Bino for the night sky?

I had a pair of 10x50 Pentax WP PCF (waterproof). They are now gone
(stolen, along with all my other optics)), so I figured a need to buy
a new pair. I think the Pentax's were pretty good, but probably had a
smaller FOV in addition I had a hard time holding them steady over 60
degrees. I was thinking 7x50 or perhaps even 8 x 42's. I am willing
to spend $600 USD. I am wanting something with a large FOV and
lightweight. I would love to get a pair fujinon's but there are WAY
heavy!

I would mostly use them for astronomy but on occasion have hawk nests
within my backyard proximity.

Any recommendations for me? Many thanks!

ulb

Such, they are not light weight, otherwise I'd say something like the 20 x
80's I use, awesome for daylight viewing.


--


"And for the second time in four million years, the monolith awoke."
Arthur C.Clarke 2062dyssey three

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Blast Off Cybershop
http://www.cafeshops.com/starlords
In the Garden Gift Shop
http://www.cafeshops.com/InGarden
Astronomy-net shop
http://www.cafeshops.com/Astronomy_net
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Bishop's Car Fund
http://www.bishopcarfund.netfirms.com/


"Ultralightbackpacker" wrote in
message ...
I had a pair of 10x50 Pentax WP PCF (waterproof). They are now gone
(stolen, along with all my other optics)), so I figured a need to buy
a new pair. I think the Pentax's were pretty good, but probably had a
smaller FOV in addition I had a hard time holding them steady over 60
degrees. I was thinking 7x50 or perhaps even 8 x 42's. I am willing
to spend $600 USD. I am wanting something with a large FOV and
lightweight. I would love to get a pair fujinon's but there are WAY
heavy!

I would mostly use them for astronomy but on occasion have hawk nests
within my backyard proximity.

Any recommendations for me? Many thanks!

ulb


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.736 / Virus Database: 490 - Release Date: 8/9/04

Ultralightbackpacker wrote in
:

I had a pair of 10x50 Pentax WP PCF (waterproof). They are now gone
(stolen, along with all my other optics)), so I figured a need to buy
a new pair. I think the Pentax's were pretty good, but probably had a
smaller FOV in addition I had a hard time holding them steady over 60
degrees. I was thinking 7x50 or perhaps even 8 x 42's. I am willing
to spend $600 USD. I am wanting something with a large FOV and
lightweight. I would love to get a pair fujinon's but there are WAY
heavy!

I would mostly use them for astronomy but on occasion have hawk nests
within my backyard proximity.

7x50 is too large an exit pupil (over 7mm), unless you are very young or a
mutant. 8x42 is a much more workable size.

My personal favorites are the Canon IS 15x50s, which would normally be too
powerful to hand hold, but image stabilization makes them useable without a
tripod. They slightly more expensive than your target price at $700+,
although Canon frequently offers $100 rebates.

My personal favorites are the Canon IS 15x50s, which would normally be too
powerful to hand hold, but image stabilization makes them useable without
a
tripod. They slightly more expensive than your target price at $700+,
although Canon frequently offers $100 rebates.

I bought IS 15x50's with a great deal of trepidation.
But................... I wouldn't trade them
for anything else out there. The IS capability is worth every $ IMHO.

Francis Marion

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:56:02 GMT, "francis marion"
wrote:

My personal favorites are the Canon IS 15x50s, which would normally be too
powerful to hand hold, but image stabilization makes them useable without
a
tripod. They slightly more expensive than your target price at $700+,
although Canon frequently offers $100 rebates.

I bought IS 15x50's with a great deal of trepidation.
But................... I wouldn't trade them
for anything else out there. The IS capability is worth every $ IMHO.

Francis Marion


Is the whole fov in focus with zero star flare? Meaning the outside
fov isn't blurred while the inside would be and vice versa? Many
thanks!

"
wrote in
news
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:56:02 GMT, "francis marion"
wrote:

My personal favorites are the Canon IS 15x50s, which would normally
be too powerful to hand hold, but image stabilization makes them
useable without
a
tripod. They slightly more expensive than your target price at
$700+, although Canon frequently offers $100 rebates.

I bought IS 15x50's with a great deal of trepidation.
But................... I wouldn't trade them
for anything else out there. The IS capability is worth every $ IMHO.

