20x70 binocs for hand-holding

I've used cheap 20x50 binocs for astronomy since I was a kid. I now
also have 7x50s I recently bought. Despite the tiny 2.5mm exit pupil
and inferior coatings, the old 20x50s show more detail in most objects
than the 7x50s...sometimes even on faint fuzzies, which surprised me.

I now see why many experienced amateur astronomers say that the
importance of exit pupil is over-rated, and magnification is more
important than its usually given credit for.

Since I don't have much trouble holding 20x50s steady, I like the idea
of upgrading to a new pair of 20x70s, which have become very
affordable and lightweight in recent years.

Question: Assuming I can hand-hold them comfortably, will 20x70s show
more stuff than 15x70s? That's my dilemma right now: 15x70s or 20x70s
for hand-holding.

Don't kid yourself re hand holding giant binos. You may think you are
seeing lots. But put the same bino on a parallelogram mount (or even a
tripod) and you will see much, much more.

You will definitely see more on a stable 20x70 than an equal quality
15x70. But I think most of the 20x binos are 80 vs. 70 mm aperture.

Phil

Patrick wrote:

I've used cheap 20x50 binocs for astronomy since I was a kid. I now
also have 7x50s I recently bought. Despite the tiny 2.5mm exit pupil
and inferior coatings, the old 20x50s show more detail in most objects
than the 7x50s...sometimes even on faint fuzzies, which surprised me.

I now see why many experienced amateur astronomers say that the
importance of exit pupil is over-rated, and magnification is more
important than its usually given credit for.

Since I don't have much trouble holding 20x50s steady, I like the idea
of upgrading to a new pair of 20x70s, which have become very
affordable and lightweight in recent years.

Question: Assuming I can hand-hold them comfortably, will 20x70s show
more stuff than 15x70s? That's my dilemma right now: 15x70s or 20x70s
for hand-holding.

On 15 Nov 2003 15:25:15 -0800, Patrick penned:
I've used cheap 20x50 binocs for astronomy since I was a kid. I now
also have 7x50s I recently bought. Despite the tiny 2.5mm exit pupil
and inferior coatings, the old 20x50s show more detail in most objects
than the 7x50s...sometimes even on faint fuzzies, which surprised me.

I now see why many experienced amateur astronomers say that the
importance of exit pupil is over-rated, and magnification is more
important than its usually given credit for.

Keep in mind that the reason people recommend 7x50s or 10x50s is
for the field of view, not for seeing the maximum amount of
detail. 20x50s are certainly going to show far more detail than
7x50s, but at the expense of a huge reduction in FOV. That's
where exit pupil comes in; for a given design, a larger exit
pupil (and lower power) corresponds to a wider FOV.

(I would just be guessing, so I won't comment on your question
about 15x70 vs. 20x70.)

Brian Rachford

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 00:24:24 GMT, Phil wrote:

You will definitely see more on a stable 20x70 than an equal quality
15x70. But I think most of the 20x binos are 80 vs. 70 mm aperture.

Actually, I have a 20x60 bino which sees *much* more use than my 20x80
Oberwerk. With the proper brace technique, the 20x60s can be
handheld, and easily attach to a monopod for more extended sessions.
Yes, their aperture is significantly smaller, but when I need to go
deeper, a 'scope seems to fill the bill much better.

I'm gonna sell the 20x80s.

Wayne Hoffman
33° 49" 17' N 117° 56" 41' W
"Don't Look Down"

http://home.pacbell.net/w6wlr/

I have a set of 20x80's, for fast looks I can handhold them, but for anything
more than a fast glimps of an objet, I mount them on my camera tripod.


--
"In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
again."

Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Freelance Writers Shop
http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Ad World
http://adworld.netfirms.com

"Patrick" wrote in message
om...
I've used cheap 20x50 binocs for astronomy since I was a kid. I now
also have 7x50s I recently bought. Despite the tiny 2.5mm exit pupil
and inferior coatings, the old 20x50s show more detail in most objects
than the 7x50s...sometimes even on faint fuzzies, which surprised me.

I now see why many experienced amateur astronomers say that the
importance of exit pupil is over-rated, and magnification is more
important than its usually given credit for.

Since I don't have much trouble holding 20x50s steady, I like the idea
of upgrading to a new pair of 20x70s, which have become very
affordable and lightweight in recent years.

Question: Assuming I can hand-hold them comfortably, will 20x70s show
more stuff than 15x70s? That's my dilemma right now: 15x70s or 20x70s
for hand-holding.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 11/10/03

I have a pair of 15x70 Celestron binos (the cheap ones) that I bought for hand
holding quick looks. At three lbs, they are at the limit for me. If I want to
get a steadier view I set up a scope.
rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

Hello, Ratperson,
Agreed.
Or, if one prefers, one could use SkyWindow. Or else Canon stabilized
binoculars, which are expensive. Both are excellent.
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

Ratboy99 wrote:

I have a pair of 15x70 Celestron binos (the cheap ones) that I bought for hand
holding quick looks. At three lbs, they are at the limit for me. If I want to
get a steadier view I set up a scope.
rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

Or else Canon stabilized
binoculars, which are expensive.

Well, please don't get me started on those. My wallet already hurts and I can
only imagine how good they must be...
rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

They are SO good that once you use them you can't look at (err... through)
ordinary binocs again. Absolutely the most fantastic view of M31 I have ever
seen. I got my Canon IS 15x50's on eBay (albeit new) for $730 with a $100
rebate from Canon. From the moment they saw first light, I haven't
regretted it for a second.

"Ratboy99" wrote in message
...
Or else Canon stabilized
binoculars, which are expensive.

Well, please don't get me started on those. My wallet already hurts and I
can
only imagine how good they must be...
rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

I have a pair of 15x70 Celestron binos (the cheap ones) that I bought for
hand holding quick looks. At three lbs, they are at the limit for me. If I
want to
get a steadier view I set up a scope.
rat

Last week the Big 5 store was selling the Barska Blackhawk 15x70 binos for $60.
I bought a pair. Unfortunately, I only looked through the demo model and did
not check the ones I had purchased and naturally I found they were out of
collimation when I got home. They went back for a refund.

But what did surprise me was that it was actually not so difficult to hand hold
them. They weight 40 oz according to the specs. I think the longer barrels of
a 70mm binocular mean that the angular shake in my arms is reduced so that it
is essentially the same as with 10x50s.

If one assumes the displacement of the shake motion is the same for both
binoculars then the magnitude of the rotation is inversely proportation to the
length of the binocular. This implies that rotation of the 15x70s is about
5/7ths that of the 10x50s and that the apparent rotation (in terms of FOV) is
only 7% more.

The reason I returned them rather than getting another pair is that they seemed
to share focusers with the 7x35 Barska's and others.

This focuser uses a pin in a slot and if you press the binocular against your
face at all, the focus will move. If they had had a decent focuser I would
have kept them.

But the surprise was that I could actually handhold them and get some decent
views, though through only one eye at a time because of the miscollimation.

jon