10X50 vs. 7X50

I'm going to buy binocs. I've read the ten power require a tripod due to
the natural shakiness of hands, but the 7 power not. Is that extra
3-power worth the extra $$ for a tripod and adaptor?

MY HALLIBURTON BOARD OF DIRECTORS RIGHT OR WRONG!

I'm going to buy binocs. I've read the ten power require a tripod due =
to
the natural shakiness of hands, but the 7 power not. Is that extra
3-power worth the extra $$ for a tripod and adaptor?


Hi Rom,

There are other advantages with using binoculars on a tripod. With a=20
tripod your binoculars stay put when you're checking charts or other=20
references. Personally, i find 10x binoculars fairly easy to handhold.=20
My most used astro binoculars are 10x42. But any binocular benefits=20
from being mounted on a tripod.

-Florian

Florian wrote:
I'm going to buy binocs. I've read the ten power require a tripod due to
the natural shakiness of hands, but the 7 power not. Is that extra
3-power worth the extra $$ for a tripod and adaptor?



Hi Rom,

There are other advantages with using binoculars on a tripod. With a
tripod your binoculars stay put when you're checking charts or other
references. Personally, i find 10x binoculars fairly easy to handhold.
My most used astro binoculars are 10x42. But any binocular benefits
from being mounted on a tripod.


"Tripods" are not really very bino-friendly. Look into a parallogram
mount such as the Unimount by Universal Astonomics.

Once there, something on the order of 15x70 is really a neat way to go.

Phil

I've read the ten power require a tripod due to
the natural shakiness of hands

Don't believe everything you read.

Go to a store. Try 10x50's. Pick a sporting goods or camera store where you can
test this issue for yourself. If they are too unsteady for you to hold on
target easily during the day, then they will be at night as well.

john

I would suggest a telescope store or a camera store that sells high end
binos. I would stay away from sporting goods stores as the binos that they
sell are usually Bushnell junk.

-mij


"Izar187" wrote in message
...
I've read the ten power require a tripod due to
the natural shakiness of hands

Don't believe everything you read.

Go to a store. Try 10x50's. Pick a sporting goods or camera store where
you can
test this issue for yourself. If they are too unsteady for you to hold on
target easily during the day, then they will be at night as well.

john

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 16:53:51 -0600, (ROM SPACE KNIGHT
NURSE) wrote:

I'm going to buy binocs. I've read the ten power require a tripod due to
the natural shakiness of hands, but the 7 power not. Is that extra
3-power worth the extra $$ for a tripod and adaptor?

There are some big differences between mounted and hand-held. In some
ways hand-held is better:

You can quickly grab the binoculars and look at your target. There's
nothing additional necessary to purchase, build, or carry/transport.
In the smaller sizes you can carry them with you all day long. The
wide true fields of view make it easy to point them at your target.

In other ways mounted is better:
It's possible to use larger, heavier and more powerful binoculars.
You'll be able to see smaller and finer details. You can keep the
binoculars pointed at a comet or whatever while you work on a sketch,
consult a chart, etc.

10x50s will show almost anything in the sky better than will 7x50s.
With a bit of practice, much can be seen with 10x50s hand-held; but a
mount would allow you to see a bit more, particularly in the realm of
fine detail. You're never likely to outgrow 10x50s.

7x50s represent a bit of wasted aperture and excess weight when used
under non-dark situations or when used by individuals (such as older
people) who's pupils don't open up to about 7mm.

For low-powered, general purpose, day/night, hand-held use I would
recommend 8x42s over 7x50s.

For higher-powered, mounted binoculars recommendations would tend to
vary with the intended purpose and individual preferences.

If you've not used binoculars before I would suggest starting out with
a hand-held pair such as 8x42s. They would be likely to remain useful
in one way or another for the rest of your life! Despite owning
larger binoculars and telescopes, I still enjoy and intend on keeping
my 8x42s!

Back to your question! Is the extra 3x (in selecting 10x50 over 7x50)
worth the additional money necessary to purchase a tripod and mount?

Frankly there are too many unknowns to answer that question! Much of
the convenience of binoculars is lost once one adds a tripod and
mount. Yet, for many people the added stability of the view (along
with other advantages) makes the added expense worthwhile.

If you asked the same question in relation to binoculars closer to
20x80 in size the answer would have been easier: As you get into
larger and more powerful binoculars a tripod and mount becomes more of
a necessity and more worthy of the cost and added inconvenience. 10x
binoculars stride the border (according to most 'experts') between
"hand-holdable" and "mount required".

Sketcher
To sketch is to see.

On 24 Jan 2005 02:37:30 GMT, (Izar187) wrote:

Don't believe everything you read.

That's always good advice!

Go to a store. Try 10x50's. Pick a sporting goods or camera store where you can
test this issue for yourself. If they are too unsteady for you to hold on
target easily during the day, then they will be at night as well.

I'm not so sure about that approach:

a) That which is difficult at first often becomes easier after
sufficient practice. (With practice, 10x50s can be quite useful
hand-held.)

b) Comparing the hand-held view to a mounted view would reveal far
more than trying hand-held alone. (More detail will be visible with
mounted binoculars.)

Sketcher
To sketch is to see.

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:47:31 GMT, Phil Wheeler
wrote:

"Tripods" are not really very bino-friendly. Look into a parallogram
mount such as the Unimount by Universal Astonomics.

I find that to be an odd statement. A tripod is not a mount. It's a
stable base to which a mount can be attached. Most parallelogram
mounts that I've seen have been attached to tripods!

Sketcher
To sketch is to see.

I've read the ten power require a tripod due to
the natural shakiness of hands, but the 7 power not. Is that extra
3-power worth the extra $$ for a tripod and adaptor?

A bino's weight also has alot to do with it, but many stargazers find 10x50s
handholdable, with an exit pupil closer to their own dark-adapted pupil size.
Using the formula 'weight x power', gives a good idea of relative ease for
manual bino handling (21oz. 10x50s and 30oz. 7x50s would seem equally
handholdable).

Don't bother with 7x50's if you are growing older. A 7mm pupil is
better for the young in really dark sky situations. Even moonlight will
probably lower your pupil diameter enough to make the 10x50's more
useful.
10x50s give a bigger picture which is always useful. 7x50s always seem
rather too low in power to me.
Most people have vehicles, walls, fences, boats, branches, or even
rocks that they can lean their elbows on when using binoculars.
A home-made broom handle of suitable length with simple padded crossbar
to support the handheld binos works well enough in the back yard.
A telescoping camera monopod with padded crossbar would be rather more
practical for dark sky sites away from home.
Tripods with pan and tilt heads are a pain. The higher you point the
less room there is for your chin and the harder it is on your neck!.
You'll think you've got whiplash injury after a few minutes!
Loungers and sun beds are probably the way to go if you want to spend a
lot of time looking high overhead.
Now what was the question again? ;-)

Chris.B