OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ "serious birder" category. My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly inferior product just for the Pentax name. So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me that I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that concerned with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there is a Pentax model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and performance to something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I just don't want to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly inferior. And I don't have any local stores where I can go and see and try out any of those I am thinking about. I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 K-mount lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the bottom of the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: > Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for > birding. Something > in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the $40-50 compact > everyday binocs > we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ "serious birder" category. > > My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things > equal. But the > few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) put Pentax > toward the bottom > of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly inferior product just for the > Pentax name. I've spent a good amount of time around very good birders; at Audubon events in the Los Angeles area, and on our annual fall migration vacation to Cape May, NJ. I cannot recall ever seeing a birder with Pentax binoculars or scopes. At the top end, it's mostly Zeiss, Leica, and Swarovski. At your price range, there may be good options from Bushnell and Nikon. There may be useful information at Cape May Bird Observatory's online store: http://featheredgeoptics.com/ Another serious binocular vendor is Eagle Optics: http://www.eagleoptics.com/ My own binoculars are Canon 12x36 Image Stabilized (the original version, which is no longer on the market). Aside from being ridiculously heavy, they work very well for me. The IS binocs never gained much traction in the birding community, though. For the average birder, I'd be looking for 8x32 or 8x42, with a wide field of view, good optical quality (based on reviews), and good eye relief if you wear eyeglasses. I like twist-out eyecups better than fold-in eyecups, especially if you wear glasses and need to retract the eyecups. Watch out for other ergonomic "gotchas"; for example, my IS binoculars have a non-locking diopter setting that "adjusts" itself randomly as the binoculars bounce around against my chest. OpTech-style neoprene straps are nice, and make the binoculars feel lighter. Since you won't be able to try-before-you-buy, make sure your vendor has a generous return policy. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
I use a pair of Pentax binoculars XCF 10x50. I think there were a little bit cheaper than your price range. I use them at the local track for watching horse and dog racing from the judges tower. I needed something to help identify colours of the jockeys and horse details. For the dogs it is the when the dogs cross the timing beams on the far side of the track, of the starting boxes start to open. I find them quite satisfactory. Phil On 17/04/11 1:25 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ "serious birder" category. My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly inferior product just for the Pentax name. So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me that I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that concerned with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there is a Pentax model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and performance to something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I just don't want to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly inferior. And I don't have any local stores where I can go and see and try out any of those I am thinking about. I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 K-mount lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the bottom of the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
Stan, I am very happy with my Pentax 8x42 DCF HR II binoculars. Phase coated, nitrogen filled, water proof, and astoundingly bright! I liked them so much, I bought a 2nd pair so we both have them. You won't be happy with Bushnel and I don't know about Nikon or Canon. See the write-ups at Willowby's in NYC. Regards, Bob and Lynn On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: > Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for > birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the > $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ > "serious birder" category. > > My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things > equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) > put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly > inferior product just for the Pentax name. > > So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any > comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me > that I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that > concerned with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there > is a Pentax model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and > performance to something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I > just don't want to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly > inferior. And I don't have any local stores where I can go and see and try > out any of those I am thinking about. > > I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an > eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 K-mount > lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the bottom of > the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? > > Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web > resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! > > stan > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
So what do $500 binoculars offer that $100 (or $50) ones don't? When I wanted something halfway decent I sprang for a pair of Minolta 10x50, which set me back something around $80-$100 IIRC. They're about as heavy as I'd like to carry around full-time, so going for larger front elements wouldn't appeal to me. And going for greater than 10x magnification makes for a darker image, and more problems hand-holding for a steady view. Once you get away from obvious distortions, chromatic aberration, and vignetting, the human eye is remarkably accomodating. While you don't want a camera to degrade the corners of the image, that's a whole lot less important for binoculars; they're a real-time device, so you're practically always limiting yourself to using the centre of the field of view; if you're interested in something off to one side, you just point the binoculars at the area of interest. On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:25:50PM -0400, Stan Halpin wrote: > Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for > birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the > $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ > "serious birder" category. > > My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things > equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) > put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly > inferior product just for the Pentax name. > > So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any > comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me > that I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that > concerned with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there > is a Pentax model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and > performance to something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I > just don't want to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly > inferior. And I don't have any local stores where I can go and see and try > out any of those I am thinking about. > > I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an > eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 K-mount > lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the bottom of > the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? > > Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web > resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! > > stan > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
Stan Halpin wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2011 20:25:56 -0700 > Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for > birding. > Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the $40-50 > compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ "serious > birder" category. > > My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things > equal. > But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) put > Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly > inferior product just for the Pentax name. > > So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any > comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me > that > I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that concerned > with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there is a > Pentax > model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and performance to > something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I just don't > want > to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly inferior. And I don't > have any local stores where I can go and see and try out any of those I am > thinking about. > > I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an > eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 K-mount > lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the bottom of > the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? > > Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web > resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! Stan, I bought a pair of Pentax DCF SP 8x43 binoculars which were in your price range several years ago and have found them very satisfactory. I did some web research and found a site with useful info and reviews: http://www.birdwatching.com/index.html I didn't buy from that site; found the model I wanted for less at another online store. Regards, Jim __ "Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see." - Mark Twain -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
On Apr 17, 2011, at 12:18 AM, John Francis wrote: > > So what do $500 binoculars offer that $100 (or $50) ones don't? > > When I wanted something halfway decent I sprang for a pair of > Minolta 10x50, which set me back something around $80-$100 IIRC. > They're about as heavy as I'd like to carry around full-time, > so going for larger front elements wouldn't appeal to me. And > going for greater than 10x magnification makes for a darker > image, and more problems hand-holding for a steady view. > > Once you get away from obvious distortions, chromatic aberration, > and vignetting, the human eye is remarkably accomodating. While > you don't want a camera to degrade the corners of the image, that's > a whole lot less important for binoculars; they're a real-time > device, so you're practically always limiting yourself to using the > centre of the field of view; if you're interested in something off > to one side, you just point the binoculars at the area of interest. > Based on limited experience and what I have read (and heard from birders), some of what you get for more money is a more solid durable build (the very top end have 25 year or lifetime no-questions-asked warranties), waterproof fog free construction, multi-coating on inner as well as outer lens surfaces, superior ergonomics (comfortable to hold, smooth focus adjustment, solid diopter setting that doesn't accidentally move, good eye relief for those who wear glasses), less color distortion, less distortion of other kinds. With only brief experience with better binocs, I can easily tell the difference between the low-end casual user type and a more expensive pair, both in the feel and the quality of the image. I suspect that the difference between a $500 pair and a $2250 pair may be less dramatic. stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
On Apr 17, 2011, at 12:25 AM, Jim King wrote: > > Stan Halpin wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2011 20:25:56 -0700 > >> >> So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any >> comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me >> that >> I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that concerned >> with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there is a >> Pentax >> model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and performance to >> something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I just don't >> want >> to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly inferior. And I >> don't >> have any local stores where I can go and see and try out any of those I am >> thinking about. >> > > Stan, I bought a pair of Pentax DCF SP 8x43 binoculars which were in your > price range several years ago and have found them very satisfactory. I did > some web research and found a site with useful info and reviews: > http://www.birdwatching.com/index.html > > Regards, Jim > Thanks all for your comments so far. Jim and Bob, the two Pentax models you mention are two that are on my list; I am glad to hear of your positive experience! And thanks all for the several new websites for me to check out. >From what I have read and seen so far, it seems that the Nikon Monarch series >is the default choice for many beginning birders ($300 range); Leupold is >another brand getting frequent mention for usability and image quality. stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
