Help me buy a good pair of binoculars
August 19, 2016 9:51 AM Subscribe
Hubby wants a good pair of binoculars to watch the ships go by on the Hudson.
We have a good view of the Hudson River from our place. He says he wants me to buy him a "good pair of binoculars". I don't know what good means, but knowing him I don't think he wants anything too cheap. I'm guessing something between the $100-$200 range? Or is that too cheap?
He wears glasses for minor nearsightedness if that matters.
What specs should i look for? I don't know anything about binoculars.
We have a good view of the Hudson River from our place. He says he wants me to buy him a "good pair of binoculars". I don't know what good means, but knowing him I don't think he wants anything too cheap. I'm guessing something between the $100-$200 range? Or is that too cheap?
He wears glasses for minor nearsightedness if that matters.
What specs should i look for? I don't know anything about binoculars.
Binoculars are one of those things were you can really get lost if you get too deep into researching them. There are many different kinds, many different specs, and I found it's possible to just learn much more than you need to when what you ultimately want is just to be able to look more closely at things and to be able to do it clearly.
To save you the trouble, I'll recommend a pair of Nikon Monarchs. I have a pair that I use for general embiggining of birds, planes, stars and boats. They are light enough, small enough, and durable enough. They're comfortable to hold and focus. They are SUPER crystal clear and sharp and they reproduce colors extremely well. They cost about $200.00, which is a pretty good price for this kind of quality.
The only thing I don't like about them is they're not very forgiving if you don't have them perfectly centered on your pupils, but you get used to that. Also the built-in lens caps are kind of annoying but I've heard there are better ones available from a third party.
I wear glasses and use them without issue. Sometimes I leave the glasses on, sometimes I take them off.
My brother-in-law, not knowing I had a pair, recently did some research to find the best pair he could find, and he wound up with the same make and model.
posted by bondcliff at 10:18 AM on August 19, 2016 [5 favorites]
To save you the trouble, I'll recommend a pair of Nikon Monarchs. I have a pair that I use for general embiggining of birds, planes, stars and boats. They are light enough, small enough, and durable enough. They're comfortable to hold and focus. They are SUPER crystal clear and sharp and they reproduce colors extremely well. They cost about $200.00, which is a pretty good price for this kind of quality.
The only thing I don't like about them is they're not very forgiving if you don't have them perfectly centered on your pupils, but you get used to that. Also the built-in lens caps are kind of annoying but I've heard there are better ones available from a third party.
I wear glasses and use them without issue. Sometimes I leave the glasses on, sometimes I take them off.
My brother-in-law, not knowing I had a pair, recently did some research to find the best pair he could find, and he wound up with the same make and model.
posted by bondcliff at 10:18 AM on August 19, 2016 [5 favorites]
I wear glasses for nearsightedness too, but for comfort usually I don't wear my glasses when I use binoculars.
I recommend the Nikon Monarch line like bondcliff recommended, and also Celestron as they have cheaper models. But a Nikon would be a good lifetime pair. Whatever brand you go with, I'd recommend an 8x42 (8 power magnification, 42mm lens size). They look bulky but this will let in a lot of light and give you a good view, especially in lower light. They also make 10x42s, but they tend to make me dizzy after a while.
posted by Drosera at 10:31 AM on August 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
I recommend the Nikon Monarch line like bondcliff recommended, and also Celestron as they have cheaper models. But a Nikon would be a good lifetime pair. Whatever brand you go with, I'd recommend an 8x42 (8 power magnification, 42mm lens size). They look bulky but this will let in a lot of light and give you a good view, especially in lower light. They also make 10x42s, but they tend to make me dizzy after a while.
posted by Drosera at 10:31 AM on August 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
Seconding Eagle Optics, I recommend their 10x40 for a wide field of view and in good to poor lighting conditions. EA binoculars are light and come with a comfortable, cushy neck strap, which is more than I can say for similarly-priced Bushnell binoculars.
