• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

7x binoculars increasing in popularity? (1 Viewer)

It does seem that the 7x, once the popular no-brainer for the beginner, has now, through unpopularity and limited availability, become the choice of the experienced and discriminating expert. Especially the 7x42.

Oh woe. I have an 8x42, now the popular no-brainer for the beginner, therefore of no interest. I also have a 5" f/12, not a 6" f/15, refracting astronomical telescope. 6" f/15, by the way, is the classic nostalgia king from the '50s, if you birdheads didn't know.

Story of my life. An inch in arrears, and an x in excess.
Ron
 
Coincidentally, I've been using lower magnification binoculars over the last few weeks as a matter of choice, starting with a WW2 BuShips 6x30 (with the sharpest reticle I have ever seen) prompting me to buy a Zeiss Design Selection 6x18 (it's still growing on me), then trying my Nikon 7x35 Action EX porro in comparison with my Olympus 7x42WP roof. The Olympus is fairly scarce, despite being praised five years ago by the Polish Antarctic Expedition for its 'unsurpassed light gathering and optical quality'. Last Friday I took my grandchildren and their friend on a birdwatching outing along the Wirral Peninsula, and I let them pick binoculars from my collection. My grandson instantly chose a 10x32 Kowa, yet the two girls preferred the 7x Nikon and 7x Olympus; I had the Zeiss 8x30 Conquest. I'd been tempted to give my Nikon 7x35A an airing, but felt an 8x would provide variety. Strange to relate, on the day I preferred the 7x Olympus; maybe it was the weather, or my eyes, but it seemed to deliver the 'easiest' view. My grandson wouldn't part with the 10x Kowa, saying it was 'brilliant'. So, it's all a matter of personal preference, which can change from day to day, for a number of reasons...
 
Hmm, the 7x Olympus you say? I might have to see if I can give a pair a gander. I always have a soft spot in my heart for a good 7x. I was just using my Nikon 7x35 Es and was again struck by how really good a binocular they are.
 
The Bushnell Excursion EX 7x36 (24-3606) are new to me and and like the Legend Ultra HD I suspect they too haven't shipped yet. As I searched the EO site last week for 7x36 I suspect they've popped up very recently.

The FOV you quote for the EX 7x36 is apparently incorrect: it's 488 feet@1000yds or 143m/1km that's 9.3 degrees. That's wider than the Zeiss 7x42 ;)

http://www.bushnell.com/general/binoculars_excursion_ex_24-3606.cfm?section=General Use

I've just had it pointed out to me ... that these numbers of inconsistent. Funny that.

143m == 8.19 degrees
488ft == 9.31 degrees

Hmmm, which one? Perhaps neither?

I see

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocula...birder-7x36-binocular?tab=specifications#tabs

says FOV is 410 feet which is 7.82 degrees (decent but a lot less spectacular).

I wonder which one is right. I wonder if Bushnell know?

I guess I'll ask them.
 
Well, I called EO this morning and asked them the two questions I posed above. They didn't know the answer to either, as the did not have them yet, but the gal I talked to said she'd check with Bushnell and will call me back.

FWIW, the Raven is indeed simply a Raptor with black armor.

I does look to me like there is maybe something up now with 7x. We will soon have 6.5 Raptor and Fury from Vortex, 7x from Vortex and Bushnell in addition to the Swift, in addition to who knows what else is out there ready to pop up. They are compacts true enough, but the 5mm exit pupil with the added brightness and reduced shake from the 7mm in a compact is an extremely appealing package.

To avoid stressing Tero any further, I didn't ask anything about camo. :>).
 
Last edited:
It does look to me like there is maybe something up now with 7x. We will soon have 6.5 Raptor and Fury from Vortex, 7x from Vortex and Bushnell in addition to the Swift, in addition to who knows what else is out there ready to pop up. They are compacts true enough, but the 5mm exit pupil with the added brightness and reduced shake from the 7mm in a compact is an extremely appealing package.

Steve C
Yes, it does appear that 7Xs are on the move. :t:

...Bob
Kentucky, USA
 
Hi to all:

well i have been a fan of low power bins since i picked up a pair of 6.5X44 Celestron ED's, way back in the day when i was just barely moist behind the ears, birder-wise. since most of my really fun birding was done under cover of dark skies and even darker canopies during spring migration, i just sort of thought about the brightness factor back then. well in the long run it was the steady, solid view and depth of field that kept me sold on the idea. geez i wish i had those nocs back, they were stolen from my car many moons ago. a birding pal picked up the 9.5's in the same line, and i liked mine a lot better, but the 9 and a halfs were sweet too!

later, when upgrading, i added the 7X45 Zeiss Night Owls, which i still have and haul them out several times every april when i hear them whinning softly in the drawer for some hot fall-out warbler action. like a cinder block around the neck, but man what a view!

bad weather/really low light days are now the domain of the 7X FL's; which are as good as the ol' NO's, more color neutral and of course much lighter. the wide field and steady look are also good for tickathons, when i am trying to check off as many species as possible in a short period of time.

lately though, i have switched almost exclusively to Canon IS bins, which give a solid tripod-like view. so compelling is this feature i am willing to sacrifice FOV and DOF for it.

a really cool, deadly duo would be something like the 6's or 7's referenced by the posters above, and a Canon 10X30 IS. The Canon 30's are not WP, but otherwise this combo might really give the best of both worlds. The fans of steadiness could have that in such a pairing.

kind regards to all,
UTC
 
Interesting comments UTC. That 6.5x ED model is one I have ready little about but what I have read seems to all be very, very positive. It is shame there aren't any more floating around.
 
