Telescope or Binoculars: Which Makes a Better Gift?

  • Context: Stargazing 
  • Thread starter Thread starter omicron
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Telescope
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the comparison of a 60mm refractor telescope and a 10x50 binocular as potential gifts for stargazing. Participants explore the advantages and disadvantages of each option, considering factors such as field of view, stability, and the ability to see celestial details.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the 10x50 binoculars are superior for learning the night sky due to their wider field of view and ability to see various celestial objects.
  • Others contend that a 60mm refractor is limited in its capabilities, primarily showing the Moon and some details of Jupiter and Saturn, and that its mount is often unstable.
  • One participant notes that their experience with a 60mm telescope did not allow for detailed views of Jupiter, possibly due to urban light pollution and an unstable mount.
  • Another participant suggests that 7x50 binoculars might be easier to hold steady and are well-suited for dark-adapted eyes, while also mentioning their availability in used markets.
  • Concerns are raised about purchasing binoculars from pawn shops, emphasizing the need for knowledge to avoid low-quality products.
  • Some participants highlight the importance of optical quality and coatings in binoculars, suggesting that good coatings can significantly enhance viewing experiences.
  • There is a discussion about the price of high-quality binoculars, with some participants sharing their experiences with expensive models and contrasting them with more affordable options.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the merits of binoculars versus telescopes, with no clear consensus reached. While some favor binoculars for their ease of use and versatility, others defend the capabilities of telescopes, particularly in specific contexts.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various factors that could influence the effectiveness of telescopes and binoculars, such as light pollution, stability of mounts, and personal experience with different models. The discussion reflects a range of experiences and preferences without resolving the debate.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to amateur astronomers, individuals considering gifts for stargazing enthusiasts, and those looking to understand the practical differences between telescopes and binoculars for astronomical observation.

omicron
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Which would be a better gift? A 60mm refractor or a 10x50 binocular?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
omicron said:
Which would be a better gift? A 60mm refractor or a 10x50 binocular?
The BINOCULARS by far. With them a person can "learn their way" around the sky with a 5 to 7 degree field of view and see many open clusters, nebulae and even split some double stars. The Moon is great in my 10x50's.

A 60mm scope is just too small to see much more than the Moon and a little bit of detail on Jupiter and Saturn. Also, the mounts that come with most 60mm refractors is just too unstable to use and/or find objects.
 
Thanks! :smile:
Just out of curiousity, can your 10x50 see Jupiter in detail? At least Its belts or the great red spot?
A 60mm scope is just too small to see much more than the Moon and a little bit of detail on Jupiter and Saturn. Also, the mounts that come with most 60mm refractors is just too unstable to use and/or find objects.
My second scope I got is a 60mm and I can't even see details on Jupiter. Maybe it's because I live in a city. The mount is definitely unstable.
 
Last edited:
7x50s are a little easier to hold steady than 10x50s, and the exit pupil of 7x50's is almost perfect for dark-adapted eyes. 7x50's were really popular for many years and there a LOT of them around used, especially since many folks switched to compact, lightweight roof-prism model with smaller objectives. You may be able to find a really nice pair of 7x50's used for a fair price at a pawn shop, thrift store, etc. I paid about $50 for my Nikons in a close-out sale (this was about 15 years ago). Remember that "coated optics" doesn't mean "multi-coated" or "fully multi-coated". Good coatings greatly improve contrast, so try to get the best optical quality you can find in your price range.
 
That would be a better choice then. But I doubt I can get any from a pawn shop here.
 
omicron said:
Thanks! :smile:
Just out of curiousity, can your 10x50 see Jupiter in detail? At least Its belts or the great red spot?

My second scope I got is a 60mm and I can't even see details on Jupiter. Maybe it's because I live in a city. The mount is definitely unstable.
Yes I can see the cloud belts, but as turbo-1 said, anything above 7x is unsteady to hand-hold. I mount mine on a standard photo tripod and can see much more than just hand-held.

I would go with the 10x50's instead of 7x50's for the increase in power. These would give you an exit pupil of 5mm. Very few people ever actually get "dark-adapted" enough for their eyes to open past 5mm, you would have to be totally away from all lights in a very dark-sky site.

