Recommendations for new Binoculars

My Bushnell 10x50 Perma Focus worked great for my Alaska Cruise. It had a 65 degree wide field of view, in which you could scan the ocean or land and quickly pick up whales, marine life and animals on shore and also you get a closeup view of the Glaciers. Having a 10X binocular vs a 7X, you will be able to see the animals, whales and the glaciers much better. I have never had a problem with the image shaking. I also have a Nikon Aculon 7X35 which is a good Binocular, but prefer the Busnell 10X50 as your view is 30% closer and image is 30% larger. This 10X power is very important for viewing in Alaska.

Here's the deal. Been using 10x50 since 1968. Have a large collection of binoculars including 6x30, 7x35, 10x50, 8x42, 10x42, & 10x70. I'm now 66 years old. Back when I was 25, I'm sure I had no issues supporting and holding a pair 10x50 binos for long viewing. As I have gotten older, I've discovered that the advantage of ten power over 7 or 8 power is negated by the shaking of the image. On a moving ship, that might come into play even more. I tried several of the image stabilized binoculars but found them fairly heavy. Also back when I tried them - the Canon had just come out, the battery life was sub par. My long camera lenses have IS and that comes in very handy. A good pair of 7 or 8x binos will give fantastic results, tripods not necessary. Many birders do use a mono-pod under their binos for the utmost in stability. That way, they CAN take advantage of the 12-18 power heavy units available. Do yourself a favoe, get a small light weight pair that is waterproof and rugged.

And BTW, the 10x50 Bushnell Perma Focus have a FOV of 7.4 degrees. Also they are "fixed" focus (always focused at infinity). You cannot change them to focus at say, a hummingbird 13 feet away.

Although I have never heard of Sightron Athlon Optics, those listed 8x42 as the best for everyone look like a good deal. If I had no binos and wanted a pair for a trip like the Alaska cruise and cruise land tour, I would most certainly take a chance. I would purchase early so as to have some time to shake them out. I would normally recommend buying in person from a shop like Land, Sea, & Sky (Texas Nautical) if possible.

My Bushnell 10x50 Perma Focus worked great for my Alaska Cruise. It had a 65 degree wide field of view, in which you could scan the ocean or land and quickly pick up whales, marine life and animals on shore and also you get a closeup view of the Glaciers. Having a 10X binocular vs a 7X, you will be able to see the animals, whales and the glaciers much better. I have never had a problem with the image shaking. I also have a Nikon Aculon 7X35 which is a good Binocular, but prefer the Busnell 10X50 as your view is 30% closer and image is 30% larger. This 10X power is very important for viewing in Alaska.

 

I also have the Bushnell 10X50 and I totally agree with you. Much better field of view and much better magnification.

I bought the Bfull 12x50 binoculars on Amazon. $33.99 but there’s a 20%off coupon that can be clipped. It feels sturdy, great light and magnification. I’m so glad we brought it to use on our excursions. Very easy to wear with glasses and I felt a good deal for the price. Came with case, strap and lens cloth. Also has a lens cap for both the front and back of the binoculars. It states it’s waterproof but I can’t vouch for that.

I just bought the Celestron Nature 8x42. It was a little cheaper than the Trailseeker, and with savings I got my son a pair of kids binoculars that were well reviewed on Amazon. I figure as a complete novice, I probably will not notice the difference between the Nature and Trailseekers [emoji6]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

 

 

Just an update. Took my Celestron’s with me to Denali. They were amazing. In fact, I even spotted a Golden Eagle while we were out for a nature hike.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Prior to our Alaska cruise 2 years ago, I went over budget and bought image stabilized Canon 10 x 30 IS II (about $400), 2 years out I think this is one of the best purchases I have ever made. The image stabilization is a game changer in my opinion. I have since used them for birding, football, more cruises, etc. The image stabilization works like magic, and I am on the same set of batteries (AA) 2 years out with lots of use.

 

Only drawback, is you are going to want to handle them more carefully than a cheap set obviously. They do have electronics inside so it is something you are going to want to care for a little more than others. However, I have had them in all kinds of outdoor situations with no issues.

I just picked up a surprisingly decent pair of 10 X 50s at harbor freight for $16. Granted not as nice as some of the others out there, but surprisingly good. And if they get damaged or lost, I’m out $16 instead of a few hundred

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Prior to our Alaska cruise 2 years ago, I went over budget and bought image stabilized Canon 10 x 30 IS II (about $400), 2 years out I think this is one of the best purchases I have ever made. The image stabilization is a game changer in my opinion. I have since used them for birding, football, more cruises, etc. The image stabilization works like magic, and I am on the same set of batteries (AA) 2 years out with lots of use.