Eagle Optics has a lifetime warranty on their binoculars. If you happen to drop yours and they get misaligned, just ship them to Wisconsin. They fix them right up free of charge, and send them back.
posted by ball00000ns at 11:07 AM on August 19, 2016
Eagle Optics has a lifetime warranty on their binoculars. If you happen to drop yours and they get misaligned, just ship them to Wisconsin. They fix them right up free of charge, and send them back.
posted by ball00000ns at 11:07 AM on August 19, 2016
Nobody has explained what the two numbers you see for binoculars mean. You'll often see binoculars as say 8x30 or something like that. The first number is the actual magnification and the second number determines the width of the lens and thus the light-gathering ability.
Larger lens means a clearer image, better field of view and better ability to see in lower light conditions too. There are two drawbacks to the larger lens though - it increases the price quite a bit and also makes the binoculars heavier.
I have a great pair of Hawke binoculars that I mainly use for daylight things like bird-watching. I want it light too. It is 10x32. Others above have recommended 8x42 and 10x40 as well.
I don't think you can go wrong with any scope with magnificatiion 8 or 10. For a decent field of view you do probably want at least 32 but closer to 40 as recommended above. Your price range will determine the rest.
posted by vacapinta at 11:37 AM on August 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
Larger lens means a clearer image, better field of view and better ability to see in lower light conditions too. There are two drawbacks to the larger lens though - it increases the price quite a bit and also makes the binoculars heavier.
I have a great pair of Hawke binoculars that I mainly use for daylight things like bird-watching. I want it light too. It is 10x32. Others above have recommended 8x42 and 10x40 as well.
I don't think you can go wrong with any scope with magnificatiion 8 or 10. For a decent field of view you do probably want at least 32 but closer to 40 as recommended above. Your price range will determine the rest.
posted by vacapinta at 11:37 AM on August 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
The majority of birders prefer 8x to 10x. More magnification sounds like a good thing, but it also magnifies any movement of your hands, making it harder to hold them still on your target. It also reduces the size of the field of view, assuming all else is equal. Eagle Optics has an outstanding reputation.
posted by jkent at 12:49 PM on August 19, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by jkent at 12:49 PM on August 19, 2016 [2 favorites]
I wear glasses, but when I use binoculars, I take off my glasses and rely the ability to focus the binoculars. Some binoculars are advertised as being suitable for glasses wearers but in my (limited) experience, they leave (washable) marks on the glasses. Doing it my way means that if I hand my binoculars to someone else, they have to spend some time re-focusing.
I have a pair of Steiner Marine-Military 6x30. The clarity and depth of field is amazing but they are not good at night when there are bright lights, headlights and the like. If night use is of interest, look for a pair that is advertised for that use.
posted by SemiSalt at 12:51 PM on August 19, 2016
I have a pair of Steiner Marine-Military 6x30. The clarity and depth of field is amazing but they are not good at night when there are bright lights, headlights and the like. If night use is of interest, look for a pair that is advertised for that use.
posted by SemiSalt at 12:51 PM on August 19, 2016
Quality control is poor (you'll glean that from the Amazon reviews), though that's only noticable if using them for astronomy. Fit and finish betrays the cheapness, though it's not THAT crappy. But check out the well-regarded space.com recommending the $25 Celestron Celestron Cometron 7x50 as their 2nd best pick (1st is $150, third is $1,050).
Is it perfect for his needs? Is it perfect for ship-watching? Who cares, they're twenty five lousy bucks, and serious amateur astronomers rave over them!
I have them and really like them, as does a bird-watching friend.
posted by Quisp Lover at 1:15 PM on August 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
Is it perfect for his needs? Is it perfect for ship-watching? Who cares, they're twenty five lousy bucks, and serious amateur astronomers rave over them!
I have them and really like them, as does a bird-watching friend.
posted by Quisp Lover at 1:15 PM on August 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
If you have a view of the Hudson, does that mean you can get to B&H? The guy who helped us at the binocular counter was great. He first showed us this $98 pair of Nikon Aculons and they were really, really nice — just bulkier and heavier than what I wanted to travel with. The combination of lower magnification (7x) and larger objective lenses (50mm) meant they were bright, extremely clear, and very easy to use with glasses. If they were just going to sit on a table at home, I might have bought them on the spot.
