What were your first pair of binoculars & for the bonus round what was your first field guide? (1 Viewer)

[lmans66]

Bushnell Audubon 8x42 and Peterson Guide

 

[ArchStanton]

MIJ Bushnell porro prism 7x35‘s.

 

[JJacq]

My first binocular was a Japanese 10x42 porro (sold under the "Perl" brand), almost certainly single-coated. They weren't bad for what they were, and gave good service for quite a while before I upgraded to a Zeiss 10x40 B/GA T*P* which I still have and use fairly regularly (including on a visit to NYC earlier this year). Funnily enough, I have gone back to using a Japanese 10x42 porro for my main birding binocular, but the Nikon SE (same model as the one you recently purchased) has performance and functionality I couldn't have conceived of all those years ago.

The bird guide (of a sort) that most sticks out in my mind dates back much earlier than my first binoculars - Christopher Hails and Frank Jarvis's Birds of Singapore. Much has changed there since, a lot of it for the better. But a bit of the same feeling of discovery and enthusiasm still gets me when I leaf through it and admire the still lovely illustrations.

Yes, just got my "vintage" Pereson Guide to Eastern Birds (NA), although 1980 is hardly "vintage" 😑 I think. But yea sense past discoveries & future ones. Now your making me even more excited about getting those SE''s! Already got a cleaning kit & strap for them, the come with lens caps & case, but it's not really a field case so I'm looking for one of those. With roofs I just leave case in the car but while these are water resistant I think, I know they're definitely not water proof. The Zeiss are beautiful & I would love to bird with those! I can say unfortunately that unlike Singapore a lot has turned to the worse here, just from 1980 to now in terms of sheer habit loss & loss in volume of Birds seen. There still are a lot of fine places to bird here, but even common species have gone down in numbers, noticeably. Glad to here Singapore is doing better. Thanks for participating Patudo, be well.

Jim

The first pair I remember buying was an 8x25 Minox single hinge, which I think was very nice overall. It served me well, then I passed it on to my partner to get an 8x32 Opticron Discovery.

I got my first field guide from a friend, it's the SEO (Birdlife International in Spain) guide of Spanish birds. I've bought it and lost/given it at least 4 times since then, still a great resource.


Wow, older than me! They look amazing.


I've always been really curious about those. I guess back when they were launched they must have looked quite futuristic in

Because of this thread, I bought the Nikon Venturer II 8x32 compact binoculars on eBay that look like new even though they must be 40 years old at least. Here is a link with a review about them by the famous Steven Ingraham and the Consumer Reports test where they were rated Best Buy out of 25 binoculars tested and even beat a $1000 Leica. I had a pair when I was much younger!

Nikon Venturer 8 x 23 binos

Hi Friends , I picked up a pair Nikon Venturer 8x 23 binos on ebay for $20. I did a little research before purchasing & found some reviews that said they were good. I was not expecting much cause of the small size & cheap price. My go to binos are all Nikons but larger , 8x50 & 10x50. Boy was I...

www.birdforum.net

Nikon Venturer II 8 X 23 6.3° Binoculars Made in Japan Vintage Leather Case | eBay

With a maximum magnification of 8x, these compact binoculars are perfect for general purpose use.

www.ebay.com

Nice catch Denco, pristine looking specimen! And just a good looking retro-futuristic design. Nice catch man, enjoy them Denco & be well!

Jim

 

[JJacq]

The first binoculars I used were my grandad's pair, which he'd had when he was in the Home Guard. Whether they were actual army-issue pairs handed out, of if he just bought them for himself cos they seemed useful, I don't know. I think if anything they'd have hindered any attempt at defending the country - those things didn't focus, terrible colour fringing, dust and greasy fingerprints on the inside of the lenses.
After repeatedly saying I could see better without them, my mum and grandad both agreeing that they were hopeless, we stopped bothering to get them out. But my grandmother complained bitterly that I should be grateful and not refuse to use them, was being a spoilt brat, and so on, and so on...til my grandad suggested SHE look through them. And then they were never mentioned again. But I never got an apology - somehow it was left as me being some sort of delinquent child for not liking the terrible binoculars no-one else could see through either, hah

The first bird book I used was also at my grandparents' house, a little red hardback with a goldfinch on the front - from as soon as I could read I'd get it out to study every week, kneeling on a scratchy rust-coloured cushion on a chair by the window, and I'm sure I probably just looked at the pictures before that, too.