The local Audubon shop is a Pentax dealer. So some of Pentax's offerings are probably suitable for birding. I have an older version of their UFC 16x25, (the newer ones are waterproof, I think, mine aren't), that work well enough. They're not particularly expensive, pretty regularly on sale for about $160.00. I have no Idea what they are at regular price. They're light weight and fairly sharp. I also have a pair of compact Nikon binoculars I keep in the glove compartment of my car, which are somewhat lower power, and pare of conventional design Bushnell glasses that I don't use much. The most annoying thing about the Pentax glasses is that the rear lens caps don't stay on particularly well, always falling off. On 4/16/2011 11:25 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ "serious birder" category. My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly inferior product just for the Pentax name. So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me that I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that concerned with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there is a Pentax model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and performance to something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I just don't want to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly inferior. And I don't have any local stores where I can go and see and try out any of those I am thinking about. I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 K-mount lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the bottom of the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! stan -- Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom! --Marvin the Martian. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Stan Halpin wrote: > Based on limited experience and what I have read (and heard from birders), > some of what you get for more money is a more solid durable build (the very > top end have 25 year or lifetime no-questions-asked warranties), waterproof > fog free construction, multi-coating on inner as well as outer lens surfaces, > superior ergonomics (comfortable to hold, smooth focus adjustment, solid > diopter setting that doesn't accidentally move, good eye relief for those who > wear glasses), less color distortion, less distortion of other kinds. With > only brief experience with better binocs, I can easily tell the difference > between the low-end casual user type and a more expensive pair, both in the > feel and the quality of the image. I suspect that the difference between a > $500 pair and a $2250 pair may be less dramatic. Stan, You're certainly on the right track with your comments. My DCF HR II 8x42's are a compact, rubber coated metal design as are Jim's DCF SP 8x43's. I think Jim's are SPecial glass and lighter metal. Eye relief and relative brightness are also similar, and were critical issues in my choice. I believe that Pentax now offers a polycarbonate body for a bit less cost (and lighter). I was happy to buy my second pair thru an ebay auction. The introduction of the polycarbonate frame made the Pentax offerings rather confusing at the time - DCF HR's (High Res), DCF HR II's, DCF SP's, then polycarbonate bodies, and all in competition with the older/cheaper PCF lines. Regards, Bob S. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
I have a Pentax spotting scope and the reaction of other birders with more "popular" brands is to come over and have a look, then go "Holy cr@p that's good". I had a top of the range Nikon scope and wanted to change to something with more light gathering power and looked at a bunch of 80mm scopes and the Pentax beat them all hands down, at least IMHO. Peter On 17 Apr 2011, at 04:25, Stan Halpin wrote: > Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for > birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the > $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ > "serious birder" category. > > My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things > equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) > put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly > inferior product just for the Pentax name. > > So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any > comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me > that I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that > concerned with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if there > is a Pentax model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and > performance to something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. I > just don't want to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly > inferior. And I don't have any local stores where I can go and see and try > out any of those I am thinking about. > > I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an > eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 K-mount > lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the bottom of > the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? > > Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web > resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! > > stan > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
An aside: I remember back in 2000 on a safari in Tanzania. Various brands of binoculars, but one woman had Leica. The difference in brightness and clarity was astonishing. Our native guide borrowed them once and did a literal double take. Hide told me after that he didn't know the such things even existed. There is pertinent advice here: don't look through Leicas. On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Peter Jordan wrote: > I have a Pentax spotting scope and the reaction of other birders with more > "popular" brands is to come over and have a look, then go "Holy cr@p that's > good". > > I had a top of the range Nikon scope and wanted to change to something with > more light gathering power and looked at a bunch of 80mm scopes and the > Pentax beat them all hands down, at least IMHO. > > Peter > > > On 17 Apr 2011, at 04:25, Stan Halpin wrote: > >> Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for >> birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the >> $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ >> "serious birder" category. >> >> My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things >> equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding >> magazine) put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy >> a clearly inferior product just for the Pentax name. >> >> So, anyone here with experience with Pentax binoculars? Can you provide any >> comparisons with other brands in the same price range? Can you convince me >> that I should (or should not) go for a Pentax? Note that I am not that >> concerned with the price as long as it is in my general price range; if >> there is a Pentax model that costs $499 that is equivalent in features and >> performance to something else that costs $349, I would probably buy Pentax. >> I just don't want to pay the same or more for the Pentax if it is clearly >> inferior. And I don't have any local stores where I can go and see and try >> out any of those I am thinking about. >> >> I am also toying with the notion of a spotting scope, and Pentax has an >> eyepiece adapter that converts their scopes to a 780mm or 1000mm f/12 >> K-mount lens. But, again, the reviews put Pentax spotting scopes toward the >> bottom of the list. Anyone here with experience with this class of product? >> >> Any information, opinions (informed or otherwise), pointers to good web >> resources, etc. would be greatly appreciated! >> >> stan >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?
