• 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.

My Zeiss Dialyt 10 x 40 B- how obsolete? (1 Viewer)

Ruff

Ruff

Two birds in one.
I've necessarily been away from birding for the last dozen years, but am returning recently to find that my rubber armoured Dialyts as above have pretty much disappeared from the scene, as observed locally and at places like Pelee. I've been reading the posts on the Zeiss Victorys and so on, and am curious as to how far my Zeiss units have dropped down the quality index. My Dialyts are so ancient as to be labelled as made in 'West Germany' and I got them circa 1988 or so. They're still going strong and I've no intention of giving them up of course, just curious.

Two other things: if anyone can tell me the official way to pronounce 'dialyt,' please do so- I've gone long enough without knowing. And also, I've seen the term "numpties" used in connection to bin buyers on these treads, WTH does that mean?
 
Last edited:
Ruff,
If your Dialyt (pronounced as you write it) is from 1988 it may already have phase correction coating for optimal sharpness, since in that year Zeiss started apllication of it. The optical performance of the Dialyts is still very good although the newer models are better of course, since they will be waterproof (most of the newer ones are) and they will have more light coming out because the quality of the optical glass used and of the coatings applied are improved. If you are happy with the Dialyt, and I see no argument not to, do not read this forum, since regularly also excellent instruments will be treated here as if they are expensive trash.
Another reason to stick to the Dialyt is their value as a collectors item next to their usablility.
Gijs
 
Gijs van Ginkel said:
Ruff,
If your Dialyt (pronounced as you write it) is from 1988 it may already have phase correction coating for optimal sharpness, since in that year Zeiss started apllication of it. The optical performance of the Dialyts is still very good although the newer models are better of course, since they will be waterproof (most of the newer ones are) and they will have more light coming out because the quality of the optical glass used and of the coatings applied are improved. If you are happy with the Dialyt, and I see no argument not to, do not read this forum, since regularly also excellent instruments will be treated here as if they are expensive trash.
Another reason to stick to the Dialyt is their value as a collectors item next to their usablility.
Gijs
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. Don't worry, I won't be damaged by negative feedback and I do want subjective opinions because in the end that's all any of us have (Buddha). EDIT: these bins do have the early version of P coating BTW. Close focus option as well.

In this particular case I do wish English was so limited in it's ways to pronounce 'dialyt' but I've heard or imagined all of the following being used: "dial-it", "dye-alt", "dye-lite," and "dial-lite"!
 
Last edited:
Ruff - Your Zeiss 10x40 B, regardless of phase coating, is a high quality piece designed to last a lifetime with reasonable care. It will resolve more than your eyes can possibly
do on their own. There are many more individual eye/brain differences found in humans than found in binoculars. Older un-coated Zeiss binoculars yield very pleasant images. Did for decades and will continue to do so.

The human quest for perfection (mostly in the eyes of the beholder) and the "propaganda" generated by the marketing folks has many users filled with self-doubt about their optics. I find this highly amusing since even today's so-called entry level binoculars are optically very good and are relatively inexpensive.

Now when it comes to mechanical reliability (which your Zeiss 10x40 B probably has few peers) , Zeiss has been a leader for years, although some recent models appear to be a little more delicate. As mentioned before, the value of the used Zeiss 10x40 B maintains itself. Even if the exterior lens have some of the coatings rubbed, the image is not really affected.

"Ancient" isn't really an adjective that describes your Zeiss. It is part of the marketing
strategy that Zeiss uses to convince the buying public that older isn't OK. Your Zeiss was designed to last a lifetime.
 
Brilliant binoculars and, IMO, still up there with the best. There will always be people that have to have, and brag about having the latest model - and there will always be those who get out there and do some real birding. My Leicas are 20+ years old and have had 20+ years hard use but, they still work. 'nuff said.

Chris

Just a thought - the price of a new pair of 'alphas' or a holiday birding in Costa Rica?

