SWMBO (she who must be obeyed) is getting into bird watching to a greater extent. I’m thinking of getting her a set of binoculars with digital camera incorporated. Anyone here have a setup they can recommend?
Thanks!
I’m a member of the local chapter of the Audobon Society, but it’s my sister who is the real expert. She’s birded on three continents, that’s Australia/New Zealand, South America, and North America.
I’ll ask her for recommendations for a good first set of binoculars. She has high quality/expensive binoculars, and a camera and scope.
Also, if you can contact a local birding group they’s be more than happy to help I think. I’ll get back as soon as I can get a call from sis.
Lots of good info on line about binoculars for bird watching. I don’t remember the specs of the ones I bought but they were not the most powerful as I would have guessed. 8X32 bushnell, not really expensive but very decent quality. They are easy to scan with and stay on target.
I’ve never heard of binocs with a built-in camera. Are you sure that’s what she’s looking for?
The more usual setups are a camera with zoom lens to take nicer photos of close up birds. I use and recommend an entry-level Canon with 55-250mm lens. Or to take lower-quality photos of far away birds for ID purposes, a spotting scope with an attachment for a camera, most often a smartphone. Some people get good enough results by just holding the camera up to the eyepiece.
So, it really depends what kind of birder your wife is. (In the US, birder is the most common term, FYI).
As Baker says, if your wife gets in touch with the local bird nerds, especially if she goes along on a field trip, very likely people will be willing for her to try their gear, and discuss pros and cons with her. Lots of birders are gearheads.
Swarovski binoculars and spotting scopes are really nice, but the price point is quite high. I have a pair of Nikon binos that work well for quick scans and tracking, but for looking at stationary birds, I have this Celestron and a sturdy tripod. I also have an adapter that I can use to attach my DSLR, but haven’t tried it yet.
Most serious birders have both binoculars and a tripod-mounted spotting scope.
My sister does this, it’s amazing what the scope can do. But it’s expensive.
She suggests, to start, a good pair of Nikon binoculars, or whatever local birders recommend. If someone goes on a field trip they can let you try their stuff too, and a decision could be made that way.
If the wife then ends up getting serious about birding, a scope would be recommended.
Vortex makes a decent optic for its price. They’re well-rated, sturdy, and sometimes on sale at Cabella and Audubon, to name two. I have two pairs, Viper 8x32 (good for birds in trees) and Razor 10x42 (better for close marine distances).
Jesus, is it not possible to enjoy bird watching without the necessity of becoming a techno-phile?
You can have both in one (sort of): image-stabilized binocs.
My version is the Fujinon Techno-Stabi 12x32. I used the Canon 15x45 IS for a long time (they still work, but have alignment issues and are now so old that they’re not supported).
The image stabilization allows you to use magnification that doesn’t work when hand-held (I think 8x is the practical max without stabilization). It really is like having powerful binoculars and a tripod in one.
Someone I ran into a long time ago using these said “These things have all sorts of shortcomings: they’re heavy, bulky, expensive, have poor close focus and eat batteries. To offset all that they have just one virtue: they let you see more birds, better, than any other optics.”
Colibri is the SDMB’s resident ornithological expert, which probably means he knows a lot about this. I expect he’ll be along shortly.
:dubious:
What in the world is wrong with soliciting opinions on good binoculars for birding?
Speaking of which, for the OP here is Audobon’s gear advice page. If you scroll down you’ll see recommendations for every price range, from less than $200 to over $2,000.
Binoculars are what makes the best birding possible. Some of those little suckers are dull in color and hard to see. Good optics make it much, much easier to identify what you are looking at.
The first week in October I saw a whooping crane for the first time. With my bare eyes it was a small white blob way across a marshy area. With the binoculars, and then with a scope as well. I saw a magnificent member of an endangered species.
Make yourselves happy.
I love to watch birds, but I’m barely competent/knowledgeable enough to call myself a birdwatcher. But it seems silly for anyone to question whether good optics help in the activity. I’m fortunate that my wife is a hobby astronomer, so she got me some good binos for a birthday a couple of years back.
I’m currently using Vortex Viper 10x40s, which have nearly the quality of much more expensive brands. Many people prefer 8x40s since they are easier to hold still and have a wider field of view.
I don’t know anyone who uses combo binoculars and digital camera. My feeling is that it would be heavy and awkward to use, and not do the individual jobs as well as separate units.
Well, there is watching birds, and then there is bird-watching (preferably “birding”) which involves identifying the species you are observing. From this comment, I must assume you only watch birds, and do not try to identify them at any distance. If not, would you care to share with us how you identify birds without using binoculars?
I’m deeply interested in this thread and will follow it closely. My biggest problem though is the fact that I am nearly blind in my right eye. Binoculars are useless for me. I need a good quality, extremely portable, tripod mounted spotting scope/camera setup. Chefguy’s Celestron looks interesting but I’m certainly open to other suggestions.
Maybe the good old fashioned way - by shooting them! 
(I’m currently reading a collection of old nature writing from the Chicago area, and a considerable amount of discussion is given to weapons and loads - with not a mention of optics! ;))
I have two pairs of low end decades-old field glasses, pretty beat up from use/abuse over time. Per your definition however, I tend to fall into the “watching birds” category. I have participated in a few Department of Natural Resources bird inventories over the years (with my glasses), primarily because I feel the inventory counts provide a worthwhile function. Anymore, most of my trips afield do not involve carrying any optical gear… but if I do happen to have a pair with me, I don’t spend any time scanning… I simply prefer to eyeball things.
Years ago, I attempted the birder thing but it left me cold. Way too competitive and statistic-driven, way too gear centric. Hell, I’ve seen birders get into heated arguments over “the right” outerwear… We’re talking clothes for Christ’s sake! Optics? Don’t get them started unless you want a fight on your hands.
Hence my upthread comment. I should have known better.
Well, certainly didn’t intend to open a can of worms - so to speak. Her interest is moderately casual. I’m searching for a unique Christmas gift. Since digital tech has been incorporated in almost everything in the world, I ASSumed it was available in binoculars. She has a couple of good sets now.
Back to the drawing board.
A good pair of binoculars is great, maybe a scope if you’re serious, but some people do go too far with the gear. I used to live near one of England’s best bird reserves, and the number of people you see there fully kitted out with all the latest fanciest gear and not the faintest clue what they were looking at and without even a basic bird book was a running joke with my family. Yes, there’s some rare birds in the place, but what you’re getting all excited about? It’s a mallard. You’d ignore it or take the kids to chuck bread at it if you saw it somewhere else.
I’ve also been to the Farne Islands a few times, off the North East of England, which have some great seabird colonies. Every time I’ve been, with my Dad, there’s been some guy (and it always is a guy) on the boat struggling with these huge expensive telescopes and camera lenses. First off they get them out on the boat, getting salt spray on them, and totally failing to use them, because it’s a little boat, bobbing all over the place, and image stabilisers aren’t actually magic. Then we get to the islands, and they’re covered in birds, it’s hard not to trip over them, they’re dive bombing you, or sitting on eggs less than an arms length from the path, totally unconcerned by humans. The huuuuuge lenses are totally useless there; they’re designed to focus on something 100 metres away, not something pecking your foot. I was getting better pictures with my cheapy point-and-click camera, 'cos I could actually get into the colony (on the paths), while they were having to stand as far away as they could (having just bought their very bestest lens). We called them ‘nostril hair photographers’, 'cos that’s what they’d be able to see (yes, I know birds don’t have nostril hairs, not the point).
Fancy gear’s great, but a bit of research on where you’re going, and what birds you’re likely to see, is kinda better.