|
I've been debating for years whether to get a pair of pocket binocs small enough to keep in the glove compartment of my car, so that I would never again find myself in that awful predicament of seeing some really cool bird but not having binocs with me at that crucial moment and thus being unable to make an identification.
But my sense is that there really aren't any decent compact binocs out there, that the size constraints compel a magnification to lens ratio that is inevitably going to doom them to poor light-gathering capacity and consequently dim images with marginal color. I've considered some of the high end compacts, like the Zeiss and the Swarovskis, but I've wondered whether it's worth the money if the magnification to apperture ratio is going to be an overwhelmingly limiting factor anyway. By such reasoning, if the image quality is doomed to be marginal at best anyway, I might as well save the money and buy some cheapies and just not expect them to perform like full sized binocs.
Am I doing compact binocs an injustice? Are there compact binocs out there that people have tried and found to possess genuinely good optics? Any recommendations?
Alternatively, what do people think of monoculars? It struck me that one way of greatly reducing the size would be to go with a monocular as opposed to a binocular and, after all, we use spotting scopes to good effect, so maybe it's not such a big deal to have binocular vision. Yet I notice they don't seem to be terribly popular, making me wonder whether it's all that great an idea. Any thoughts?
|