Would these be good for intro stargazing? There was a telescope on here a while back that was refereed to as a hobby killer for beginners and the suggestion was to go with binoculars instead. Would these be good for looking at stars?
Actually, it is like this…
The exit pupil, which partly determines the amount of light you see, is the objective diameter (42mm) divided by the magnification (10x). This means that the 10x42mm binocular has an exit pupil of 4.2mm. The 8x42mm model has an exit pupil of more than 5mm.
As a result, the 8x42mm produces brighter images. However, the brightness of image is also determined by maximum opening of your pupils. As we age, the maximum pupil opening gets smaller. 4mm to 5mm is typical for adults.
In addition, the limiting factor of the exit pupil and your own maximum pupil opening also depends on the lighting condition. If it is bright outside, everyone has a smaller pupil opening, so the exit pupil of the binocular does not even matter, at all.
The bottom line is that if you will use this at night or in low light situations, get the one with the maximum exit pupil. However, if you will mostly using it during the day with plenty of light, get the one that is easier to transport (lighter).
Hope this is of some help!
The 10x model has a 10 times magnification. You can see more stars than you can with bare eyes, for sure. However, you may not be able to see the ring of Saturn, or the red spot of Jupiter.
As another poster mentioned, even at 10x, hand holding it can be an issue. This is especially the case if you have to hand hold it over a long period of time.
Variable focal length (zoom to the rest of us) requires more complex optics and more individual lenses inside the binocular. As a result, it is actually more difficult to get good results with a zoom model than a fixed power model.
If you are hunting or observing wildlife, the zoom feature can be helpful to locate animals that are moving, then zoom in for more details.
In general, my own preference of country of origin is German/Japan, then Korea, then China.
However, I have an REI binocular and some other scopes made in China, and the optical quality is not bad for the money. If you need that extra contrast and sharpness for life-or-death situations, such as spotting a sniper from hundreds of yards away, the extra cost of a Japanese or German one is worth it.
Keep in mind that even with products made in China, the actual quality depends on quality control, quality tolerance and many other factors. You can get one really good binocular made in China, you can also get one that is not so great.
Given that you maximum pupil opening is more than 5mm, the 8x42 is brighter (42/8 > 42/10) than the 10x42. The magnification difference between an 8x and a 10x is not that significant for most people.
The 8x also has a wider field/angle of vision.
Edit: I just realized that the 8x42 model also has a longer eye relief of 19mm. This means it is a better model for people (like myself) who wear glasses. If you can take off your glasses when using a pair of binoculars, you don’t need the long eye relief. However, if you need your glasses when using a pair of binoculars, a long eye relief is a must!
Thank you to all that have shared their knowledge. It’s truly appreciated and makes buying from a place like woot a much better experience than buying from almost any other online store.
yo does someone care to answer my question about which ones are more appropriate for viewing sporting events from the stands? i’m talking about wanting to see 22 players at the line of scrimmage rather than one dude’s jock strap through his britches.
Ok, so here’s my question. After the rebate, these are going to be $100 plus s/h & tax, about $17 for me (and of course who knows how long it will take to actually get the rebate.)
If I’m only going to buy one pair of binoculars, would I be better off spending a little more and getting Nikon glass (all of my photography lenses are Nikkor) or do the differences not justify the added cost?
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-7541-Monarch-10x42-Binocular/dp/B005KG3U92?ie=UTF8&tag=libraryextension-20&camp=211189&creative=9325&linkCode=as2&creativeASIN=B005KG3U92
10x42 = $200 + tax
8x42 = $179 + tax
Technical Specs:
- Focusing System – Center Focus
- Magnification – 8x or 10x
- Objective Diameter (mm) – 42
- FOV @ 1000 yds – 299 to 330 ft
- Close Focus Distance (ft) – 9.8
- Exit Pupil (mm) – 4.2
- Eye Relief (mm) – 17.4 to 24.1
- Waterproof/Fogproof – Yes
- Prism coating – High Reflective Silver Alloy Phase corrected prisms
- High Reflective Silver Alloy Phase corrected prisms - helps eliminate the degradation of the image caused by different light phases reflecting in the binocular.
- Fully Multicoated - all lens surfaces are multicoated with anti-reflective coatings
- Polycarbonate Body - designed to be rugged and durable
- Multi-click Turn and Slide Eyecups with generous eye relief - great for eyeglass wearers
- Unmatched Warranty - 25 year No Fault repair or replace warranty
BTW, I do wear glasses. From this woot offer, I was leaning towards the 10x42 as they are the same weight and size as the 8x42 and I will be using them mostly during the day and if it’s at night, there is so much ambient light in NYC, you can barely call it dark.