Folks - If you ever get a hold of a pair of old Canon 7x35 porros (assuming in colimation, etc.) you will get "jolted" in finding how really good they are. One feature for eye glass wearers is that when the eye cup is removed, the metal surface aurrounding the glass is flat and a bit of 3M sticky rings stuck to the metal allows one to get the entire FOV and yet protect the eye glasses. I have purchased many at bargain prices to move them on to friends. The only knock on the old Canons is that the tolerances are so tight that the oculars can get really hard to move focusing far and near. And of course they aren't rubber covered or water proof. But they are superior to the B&L Zephyrs. John
 
I was out this evening with my 6.5x21 Pentax Papillio for the first time this year. Not quite 7x but very close. And of course a unique bin (well, that an the 8.5x).

A bumblebee was feeding on the flower just to the right of my chair (about an arm length away from my head). He filled about 1/3 of the FOV: black, yellow and hairy.

Also checking out the cavity nesting BC chickadees and a pair of nesting crows who know own the P-Patch and have taken to intimidating the gardeners ;)

So if you have no other reason to get a low mag bin get a Papillio.
 
You guys have my curiousity up when it comes to some of these older porros. I am going to have to follow the rest of your examples and start watching ebay for them.

;)
 
The extra detail seen with an 8x over a 7x (the "efficiency" of a bin depends on it's magnification and transmission) is a probabilistic thing. It is 14% (8/7) so the distance ring around you in which you can see a particular feature is expanded by 14%. If you are IDing birds by field mark at 25m to 40m with 8x then that same ring is 87.5% (7/8) smaller with 7x or 21.9m to 35m. So you might expect to miss some birds with a 7x.

The same argument with different numbers applies to 10x. There is also an additional quirk. See Vukobratovich "Binocular performance and design" paper at the University of Arizona optomech paper collection

http://www.optics.arizona.edu/optomech/papers/Vukobratovich 1989.pdf

where more magnification is worth "less" with each increase even on a fixed bin (for reason I still don't quite get) so in real life these numbers will be slightly smaller.

Of course you trade this off for shake and that leads to other ergonomic feature that might help say over a day's birding. Useful for pelagic trips too!

I agree that there should be more smaller 7x bins especially at 32mm but I suspect there is almost a reverence of tradition (playing to old fogies like us?) for "magic numbers" like 7x42 and 7x35 (well, 36 now). I think for some 7x32 just seems too odd.

I still think you need a reason to pick 7x over 8x but for some folks it's the right choice for a variety of personal reasons.

If you have more than a couple of bins then one of your selection should be a 7x. I suspect this might be even more true if you are a 10x bin fan. It makes more sense perhaps to have a 7x and a 10x than say a 8x and 10x or an 7x and 8x.

Good summary Kevin. I would tend to agree with you that if you have 2 bins it makes more sense to have 7× and 10× than other combinations.

What makes bino discussion threads interesting is of course that everyones eyes are different, and what suits one person may not suit another. Throw in the weighted importance of ergonomics and price and we could go on for hours. ;)

The key point, mentioned by many people in numerous threads, is that you need to try as many as possible before buying.

There probably needs to be significant public demand before we see a big increase in the number of smaller magnification bins. Choice is good, but tradition remains important, and rightly so. If it ain't broke etc.
 
What makes bino discussion threads interesting is of course that everyones eyes are different, and what suits one person may not suit another. Throw in the weighted importance of ergonomics and price and we could go on for hours. ;)

The one sentence that sums this up is: All binoculars are a compromise.

There is no perfect bin if for no other reason, as you say, people are different.

We do go on for hours and hours ;)
 
interesting, Leica & Zeiss both make 7x42 binoculars and no 7x32 binoculars. Somebody must be buying them. At those prices the buyers probably aren't beginners. I wonder what these buyers know that we don't? chip
 
interesting, Leica & Zeiss both make 7x42 binoculars and no 7x32 binoculars. Somebody must be buying them. At those prices the buyers probably aren't beginners. I wonder what these buyers know that we don't? chip

There are quite a few Meopta Meostar class on up at 7x42. I'd be real interested in seeing some statistics on the average age of the 7x42 user and how many binoculars they had before the 7x. There is just enough less visible image shake at 7x that it is probably easier for people with less steady hands to hold them. Also less tiring to use for longer periods.
 
I'm 59 I have no problem holding 10x or 12x. My 1st binoculars were Bushnells 7x35 when I was 8 years old. Over the years I have had a dozen or so pairs 6x, 7x, 8x, & 10x. Some times holding them still is an issue that has nothing to do with physical limitations. Example, try viewing out an auto's window when someone else is in the auto and not sitting still. Try viewing when the wind is blowing hard. Try viewing from a floating dock or boat. For these reasons I think for me the 7x or 8x are best all around. When I'm setting on a hill watching hawks then I use my 10x. My 10x are Zeiss. I chose the 7x Leica over the 8x because of one less element. They seem to let more light through for these old eyes that only dilate 4.5mm. chip
 
Folks - If you ever get a hold of a pair of old Canon 7x35 porros (assuming in colimation, etc.) you will get "jolted" in finding how really good they are. But they are superior to the B&L Zephyrs. John

OK John Dracon,

It's your fault now. |:D| After the above and the similar post in '60's & '70's glass, I just picked off an apparrently cherry Canon 7x35 for what I call cheap from that famous auction site.
 
Didn't Leica/Leitz at one time make a 7x35 roof binocular?

I always thought that a good 7x35 would be a pretty interesting to many birders.

Mike
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top