We stupidly didn't buy the pair we liked most while we were there (Vixen Foresta DCF HR 8x32). They were good with glasses, and rather compact thanks to a smaller objective lens, but my wife didn't want to spend $200 without shopping around. The price jumped almost $100 about a week later and has stayed there since.
We eventually bought the same Nikon Monarch 3 8x42 model that was recommended above … and then we ended up getting the Vixen pair from Amazon when they temporarily dropped the price to $190. We tried them both and returned the Nikons, which I found to be less sharp than the Vixens. The eye cups on the Monarch 3 were also surprisingly difficult to use with glasses, as there's not a click stop where I'd want it*. So for $200, I'd rather have the Vixens than the Monarch 3, but they're hard to find for $200. But wait, there's more!
* Most binoculars have eye cups that you turn to increase or decrease how far they extend. They have click stops along the way. For whatever reason, the first click stop in the Monarch 3 is really far out, and the remaining three are pretty close together. I thought it was really awkward. I did not have that problem with any other pair.
We have now bought a better pair of Nikons (the step-up Monarch 5), and they are a significant improvement (they're sharper, brighter, and have better color rendering, based on the birds I can see from our front porch). They're running around $260 on Amazon right now, and if you can swing the extra they're totally worth it. The Monarch 5 is by far the best of all of the binoculars we've tried. They're the most compatible with glasses, too. Oddly, even though they have larger objective lenses than the Vixens (42mm vs 32mm) they aren't perceptibly heavier. We're outside the return window on the Vixens, or I'd have sent them back the day the Monarch 5 arrived.
So if you want to spend $100 and you don't need them to be particularly light and compact, you may be happy with the Nikon Aculon A211 7x50. If you want something that's light and reasonably compact, the Nikon Monarch 5 8x42 is hard to beat, but it's over $200. In between, you'll probably have to do some shopping around to figure out what works for you. I read good things about Celestron binoculars in the sub-$200 range, but bad things about their quality control. Personally I was wary of buying any without being able to try them first, but that's where B&H could help you.
posted by fedward at 7:41 PM on August 19, 2016
We stupidly didn't buy the pair we liked most while we were there (Vixen Foresta DCF HR 8x32). They were good with glasses, and rather compact thanks to a smaller objective lens, but my wife didn't want to spend $200 without shopping around. The price jumped almost $100 about a week later and has stayed there since.
We eventually bought the same Nikon Monarch 3 8x42 model that was recommended above … and then we ended up getting the Vixen pair from Amazon when they temporarily dropped the price to $190. We tried them both and returned the Nikons, which I found to be less sharp than the Vixens. The eye cups on the Monarch 3 were also surprisingly difficult to use with glasses, as there's not a click stop where I'd want it*. So for $200, I'd rather have the Vixens than the Monarch 3, but they're hard to find for $200. But wait, there's more!
* Most binoculars have eye cups that you turn to increase or decrease how far they extend. They have click stops along the way. For whatever reason, the first click stop in the Monarch 3 is really far out, and the remaining three are pretty close together. I thought it was really awkward. I did not have that problem with any other pair.
We have now bought a better pair of Nikons (the step-up Monarch 5), and they are a significant improvement (they're sharper, brighter, and have better color rendering, based on the birds I can see from our front porch). They're running around $260 on Amazon right now, and if you can swing the extra they're totally worth it. The Monarch 5 is by far the best of all of the binoculars we've tried. They're the most compatible with glasses, too. Oddly, even though they have larger objective lenses than the Vixens (42mm vs 32mm) they aren't perceptibly heavier. We're outside the return window on the Vixens, or I'd have sent them back the day the Monarch 5 arrived.
So if you want to spend $100 and you don't need them to be particularly light and compact, you may be happy with the Nikon Aculon A211 7x50. If you want something that's light and reasonably compact, the Nikon Monarch 5 8x42 is hard to beat, but it's over $200. In between, you'll probably have to do some shopping around to figure out what works for you. I read good things about Celestron binoculars in the sub-$200 range, but bad things about their quality control. Personally I was wary of buying any without being able to try them first, but that's where B&H could help you.
posted by fedward at 7:41 PM on August 19, 2016
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by rtha at 10:02 AM on August 19, 2016