As for the Pawn shop, I would steer clear unless you know a lot about how to "check out" binoculars before you buy. I just got a nice pair of Pentax 8x40's for hand holding for under $100 on sale at Adorama in New York. I also have a pair of 7-pound 20x80's, but the tripod and mount cost more than the binoculars did!
 
Labguy said:
Yes I can see the cloud belts, but as turbo-1 said, anything above 7x is unsteady to hand-hold. I mount mine on a standard photo tripod and can see much more than just hand-held.
This is one reason I never opted for the big 100mm binoculars. It means one more tripod and mount to carry and a lot more bulk. I have a nice Cassegrain/Newtonian as a wide-field scope, but I never take it out for that reason. Once I've set up the Astro-Physics (with its Vernonscope and 2" 50mm ocular as a finder), I've pretty much got all I need, with the 7x50s for quick scans.

Labguy said:
I would go with the 10x50's instead of 7x50's for the increase in power. These would give you an exit pupil of 5mm. Very few people ever actually get "dark-adapted" enough for their eyes to open past 5mm, you would have to be totally away from all lights in a very dark-sky site.
I live in central Maine where there are no big cities and few large towns. A 20-minute drive will get you to skies where the milky way will knock you out and M31 glows like a beacon. The crisp bright images and 7.2 degree field of view of the 7x50s (and being able to use both eyes to integrate the images) are a big plus under these circumstances.

Labguy said:
As for the Pawn shop, I would steer clear unless you know a lot about how to "check out" binoculars before you buy. I just got a nice pair of Pentax 8x40's for hand holding for under $100 on sale at Adorama in New York. I also have a pair of 7-pound 20x80's, but the tripod and mount cost more than the binoculars did!
True, you've got to do your homework or deal with a seller that is knowledgeable and trustworthy. If you deal with a pawnshop, you'd better count on the "homework" factor to protect yourself. Go out armed with price lists and specs to make sure you're getting a fair deal. For sure, there are lots of junk binoculars in pawn shops, but there are occasional prizes, too, including some well-made military surplus ones.

Here is a link to a most informative page (from Sky and Telecope) about how to evaluate binoculars.
http://skyandtelescope.com/howto/scopes/article_256_1.asp
 
Last edited:
don't buy junk for 200 dollars.good quality binoculars or telescopes are quite expensive.
I bought Fujinon 16 x 70 binoculars and they are simply excellent,but I had to pay for them 1000 bucks.
Scanning the sky with binoculars is much better on your eyes, go for binoculars.
 
tumor said:
don't buy junk for 200 dollars.good quality binoculars or telescopes are quite expensive.
I bought Fujinon 16 x 70 binoculars and they are simply excellent,but I had to pay for them 1000 bucks.
Scanning the sky with binoculars is much better on your eyes, go for binoculars.
Where do you live that the Fujinon 16 x 70 binoculars cost $1000?

They can be had for $600 a lot of places. I bought those about 5 years ago when they were selling for about $450.

Also, there are some fine binoculars from Japan and Germany, some small ones costing well over $2000, but there have come onto the market some very good ones, BAK-4 prisms, full (and correct) multicoatings, waterproof, etc., etc. that can be had for far less than the big-bucks that Swarovski, etc. want for their jewel-plated stuff. A lot of the price of the famous names goes into just buying the name, not better binoculars. Some of the $2000+ jobs ARE sharper to the edge, but not enough to justify those prices.

P.S. The Pentax 8x40's I just got retail for over $200, were on sale for $120 and had a Pentax rebate for $40. That's $80 for waterproof, BAK-4, famous Pentax FMC and all. I got them yesterday and just took them out back for a "first-look" and they are VERY sharp. Certainly not junk, but cost me $80.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Adorama will send you the following email when you request a price for the Fujinon 16x70 FMTSX binoculars:

ADORAMA
-------------------------------------
Here is your requested price quote:
SKU: FN1670FMTSX
Brand: Fujinon
Title: Fujinon 16 x 70 FMT-SX Polaris Binoculars with Case & USA Warranty
Price: $564.95
Unfornunately, this binocular has only 10mm of eye relief which is very tight for most people. I sold mine.
 
  • #11
I paid for mine 16x70 Fujinon's in Canadian dollars few years ago, that would make about thousand US bucks.Sorry about that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
9K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K