|
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 8,759 Likes: 12
Campfire Outfitter
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 8,759 Likes: 12 |
Anyone use the larger 50mm tract toric binoculars? Are they any good?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,011
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,011 |
I went from Swaro 15's to the Tract 12.5. I have not been disappointed.
I am continually astounded at how quickly people make up their minds on little evidence or none at all. Jack O'Connor
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,969 Likes: 5
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,969 Likes: 5 |
I went from Swaro 15's to the Tract 12.5. I have not been disappointed. I have a pair if Tract 12.5 binoculars and I like them better than my 10X42 Ultrivida
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 481
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 481 |
I do not understand 50mm binos in a 10x magnification. I am not sure what you gain other than bulk and weight, as any sound optic should give you more than adequate light retention with a smaller 42mm objective for normal hunting use. I am able to see well past shooting light with my 10x42 ELs.
I have never tried a 12.5x but assume you definitely need the larger objective for low light conditions. I wish Tract would have brought out a 15x bino instead of the 10x50s. If they do, I will definitely give them a try.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 580
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 580 |
I do not understand 50mm binos in a 10x magnification. I am not sure what you gain other than bulk and weight, as any sound optic should give you more than adequate light retention with a smaller 42mm objective for normal hunting use. I am able to see well past shooting light with my 10x42 ELs. Jesus Christ, 5mm exit pupil diameter vs. a 4.2 mm exit pupil diameter.
Jackie Treehorn: Treats objects like women. Montana uses Ruger actions.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 8,759 Likes: 12
Campfire Outfitter
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 8,759 Likes: 12 |
I do not understand 50mm binos in a 10x magnification. I am not sure what you gain other than bulk and weight, as any sound optic should give you more than adequate light retention with a smaller 42mm objective for normal hunting use. I am able to see well past shooting light with my 10x42 ELs. Jesus Christ, 5mm exit pupil diameter vs. a 4.2 mm exit pupil diameter. My thoughts exactly. That's whats got me interested in them.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 3,272
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 3,272 |
Nope... I have used larger objective (50/56mm) optics for 40 years and you gain a LOT of brightness in DARKNESS. I have compared them with smaller sets - have you? All binocs work in the light.
Last edited by Sasha_and_Abby; 04/19/20.
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die, I want to go where they went" Will Rogers
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 481
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 481 |
I completely understand the exit pupil diameter math. However, if good quality optics get you satisfactory light retention well beyond legal shooting light with a 4.2mm exit pupil, then why pay the 19% weight penalty from going to 50mm from 42mm on a 10x bino. I have not looked through any of Tracts binos, and perhaps I am over estimating their 10x42 light retention capability. I somehow doubt that based on what i have seen with their scopes. This is the same arugment as a 3-9×40 scope vs. a 3-9x50.
Some of my hunting spots are in heavy timber and swamps which require binos with good light retention. I also hunt large beanfields and out west where its wide open. I get everything I need with a set of Swaro 10x42 ELs. Having more exit pupil at the expense of heavier optics would not be worth it to me. However, added weight for someone who doesn't walk the miles I do may appreciate a little more brightness after sunset. YMMV.
I can certainly see the benefit of choosing a bino with added weight and larger objective for gains in moving up in magnification if magnification is what's desired.
Last edited by CarolinaHunter; 04/19/20.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 580
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 580 |
I completely understand the exit pupil diameter math. However, if good quality optics get you satisfactory light retention well beyond legal shooting light with a 4.2mm exit pupil, then why pay the 19% weight penalty from going to 50mm from 42mm on a 10x bino. I have not looked through any of Tracts binos, and perhaps I am over estimating their 10x42 light retention capability. There's a lot to unpack there, but in short, you have your head buried in your ass. There's a 16% increase in exit pupil diameter; i.e., there's no way that a 10x42 is going to provide as much usable light as a 10x50. That's basic physics. Of course your own statement of "I have not looked through any of Tracts 'binos'" pretty well exposes your paper as$h0le argument as nothing. I have both pairs of Tract Toric binoculars -- the 10x42 and the 10x50 -- and --SURPRISE -- the 10x50 is just a LITTLE BIT MORE USEFUL from a brightness standpoint than the 10x42. How useful? Don't know, but it sure as hell offsets the 5.4 ounces of weight you're harping on now. Though I could always perform an objective test like reading grids of numbers and characters at different distances and times of day. Christ, it would be SO MUCH BETTER if people who didn't know about the actual equipment being queried would just STFU. Seriously, you don't have anything to add.
