Top 7x42 on the market

[ND2000]

All -

Would love to get as many opinions as possible regarding the best 7x42 on the market today, both above and below $1,000. Thanks in advance!

ND2000

[WmCCO-5]

ND2000,

I'll jump into this "briar patch" of a question and do so with absolutely no intent of sounding like a politician...or, of minimizng the seriousness of your post. With regard to "roofs" (only), the real answer is the BR,BN,FL or SLC that provides you with the best image and handling.

A good place to start your quest is to review the respective forums at the top of this page; then, head for the nearest store or fair and handle 'em all.

To my eyes and hands the answer is... Mr. BN... even though the FL and BR are a bit brighter. I just love the Leica 7x42 BN and the comfortable view that it provides!

I'm sure that others with more 7x42 experience than I have will jump in here, forthwith.

Best of luck.


Bill

[denco@comcast.n]

That's EASY! LEICA 7X42 BN>

Dennis

[Marley]

The Leica 7x42 Ultravid is also a top option, although I hear that the sweet spot on the Trinovid is a bit larger (I have never looked through the BN).

I did look through the FL the other day and the brightness and lack of CA is very impressive. If I had it to do over again, the FL might just top my Ultravids.

As noted above, you really need to try all for yourself to make the best decision. Bin handling, balance and eyecup/eye socket interface cannot be underestimated.

The BRs, BNs, FLs and SLCs are all top offerings but you need to try before you buy!

Regards,

Steffan

[dogfish]

The FL is the best for my eyes; hard to imagine the Leica BN could compete with the FL (or the Ultravid for that matter). FL's brightness, almost neutral image and class-leading field of view are inbeatable IMHO.

Sean

[Surveyor]

At this time the 7x42 Ultravid is my favorite.

[Jack Daw]

Zeiss Dialyts Classic 7x42 had them now for nearly 8 years - not let me down once; brilliant light gathering esp. at dusk and ergonomics too. What will happen if they ever get broken - shudder to think.
Regards Jack

[buzzard12]

Zeiss Dialyts Classic 7x42 had them now for nearly 8 years - not let me down once; brilliant light gathering esp. at dusk and ergonomics too. What will happen if they ever get broken - shudder to think.
Regards Jack

Love mine too, recently replaced a pair stolen in SE Asia. Great to have them back...

[chartwell99]

That's EASY! LEICA 7X42 BN>

Dennis

I agree that the Leica 7 x 42 (mine is a BA) is a gem but there was a time not so long ago when the model was treated as a pariah. When I acquired a 7 x 42 Zeiss ClassiC a while back, my wife insisted that the Leica was redundant and, at her urging, I attempted to sell it with zero success (success defined as receiving at least $600, and I never came close to that amount). The two binoculars probably are redundant of each other, but happily I still own and enjoy both.

[CHenry]

Over $1000: Swarovski SLCnew, possibly Meopta Meostar B1
Under $1000: Meopta Meostar B1

[KorHaan]

7x42 FL for me.

A few days ago I was out birding, standing by a marsh at dusk, waiting for a Little Crake that had been heard and seen there earlier. As it grew darker I could just distinguish with the naked eye a family of Grey Lag Geese swimming by; through the FL's the image was amazingly bright, showing lots of details on the birds. Like when you look through a low end pair of bins on an overcast day.
Unfortunately it started to rain, and it got gradually worse to a steady downpoor; since a Little Crake would be a lifer for me, I endured the shower and got my bins soaked for another hour and a half. No problems, no fogging, just spatters on the objectives.
It was completely dark by this time. With the naked eye I could barely see the elders sticking out above the reedbeds. Looking through the FL's I could not only see the sharp contours of the elders, but I could easily distinguish the elder blossoms in surprising detail. Great Crested Grebes on the water were still distinguishable though it was nearly midnight.
Pity the Little Crake did not perform but the FL's did.

Great pair of bins.

Greetings, Ronald

[WmCCO-5]

Ronald,

Great report!

Bill

[KorHaan]

Ronald,

Great report!

Bill

Thanks, Bill. Imagine what a view the 8x56 FL's would provide when the 7x42 is already that good... But this is not the subject in this post.

[ThoLa]

Thanks, Bill. Imagine what a view the 8x56 FL's would provide when the 7x42 is already that good... But this is not the subject in this post.

Impressive but shaky. The 8x56 is really heavy, so heavy in fact that it is a real challenge to hold it steady. The weight distribution is also not nearly as perfect as in the 42 mm models.
It is clearly designed for hunters who stay stationary and use is in a hide with some sort of support. You at least need to rest you elbows on a support to use it for a prolonged period of time.
It is as heavy as a 65 mm Diascope with an eye-piece.

Tom

[Atomic Chicken]

Greetings!

Impressive but shaky. The 8x56 is really heavy, so heavy in fact that it is a real challenge to hold it steady. The weight distribution is also not nearly as perfect as in the 42 mm models.
It is clearly designed for hunters who stay stationary and use is in a hide with some sort of support. You at least need to rest you elbows on a support to use it for a prolonged period of time.
It is as heavy as a 65 mm Diascope with an eye-piece.

