Do you have any special needs for the binoculars used for bird watching? Weight, brightness, magnification, chromatic aberration, flat field, chromatic aberration, distortion, field of view, sharpness, you who love nature, bird watching, and life are welcome to share your thoughts.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
What size binoculars do you use for bird watching? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SUN_NICK
- Start date
MiddleRiver
Well-known member
Hello and welcome!
Since this is your first post, I'm curious: Are you a bird watcher? What do you like in binos?
Since this is your first post, I'm curious: Are you a bird watcher? What do you like in binos?
A2GG
Beth
These days I prefer a lighter weight binocular. I use a Nikon Monarch HG 8x30
It’s sharp enough. It’s important to have very good to excellent resolution for bird watching.
I’d like it to be brighter at times so I’m shopping for a second binocular right now.
I’ll probably stay around the 8x32 size for compact size and light weight (compared to 42mm binos).
A flat field isn’t essential for me.
It’s sharp enough. It’s important to have very good to excellent resolution for bird watching.
I’d like it to be brighter at times so I’m shopping for a second binocular right now.
I’ll probably stay around the 8x32 size for compact size and light weight (compared to 42mm binos).
A flat field isn’t essential for me.
Will K
Too well-known member
I'm pretty new to bird watching.
I developed an appreciation of optics first, however, so I enjoy binos for the 'super-vision' they provide, rather than being driven by any particular interest in whatever I'm looking at, exactly (birds, planes, buildings, insects, etc.)
Consequently, I prefer more powerful magnification and immersive FOV, alongside very bright and clear images, but I don't like something that too heavy to carry around for everyday use. The NL Pure 12x42 is my current model.
I also love scoping!
I developed an appreciation of optics first, however, so I enjoy binos for the 'super-vision' they provide, rather than being driven by any particular interest in whatever I'm looking at, exactly (birds, planes, buildings, insects, etc.)
Consequently, I prefer more powerful magnification and immersive FOV, alongside very bright and clear images, but I don't like something that too heavy to carry around for everyday use. The NL Pure 12x42 is my current model.
I also love scoping!
Binocollector
Well-known member
I prefer wide angle models between 6-8x magnification. But I also often use my Canon 8x32WP which has only 7.5° but a very flat field.
Depends on the mood and situation.
Depends on the mood and situation.
Steve Thompson 136
Member
My own preference is for 10x42 - currently have Zeiss Victory FLs which are brilliant- literally!- for light transmission and not too heavy - I’ve used them daily for 11 years and never found them a burden. My wife tried the Swarovski NL Pure 10x32s at Cley Spy - they are stunningly good and light weight. I use the Zeiss in all lights - they are good in low light- and all environments - hills/ mountains, forest, Reed beds country walks- and they suit me very well. Sharpness and light gathering are the two things I value but also a well-built binocular. Recently looking at Bean Geese from about 400 yards the colour and detail on the bills was clearly visible even before I got the scope on them, so excellent quality optics paid off in identifying the birds.
This pretty well sums up my thoughts on the subject.
Will K
Too well-known member
Agreed!
The Zeiss Victory SF has the best focuser I’ve ever used. The NL is excellent, too, but has a very slight graininess, now and then.
tenex
reality-based
Any binocular one may have can be used for birdwatching. A relatively fast focuser helps (one thing you didn't mention).
8x or 10x magnifications are most common; some even like 7x but the choices are fewer. Flat field is entirely a matter of taste: some prefer it, some dislike it (depending on implementation), many don't care. Weight vs aperture etc are all matters of personal taste and/or specific usage scenarios. 60° apparent field is generally considered wide enough; some may want more. Some are bothered more by aberrations than others.
There is no perfect binocular, so all these parameters (and trade-offs between them) have been debated here for years, and everyone finds their own solution. You can search and read these older threads instead of asking to recapitulate them, or give us a better idea of what your individual needs and usage may be.
8x or 10x magnifications are most common; some even like 7x but the choices are fewer. Flat field is entirely a matter of taste: some prefer it, some dislike it (depending on implementation), many don't care. Weight vs aperture etc are all matters of personal taste and/or specific usage scenarios. 60° apparent field is generally considered wide enough; some may want more. Some are bothered more by aberrations than others.
