I have a pair of Bausch & Lomb 7-15 x 35 zoom 5.6 degree field of view binocs, pretty inexpensive, bought 25 or more years ago. I never use the zoom feature, as getting much above 8 power the image starts to shake some. And the zoom adds a bit of weight, and lenses, making a less clear image, with less light.

I was thinking of something like 8x30 or 8x25. Long eye relief is a must as I wear glasses. And a wide field of view would be helpful as well.

Suggestions on power x aperture? And make / models? And I've seen some image stabilized ones, any thoughts on those?

Thanks in advance.

I have a pair of Nikon binoculars. I was amazed how much clearer the Nikon binoculars were compared to my previous ones, and others that I've used on occasion. The biggest difference was the clarity and brightness. You have to see the difference to understand how important it is.

I couldn't find quickly which ones I have, and I don't recall the specs, but I found this which might work for you as it's a pretty wide field. When watching football binoculars are really good for running plays, but on passing plays you want a wide field because you can't focus on the QB and then follow his pass quick enough.

IMHO having binoculars are almost essential if you're on one end of the field and want to watch the action taking place on the other side.

Also good for watching the sideline interactions, etc.

Cal Geek;841954176 said:

---

I have a pair of Bausch & Lomb 7-15 x 35 zoom 5.6 degree field of view binocs, pretty inexpensive, bought 25 or more years ago. I never use the zoom feature, as getting much above 8 power the image starts to shake some. And the zoom adds a bit of weight, and lenses, making a less clear image, with less light.

I was thinking of something like 8x30 or 8x25. Long eye relief is a must as I wear glasses. And a wide field of view would be helpful as well.

Suggestions on power x aperture? And make / models? And I've seen some image stabilized ones, any thoughts on those?

Thanks in advance.

---

7 x 25 binoculars have always been pitched as the best compromise for what you seek. Just get a good lens and this will make a difference in eye fatigue.

These tips are instructive:

"Binoculars come in two kinds: The more common porro-prism style and the less-common roof prism variation.
Consider ruggedized binoculars that protect the delicate lens elements inside from water and sudden shocks.
If you wear glasses, pick binoculars with long eye relief, but remember that too much eye relief can also have an effect on your binoculars' field of view, since eyeglasses will prevent the viewing ends of the binoculars to get close to your eyes.
A binoculars' exit pupil rating determines how bright the viewed image will seem to your eyes."

It depends on where you are sitting, but 8x on the sides is usually a good compromise between being able to see the plays without having to pan too much. You may want 10x if you are high in the endzone.

Good quality binoculars are going to be a lot clearer than cheap ones.

I like the Canon IS (image stabilization) binoculars in that they have active stabilization that will account for the shake. They can get pricy though.

I know nothing about binoculars except that when I was in the Military in the 1960's, we had incredible ones that were so clear and had a bluish tint. Wish I had one of those now. One would assume that binoculars have improved quite a bit since then. True?

binoculars? are you planning a trip to the USC game?

Cal Geek;841954176 said:

---

I have a pair of Bausch & Lomb 7-15 x 35 zoom 5.6 degree field of view binocs, pretty inexpensive, bought 25 or more years ago. I never use the zoom feature, as getting much above 8 power the image starts to shake some. And the zoom adds a bit of weight, and lenses, making a less clear image, with less light.

I was thinking of something like 8x30 or 8x25. Long eye relief is a must as I wear glasses. And a wide field of view would be helpful as well.

Suggestions on power x aperture? And make / models? And I've seen some image stabilized ones, any thoughts on those?

Thanks in advance.

---

Infinite / contrary tradeoffs of weight, price, power, eye relief, sturdy build (bounces do happen), rain defense, modes of use besides football, field of vision.. .. i forget the rest.

It was really hard choosing, shopping notes gleefully thrown out afterwards. Decided early it would be foolish considering stuff not yet 'test driven' in a shop.

Overweighting the bolded particulars above, last time [10 years ago??] we finally settled for Orion 8X42 w/8.2 degree view "ultraview". Worked out OK, though on the heavy side of druthers.

Good luck!

