[Birding-Aus] Low light bins
Lloyd Nielsen
time. Started with a second hand pair of heavy 16x50s (Pentax) when I
left school. The most positive thing one could say about these was that
they were better than having no bins! After these were dropped on a
concrete floor by a birding mate, I went to 8x30s then later to wide
angle 8 x 40s which were a big improvement. At that stage, I could only
afford cheap bins but these usually only lasted a few years. Over the
years, I tried Bausch & Lomb, Pentax, Swift etc. The Swift were 7x42s
but they literally fell to pieces after about 5 years. I was always
reluctant to pay the big high prices of Leica, Zeis etc when friends
seemed to have to send them back for repairs after 8-10 years of birding
and often after not doing as much intensive birding as I was. One of the
best pairs I had was a pair of Bushnells (8x40s) with the lever focus
which gave much quicker focusing than the wheel on all binocs these days.
About 10 years ago, I purchased a pair of Minox 7x42s - $1500 here in
Australia, got them from B&H in the US for less than $1,000 including
freight, with tracking all the way, and arriving in less time than it
usually takes to get goods from Sydney to Nth Qld. Minox were apparently
Austrian made but I think now made in Germany – with a 30 year
guarantee. They feel great in your hands and have a very close focus. I
am 6 feet tall and can almost focus on my feet. Can’t say anything about
service – they are going so well even after heavy use from one end of
the continent to the other and in some very difficult situations over
that time. I should add that I do look after them well though.
I find these just great. Depth of field is excellent as well, helping to
make them easy bins to use. They have been compared with top of the line
Swavarozki, Leica etc by friends and others. The difference seems
negligible. Also, the loss of magnification between 7x compared to 10x
is hardly noticeable and not worth worrying about. One big advantage of
these is their light gathering capacity. They are superior in rainforest
– you can get a clear, bright view of a bird such as a Fernwren in the
very low light on the rainforest floor when you can barely make out the
bird with the naked eye. (My understanding is that to calculate light
value, you divide the exit lens (42) by magnification (7) which equals 6
and square it giving a final figure of 36. 10x40s gives a light value of
16.)
Something which is rarely mentioned when talking bins for birding is
that the higher the magnification the more difficult it gets to locate
the bird. As an example, I needed to check bill colour of Fuscous
Honeyeaters at the tops of tall eucalypts. I bought a pair of 12x50s
(Minox) thinking they might be the answer. However, they were very
disappointing partly because the depth of field is so narrow in that
model which makes them quite difficult to use – but also because the
narrow field of view made it difficult to locate the bird. Also the
shake from the high magnification made it even more difficult. All in
all, they were horrible, especially for general birding and went into
the vehicle as a spare pair. Despite this, and even though the field of
view was even smaller, I later bought a pair of image stabilized Canon
15x50s. Being image stabilized, these are brilliant for the purpose of
determining the bill colour at those heights but still often difficult
to locate the bird. They certainly are not for general birding though –
back to my 7x 42s for that.
If I ever have to replace the 7 x 42s, it will be with a similar pair of
Minox. I have friends with Minox 10x42s though and they are well
satisfied with them.
I have never used a harness though have tried them (wide straps). In our
heat up here, they were just uncomfortable. I prefer to sling the binocs
over my left shoulder and grab them with my right hand from there –
which works much better for me than having them around your neck and
banging on your chest as you walk.
Lloyd Nielsen,
Mt Molloy, Nth Qld
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: birding-a...@vicnet.net.au
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
Peter Shute
I also find interesting the comments you and several others have made about depth of field. I've read many arguments about this in other forums, with some saying they can't see how manufacturers can really vary it.
Some claim that people are mistaking field curvature (if that's the right term) for depth of field. I.e. The focus distance is closer to the observer at the edge than in the centre of the view. If that's the case then the most expensive pairs with a flat field would have the worst apparent depth of field.
I haven't owned or tried enough pairs to know if this is correct. All mine have been very curved.
Peter Shute
--------------------------
Sent using BlackBerry
Lloyd Nielsen
Yes, I just put the strap over my should and let them hang down from
there. They sit comfortably from there if I am not moving fast. I can
hold them with my left elbow against the body if needed. If I have to
move fast or walk some distance, I put the strap from the shoulder over
my head as well with the strap across my chest, when they sit high under
my left arm which is quite comfortable. I have never been a fan over
putting the strap over my neck - the weight on the neck gets rather
unbearable after a few hours - also you have to hold them with one hand
if you are walking fast.
Regarding depth of field, this was really brought home to me when I
bought the 12x50s. There is just a slither in focus and you only had to
move the focusing wheel a millimetre or so for it to go out of focus.
Comparing it in a photographic sense, it was like using f2 with the
12x50s as against f16 with the 7x42s. I would be sure that it is not
mistaking field curvature for depth of field.
Lloyd Nielsen
> Austrian made but I think now made in Germany – with a 30 year
> guarantee. They feel great in your hands and have a very close focus. I
> am 6 feet tall and can almost focus on my feet. Can’t say anything about
> service – they are going so well even after heavy use from one end of
> the continent to the other and in some very difficult situations over
> that time. I should add that I do look after them well though.
>
> I find these just great. Depth of field is excellent as well, helping to
> make them easy bins to use. They have been compared with top of the line
> Swavarozki, Leica etc by friends and others. The difference seems
> negligible. Also, the loss of magnification between 7x compared to 10x
> is hardly noticeable and not worth worrying about. One big advantage of
> these is their light gathering capacity. They are superior in rainforest
> – you can get a clear, bright view of a bird such as a Fernwren in the
> very low light on the rainforest floor when you can barely make out the
> bird with the naked eye. (My understanding is that to calculate light
> value, you divide the exit lens (42) by magnification (7) which equals 6
> and square it giving a final figure of 36. 10x40s gives a light value of
> 16.)
>
> Something which is rarely mentioned when talking bins for birding is
> that the higher the magnification the more difficult it gets to locate
> the bird. As an example, I needed to check bill colour of Fuscous
> Honeyeaters at the tops of tall eucalypts. I bought a pair of 12x50s
> (Minox) thinking they might be the answer. However, they were very
> disappointing partly because the depth of field is so narrow in that
> model which makes them quite difficult to use – but also because the
> narrow field of view made it difficult to locate the bird. Also the
> shake from the high magnification made it even more difficult. All in
> all, they were horrible, especially for general birding and went into
> the vehicle as a spare pair. Despite this, and even though the field of
> view was even smaller, I later bought a pair of image stabilized Canon
> 15x50s. Being image stabilized, these are brilliant for the purpose of
> determining the bill colour at those heights but still often difficult
> to locate the bird. They certainly are not for general birding though –
> back to my 7x 42s for that.
>
> If I ever have to replace the 7 x 42s, it will be with a similar pair of
> Minox. I have friends with Minox 10x42s though and they are well
> satisfied with them.
>
> I have never used a harness though have tried them (wide straps). In our
> heat up here, they were just uncomfortable. I prefer to sling the binocs
> over my left shoulder and grab them with my right hand from there –
Peter Shute
You've reminded me that another feature claimed to be misinterpreted by birders as shallow depth of field is "fast" focus wheels.
I found this myself when I changed to a pair that requires far less turning to focus. I actually misinterpreted it as being less sharp than the previous pair, because I wasn't used to having to be so careful when focusing.