I have a pair of Nikon binoculars I keep in the car for "just in case". I would have bought Pentax, but at the time I was in the market, no one around here stocked Pentax. The binoculars I've looked at, I thought the Pentax binoculars were better quality than the equivalent Nikon binoculars. From: Bob Sullivan Stan, I am very happy with my Pentax 8x42 DCF HR II binoculars. Phase coated, nitrogen filled, water proof, and astoundingly bright! I liked them so much, I bought a 2nd pair so we both have them. You won't be happy with Bushnel and I don't know about Nikon or Canon. See the write-ups at Willowby's in NYC. Regards, Bob and Lynn On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: Meg and I will probably be buying at least one pair of binoculars for birding. Something in the $250-500 range - i.e., quite a bit better than the $40-50 compact everyday binocs we have now, but not anything in the $1000+ "serious birder" category. My inclination to brand loyalty tells me to buy Pentax, all other things equal. But the few reviews I have found (e.g., in Cornell's birding magazine) put Pentax toward the bottom of the list. And I don't want to buy a clearly inferior product just for the Pentax name. - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3580 - Release Date: 04/17/11 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
"Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
"A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_?
;-)
My ears/eyes are irritated even when people use "pair of ..." with the
nouns which are usually not used in a singular form (at least in the
contemporary language), such as "pants" ("pantaloons"), "trousers",
"shorts", etc, while talking about a single object.
At least, in that situation, it is based on the "etymology" of the
object itself, as AFAIK, first, pants were not sewed together.[*]
... And that usage is considered acceptable.
But one optical device in question is called a binocular, not binoculars!
(Binocular is a pair of monoculars or telescopes.)
So, people who own just one binocular [#] and talk about
_their_ "pair of binoculars" are half-similar to me bragging about
_my_ "pair of 645D's" (as I have none).
:-)
--
[*] I spent some time investigating this question, and found that this
usage and word etymology is very similar in many languages from the
Indo-European family, including English, French, Russian and several
other slavic languages. And, in particular, it extrapolated on the
objects that never had separate parts, such as "shorts" (aka "short
pants").
[#] Unlike e.g. Bob S. who owns two binoculars.
Igor
PS. This reminded me of a question I wanted to ask some time ago.
Question for Italian speakers (Dario?): I wonder if "pair of 'pantaloni'"
("accoppiamento dei pantaloni"[?] - or whatever it is) is a common
expression in Italian?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 02:19:30PM -0400, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > > "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_? > ;-) > > But one optical device in question is called a binocular, not binoculars! Not in English. It may not be accurate, or rational. But it is "correct" (sic) usage. You can also use "binocle", or just the singular "binocular". But by far the most common form is the phrase "a pair of binoculars". Or so says the OED. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
Similar usage as "a pair of pants." The binoculars have two oculars, pants have two legs. stan On Apr 17, 2011, at 3:32 PM, John Francis wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 02:19:30PM -0400, Igor Roshchin wrote: >> >> >> "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_? >> ;-) >> >> But one optical device in question is called a binocular, not binoculars! > > Not in English. > > It may not be accurate, or rational. But it is "correct" (sic) usage. > > You can also use "binocle", or just the singular "binocular". But by far the > most common form is the phrase "a pair of binoculars". Or so says the OED. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
> Igor Roshchin
> "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one
> _binocular_?
> ;-)
>
it's a pair of binoculars.
>
> My ears/eyes are irritated even when people use "pair of ..." with the
> nouns which are usually not used in a singular form (at least in the
> contemporary language), such as "pants" ("pantaloons"), "trousers",
[...]
>
> --
> [*] I spent some time investigating this question, and found that this
> usage and word etymology is very similar in many languages from the
> Indo-European family, including English, French, Russian and several
> other slavic languages. And, in particular, it extrapolated on the
> objects that never had separate parts, such as "shorts" (aka "short
> pants").