#signed, Backyard bird watchers 'R Us

I've used these for Cal football the last couple years - they are probably my favorites of all time (available on Amazon) they work great with my eyeglasses

Alpen PRO 8X42 wide angle Binocular

Product Features

Wide-angle binocular with 8x magnification and 42mm objective lenses
BaK-4 lenses with multicoated optics for superior brightness, resolution, and clarity
Rubber armoring for durability; comfort-fit styling for security in the hand
430-foot field of view @ 1,000 yards; 16mm of eye relief
Twist-out eyecups; measures 5 inches long and weighs 26 ounces

8x42 seems to be a good general binoc and good for football. 8x seems to be the maximum X power before things get shaky (need a tripod or stabilization) and 42 gives a decent size aperture to look through. Higher X power and smaller aperture increases the shakes. Lower X power and bigger aperture lowers the shakes.

I have a 8x42 pair, REI house brand, and while they are on the heavy side, they're worth it at the game. Modern lenses coating, anti-reflective are helpful too. Also have a pair of 25 y.o. 7x24 travel size Nikons. They work okay but the bigger binoculars are better for sports viewing. The smaller ones are better for hiking and spotting.

One modification - got a big neoprene neck strap.

beelzebear;841954359 said:

---

8x42 seems to be a good general binoc and good for football. 8x seems to be the maximum X power before things get shaky (need a tripod or stabilization) and 42 gives a decent size aperture to look through. Higher X power and smaller aperture increases the shakes. Lower X power and bigger aperture lowers the shakes.

I have a 8x42 pair, REI house brand, and while they are on the heavy side, they're worth it at the game. Modern lenses coating, anti-reflective are helpful too. Also have a pair of 25 y.o. 7x24 travel size Nikons. They work okay but the bigger binoculars are better for sports viewing. The smaller ones are better for hiking and spotting.

One modification - got a big neoprene neck strap.

---

Sound advice, thanks.

And I stand corrected about your maturity in that other thread.. sorry.

#Five (or less) char handles are spell-able.

SiniCal;841954231 said:

---

It was really hard choosing, shopping notes gleefully thrown out afterwards. Decided early it would be foolish considering stuff not yet 'test driven' in a shop.

---

I totally second Sini's suggestion that you need to test drive binocs before buying. I probably ran into him at the Cupertino Orion shop. It was only from looking through some $500 Nikon glass did I realize how much better the optics of higher-end binocs were. Edge-to-edge sharpness and overall very crisp and contrasty image. However these binocs were not waterproof, which I thought was ridiculous given the price. So I wasn't tempted to spend over my budget.

I ended up buying the Nikon Action EX 8x40 with 8.2 field of view ($113 at B&H) because it had reasonable FOV and was rubber coated and waterproof/fogproof, which has come in handy at a few rainy Cal games. I previously had Celestron 8x40 binocs with a 9.0 FOV but it wasn't waterproof and the optics of the Nikon were a little better.

Looking at the Nikon specs, I would probably recommend the 7x35 version of the Action EX line ($105 at B&H <= read the reviews), because of the 9.3 FOV. For football, I think high power is overrated. FOV is the most important spec.

http://www.nikon.com/products/sportoptics/lineup/binoculars/standard/ex_x35x40x50/spec.htm

Unfortunately, looking at the Orion web site, it looks like they no longer carry Nikon, although that may just be the web site. If the stores carry more than just Orion, Celestron, and Bushnell brands, then I could recommend it more for a visit. Otherwise, a high-end sports store might be a better bet to compare brands.

:axe

TouchedTheAxeIn82;841954422 said:

---

I totally second Sini's suggestion that you need to test drive binocs before buying. I probably ran into him at the Cupertino Orion shop. It was only from looking through some $500 Nikon glass did I realize how much better the optics of higher-end binocs were. Edge-to-edge sharpness and overall very crisp and contrasty image. However these binocs were not waterproof, which I thought was ridiculous given the price. So I wasn't tempted to spend over my budget.

I ended up buying the Nikon Action EX 8x40 with 8.2 field of view ($113 at B&H) because it had reasonable FOV and was rubber coated and waterproof/fogproof, which has come in handy at a few rainy Cal games. I previously had Celestron 8x40 binocs with a 9.0 FOV but it wasn't waterproof and the optics of the Nikon were a little better.. ..

---

Huh.. Ms Sini chose Nikon too, 8X24 7.5. [dunno if the "ucf wr" imprint means anything] She bought them for backpacking tho. Football gamedays "they're fine" is her executive summary.

#My Missy Wears Glasses, <mumble mumble> My Passes.