Then when I was older, maybe 12 or 13, I decided I wanted my own better bird book, and bought the Kingfisher Field Guide to the Birds of Britain and Europe (this one).
It still sits on my table, and does still get flicked through, even though I got a couple of UK-only books as my main reference material when I decided to start birding thoroughly, and they're my go-to pick when wanting to ID something, I still quite like looking at the other old familiar book with birds I know I'll never see, too!

I can't lie, this is one of my favorites! Bins that were handed down from the maelstrom of the 2nd WW, Ok,...Ok, for the Home Guard "maelstrom" is pushing it but they were all brave enough knowing what they might face & they were men the age I am now & older. It certainly has a dash of dry understatement & humor along with a bit of family drama. Don't mean to minimize what you may have felt at the time Georgebird but you tell it very well. Really makes me wonder were those binnoculars came from, although it sounds like that they went from whence they came somewhere in the mists of time. Thanks for participating Georgebird & be well.

Jim

 

[JJacq]

MIJ Bushnell porro prism 7x35‘s.

As has been stated a few times here already, some of of those rebranded MIJ binnocs were quite good while the more dedicated Japanese brands like Nikon, Fuji, etc. put out some damm nice glass. Full disclaimer, I'm feeling bullish about a pair of Nikon SE 10x42 I just bought & just receiving soon. Thanks for participating Archstanton, be well.

Jim

 

[JJacq]

Bushnell Audubon 8x42 and Peterson Guide

Yes! Had a pair of Audubon branded Bushnell, also I believe was 8× but could have also been 7×. Know for fact that I later had a pair of Bushnell Natureview's which strongly belive were 8x42. Liked them both but don't believe that either were "fully-multicoated" vs multi-multicoated" but that distinction would've been lost on me at the time. Peterson alum as well. Thanks for participating Imans66, be well.

Jim

 

[Ruff-Leg]

Jason Empire 7x35 WA. Peterson's Eastern, 2nd Ed., followed by Chan Robbins' Birds of North America. The latter still represents an excellent concept with thumbnail spectrograms and migration timelines built into the range maps. Subsequent bins (Bushnell 10x42 roofs) and field guides (Audubon) just didn't improve my birding experience. Only in 1983 did that change with my Trinovid 7x42 and the new NatGeo, its inconsistent artwork notwithstanding.

 

[A2GG]

Leupold Yosemite 6x30 (porro) and a Sibley Guide for Eastern NA.
I still have the book which I keep in my car.

 

[moose1991]

In 1997 I bought these, Bushnell Birdlife 8x42 & Mitchell Beazley pocket guide.
I'm a late-comer compared to you lot.

 

[Maljunulo]

The more I use books, the less I think they are useful.

The living, individual bird seldom (for me) resembles the drawing, painting, or photo in the book.

Unless you are an ornithology student, or someone who has memorized many diagnostics, there is an excellent chance of looking at the wrong thing, or failing to look at the correct thing.

If it is a flyby, and you have to grab what you can, and record it in your memory. Then, when you look at the book later, it may or may not help, when color phases, subspecies, immatures, or individual variation all come into play.

On the other hand, it is irksome to look at/watch a bird and not know what it is.

There is a bit of a conflict there.

 

[JJacq]

The more I use books, the less I think they are useful.

The living, individual bird seldom (for me) resembles the drawing, painting, or photo in the book.