>
> [#] Unlike e.g. Bob S. who owns two binoculars.
>
It's perfectly correct to say 'pair of...' these things in English.
>
> Igor
>
> PS. This reminded me of a question I wanted to ask some time ago.
> Question for Italian speakers (Dario?): I wonder if "pair of
> 'pantaloni'"
> ("accoppiamento dei pantaloni"[?] - or whatever it is) is a common
> expression in Italian?
Pantalone is interesting because it originally did not refer to gentlemen's
legwear but to a character in the Commedia dell' Arte - a Venetian merchant,
usually one of the characters blocking the young lovers who are always
trying to get each others pants off. His name became somehow attached to the
legwear, and stuck.
Pantaleon was one of the early Christian martyrs. He has a hill and a
monastery in Ethiopia that I've been to. Near Axum if I recall correctly.
Got some nice photos there one morning before a pair of monks (that's 2
monks) woke up and chased me away.
B
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
On Apr 17, 2011, at 12:32 , John Francis wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 02:19:30PM -0400, Igor Roshchin wrote: >> >> >> "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_? >> ;-) >> >> But one optical device in question is called a binocular, not binoculars! > > Not in English. > > It may not be accurate, or rational. But it is "correct" (sic) usage. > > You can also use "binocle", or just the singular "binocular". But by far the > most common form is the phrase "a pair of binoculars". Or so says the OED. Avoid referring to them that way. Instead use "my binoculars" - "your binoculars" - "these binoculars" so peoples brains don't get twisted around their eyes - oh, wait! They already are! (yes, I see the double plurality in those words"peoples brains") Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com http://gallery.me.com/jomac -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
"A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_?
No, that would be "a couple of pairs of binoculars". I am personally
holding out for "multiple binoculi".
;-)
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
>
>
> "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_?
> ;-)
>
>
> My ears/eyes are irritated even when people use "pair of ..." with the
> nouns which are usually not used in a singular form (at least in the
> contemporary language), such as "pants" ("pantaloons"), "trousers",
> "shorts", etc, while talking about a single object.
> At least, in that situation, it is based on the "etymology" of the
> object itself, as AFAIK, first, pants were not sewed together.[*]
> ... And that usage is considered acceptable.
>
>
> But one optical device in question is called a binocular, not binoculars!
> (Binocular is a pair of monoculars or telescopes.)
>
> So, people who own just one binocular [#] and talk about
> _their_ "pair of binoculars" are half-similar to me bragging about
> _my_ "pair of 645D's" (as I have none).
> :-)
>
>
> --
> [*] I spent some time investigating this question, and found that this
> usage and word etymology is very similar in many languages from the
> Indo-European family, including English, French, Russian and several
> other slavic languages. And, in particular, it extrapolated on the
> objects that never had separate parts, such as "shorts" (aka "short
> pants").
>
> [#] Unlike e.g. Bob S. who owns two binoculars.
>
>
> Igor
>
> PS. This reminded me of a question I wanted to ask some time ago.
> Question for Italian speakers (Dario?): I wonder if "pair of 'pantaloni'"
> ("accoppiamento dei pantaloni"[?] - or whatever it is) is a common
> expression in Italian?
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.
>
--
Steve Desjardins
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > But one optical device in question is called a binocular, not binoculars! > (Binocular is a pair of monoculars or telescopes.) You are correct, and this usage is observed by professionals in the field. For example, on Zeiss's web page: "This is corrected by folding in or separating the barrels of the binocular." Leica: "the most powerful binocular in the 42mm class" However, "pair of binoculars" is so much more common in colloquial American English, that it sounds stilted to talk about "a binocular" as a layperson. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
[See the most interesting for PDML finging on this questions a bit
further in the text.]
Apparently, when I looked up "binocular" at M-W.com,
I didn't notice that for the second meaning, they mention that
it is used in the plural form.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/binocular?show=1
OED has the same.
(BTW, AFAIK, OED is focused more on British English, - hence, "binocle"
seems to be more British than American. "Binocle" appears to come from
French, while "binocular" originates as short for "binocular glass")
So, I stand corrected about usage of "binoculars" for a single object.