C
 
Last edited:
John Dracon said:
Ruff - Your Zeiss 10x40 B, regardless of phase coating, is a high quality piece designed to last a lifetime with reasonable care. It will resolve more than your eyes can possibly
do on their own. There are many more individual eye/brain differences found in humans than found in binoculars. Older un-coated Zeiss binoculars yield very pleasant images. Did for decades and will continue to do so.

The human quest for perfection (mostly in the eyes of the beholder) and the "propaganda" generated by the marketing folks has many users filled with self-doubt about their optics. I find this highly amusing since even today's so-called entry level binoculars are optically very good and are relatively inexpensive.

Now when it comes to mechanical reliability (which your Zeiss 10x40 B probably has few peers) , Zeiss has been a leader for years, although some recent models appear to be a little more delicate. As mentioned before, the value of the used Zeiss 10x40 B maintains itself. Even if the exterior lens have some of the coatings rubbed, the image is not really affected.

"Ancient" isn't really an adjective that describes your Zeiss. It is part of the marketing
strategy that Zeiss uses to convince the buying public that older isn't OK. Your Zeiss was designed to last a lifetime.
Click to expand...

chris butterworth said:
Brilliant binoculars and, IMO, still up there with the best. There will always be people that have to have, and brag about having the latest model - and there will always be those who get out there and do some real birding. My Leicas are 20+ years old and have had 20+ years hard use but, they still work. 'nuff said.

Chris

Just a thought - the price of a new pair of 'alphas' or a holiday birding in Costa Rica?

C
Click to expand...

I did a brief side-by-side comparison of my old Dialyts with the latest Victorys when I was at Pelee earlier in May. As I already said, I've been unable to bird much for about 12 years, but in that time was using binoculars regularly for other reasons, and while I could detect a little more brightness with the new unit, the difference (to me) was not worth an upgrade, not by a long long shot. That was outside on a sunny day and low light might have made a bigger difference, I don't know. But I was curious about the opinions of the well informed... and you never know when you may suddenly need new binoculars.
 
Ruff said:
I did a brief side-by-side comparison of my old Dialyts with the latest Victorys when I was at Pelee earlier in May. As I already said, I've been unable to bird much for about 12 years, but in that time was using binoculars regularly for other reasons, and while I could detect a little more brightness with the new unit, the difference (to me) was not worth an upgrade, not by a long long shot. That was outside on a sunny day and low light might have made a bigger difference, I don't know.
Click to expand...

There are some differences, no doubt about it. The Victory FL are waterproof, there's virtually no CA, the transmission is somewhat better. But the Dialyts are still very nice indeed. I actually prefer the focussing of the Dialyts over that of most "modern" bins, and the Dialyts just "feel" better in the hand in my opinion.

Hermann
 
dalat said:
It's not really a German word, that's why I said you can pronounce it as you want ;), I guess it's derived from this technical term: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialyte_lens
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I never knew, and when I bought them there was no internet on which to ask and find out. (Wow, I must be old!)

Hermann said:
There are some differences, no doubt about it. The Victory FL are waterproof, there's virtually no CA, the transmission is somewhat better. But the Dialyts are still very nice indeed. I actually prefer the focussing of the Dialyts over that of most "modern" bins, and the Dialyts just "feel" better in the hand in my opinion.

Hermann
Click to expand...

I thought my Dialyt model is waterproof? Not that I had plans to test that....
 
Last edited:
Greetings. Perhaps my recent experience to acquire a Zeiss 10x40 B T* P* Victory rather than the Victory 10x42 is relevant. It is likely so because I think that the recent modern advances in glass manufacturing and coating can make a lot of appreciable differences. I was looking for the older model to save money at the premise that the performance difference was likely to be de minims. In a direct comparison between the two, the difference was indeed significant. I did not buy the 10x40, and with the HT around the corner, did not buy the FL 10x42 either (but this is another story).