Unless you are an ornithology student, or someone who has memorized many diagnostics, there is an excellent chance of looking at the wrong thing, or failing to look at the correct thing.

If it is a flyby, and you have to grab what you can, and record it in your memory. Then, when you look at the book later, it may or may not help, when color phases, subspecies, immatures, or individual variation all come into play.

On the other hand, it is irksome to look at/watch a bird and not know what it is.

There is a bit of a conflict there.

I know exactly what you mean, it's almost diminishing returns after awhile. Familiarity is the best teacher but of course those are you see commonly. I think field guides work better with guides to local birding spots even if it's state wide it will still touch on your area. The best are those that mention possible species you might see in the localities they describe. Just being out there is the best teacher. But yea it's also damm frustrating at times. Be well Maljunulo.

Jim

 

[JJacq]

If I'm also being honest I also just like looking at the photos & the art.

Jim

 

[JJacq]

In 1997 I bought these, Bushnell Birdlife 8x42 & Mitchell Beazley pocket guide.
I'm a late-comer compared to you lot.

 

[CharleyBird]

In 1997 I bought these, Bushnell Birdlife 8x42 & Mitchell Beazley pocket guide.
I'm a late-comer compared to you lot.

The Beazley remains one of the best easily carried guides IMO, and was deservedly updated.
Some field guides are really too big and heavy e.g. the latest hardback Collins. However my first Collins and the small Observers Book (from the mid to late 1970's) literally fell apart due to use.

From 1969 to now, lower row actually carried:

 

[Boogieshrew]

In 1997 I bought these, Bushnell Birdlife 8x42 & Mitchell Beazley pocket guide.
I'm a late-comer compared to you lot.

I still have my Beazley just for nostalgia's sake. Love that book. It went on many adventures twitching all over Britain from the Scillies to the northern tip of Shetland

 

[Boogieshrew]

The Beazley remains one of the best easily carried guides IMO, and was deservedly updated.
Some field guides are really too big and heavy e.g. the latest hardback Collins. However my first Collins and the small Observers Book (from the mid to late 1970's) literally fell apart due to use.

From 1969 to now, lower row actually carried:

View attachment 1597924

You've just reminded me that my original copy of Collins ended up rebound in gaffer tape 😂
It is still in use by a friend.

 

[Woen]

My parents gave me a Cat Eye 8x40 Perma Focus when I was young (around 1990). Later in 1994 they gave me a Kamakura 8x40 (I think, the text has faded). A lot of people liked that second binocular, it was pretty bright and performed well in low-light conditions. My first fieldguide was the famous LaJo (Lars Jonsson 1994).

 

[Patudo]

The more I use books, the less I think they are useful.

I just couldn't resist chortling at this. But I have to admit most of my species ID is probably done via the internet these days.

That said, a good field guide is always worth having. If it's well structured it should guide you (excuse the pun) towards the family your bird is likely to be in, provide notes and illustrations showing field marks and other characteristics to watch out for, etc. That is the info that is most valuable, as you can't expect a bird you see in the field to be in the exact same pose and light (which influences how colours show) as in the guide.

 

[Maljunulo]

I just couldn't resist chortling at this. But I have to admit most of my species ID is probably done via the internet these days.

That said, a good field guide is always worth having. If it's well structured it should guide you (excuse the pun) towards the family your bird is likely to be in, provide notes and illustrations showing field marks and other characteristics to watch out for, etc. That is the info that is most valuable, as you can't expect a bird you see in the field to be in the exact same pose and light (which influences how colours show) as in the guide.

I do carry one in the car, and I agree with you on the best way to use one.

 

[JJacq]

My parents gave me a Cat Eye 8x40 Perma Focus when I was young (around 1990). Later in 1994 they gave me a Kamakura 8x40 (I think, the text has faded). A lot of people liked that second binocular, it was pretty bright and performed well in low-light conditions. My first fieldguide was the famous LaJo (Lars Jonsson 1994).