I still dislike "pair of binoculars" being used for just one object.
If I were a sales person, and a customer would order that way,
I would sell two!
> Similar usage as "a pair of pants." The binoculars have two oculars,
> pants have two legs.
>
> stan
"bi-" already stands for two.
You don't say "a pair of bicycles" for just one bike, even though there
are two (mono-)cycles in each.
Joseph: it would be "people's brains" ;-)
Steven wrote:
> No, that would be "a couple of pairs of binoculars". I am personally
> holding out for "multiple binoculi".
> ;-)
Steven, binoculi is plural for binoculus... :-)
And now, - the most interesting on the subject of this word for PDMLers:
>From OED:
"1935Discovery Nov. 330/2 We were busy watching the parties of
cormorant through the binoculars."
Bob: you are correct.
Yes, "pantaloons" originates from the Italian comedy character,
Venetian Pantaleone, who was wearing long and wide pants.
This word propagated to various European languages: pantaloni (Italian)
pantalons (German), pantalones (Spanish), pantaloons (English)
I learned this some 3 years ago when I was investigating the origin
of these "pairs of ...".
(And OED suggests "pantaloons" as the contemporary spelling.
M-W - gives this and "Pantalone" for the character,
but seems to suggest only the former one for the breeches.)
Here is what OED said then about ethymology of this word (I am copying
from my 2008 notes, it may have changed since that):
(OED online, Draft Revision, Mar. 2008):
Pantaloon [< French pantalon the character Pantaloon (1583-4 as
Panthalon), person who changes his behaviour, opinions, etc.,
out of self-interest (1651), a comically hypocritical character (1679),
costume of Pantaloon (1585 as pantaleon), close-fitting garment going
from the neck or shoulders to the feet with straight legs (1628), type
of (1650), long trousers (1790; also 1797 denoting a woman's undergarment)
and its etymon Italian pantalone the Venetian character Pantaloon
(1561 or earlier), so called from the frequency of Pantalone as a male
forename among Venetians, which was in turn after the name of San
Pantaleone or San Pantalone, the patron saint of the city (from at least the
10th cent.). Cf. Italian pantaloni trousers (1799; < French).]
Igor
> From s...@trantor.komkon.org Sun Apr 17 14:19:31 2011
> Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 14:19:30 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Igor Roshchin
> To: PDML@pdml.net
> Subject: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax
> binoculars?)
>
>
>
> "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_?
> ;-)
>
>
> My ears/eyes are irritated even when people use "pair of ..." with the
> nouns which are usually not used in a singular form (at least in the
> contemporary language), such as "pants" ("pantaloons"), "trousers",
> "shorts", etc, while talking about a single object.
> At least, in that situation, it is based on the "etymology" of the
> object itself, as AFAIK, first, pants were not sewed together.[*]
> ... And that usage is considered acceptable.
>
>
> But one optical device in question is called a binocular, not binoculars!
> (Binocular is a pair of monoculars or telescopes.)
>
> So, people who own just one binocular [#] and talk about
> _their_ "pair of binoculars" are half-similar to me bragging about
> _my_ "pair of 645D's" (as I have none).
> :-)
>
>
> --
> [*] I spent some time investigating this question, and found that this
> usage and word etymology is very similar in many languages from the
> Indo-European family, including English, French, Russian and several
> other slavic languages. And, in particular, it extrapolated on the
> objects that never had separate parts, such as "shorts" (aka "short
> pants").
>
> [#] Unlike e.g. Bob S. who owns two binoculars.
>
>
> Igor
>
> PS. This reminded me of a question I wanted to ask some time ago.
> Question for Italian speakers (Dario?): I wonder if "pair of 'pantaloni'"
> ("accoppiamento dei pantaloni"[?] - or whatever it is) is a common
> expression in Italian?
