I just took an evening walk and toured the neighboring hills with my 7x42 classic t*p* binoculars, and it was a pleasure viewing the surrounding terrain. Sure, the edges aren't as clear as my Nikon SEs, but the view is so relaxed and vivid at the same time. I've been selling off a few binos from my collection, but these will be staying with me. I seem to forget just how great these are. Along with being an ergonomic delight. Armored but lightweight and perfectly balanced. Walk around with the 10x56 Nightowls for a while and these feel like compacts in comparison! Keepers.
-
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.
7x42 classics. Sigh (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter nyatt
- Start date
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello Nyatt,
I recently wrote the following:
The reason Kenny and others like the Zeiss 7x42 ClassiC is that it represents a very shrewd compromise.
<A bright image based on:
42 mm. objectives
Total internal Reflection of the Abbe-Koenig prisms, better than even modern dielectic coatings
and the best multi-coating
<A remarkable Field of view of 8.5º and an apparent Filed of View of nearly 60º,
using extraordinary eyepieces making much of that field useful.
<Suppression of Chromatic Aberration by using long focal length objectives
<Seven power giving a stable platform to appreciate the resolution.
<Multi-coating and phase coating for contrast
<Using A-K prisms provide a slight stereo effect
I would venture to guess that Zeiss was always tweaking those coatings to optimize the color and contrast, while I suspect that not all phase coatings equal those of Zeiss.
The two drawbacks were:
<Long barrels, which some actually like, that seem a throwback to Porro II binoculars
<Standard external focussing, providing a long close focus.-
on Cloudy Nights
Others added the thought that the 6 mm. exit pupil was an important part of the experience.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :scribe:
I recently wrote the following:
The reason Kenny and others like the Zeiss 7x42 ClassiC is that it represents a very shrewd compromise.
<A bright image based on:
42 mm. objectives
Total internal Reflection of the Abbe-Koenig prisms, better than even modern dielectic coatings
and the best multi-coating
<A remarkable Field of view of 8.5º and an apparent Filed of View of nearly 60º,
using extraordinary eyepieces making much of that field useful.
<Suppression of Chromatic Aberration by using long focal length objectives
<Seven power giving a stable platform to appreciate the resolution.
<Multi-coating and phase coating for contrast
<Using A-K prisms provide a slight stereo effect
I would venture to guess that Zeiss was always tweaking those coatings to optimize the color and contrast, while I suspect that not all phase coatings equal those of Zeiss.
The two drawbacks were:
<Long barrels, which some actually like, that seem a throwback to Porro II binoculars
<Standard external focussing, providing a long close focus.-
on Cloudy Nights
Others added the thought that the 6 mm. exit pupil was an important part of the experience.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :scribe:
James Bean
Well-known member
Zeiss 7x42, ClassiC by name and classic by nature. I have its forebear, Hensoldt Wetzlar 7x42 Dialyt, a mint leatherette model in exquisite leather case (Foto Kaps, Regensburg). The optics are very good, if not quite up to modern standards, but a 'comfortable' view, clear and sharp. It's almost a shame to use it, being so pristine, but then it would also be a shame not to use it. I also have a Zeiss 10x40 BGAT* which, again, is not quite as contrasty as more recent equivalents, but it's easily 'as good a view' as, if not better than, a Zeiss 8x30 BT* Conquest I recently acquired. As for elegance and build quality, these 'oldies' really are in a class of their own; 'they don't make 'em like that any more'. There is something about older Zeiss optics (others too, e.g. Nikon porro) which I can't define, but they seem to have a 'wholesome' and 'easy' image which, although not quite as 'crisp' as (say) a Hawke ED, nevertheless provide a sharp enough and pleasing view. Is it the lead glass (now 'non-PC') I wonder? Whatever the reason, classics are 'keepers'.
chartwell99
Well-known member
I agree emphatically. My Zeiss 10 x 40 BGAT, thanks to its obsolete close focus capability, is no longer an effective birding glass but it excells for sports events and horse racing, where it continues to amaze its owner and all of the curious who examine it. My 7 x 42 Classic still renders a view unmatched by any other glass from other makers. Build quality for both Zeiss "Classic" binoculars is truly remarkable, and adds immeasurably to the pleasure of use.
