OHIO-BIRDS Archives

March 2010

OHIO-BIRDS@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"T. K. Tolford" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
T. K. Tolford
Date:
Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:29:06 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
If you want the best bang for the buck in my opinion, consider Eagle Ranger. 
I researched and compared Nikon, Swarovski, Zeiss, Celestron, Steiner and a 
couple other top of the line of each brand I could get my hands on while out 
in the field from sunrise to mid-day. Looking through them in a store just 
doesn't cut it ... in my opinion.

My research is from two or three years ago. Changes are made often so do the 
research as these observations may not hold completely true today!

At the time, Zeiss was the most impressive. Allowed the most light in low-
light conditions, altered the colors of what you are looking at the least 
... actually not at all! (which is often caused by the coating used by 
different lens manufacturers).

I bought the Eagle Ranger 10X42. It is sealed so water can't get into the 
lenses. Lenses are fully multi-coated, binocular housing rubberized. You 
definitely want Fully multi-coated lens! (FYI - 10x50's were just a bit too 
much and lost a bit of flexibility)

FYI - Rangers used to be made by Celestron.

Nikon gave everything a slightly yellowish appearance. I probably wouldn't 
have noticed had I not compared it next to other binocs ... it is very 
subtle. Swarovski grayed everything a bit (the Ranger does ever so slightly, 
but no more than Swarovski and Swarovski were very heavy compared to 
Rangers). The other binoc brands just didn't let in enough light for low-
light or didn't have good close focus. I can't remember the other brands but 
I tried two or three others.

The Ranger was, at the time, the best binocular for close range, low light, 
brightness and most natural appearance of colors through the lenses ... in 
my opinion ... of the particular models I compared. Of course, if I had 
$1500 I would have purchased Zeiss!!!

Hope this helps.

Tim Tolford
www.hbrcnet.org

______________________________________________________________________

Ohio-birds mailing list, a service of the Ohio Ornithological Society.
Our thanks to Miami University for hosting this mailing list.
Additional discussions can be found in our forums, at www.ohiobirds.org/forum/.

You can join or leave the list, or change your options, at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=OHIO-BIRDS
Send questions or comments about the list to: [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2