>
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
Igor, did you look up at the same time the definitions of the internet-ese you used in posting this message? The English and my distant relative Webster would be beside themselves. :-) On Apr 17, 2011, at 19:59 , Igor Roshchin wrote: > [See the most interesting for PDML finging on this questions a bit > further in the text.] > > Apparently, when I looked up "binocular" at M-W.com, > I didn't notice that for the second meaning, they mention that > it is used in the plural form. > http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/binocular?show=1 > OED has the same. > (BTW, AFAIK, OED is focused more on British English, - hence, "binocle" > seems to be more British than American. "Binocle" appears to come from > French, while "binocular" originates as short for "binocular glass") > > So, I stand corrected about usage of "binoculars" for a single object. > > I still dislike "pair of binoculars" being used for just one object. > If I were a sales person, and a customer would order that way, > I would sell two! Joseph McAllister Lots of gear, not much time http://gallery.me.com/jomac -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:59:10PM -0400, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > BTW, AFAIK, OED is focused more on British English. . . Well, of course it is. But who else are you going to accept as the authority on the language? An anectode I fondly remember from my past: At one of the Cambridge Union debates, the principal guest speaker was Peter Ustinov. He was his usual erudite self, and used a couple of particularly florid expressions, provoking some mild heckling. They should have known better; he was prepared for that, en explained that he'd checked the usage first by looking the expression up in the OED. When this in turn was met by the anticipated cat-calls, he explained that he would have used some other dictionary, but apparently Cambridge didn't publish one! What he was not prepared for, though, was the immediate response from some unknown wit in the back benches: "We don't need to - we know all the words!" (No - I don't know who made the wisecrack. I couldn't see the speaker from where I was sitting up in the gallery, and I didn't recognise the voice.) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
>> BTW, AFAIK, OED is focused more on British English. . . Um, no, it's not. It tries with great energy to span all the Englishes, and doesn't do a bad job. I worked on the OED for some years starting in 1987 and have to shut up right here lest I become boring on the topic. -T -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
Joseph, Sorry, I don't think I understand you here.. Are you referring to the abbreviations I used? Why? I missed the connection. Igor > Igor, did you look up at the same time the definitions of the > internet-ese you used in posting this message? > The English and my distant relative Webster would be beside themselves. > : -) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
I guess the reason I posted that was the humorous juxtaposition of a discussion of the correct use of one word or words, and the alphabet soup representing the current use of terms online using first letters only of the phrases one wants to convey. An assault on the senses of many who take great care in their use of the English languages. Gave me a chuckle… On Apr 17, 2011, at 23:09 , Igor Roshchin wrote: > Joseph, > > Sorry, I don't think I understand you here.. Are you referring to the > abbreviations I used? Why? I missed the connection. > > Igor > > >> Igor, did you look up at the same time the definitions of the >> internet-ese you used in posting this message? > >> The English and my distant relative Webster would be beside themselves. >> : -) Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com The Big Bang was silent, and invisible in it's beginning moments. — from the Pentaxian's thoughts on particle physics, so far. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
On 4/17/2011 21:19, Igor Roshchin wrote: "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_? ;-) Igor, look for the answer within... In our native language we don't say "a pair of binoculars" but we definitely say "a pair of pants"... Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
Wed May 4 04:22:22 EDT 2011 Boris Liberman wrote: > On 4/17/2011 21:19, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_? > > ;-) > > Igor, look for the answer within... In our native language we don't say > "a pair of binoculars" but we definitely say "a pair of pants"... > > Boris Boris, I understand what you mean, and I thought about that. I don't say "a pair of pants" in any language: My guts curl up in the opposite direction every time I hear any of these expressions. :-) Igor -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
On 5/4/2011 14:32, Igor Roshchin wrote: Boris, I understand what you mean, and I thought about that. I don't say "a pair of pants" in any language: My guts curl up in the opposite direction every time I hear any of these expressions. :-) Igor My lips are sealed... If only for sake of proper direction of curl of your guts... But I hear you too. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: "Pair of binoculars" (Was: OT: Possible enablement - Pentax binoculars?)
Well try a pair of monoculars, then. :-) 2011/5/4 Boris Liberman : > On 4/17/2011 21:19, Igor Roshchin wrote: >> >> "A pair of binoculars" - is this two binoculars or just one _binocular_? >> ;-) > > Igor, look for the answer within... In our native language we don't say "a > pair of binoculars" but we definitely say "a pair of pants"... > > Boris > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ http://alunfoto.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