For the fun of it, I took out my Nikon 8x32 SEs tonight. Interesting comparison. The color and center view are similar. The Nikons are very sharp, right up to the edge; much more so than the Zeiss 7x42s. But the placement of the eye is much more forgiving with the Zeiss. I believe both will find permanent spots in my glass collection. Many have come and gone, being enjoyed for a season or two, but these continue to set the standard for these eyes. The Nikons are just finicky enough that I find myself being drawn back to the Zeiss whenever the newness of my latest glass acquisition starts to wear off. It's nice to have choices like those!
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
"I just took an evening walk and toured the neighboring hills with my 7x42 classic t*p* binoculars, and it was a pleasure viewing the surrounding terrain. Sure, the edges aren't as clear as my Nikon SEs, but the view is so relaxed and vivid at the same time."
"I took out my Nikon 8x32 SEs tonight. Interesting comparison. The color and center view are similar. The Nikons are very sharp, right up to the edge; much more so than the Zeiss 7x42s. But the placement of the eye is much more forgiving with the Zeiss."
If you find a binocular that just seems to disappear when you use it, then you're home. Ergos and handling are every bit as important as ultimate optical performance, even more so really. I tried, but didn't get on well with the 8x32 SEs. The eye placement thing was a deal breaker for me though, like you and so many others, I found the view superb.
Regarding flatness of field, or sharpness to the edge, I think it's a non starter when one is actually using their bins and not testing or comparing them. The sweet spot of 7x42 classics is so large anyway, do you really care about the edges? Just turn your head
If you love using your 7x42s then by all means use them, use them up and enjoy them without concern you're not behind the latest $2000. bin. My favorite bins are my Leica 8x32BNs despite having 7x42BRs and several other high quality birding bins. They (for me) are just the most transparent bins I've ever used in that no thought whatsoever goes into my using them. The view may not be quite state of the art for 2009 but I really don't care as they are close enough.
Cheers
Oh, and nyatt... I'm enjoying the HG5x15 and use it every day walking my dog!
"I took out my Nikon 8x32 SEs tonight. Interesting comparison. The color and center view are similar. The Nikons are very sharp, right up to the edge; much more so than the Zeiss 7x42s. But the placement of the eye is much more forgiving with the Zeiss."
If you find a binocular that just seems to disappear when you use it, then you're home. Ergos and handling are every bit as important as ultimate optical performance, even more so really. I tried, but didn't get on well with the 8x32 SEs. The eye placement thing was a deal breaker for me though, like you and so many others, I found the view superb.
Regarding flatness of field, or sharpness to the edge, I think it's a non starter when one is actually using their bins and not testing or comparing them. The sweet spot of 7x42 classics is so large anyway, do you really care about the edges? Just turn your head
If you love using your 7x42s then by all means use them, use them up and enjoy them without concern you're not behind the latest $2000. bin. My favorite bins are my Leica 8x32BNs despite having 7x42BRs and several other high quality birding bins. They (for me) are just the most transparent bins I've ever used in that no thought whatsoever goes into my using them. The view may not be quite state of the art for 2009 but I really don't care as they are close enough.
Cheers
Oh, and nyatt... I'm enjoying the HG5x15 and use it every day walking my dog!
Last edited:
brownpelican1
Well-known member
Are the Zeiss Classic 7x42's eyeglass friendly?
This is my first post on birdforum though I've been a visitor for several years. I am considering the purchase of a 7x42 Zeiss Classic but am hesitant because I have never seen any comments about eye relief. Can anyone shed some light on the "friendliness" of these bins for eyeglass wearers? Thanks!
This is my first post on birdforum though I've been a visitor for several years. I am considering the purchase of a 7x42 Zeiss Classic but am hesitant because I have never seen any comments about eye relief. Can anyone shed some light on the "friendliness" of these bins for eyeglass wearers? Thanks!
A while back (quite a while!) I was talking with a gentleman at the Hawk Mountain Migration Lookout and the subject of eye relief of binoculars came up. He told me he had recently got rid of a 7 x 42 Zeiss Classic because the eye relief was too long. We had been discussing the very long eye relief of my Leitz 7 x 42 Trinovid.
It should be satisfactory for eye glass wearers. My Leitz was more than satisfactory.
Bob
Last edited:
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
They are wonderful with glasses--one of my all time favorites. They have an honest 18mm as I recall.
--AP
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
Of course, if you need an honest 15mm then you'll get blackouts from honest 18mm
Too much I find worse than too little.
The only way to know is to try them there are too many other variables (glasses fit, prescription, face shape) to know for sure. But at least you know that they have long ER.
Too much I find worse than too little.