The Victory 10x40 is not the dialyt--but I would be very surprised if the dialyt's performance is comparable to the newer designs (e.g., FL 10x42 and the HT). It may have other attributes that endears it to its users. And if so, please keep it and enjoy in good health--but, if your objective is to maximize your visual enjoyment, it is very likely that the newer Zeiss designs are appreciably better. Best regards.
 
Hello Ruff,

I once owned a Dialyt 10x40, T*P. I could not complain of its optics but it did not suit me, ergonomically. I did buy a Zeiss 10x32 FL, which did "work" for me. I believe that the advances of multi-coating and phase coating, which may be incorporated in your binocular, are along way ahead of what came previously. HD/FL glass does have advantages, especially in colour rendition, but not as much as multi-coating and phase coating brought to binoculars.
Bird watching is much more about the experience that persistence and patience bring to the enthusiast than about his glass.
My experience, today, seeing red-headed woodpeckers and cowbirds had little to do with my binocular. A binocular even older than your Zeiss Dialyt would have done quite well.
What, indeed, is a numpty?
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :scribe:
 

Attachments

  • red headed woodpecker.jpg
    red headed woodpecker.jpg
    28.5 KB · Views: 291
  • cowbird.jpg
    cowbird.jpg
    32.1 KB · Views: 258
Last edited:
Pinewood said:
Hello Ruff,

What, indeed, is a numpty?
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :scribe:
Click to expand...

I deleted a bit too much of your post there, but yes I absolutely agree- bins aid birding but they are not birding. Actually, when I started, the old timers often basically scorned having fully operational binoculars, and the really skilled ones (or those who wanted to look that way) wore ancient units that looked like they had been polished with gravel.

I Googled 'numpty' and learned it's originally a Scots word that means 'a foolish or naive person', with recent connotations about someone making foolish ill informed purchases. (I was thinking perhaps it was one of those Brit birding terms I used to love, but apparently it's not so specialized.)
 
Last edited:
The Dailyt 10x40's are an excellent binocular, even by today's standard. I bought mine in 86, and they have served me well.

They have been sent to Zeiss several times over the years, never because of a problem, just for a cleaning. Ziess chose once, sometime in the early 90's, to replace the prisms, and they were upgraded to phase coated ones. I sent them in two years ago, and the whole focusing mechanism was replaced. Not really sure why either of these were done, I never had any problems with them. They have also replaced the eyecups each time they have been in for service, all free of charge!

They are still extremely capable optically, and give any modern alpha I have tried, a good run for their money. In fact, until I tried the HT's I never kept another pair, I just couldn't see that much of a difference. During normal daytime observations, even the HT's offer very little more.

I think the main performance difference is in the coatings. Also keep in mind, in my limited understanding of it, the glass used in these had lead in them. They are already "HD" glass. The newer glass types (FL) were needed when manufactures could no longer use lead in it.

If you like them, and they work for you, use them! Whenever I am in a new area, or with a large group of birders, I usually seek out those I see using the Dailyt 10x40 or 7x42's, 9 times out of 10, they are the most experienced birders there, and know the area and where the birds are. That to me, says something about their quality!

Kevin
 
Mine were inherited from my old man when he passed away. In fact I'm not sure whether they are phase-coated or not.
When I decided to take up birding I also bought the Minox HG 8x33. My ability to assess binoculars was less evolved by then (2009/2010) and I found the HG basically similar to the Dialyt.
When I purchased the Fury 6.5x32 I found it immediately more useful than the Minox.
It also pointed out the yellow hue and subpar back-lighting properties of the Dialyt.
(Subsequently I ended up buying the FL 10x32 to match the Fury, and it is brighter than the Dialyt with a wide margin).