Tom

Yes... that's all fine, but the real burning question is: Is it heavy? :D

Best wishes,
Bawko

[ThoLa]

Greetings!

Yes... that's all fine, but the real burning question is: Is it heavy? :D

Best wishes,
Bawko


Within 5% +/- it's as heavy as a human brain .........

to compare with for those endowed with ....

[henry link]

I suppose I'm probably the only one here who actually uses an 8x56 FL for birding. I've found it to be just as handy as the 8x42 for quick aquisition and focusing on a bird. In addition I can hold it quite a bit steadier than any smaller 8x bin, in part owing to the extra weight which tends to damp hand tremors and in part because of the large surfaces to grip. I often hold it with the right hand at the back end for focusing and the left hand forward wrapped around the left barrel.

[ThoLa]

I suppose I'm probably the only one here who actually uses an 8x56 FL for birding. I've found it to be just as handy as the 8x42 for quick aquisition and focusing on a bird. In addition I can hold it quite a bit steadier than any smaller 8x bin, in part owing to the extra weight which tends to damp hand tremors and in part because of the large surfaces to grip. I often hold it with the right hand at the back end for focusing and the left hand forward wrapped around the left barrel.

Funny! I developed the same asymmetrical grip after a few minutes. But I found it rather awkward. Optically they are second to none, but - apart from slightly more CA - I felt happier with the 50 mm Conquests - as far as handling (and price) is concerned. The 56 FLs are forward-heavy, aren't they?

As regards any dampening effects of heavy weights, there seem to be two camps. I seem to be in the better-with-lighter group.

Tom

[henry link]

The 56 FLs are forward-heavy, aren't they?

Tom

Tom,

The center of gravity is farther from the eyepiece compared to the 42mm FLs, but the positions of the focuser and bridge are also farther from the eyepiece, so the balance in the hands seems about right to me. I've really found no significant problems in the way the 8x56 handles, but I'm an optics guy. The ergonomics would have to be terrible for me to give up what I see as the best image quality. I think for most people the weight would be more of a problem than the handling. I doubt very many birders want to carry 1200g binoculars around all day, no matter how good the optics.

Henry

[matt green]

Are 7x42's the new 8x42?

My first choice would be for the ultravid, I haven't seen anything else that equals the resolving power over long range..

Though the field of view and close focusing of those zeiss fl's must make them a second place contender.

Almost got myself a secondhand pair of those swarovski slc's, would of been very happy with them but I got gozumpted!!

Matt

[KorHaan]

Anyone any thoughts on Optolyth Vianova 7x42?

Greetings, Ronald

[normjackson]

Almost got myself a secondhand pair of those swarovski slc's, would of been very happy with them but I got gozumpted!!
Matt
The one at waltersphotovideo.co.uk?

Anyone any thoughts on Optolyth Vianova 7x42?

Hmm, it's lighter than the 8x56? (o)<

[KorHaan]

The one at waltersphotovideo.co.uk?


Hmm, it's lighter than the 8x56? (o)<

You don't say?! :-)

LOL

[KorHaan]

Anyone any thoughts on the Optolyth Vianova 7x42 apart from the weight?

:-)

[Paskman]

The one at waltersphotovideo.co.uk?

Matt

It is still there at £360 - Bargain!

Paul

[matt green]

The one at waltersphotovideo.co.uk?



Nope, I was going for the latest SLC neu model at a viking optical centre in norwich - it was immaculate for £530!!

Now sorted with a 8x32 trinovid:t:

Matt

[normjackson]

Nope, I was going for the latest SLC neu model at a viking optical centre in norwich - it was immaculate for £530!!

Now sorted with a 8x32 trinovid:t:

Matt
Ah, wonder if that's the place where some other BFer was considering a Viking V-80ED scope package for under £300. Sounds like they offer some good deals.
Congrats on the new purchase. My guess is that that binocular is lighter than the 7x42 :-O

[AlanFrench]

The Swarovski 7x42 SLCs. The focus is smooth and fast, and the optics are wonderful.

Clear skies, Alan

[MacGee]

I doubt very many birders want to carry 1200g binoculars around all day, no matter how good the optics.
How do you carry them, Henry? I have trouble carrying my 840g 7x42s, partly because of the weight pulling on my neck and partly because of the way they feel against my chest—like a brick.

Michael.

[KorHaan]

How do you carry them, Henry? I have trouble carrying my 840g 7x42s, partly because of the weight pulling on my neck and partly because of the way they feel against my chest—like a brick.

Michael.

Hi Michael,

I'm not Henry but I would like to respond here.
I've attached a counterweight ( a metal buckle ) of 125 grams on the neck-strap, which makes my 740 gram bins actually feel like 615 grams. Like you I had trouble carrying my bins around my neck all day, until I thought of this solution. I began by attaching the bino case with some weight in it to the neck-strap but this looked definitely soppy; big bulge on your back you may be adressed to as Quasimodo, so I decided to look further and came up with the buckle. I simply put two pieces of strap and attached them to the eyelets of my bins and to the left and right end of the buckle. Whole thing is nice and flat, works great.
Yet a bino harness may be more comfortable, but it's a bit of a fuzz when you want to take off your coat when it gets hot.