The only way to know is to try them there are too many other variables (glasses fit, prescription, face shape) to know for sure. But at least you know that they have long ER.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
:hi: Welcome aboard Birdforum! :hi:
The Classic 7x42 are VERY eyeglass friendly, either near of far sighted. Now that I use glasses all the time I find these to be quite comfortable.
Ed
Last edited:
brownpelican1
Well-known member
Thank you Ed, Kevin, Alexis & Bob. You have provided the info I was looking for! 18mm of eye relief works well for me. I was very comfortable with the eye relief on my 8x42 Nikon Premier LX's. I replaced them 6 months ago with 8x42 Zeiss Victory FL's. After my initial love affair with the Victory's I began to notice some discomfort and eye strain after prolonged use. I never experienced these symptoms with the Nikon's. I am not an optics expert so I attributed my problems with the Victory's to the reduced eye relief (16mm vs. 18 or was it 20mm for the Nikons?). Am I barking up the wrong tree? Would going from the 8x42 Victory's to the 7x42 Classics help (theoreticaly)? I have experimented with the diopter and the IPD but that didn't help. I have been "lured" by the discriptions of the 7x42 Classic view as "Natural", "Easy", "Comfortable", etc. I use my bins for birding and I bird 300+ days a year. Your comments would be instructive.
brocknroller
porromaniac
I don't think your eyestrain has anything to do with the lower ER unless you are using the bins with eyeglasses and are pushing your eyeglasses hard against your face so you can see the entire FOV. That can give you a headache and create a deep ridge on your forehead that will make you look like a Klingon.
If you don't wear glasses with bins, then you have to consider other possibilities such as the binoculars being out of collimation - not enough to give double images but enough to cause eyestrain -- this is particularly true if the vertical alignment is off since there's less tolerance for vertical misalignment than horizontal.
Or perhaps after using the 8x42 LX, which is sharp to the edge, your eyes are used to scanning the entire FOV, and with the FLs, you have to concentrate on the centerfield because the edges are out of focus (Zeiss's design scheme to increase sharpness at the center rather than spread the sharp field at a lesser resolution over a wider portion of the FOV).
The three bins I use the most have large sweet spots with gradual fall off at the edges - the Nikons SE, EII, and LX.
I also use my 804 MC Audubon, which has a decent sweet spot and fuzzy edges that I have to move my eyes to see. The 804 Audubon has a very relaxed image.
However, if I use a bin with a small "sweet spot", my eyes tend to scan the entire FOV, particularly the leading edge when I pan, and my eyes will try to focus the out of focus areas, and I end up with eyestrain if not a headache.
Brock
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
ER won't give you eye strain problems. It will give you kidney bean blackouts (too much) or loss of FOV (too little).
Though I do find my 8x42 FL to have just too much ER for my set up. SO getting the eyecup high right is an issue. Unlike the previous Victory 8x40 which I found very easy to use. Annoying but not straining.
The other thing that could be causing eye strain (other than collimation) is a mis-set diopter setting.
Or bifocal/PAL eyeglass problems.
BTW, the change in the quality of the view between the 7x42 Classic and 8x42 FL will be very noticeable.
Though I do find my 8x42 FL to have just too much ER for my set up. SO getting the eyecup high right is an issue. Unlike the previous Victory 8x40 which I found very easy to use. Annoying but not straining.
The other thing that could be causing eye strain (other than collimation) is a mis-set diopter setting.
Or bifocal/PAL eyeglass problems.
BTW, the change in the quality of the view between the 7x42 Classic and 8x42 FL will be very noticeable.
brownpelican1
Well-known member
Thank you Kevin and everyone else who responded to this issue. Brock seems to have provided an insight which has helped. My Nikon LXs were uniformly sharp edge to edge while the Zeiss is incredibly sharp in the center "sweet spot" gradualy becoming less sharp at the edges. I was straining my eyes to get the outer edge in focus. Once I was aware of the different optical designs I was able to use my current "tool" the way it was designed to function and the eye strain was gone. That being said, I now know that I prefer the Nikon design philosophy. Live and learn!
Tom
jaymoynihan
Corvus brachyrhynchos watcher
Oh yes. I guess my favorites. My Nikon 8x32 SE's are "technically" better to my eyes. But the 7x42 classics really "relax" the eyes (i wear glasses BTW). They are long, but balance in the hand just right for me (medium sized hands).
They would be my answer to the "desert island" question.
Disclosure: Have never looked through the newer FL series....
They would be my answer to the "desert island" question.
Disclosure: Have never looked through the newer FL series....
