Are the Nikon Aculon 8x42 best bang for buck?
My goal is for basic astronomy (looking at the moon, the andromeda galaxy, maybe a few very big star clusters or nebula, and easy bright star finding and hopping, strictly hand held), and daytime dry nature use.
I want an exit pupil of at least 5-6mm for seeing the andromeda galaxy.
I want an apparent field of view of at least 50 degrees.
Magnification needs to be at least a true 6x, preferably 8x.
So, 35mm to 42mm or more, depending on magnification and number of coats.
Bk7 is fine: I care more about the center performance than the periphery performance.
Aspherical lenses are a perk but not required as long as the edges are just good enough to help me find stars. I don't care if they are blobs as long as I know where I am in the sky and can see them well with the center.
Price: I might spend $50 today, or $90 in two months from now.
I'm OK with a monocular if it costs less or has better quality for the same price.
After experimenting with some $15 binos, I now know that the apparent field of view is my most important factor, so I can find stuff quicker. My cheap binos have an apparent 25 degree field of view. That is probably why cheap binos don't even advertise that info.
This bino is 50mm and $76, but does not state that it is aspherical. I still like the Nikons better.
Do most coatings eliminate UV light?
I did a keyword search for "apparent" and did not find many binos that advertise their apparent field of view.
You might also consider the Vixen Ascot wide-field 10x too, which is made for astronomy. These can be found for around $159.99.
If you feel like doing some searching, the older Pentax WP (not the WPII) is pretty good, and come in several sizes that are suitable for astro work.
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:32 pm