Greetings, Ronald

[MacGee]

I've attached a counterweight ( a metal buckle ) of 125 grams on the neck-strap, which makes my 740 gram bins actually feel like 615 grams. Like you I had trouble carrying my bins around my neck all day, until I thought of this solution. I began by attaching the bino case with some weight in it to the neck-strap but this looked definitely soppy; big bulge on your back you may be adressed to as Quasimodo, so I decided to look further and came up with the buckle. I simply put two pieces of strap and attached them to the eyelets of my bins and to the left and right end of the buckle. Whole thing is nice and flat, works great.That's ingenious, Ronald. Do you have a photo, by any chance?

Michael.

[KorHaan]

That's ingenious, Ronald. Do you have a photo, by any chance?

Michael.

Hi Michael,

I have no digital camera. I'll make a drawing and post it tomorrow.

Greetings, Ronald

[KorHaan]

Hello michael,

Hope this works; I attached 3 files with drawings.

Greetings, Ronald

[KorHaan]

Hello michael,

Hope this works; I attached 3 files with drawings.

Greetings, Ronald

Hm, not very sharp. Oh well.
The buckle is one of the type mountain climbers use and can be bought in any outdoor sports store.

greetings, Ronald

[MacGee]

Hello michael,

Hope this works; I attached 3 files with drawings.

Greetings, RonaldThanks, Ronald, that's very clear. I think over here the mountain climbers call those things karabiners. But I'm very impressed by your beautiful drawings. Funny too. Excellent.

Michael.

[mook]

Hi Ronald,

Very nice graphics! Reminds of the very entertaining characters (and situations) that are found in many Japanese product manuals.....they have a great knack of bringing their products to life in cartoon form - often with quite bizarre possibilities if you fail to follow proper procedure!!

I hope we see a lot more of your character explaining the whys and wherefores of binoculars/birding techniques.....does he have a name?

Cheers,

Mook.

[KorHaan]

Hello Michael,

Once again the buckle, this time a bit sharper I hope.

Greetings, Ronald

[KorHaan]

Hi Ronald,

Very nice graphics! Reminds of the very entertaining characters (and situations) that are found in many Japanese product manuals.....they have a great knack of bringing their products to life in cartoon form - often with quite bizarre possibilities if you fail to follow proper procedure!!

I hope we see a lot more of your character explaining the whys and wherefores of binoculars/birding techniques.....does he have a name?

Cheers,

Mook.

Hello Mook,

Ehmmmm... it's me, this character, well, sort of; so I suppose I could call him Ronald, but options for a better name are open. :-)

I'm a professionel cartoonist, and now that I have found a way to get these cartoons on this thread, you bet there's gonna be more!!

But I will open a new thread, because I have found out something new today...

Greetings, Ronald

[hinnark]

Hi Ronald,

very interesting. Thanks for sharing. And with a portion of humour:

Ehmmmm... it's me, this character, well, sort of; so I suppose I could call him Ronald, but options for a better name are open.

even more understandable :t:

Steve

[mook]

Hi Ronald,

Cool! I'm looking forward to more adventures.....seeing as though he's based upon your good self, why not call him Little Ron....?

I can see it now.... 'Little Ron's Guide To.....'

Now, how interesting would it have been if he was around for the Swarovski 'hole' and Leica 'jerky wheel' debacle of late.....???? Ok, let's promise NOT to revisit those.....the jokes were wearing far too thin long before the last posts!

Cheers,

Mook.

PS. My moniker (Mook) comes from a comic strip character I created for a staff magazine....needless to say it was 'me' taking the 'p' out of the company, little did they realise.....he he he.....

[KorHaan]

Hi Ronald,

Cool! I'm looking forward to more adventures.....seeing as though he's based upon your good self, why not call him Little Ron....?

I can see it now.... 'Little Ron's Guide To.....'

Now, how interesting would it have been if he was around for the Swarovski 'hole' and Leica 'jerky wheel' debacle of late.....???? Ok, lets promise NOT to revisit those.....the jokes were wearing far too thin long before the last posts!

Cheers,

Mook.

PS. My moniker (Mook) comes from a comic strip character I created for a staff magazine....needless to say it was 'me' taking the 'p' out of the company, little did they realise.....he he he.....

Hi Mook,

"Little Ron" seems a very good name to me, thanks! And by the way, he's now featuring on a new thread I've started, because this thread was about Top 7x42's on the market.

Greetings, Ronald

PS. My users name on the Forum ( Kor Haan ) comes from a comic strip character I created 10 years ago. It's a Black Grouse AND a birder ( see my website). Funny though a new strip character is born this day...

[FrankD]

I have not decided yet. My two favorites would probably be the BN and the FL with the Ultravid not too far behind.

I cannot rule out the Meopta Meostar either...and at any price point. The 8x42 is still my favorite all around binocular. It is the only one I can say that I truly cannot sell.