 

Only drawback, is you are going to want to handle them more carefully than a cheap set obviously. They do have electronics inside so it is something you are going to want to care for a little more than others. However, I have had them in all kinds of outdoor situations with no issues.

Those are great binoculars. I have several friends that use the 42 and 50mm size mostly for astronomy. I've never owned a pair mostly because my collection grew b4 they came up with the much more efficient battery life. Canon IS binos are extremely tough. I've seen them get knocked off tables in the dark and fall onto concrete pads and come up totally unharmed. They have even gotten the weight lower now. I checked your 30mm - only ~1.3lb - still heavy 30mm. You are right about them being perfect for any daytime use.

Make sure you get two pair, or however many are in your cabin. Passing them back and forth, and hoping that what person A saw is still there when person B gets a look, gets to be a bit of a annoyance after a while.

Don’t miss this earlier thread. https://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2623765&highlight=Binoculars

 

I think weight is a very important consideration!

I consider weight a very important consideration. Especially if you'll be carrying them around on your neck most of the day. Someone mentioned the Canon 10x30 IS. While they are excellent binoculars optically and structurally, keep in mind they have low light grasp (30mm objective) and weigh 21oz. A non IS pair the same size (10x30) might weigh only 9oz. I will repeat that in my opinion any binocular 10x or over needs IS or a tripod. Clearly a tripod is out of the question for portable, quick use, so the IS (and extra weight & cost) clearly is on the wanted list.

Don’t miss this earlier thread. https://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2623765&highlight=Binoculars

 

I think weight is a very important consideration!

Thanks for that link, very useful info (well, except for the one guy who kept insisting he was RIGHT). I think i am going to take the well-reasoned advice from rd3 and go with 10x32 since i have trouble holding objects (hand tremor) and i think i will do better with lighter-weight binos.

Anyone ever try a monocular? I just ordered an 8x42 from amazon. Small and compact with great reviews. Also ordered an adapter to take pictures with my iPhone. Wondering if anyone has had expierence with this and what you thought of it??

 

 

 

Did you get your monocular? What do you think? Which one was it on Amazon?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Did you get your monocular? What do you think? Which one was it on Amazon?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

I received it from amazon last week and really like it! The monocular size is nice, compact. I tried it briefly with the iPhone adapter which works well. Took some nice telephoto pictures but I need to practice more to set it up better. You can’t beat the price (Feemic monocular 8x42 $29 Vankey cellphone adapter $13). I can’t wait to try these out on our upcoming trip! I know these are not the high quality of binoculars discussed on this thread but fits the bill for my budget. The monocular is clear and easy to use. Works for me! BTW...we have another pair of midrange $ binoculars we will be taking with us. The monocular was purchased so we each have something to use.

I received it from amazon last week and really like it! The monocular size is nice, compact. I tried it briefly with the iPhone adapter which works well. Took some nice telephoto pictures but I need to practice more to set it up better. You can’t beat the price (Feemic monocular 8x42 $29 Vankey cellphone adapter $13). I can’t wait to try these out on our upcoming trip! I know these are not the high quality of binoculars discussed on this thread but fits the bill for my budget. The monocular is clear and easy to use. Works for me! BTW...we have another pair of midrange $ binoculars we will be taking with us. The monocular was purchased so we each have something to use.

 

 

 

Thanks! I think that might make a good bday gift for DH. We already did the Alaska cruise but we will be going to Glacier Natl Park... we do love wildlife and scenery!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

So I got the Celestron 8X32s in the mail today. The result is not really surprising after just a few minutes. Please keep in mind, I am only focusing on stuff liek my backyard and things across the street (nothing truly "far away") at this first blush.

 

First, they are considerably lighter that the 8X42s (1 lbs vs. 1.46 lbs). Second they seem just about as sharp as the 8X42s. The 32 image does seem to have more blur at the edges however. It is not quite as bright as the 8X42s, but still reasonably good. The big difference for me is the field of view. The 42s are definitely larger (more-so than the numbers 409 ft vs 426ft might suggest). The "vertical" size of the image in particular seems notably larger in regular viewing. It is simply easier to bring the 42s up to your face and immediately get the scene without panning around to find the "sweet spot". So, for me it comes down simply to weight vs. field of view. My wife says "how about both" (which does echo the comments of others with regard to each person having their own binoculars), but if I had to pick one right now...man, I'd probably keep the 42s.

