Welcome to the IHoP

[dem beats 1,223]

To me peng, chromatic abberation(usually a weird blue fuzz around objects from colamination issue I think( I'm just learning optics bear with me)) and when an object distorts as it approaches the edges of an image are the biggest issue I can have with an optic. It makes me dizzy even staying still sometimes.

That is the reason I didn't buy the scope I set out to purchase. I tested a bunch of them and it bugged my eyes in 10 min of viewing. I couldn't imagine trying to focus for an hour and shoot.

[dem beats 1,223]

Not the coleman though.

I don't know what OEM they use to make them, but it's a bit like buying a Ford dirt bike. Good company, just stretching into a realm they have no knowledge in.

[dem beats 1,223]

R2, have you/can you ever turned metal rods?

[Adrian_D 520]

skip to 0:55 for the good stuff

Traction and power..

Absolutely funny to see the driver in overalls

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

http://www.nikon.com/products/sportoptics/lineup/binoculars/marine/hp_x70/index.htm

For checking out details of the surface of the moon

http://www.opticsplanet.net/zeiss-20x60-stabilize-binoculars-526000.html

Winner.

Sweet merciful crap...

[Adrian_D 520]

Vertigo spell and vision blurring head ache. Sweet start to Tuesday.

Boo

I was sleepy all day and had to follow some procedures written by the indian software team. Didn't understand a thing :|

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

I would take these out of those choices I think. I think durrability is worth more than amazing OMG sexy better than the naked eye glass, unless I have a specific reason for that.

http://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-8x42-Waterproof-Fogproof-Binocular/dp/B00009R6SC/ref=sr_1_289?ie=UTF8&qid=1321368523&sr=1-289

But I think these would be a really good option. It's simmilar to the other nikons you posted

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0001HKIK4/ref=cm_cr_asin_lnk

Those Bushnells are a lot easier on the pocket book; I think the local sporting goods store has those and the H20 10x42 models on display, I'll have to check 'em out in person.

[topgun 262]

R2, have you/can you ever turned metal rods?

Define 'metal rods'. But yes.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/110744819648

This is the exact model Bushnell we have and is inadequate at the range. Stepping up to a 42 mm would help a bit, but the extra magnification of the 10x42 is tempting....decisions decisions...

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Decent work out.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

skip to 0:55 for the good stuff

That thing's hauling ass. I wanna drive it!

[Godsmack 361]

Taking time off work (well more like away) to wait for Direct TV for the 2nd 1/2 day FTMFW!!!!

J

[dem beats 1,223]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/110744819648

This is the exact model Bushnell we have and is inadequate at the range. Stepping up to a 42 mm would help a bit, but the extra magnification of the 10x42 is tempting....decisions decisions...

I cannot open the link right now, but a bigger objective will only basically help gather more light and probably better pupil at the occular(eye side of the optic). This is only true assuming relatively similar glass and design quality. If one pair is 44mm of high end German precision ground glass seated with precision strong bonding glues and super low tolerance moving parts, it will kick ass on an optic that is 60mm objectives but low quality glass and production.

What I'm saying is that you probably want the Nikon that was just a bit more. I read a few dozen mixed reviews and what's really amusing is most mentioned them not working well with glasses. On the ones I linked I couldn't find that as an issue. I also thought one retailer had them for 140, or the same as the trail blazers. The waterproof busheys were called heavy. That's because it was a bunch of liberal limp wristed bird watchers in leiterhosen and not a good meat eating Texas boy!

Durability, weight, and optic awesomeness.

Pick 2, or have a few grand extra to shave diminishing returns.

It's the theil small of optics lol

[dem beats 1,223]

And if the 8 power is not enough then you uave to move to 10.

[dem beats 1,223]

I'm going to invest in a range finder or spotting scope instead of binoculars to save some cash I think. The scope I'm having built will have 3.8-22 magnification with a 58mm objective. It has an extremely wide FOV also which should help since the low power is still so relatively high. Shit man I saw binoculars with 35mm objectives..... That's the OD of my scope tube. Lol

I just may want to range or spot without having to point my rifle at it.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

using with glasses isn't a high priority, so those H20 Bushnells in 10x42 will probably be the hot ticket

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

I'm really digging the textured rubber on the outside, too.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

27 ounces is "heavy"?

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

I did see this, though:

http://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-19125C-Deluxe-Binocular-Harness/dp/B00200BVXS/ref=pd_sim_sg_2

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

using with glasses isn't a high priority, so those H20 Bushnells in 10x42 will probably be the hot ticket

According to Bushnell's site they both have the same relief too, so the 10x42 is definitely on the list.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

and the 12x42 is only 10 bucks more

[dem beats 1,223]

I did see this, though:

http://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-19125C-Deluxe-Binocular-Harness/dp/B00200BVXS/ref=pd_sim_sg_2

Turkey hunters like shit like that.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

I still find myself going back to the Trailblazer 10x50 again and again, though

[dem beats 1,223]

Then maybe they are for you. I'm not 100% sure but I think those were the ones that mentioned they didn't work so well with glasses and didn't adjust for when not wearing them. They look good and rugged though. It's either because it truely has a good protective shell, or because its made to look like that and all the money went to form and no function. I've never touched them though.

[dem beats 1,223]

So here is something interesting. The dog legged shape of some binoculars is due to the prism system called Porro. It's more simple to design and due to its design it doesn't need as much work to get a really great image. The straight style binoculars are one of a couple prism designs called roof prism. These allow for a little less weight, and size. Especially width. However the nature of that prism design seperates the light and then brings that split image back together. In other words it requires much more design and precision in the manufacturing process. It also has an extra level of light loss due to the mirror system used in most designs.

On a few sites it notes that you should expect to have another 50% to 25% tacked to any given quality of optic to get same results in a roof design. So if you have any given price the porro dog legged wider style will be a bit heavier and wider, but would have superior quality to the straight roof style. Weather that is put into better glass for a better image or better build quality for durability would but up to the manufacturer.