Can the Farpoint UBM mount to a standard camera tripod? Can it only mount to your tripods?
The Farpoint UBM comes with a 3/8″ mount post, so it can mount to any tripod with a 3/8″ stud. Keep in mind though that the tripod has to support the combined weight of the mount, the binocular, and the counterweights. For a 10 lb. 25×100 binocular, the total weight would be close to 30 lbs.
Thanks Kevin. Good point. My camera tripod probably won’t be able to handle that kind of weight. Even with my current 10×50 I would need something sturdier.
My replies are after each question below-
I’ve been looking to replace my old Minolta 10×50 ultra wide (7.8 degree) binoculars. I’ve been looking for several weeks and have concluded there is no one pair that can do all that I want.
What I want is a “grab and go” to just sit out back and scan the heavens. I also want to view all the M objects with good detail. I have a Celestron 9.25 but it’s too much work. I currently have it for sale on Craig’s list. So this leaves me with two issues.
1) For the grab and go binocular, what would give me the best wide view, sharpest image, high contrast and wow factor? The 10×42 Sport ED, the 8×40 Mariner or the 10×50 Ultra? They all sound like great bino’s, but for pick up and view without a tripod, what would you suggest? I have no problem spending more if the view is going to be much better.
Forget the 8×40- wide FOV, but not enough light-gathering. Also consider the new 10×50 Deluxe– very close to the Ultra, but just $169- so a great value in my opinion. If wide FOV is important, also consider the 8×42 Sport ED– 8.1 degrees, and it’s apochromatic. Bonus- it’s also our finest bird-watching binocular.
2) For astronomy, is bigger really better? Are the 28×110 Ultra much better than the 15×70 Ultra? Or is field of view the only difference?
One comment- objective lens size has nothing to do with FOV. It’s simply about light-gathering, and generally speaking, more is better- but that greatly affects size, weight, and of course cost.
Is the cost of bigger bino’s worth it? Will they both work well in light polluted area’s. I’ve looked at all your mounted bino’s and it gets confusing. Because they all need to be mounted on a tripod, Which to you feel would work best in light polluted area and give me the best view, sharpest image, high contrast and wow factor?
Yes, the best are the BT Series (binocular telescopes). For 3 reasons these are always the top choice for astronomy- 45-degree viewing, interchangeable eyepieces, and highest optical quality.
I really like the BT-70-45. Will the view really be worth the significant difference in price? Or is it just convenience of the 45 degree angle?
I’m sold on Oberwerk and thanks again for any information you can provide for me to make a good decision.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks for all you help and for answering all my questions. At this time I’m looking at the 15×70 Ultra. A bit more than I wanted to spend, but the reviews and my needs make this binocular the best choice.
Another question. Is the Farpoint UBM mount far better than the 4000 or 5000 series? I don’t plan on sitting, so what would be a solid stand for the 15×70?
Thanks again for all your help.
Can’t go wrong with the 15×70 Ultra. Parallelogram mounts have advantages and disadvantages. The great thing about the parallelogram mount is the binocular is suspended in front of you and you can make the binocular move anywhere you can point your head, and the binocular will stay put when you let go. This works well while seated or standing. The other advantage is you can raise or lower the binocular about 2 feet without losing your target- so great for sharing the view. On the other hand, The parallelogram is bulky, heavy, and takes extra time to set up and tear down- not to mention expensive. A 4000 or 5000 tripod is more of a “grab and go” setup. Let me know if that answers the question- or not.