For me choosing a product doesn’t always come down to the least expensive. I don’t want to have to replace these for a long time, if ever. They are replacing a cheap pair I’ve had for almost 30 years which are like 3.5x30 and cheap plastic.
Any advice or suggestions are appreciated. I didn’t do much searching, this Nikon was the 2nd item I pulled up in my search.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/binocular_basics.htm
You’re going to want a wider field of view, so, out of these choices, the 8x36—less to carry around, too!
While these binoculars are an improvement over viewing with the naked eye alone, there are other issues which make these binoculars a poor selection for stargazing. Making the image appear 10 times larger than it actually is will make the image seem to bounce as the binoculars respond to the slightest movement of your hands and arms as they are holding the binoculars. You just can not hold them steady enough to get a pleasing image and after a while you just give up in defeat.
If you want a good pair of binoculars for stargazing, you will also need a means of mounting the binoculars to insure a degree of stability. Some of these mounts become very large, very cumbersome and very expensive. If stargazing is your goal, you are better off looking at a fair to good telescope (a 6" SCT is a good candidate) with a solid equatorial mount. The price tag for this type of setup is about $1,000…but it will last a lifetime.
First, if you wear glasses, you don’t want the 10x42s, the eye relief will drive you nuts, the 8x42s will be much better and you really won’t miss the extra magnification. (Actually you might want to look through a pair of 7x50s some time for a comparison…) Realize that even the military doesn’t use 10x binocs–too hard to hold steady.
Second—quality versus price. This is a truly difficult question. I have been in astronomy and outdoor stuff all my life and today is the 1st time I’ve ever heard of Vanguard binocs. They may be really good, the “buy of the century”, but I’m always a little suspect. If they ar going to be something you’re going to depend on for the rest of your life, if you make your business with them—then I would want to actually LOOK through the models before I’d EVER pick one out. If they’re going into a box in the back of your closet, only to see daylight a couple of times a year, then these should be fine. You know the difference that glass can make—from experience I can say that it makes EVEN MORE difference in a binoc than in a camera lens. A buddy had a nice set of Nikons that were so vivid they were almost 3D. I know it doesn’t help much right now, but please sometime go look through some REAL top notch binocs before you jump into a decision. Swarowski, Nikon, Pentax, Steiner, Zeiss, Bushnell. You won’t be sorry, the difference is amazing—maybe not affordable, but amazing.
I just bought these for 50 dollars for sky gazing. they have amazing reviews and are on sale. http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-SkyMaster-Binoculars-Tripod-Adapter/dp/B00008Y0VN/ref=pd_sim_p_1
I’m going to take your suggestion and head over to B&H Photo and let my eyes decide. I was going to jump on these b/c of what seemed like a good buy, but the more I thought about it, it’s not cheap if they end up sitting around. I’ve bought 1 too many Woots that take up more space than they are useful.
I really appreciate your advice and the info you gave me!
Thanks for setting me straight, I was on the first cup of coffee this morning with a five year old in the background. I won’t edit my first post, as I deserve the flak.
These days, like most other things, off brand binoculars with all the high end features (bak4 prisms, HD coatings, etc) are being made in China. Even low end Nikon and Canon binoculars (among others) are made in China now. Chinese made optics do not match Swarovski, Zeiss, and some of the other high end ones, but they have most of the same optical features of those high end ones, and will give you a good image. And it doesn’t matter if you have a $200 pair or a $1,000 pair, drop them in the sand or don’t take care of them, they are done. Checking them out in a store is great advice.
As for the type, 10x42 can be pretty shaky, even in high light. I use them for work looking at shorebirds. Bright sun, with sun reflecting off the water and sand. And, I usually have a spotting scope with me as well if I need a steady image. the binoculars are for speed. I really like my 8x42’s, great for all around use.
For the 10x42 The field of view at 1000 yards is about 300ft. Use this figure to determine the diameter of the image at your estimated range. If you’re 150yds from the field, the FOV is going to be about 45ft. The 8x might be better as the FOV is 6ft wider at 150 yards. I don’t know why if the magnification on the 1042 is 25% more powerful that the FOV isn’t 25% smaller…some brainiac can explain I’m sure…
“8x42 are going to give you the same magnification as the 10x42, but they let in a little less light”
Actually, that’s backwards. Same objective size (same light gathering), lower magnification.