Tom,

Another thought...

Some years ago, Larry Zeitlin posted a 4-part series on binoculars.  Part of that was a discussion of the physiology of the light gathering ability of the human eye as it ages.  I have always found Larry's information to be spot on, so based on that series, I went off and bought a Weems and Plath binocular called the APACHE.  It's a mil spec, nitrogen-fill optic rated at 7 x 28 with a 7 degree field width, used in the military by special ops forces.    At opera glass size, it's small, light, and easy to handle.  It's made to be worn with or without glasses.  I wear glasses, so I find that extremely helpful.  For my eyes, it's every bit as good as my Steiner Observer 7 x 50, and a whole lot lighter to handle and use.  And, easier to handle than the heavier units in a seaway.  I rarely operate at night.  If you operate mainly in daylight hours, you do not need the greater light gathering capability of larger diameter, heavier optics.  The APACHE is GREAT for my needs, and has become my go-to vision assist unit.  Thanks, Larry!

And of course, "no personal interest except as a highly satisfied user..."

Larry's articles on binoculars are surely in the archive.  If you can't find them there, I can probably forward them.  I strongly suggest you review his material before you spend a lot of money on stabilized binocs...

Jim

Peg and Jim Healy aboard Sanctuary, currently at Charlotte Harbor, Punta Gorda, FL
http://gilwellbear.wordpress.com http://gilwellbear.wordpress.com/
Monk 36 Hull #132
MMSI #367042570
AGLCA #3767
MTOA #3436

While carefully avoiding either recommending for or against buying
stabilized binoculars (a bit like discussing anchors), I would like to
offer the following bit of info.  There are really more or less two
distinct kinds of stabilization. For want of better explanations, there is:

1. Stabilization that is more or less for higher frequency vibration.
   Kind of like the vibration you would encounter if you sat in the bed of
   a pickup truck driving on a gravel road.  {;-) These have directional
   shock sensors (accelerometers) that sense accelerations in different
   planes and try to compensate by adjusting the prism.  They don't do much
   for the slow accelerations that a rolling deck creates, and they really
   only can track higher accelerations (including some handshake) but not
   to a great degree of angular displacement even then.  They keep higher
   pitched vibrations from blurring the image, but don't respond to
   slow/low accelerations.

2. Stabilization that is much more useful for low frequency optical
   challenges, like that encountered while standing on the rolling and
   pitching deck of a boat in waves.  These binoc's have true laser
   gyroscopes in them, and micro-motors that adjust the prizm accordingly.
   These units, you can look through and keep an image stabilized on a
   rolling deck.

I have had both kinds of binoculars, and the latter kind of
stabilization was by far the most useful for me on the rare occasions
that I have needed them.  It is far to much for me to fat finger out
here all the why's and wherefore's, but the kind of stabilization that
the Fujinon Techno-Stabi  binoculars has is truly much more useful on
those admittedly rare instances when you really need stabilization.
These binoculars are the only ones that I know of that have true
gyro-stabilizers built in, and it is really quite incredible how well
they work even on a rolling deck.  The bad news is that they are rather
expensive and even a bit clumbsy compared to the kind that just have a
shock sensor and vary the prizm that way.  In truth, the frequency that
I have needed them does not really warrant the price I paid, but they
really are impressive. Failing a desire to fork out over $1000 to have
this degree of stabilization,  I would simply focus my attention (pun
intended) on the quality of the optics.

FWIW,
Ken Bloomfield
m/v Tellico Lady