Francis Marion


Is the whole fov in focus with zero star flare? Meaning the outside
fov isn't blurred while the inside would be and vice versa? Many
thanks!


yes. remarkable edge to edge sharpness.

Is the whole fov in focus with zero star flare? Meaning the outside
fov isn't blurred while the inside would be and vice versa? Many
thanks!

I have never seen any edge flare with my pair. Nada, pinpoint stars across
the entire field.

The only thing I've noticed with mine is that after I've been looking thru
them constantly for several minutes...........
if I make a sudden movement, shaking or just changing views, the IS
compensator will take just an instant to catch up with the motion.
It looks fuzzy for an instant and then kicks right back into sharp focus.

It's not a defect in the instrument, it just takes a little awareness of
what's happening and it's really no big deal.

They do get heavy though, after 4-5 minutes of constant use.

Steady skies and binoculars,

Francis Marion

Paul Lawler wrote:
Ultralightbackpacker wrote in
:


I had a pair of 10x50 Pentax WP PCF (waterproof). They are now gone
(stolen, along with all my other optics)), so I figured a need to buy
a new pair. I think the Pentax's were pretty good, but probably had a
smaller FOV in addition I had a hard time holding them steady over 60
degrees. I was thinking 7x50 or perhaps even 8 x 42's. I am willing
to spend $600 USD. I am wanting something with a large FOV and
lightweight. I would love to get a pair fujinon's but there are WAY
heavy!

I would mostly use them for astronomy but on occasion have hawk nests
within my backyard proximity.


7x50 is too large an exit pupil (over 7mm), unless you are very young or a
mutant. 8x42 is a much more workable size.

My personal favorites are the Canon IS 15x50s, which would normally be too
powerful to hand hold, but image stabilization makes them useable without a
tripod. They slightly more expensive than your target price at $700+,
although Canon frequently offers $100 rebates.

I was using a friends Canon IS 15x50s the night of the Perseid peak
(comments Mike, if you're lurking?). They compared favorably to my 8x56
bino while handheld. At 15x it was a bit harder to find things than at
8x, but the learning curve is steep. I liked the higher power, and
image stabilization made it practical.

Shawn

P.S. Despite having two scopes and two binoculars we still saw a good
number of meteors.

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:11:50 GMT, Paul Lawler
wrote:

Ultralightbackpacker wrote in
:

I had a pair of 10x50 Pentax WP PCF (waterproof). They are now gone
(stolen, along with all my other optics)), so I figured a need to buy
a new pair. I think the Pentax's were pretty good, but probably had a
smaller FOV in addition I had a hard time holding them steady over 60
degrees. I was thinking 7x50 or perhaps even 8 x 42's. I am willing
to spend $600 USD. I am wanting something with a large FOV and
lightweight. I would love to get a pair fujinon's but there are WAY
heavy!

I would mostly use them for astronomy but on occasion have hawk nests
within my backyard proximity.

7x50 is too large an exit pupil (over 7mm), unless you are very young or a
mutant. 8x42 is a much more workable size.

My personal favorites are the Canon IS 15x50s, which would normally be too
powerful to hand hold, but image stabilization makes them useable without a
tripod. They slightly more expensive than your target price at $700+,
although Canon frequently offers $100 rebates.


Hi Paul,

Is the 7mm just a waste or does it actually cause problems. For
example I know that when eye relief is very long, this causes some
issues.

I am 32 so I don't fit theyoung crowd, and am wearing prescription
glasses.

Many thanks!

ulb

Ultralightbackpacker wrote in
:

7x50 is too large an exit pupil (over 7mm), unless you are very young
or a mutant. 8x42 is a much more workable size.

My personal favorites are the Canon IS 15x50s, which would normally be
too powerful to hand hold, but image stabilization makes them useable
without a tripod. They slightly more expensive than your target price
at $700+, although Canon frequently offers $100 rebates.

Is the 7mm just a waste or does it actually cause problems. For
example I know that when eye relief is very long, this causes some
issues.

I am 32 so I don't fit theyoung crowd, and am wearing prescription
glasses.

I don't think it really causes problems... it's just that the light in
excess of your pupil diameter is never even entering your pupil, so you
paid for something you aren't getting.

If you have astigmatism, and need to wear glasses to use your binoculars
then eye relief needs to be long. Otherwise the diopter adjustment on the
binoculars should be able to compensate for your eyes.

I hope someone else who knows a lot more about this than me, will
elaborate.