There is no perfect binocular, so all these parameters (and trade-offs between them) have been debated here for years, and everyone finds their own solution. You can search and read these older threads instead of asking to recapitulate them, or give us a better idea of what your individual needs and usage may be.
Last edited:
After not really enjoying looking through lesser 10x binoculars over the years, I was in for a bit of a surprise when I tried out the Ultravid 12x50 a while back, which is now on my shortlist.
For birdwatching, I'm mostly using 8x42, 10x42, 8x32.
I prefer 10x42 over 8x32 because the twilight factor (the level of details that we can see) in better on the 10x42.
During winter, I prefer an 8x42 because the ambiant light is frequently low; the weight is not an issue because my neck is covered by the layers of clothing, and the majority of binoculars of this size have an acceptable weight for me.
However, during summer, most of the time I don't have too many clothes on me, and my neck feels more comfortable with an 8x32 but I can carry on an 8x42 or 10x42 if they are lightweight.
So the ideal pair for me is a pair of binoculars 8x42/10x42 (high twilight factor) that I can carry on even during summer (lightweight). Compactness is not important for me if the binoculars are well balanced. And I think that well balanced binoculars help me to have a steady image even with a 10 magnification.
I prefer 10x42 over 8x32 because the twilight factor (the level of details that we can see) in better on the 10x42.
During winter, I prefer an 8x42 because the ambiant light is frequently low; the weight is not an issue because my neck is covered by the layers of clothing, and the majority of binoculars of this size have an acceptable weight for me.
However, during summer, most of the time I don't have too many clothes on me, and my neck feels more comfortable with an 8x32 but I can carry on an 8x42 or 10x42 if they are lightweight.
So the ideal pair for me is a pair of binoculars 8x42/10x42 (high twilight factor) that I can carry on even during summer (lightweight). Compactness is not important for me if the binoculars are well balanced. And I think that well balanced binoculars help me to have a steady image even with a 10 magnification.
Last edited:
I like a flat field, big FOV and sharp edges, so I usually prefer Swarovski's for my birding binoculars. I use a Swarovski NL 8x32 now because it has sharper edges than the Zeiss SF 8x32. For my mostly daytime birding in the open I have been liking an 8x32 for it's lighter weight, smaller size and almost equal performance to an 8x42, especially if it is a bright alpha 8x32 like the NL. 10x for me is just harder to hold steady so what you gain in magnification you lose because of the shaking. If you can hold 10x steady, they are fine also.
Last edited:
I started using 10x42 bins because the magnification and light provided good, detailed viewing. But I've switched to smaller objectives for less weight and bulk. So I use a 10x32 and 8x30 mostly, or a 10x25 when I want bins that fit in a jacket pocket. I also have the Papilio 6.5x21, great for close-up viewing, but I don't use them as often as the others.
I think one of the most memorable experiences with my 10X42 EL occurred at dusk one evening.
It was in a large, mostly open area of river floodplain. It is a familiar area, and I knew where some of the ephemeral “ponds” were, even though I couldn’t see them. I looked through the EL, not sure what I would see, and there was this glorified puddle, and I could see well enough to tell that it was covered with ducks. Not only that, but they were definitely and very clearly identifiable as (presumably migrating) Wood Ducks.
I was absolutely stunned, and have never forgotten the experience.
It was in a large, mostly open area of river floodplain. It is a familiar area, and I knew where some of the ephemeral “ponds” were, even though I couldn’t see them. I looked through the EL, not sure what I would see, and there was this glorified puddle, and I could see well enough to tell that it was covered with ducks. Not only that, but they were definitely and very clearly identifiable as (presumably migrating) Wood Ducks.
I was absolutely stunned, and have never forgotten the experience.
It depends when and where I'm birding - much of my birding is open marshland so mainly 10x32, switching to 10x40 on dull winter afternoons, and occasionally 15x56. For open woodland or other close range generally 8x32. Dark woods or dawn/twilight birding 7x50. If I'm popping somewhere for non-birding purposes I'll generally carry 8x25's just n case...
Similar threads