 

More to come yet again...

 

RSLeesburg - If those Nature DX are anywhere near as nice as the Trailseekers, I'm sure you won't be disappointed.

 

 

Well our cruise is only two weeks away and it looks like we have decided to keep both pairs of binoculars: the TrailSeeker 8X42 and the lighter 8X32. Even through the former are "better", I have a feeling we'll use the latter more due to its lighter weight...we'll know soon enough.

Well, after all my deep and careful consideration, I purchased a pair of Celestron Trailseeker 8x32 ($180 at amazon). I do not love them.

 

Compared to DH's Bushnell fixed focus 10x50, these are muchless powerful for far away objects -- and that's why i am buying them in the first place.

 

I can definitely see that these 8x32 would be great for bird watchers, as they focus nicely on things in my backyard. But looking out to the horizon, not so much.

 

I purchased these in large part for the light weight (only 1.0 pounds), but i am going to gladly give up light weight for a more powerful set.

Well, after all my deep and careful consideration, I purchased a pair of Celestron Trailseeker 8x32 ($180 at amazon). I do not love them.

 

Compared to DH's Bushnell fixed focus 10x50, these are muchless powerful for far away objects -- and that's why i am buying them in the first place.

 

I can definitely see that these 8x32 would be great for bird watchers, as they focus nicely on things in my backyard. But looking out to the horizon, not so much.

 

I purchased these in large part for the light weight (only 1.0 pounds), but i am going to gladly give up light weight for a more powerful set.

 

If you have time, I'd send those back. I got a pair of these https://smile.amazon.com/Alpen-Optics-SHASTA-Waterproof-Binocular/dp/B01DD9C51Q/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1530903962&sr=8-3&keywords=alpen+binoculars last year from Costco. They are comparable to my Nikon's that I paid a lot more for a few years back. they are damn nice with a lifetime no questions guarantee that won't break the bank. For Alaska with the possibility of clouds and rain at any given time you want a bigger objective lens than you got with the 8x32's, for better light transmission. Plus increased magnification is never a bad thing. The downside to good glass is weight, be it a camera lens or binocular's good glass tends to be heavier, but you will notice the difference in clarity.

Yeah, i returned the 8x32 today. I looked at the ones you suggested, but they clock in at over 2 pounds, which is more than i want to handle. I am giving these 10x42 from Gosky a try, they are halfway between 1 and 2 pounds, with a better magnification than my original choice.

I have just come back from my cruise - I had a set of 12x 32 (make will not compare with you in US) but I am commenting on size. I also had a smaller pair but they were disappointing. I wished I had bigger ones and I would not have cared about the weight.

 

When you get instructions about "Caribou at 9 o'clock" or "whales at 11 o'clock", the wider the field of vision the better.

 

Those little sea otters were the best and do need magnification.

Another vote for the Canon image stabilizer binos.

 

I have taken my 10x30’s on many cruises. You can lock into anything while the ship is moving and your image is nice and still and no dizziness.

 

For our upcoming Alaska trip I just got myself the Canon IS 12x36. Now my wife can use the other pair.

 

I also agree that each person needs their own pair. A lot can be missed when swapping binos and readjusting them back to the other persons settings.

 

Also keep in mind that if you keep your optics (binos, camera, etc) in the stateroom changes in temp and humidity when you step onto the balcony can fog you up in seconds. You will definitely miss something then. I have been known to keep my optics on the balcony if I anticipate using them anytime soon. This is especially useful in the carribean.

 

We will see about Alaska. ;)

Another vote for the Canon image stabilizer binos.

 

Also keep in mind that if you keep your optics (binos, camera, etc) in the stateroom changes in temp and humidity when you step onto the balcony can fog you up in seconds. You will definitely miss something then. I have been known to keep my optics on the balcony if I anticipate using them anytime soon. This is especially useful in the carribean. We will see about Alaska. ;)

 

I found this out and quickly learned to wrap the camera or binoculars in a towel and set them on the balcony either the night b4 or shortly b4 deciding to use them. That way, I found them acclimated to the outside temperature and ready to use when needed. Yes, in the Caribbean. Might not be an issue in Alaska because the outside temp will most likely be below the room temp - will fog up when brought back in - use the towel trick.

For carry I recommend getting a binocular harness. I've used one for years as it's great for taking the weight off your neck and putting it on your shoulders. The binocs don't swing around your neck and keep your hands free. They'll sit comfortably right in front ready to go when you need them.