overall.

www.ebay.com

Swarovski Binoculars 7x42b (Green) | eBay

Swarovski Binoculars 7x42b (Green) - Binoculars are in excellent condition. No scratches on lenses. Exterior is in great condition. Light wear on rubber eye pieces.

www.ebay.com

For inmersive view I would choose a 7x42
All of these are amazing.
Take your pick

The user meant huge AFOV, the apparent FOV, not the true FOV. Furthermore, the Leicas usually have a constrained FOV, and thus (I think) a narrow AFOV.

 

[Binocollector]

For NL like performance there are some new “banner cloud” 8x42, 10x, 12x binoculars that you’ll find on these forums and cloudynights. Initial scepticism seems to have moved to acceptance that they are very good optically

The debate never revolved around the optical performance but around the question whether one should buy binos from China at all, whether they are reverse-engineered and possibly breaking patents (so far I saw no one clarifying that), that they are still a copycat product even if they don't break patents, that they aren't even all that cheap especially when considering that the manufacturer has no real presence in Europa or the US. And in case something should be faulty, you'd be stuck with the complicated process of sending them halfway around the world. Those were the issues.
I'll stick with my Fuji HC and Meopta Meopro Air which both were cheaper than the banner cloud.
So, no, the skepticism hasn't vanished at all.
Also - the claim that they offer "NL like performance" has been utterly debunked. The problem with that claim in the first place is that bino performance is pretty good even with a cheapo Opticron porro. But if you want the best, you still have to pay for it. And the last few percent of performance cost the most money. That's a rule that will never be broken.
I'm also pretty certain that prices won't remain the way they are should China ever manage to completely destroy any competition. It's even possible companies sell new products at a loss (if they can make up for it elsewhere) to gain market shares, then up the prices once competition has been eliminated. I'm glad and thankful for anyone still buying European binos.
I'll hate to see the day when we won't have a choice anymore, all because people were looking for the cheapest product with complete disregard for any other concerns that always are involved in today's market with basically anything you buy.

 

[agus_m]

The debate never revolved around the optical performance but around the question whether one should buy binos from China at all, whether they are reverse-engineered and possibly breaking patents (so far I saw no one clarifying that), that they are still a copycat product even if they don't break patents

What? the debate was mainly if someone has to pay so much for small performance gains, the elitism thing, fanboys from both sides bashing each other. No one trying to see each other's perspective.
Why isn't a debate about China with every new MIC bino? Good thing, after all this is not a political forum.
Also, if you need to use whole set up with a booster, tripods, to know which bino is the sharpest, I wouldn't say the "NL performance" has been "utterly debunked". Still, everyone is so focused on the whole NL vs BC controversy, that they are ignoring the elephant in the room: the BC vs all subalphas.
So far I see no evidence that they are a copied design. Binoculars are 100+ years old technology, this is not cutting edge tech. Sky Rover and other companies have been in the eyepiece business for a while, I wouldn't discard they have expertise in optics.
Buy I think you are right in one thing, I wouldn't buy these yet. We have yet to see how reliable the company is, and the quality of the product.

 

[OrangeO]

Also, if you need to use whole set up with a booster, tripods, to know which bino is the sharpest, I wouldn't say the "NL performance" has been "utterly debunked".

I only use my binoculars handheld but to test how sharp a binocular is you need to set them down. The only kind of sharpness you can test when hold a binocular is how steady you can hold them and in such a situation lower magnification binoculars will be sharper.

Binoculars are 100+ years old technology, this is not cutting edge tech.

Optics are some of the most cutting edge tech on earth. They are used in photolithography machines to make microprocessors. For binoculars and camera lenses all optical designs are copied and stolen. The challenge is the manufacturing. You can have two designs that look identical but function differently because of the coatings, type of glass, quality, etc.. You can also have different looking designs that perform the same. The question "Is it a copied design?" is unanswerable.

 

[wllmspd]

I once had an optical design lecture and the lecturer used the word “inspiration”, you look at lots of different ideas and designs out there and then see how you can use bits of them and adjust to the requirements and tolerances that you have for your specific application. Not copying as you’ll have a different set of constraints and thus need to find your own solution. With simple specs like field of view it is impossible to judge the optical similarity of products. I’d like some comparisons of the banner cloud to the existing mid range products like the Nikon E2, same price category.

Peter

 

[OrangeO]

My hands aren't the most stable, so I really liked the concept of NL pure headrest, but I'm wary of the glare I've read of.

I've never used 8x bins, only 10x, not sure if that changes things much? I'm open to try basically any format, and weight under 30oz is not an issue.

Try the NL in person. The glare has a lot to do with how well you can your eyes in the best placement.

After using 10x most of the time I always feel like I need just a little more whenever I use 8x. Maybe if I use 8x enough I will get used to it. 10x is certainly my limit for steadiness and I don't feel like I need more reach in regular use so for now it feels like the best option for me.

 

[agus_m]

Optics are some of the most cutting edge tech on earth. They are used in photolithography machines to make microprocessors.

You are comparing machines with super tight tolerances, working at UV diffraction limit Vs hand held binoculars.

 

[agus_m]

I only use my binoculars handheld but to test how sharp a binocular is you need to set them down

Yeah, it is nice to have a high precision intrsument. The point is that people will buy the BC because it is cheap and they will use it handheld, only a handful of people will do booster tests.

 

[wllmspd]

Photolithography is now using tin laser light at 23,5nm xray, wanting high numerical aperture and diffraction no limited performance is off the scale impressive.
I prefer an 8x30 in the day, more power means a spotter or the 30x70 ultra wides, both tripod stabilised.

Peter

 

[OrangeO]

You are comparing machines with super tight tolerances, working at UV diffraction limit Vs hand held binoculars.

I am, they both use optical glass technology. You said binoculars are not cutting edge tech, I disagreed.

Yeah, it is nice to have a high precision intrsument. The point is that people will buy the BC because it is cheap and they will use it handheld, only a handful of people will do booster tests.

$500 is not cheap. That is the most the vast majority of people would pay for binoculars. Just tell the average person you payed more than $250 for a pair of binoculars and their eyes will pop out their sockets.

They all come with a tripod adapter and the manufacturer also markets them for stargazing. It's reasonable to assume some people will put them on a tripod.

 

[Maljunulo]

I can’t decide if seeing some of the thought processes here is fascinating or scary.