Jackie Treehorn: Treats objects like women. Montana uses Ruger actions.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,969 Likes: 5
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,969 Likes: 5 |
I completely understand the exit pupil diameter math. However, if good quality optics get you satisfactory light retention well beyond legal shooting light with a 4.2mm exit pupil, then why pay the 19% weight penalty from going to 50mm from 42mm on a 10x bino. I have not looked through any of Tracts binos, and perhaps I am over estimating their 10x42 light retention capability. There's a lot to unpack there, but in short, you have your head buried in your ass. There's a 16% increase in exit pupil diameter; i.e., there's no way that a 10x42 is going to provide as much usable light as a 10x50. That's basic physics. Of course your own statement of "I have not looked through any of Tracts 'binos'" pretty well exposes your paper as$h0le argument as nothing. I have both pairs of Tract Toric binoculars -- the 10x42 and the 10x50 -- and --SURPRISE -- the 10x50 is just a LITTLE BIT MORE USEFUL from a brightness standpoint than the 10x42. How useful? Don't know, but it sure as hell offsets the 5.4 ounces of weight you're harping on now. Though I could always perform an objective test like reading grids of numbers and characters at different distances and times of day. Christ, it would be SO MUCH BETTER if people who didn't know about the actual equipment being queried would just STFU. Seriously, you don't have anything to add. Hard to see game can be found easier with 10X50's VS 10X42
Last edited by jwp475; 04/19/20.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,168 Likes: 16
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,168 Likes: 16 |
I completely understand the exit pupil diameter math. However, if good quality optics get you satisfactory light retention well beyond legal shooting light with a 4.2mm exit pupil, then why pay the 19% weight penalty from going to 50mm from 42mm on a 10x bino. I have not looked through any of Tracts binos, and perhaps I am over estimating their 10x42 light retention capability. There's a lot to unpack there, but in short, you have your head buried in your ass. There's a 16% increase in exit pupil diameter; i.e., there's no way that a 10x42 is going to provide as much usable light as a 10x50. That's basic physics. Of course your own statement of "I have not looked through any of Tracts 'binos'" pretty well exposes your paper as$h0le argument as nothing. I have both pairs of Tract Toric binoculars -- the 10x42 and the 10x50 -- and --SURPRISE -- the 10x50 is just a LITTLE BIT MORE USEFUL from a brightness standpoint than the 10x42. How useful? Don't know, but it sure as hell offsets the 5.4 ounces of weight you're harping on now. Though I could always perform an objective test like reading grids of numbers and characters at different distances and times of day. Christ, it would be SO MUCH BETTER if people who didn't know about the actual equipment being queried would just STFU. Seriously, you don't have anything to add. Hard to see game can be found easier with 10X5p's VS 10X42 Larger objectives bring an increase in resolution, all other thing being equal. Resolution is what allows one to resolve a sneaky buck from the treeline.
John Burns
I have all the sources. They can't stop the signal.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,186 Likes: 21
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,186 Likes: 21 |
Yep--along with more light transmission (not "retention").
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 580
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 580 |
Anyone use the larger 50mm tract toric binoculars? Are they any good? If you can swing it, talk to the Jons at Tract about buying and comparing both side-by-side and return the binocular you don't intend to use. They're fairly accommodating people.
Jackie Treehorn: Treats objects like women. Montana uses Ruger actions.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,722
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,722 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 97
Campfire Greenhorn
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 97 |
I’ve no other 12.5 to compare them to but mine are awesome. I may be the only knucklehead that feels this way but if I get five years out of them and the company folds I can deal with that. If I spent 2K plus maybe not. My 8x42 have been awesome for the two years I’ve had them
Last edited by RICKMELEAR; 04/21/20.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 68
Campfire Greenhorn
|
Campfire Greenhorn
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 68 |
sheesh amazing amount of emotion being displayed over a discussion about binoculars. Wish I had that much energy to get fired up... my experience is that tract makes good stuff.
|
|
|
|
640 members (160user, 10gaugemag, 12344mag, 163bc, 10gaugeman, 1234, 70 invisible),
2,599
guests, and
1,220
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,432
Posts18,507,574
Members74,002
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|