The folding rubber eyecups are less appropriate by modern standards and so is the close focus. In particular I remember an occasion when I brought the Dialyt and found snow buntings in the frosty winter grass about 10 feet ahead. I had to take several steps backwards to get them into clear focus.
I love the shape and the ridges that make this a superb instrument to hold. Its focus knob should be three times wider by modern standards, though.
It is also very comfortable to look through, a very easy view.
My main objection to the Dialyt is the colour representation which is decidedly yellowish. But so are the Meostar 8x32 and the older Conquests.
Let us also not forget Holger's comparative review of the Dialyt, a newer Docter and a Chinese 10x42:
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/dialyt10x40.html

It would, however, be foolish to dismiss them as obsolete since many experienced birders continue using theirs and don't plan to swap them. However, one of them confessed that he stubbornly avoids to touch any of the newer offerings since he would probably get stuck with it. As for me, I could think of getting a Terra ED to let the Dialyt finally retire, but that is probably conspicuous consumption. Maybe if I had a car, I'd rather leave the Terra ED in the glovebox than my old man's glass!


//L
 
looksharp65 said:
Mine were inherited from my old man when he passed away. In fact I'm not sure whether they are phase-coated or not.
When I decided to take up birding I also bought the Minox HG 8x33. My ability to assess binoculars was less evolved by then (2009/2010) and I found the HG basically similar to the Dialyt.
When I purchased the Fury 6.5x32 I found it immediately more useful than the Minox.
It also pointed out the yellow hue and subpar back-lighting properties of the Dialyt.
(Subsequently I ended up buying the FL 10x32 to match the Fury, and it is brighter than the Dialyt with a wide margin).

The folding rubber eyecups are less appropriate by modern standards and so is the close focus. In particular I remember an occasion when I brought the Dialyt and found snow buntings in the frosty winter grass about 10 feet ahead. I had to take several steps backwards to get them into clear focus.
I love the shape and the ridges that make this a superb instrument to hold. Its focus knob should be three times wider by modern standards, though.
It is also very comfortable to look through, a very easy view.
My main objection to the Dialyt is the colour representation which is decidedly yellowish. But so are the Meostar 8x32 and the older Conquests.
Let us also not forget Holger's comparative review of the Dialyt, a newer Docter and a Chinese 10x42:
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/dialyt10x40.html

It would, however, be foolish to dismiss them as obsolete since many experienced birders continue using theirs and don't plan to swap them. However, one of them confessed that he stubbornly avoids to touch any of the newer offerings since he would probably get stuck with it. As for me, I could think of getting a Terra ED to let the Dialyt finally retire, but that is probably conspicuous consumption. Maybe if I had a car, I'd rather leave the Terra ED in the glovebox than my old man's glass!


//L
Click to expand...

Most of your points are valid, but Holger's review is not. The Dailyt he reviewed did not have the T* multi-coatings or phase coating. Both of these put the newer ones into a much higher performance level. And, he himself, mentions that there could be a problem with the mirror coatings... Also, I have always found the Dailyt's to preform very well in back-lit situations.
 
Last edited:
I'm seeing more birders out and about this year compared to previous years perhaps b/c I am going to more 'hot spots'. To my surprise, I am seeing quite a few birders with older bins. People still seem to be enjoying them. This year I purchased an old Jenoptem from the 80's. No, it's not as good as the two modern bins I own, but it's still nice. I think that most working binoculars aren't obsolete if you can still see decent detail and still see the bird.
 
Last edited:
looksharp65 said:
Mine were inherited from my old man when he passed away. In fact I'm not sure whether they are phase-coated or not.
When I decided to take up birding I also bought the Minox HG 8x33. My ability to assess binoculars was less evolved by then (2009/2010) and I found the HG basically similar to the Dialyt.
When I purchased the Fury 6.5x32 I found it immediately more useful than the Minox.
It also pointed out the yellow hue and subpar back-lighting properties of the Dialyt.
(Subsequently I ended up buying the FL 10x32 to match the Fury, and it is brighter than the Dialyt with a wide margin).

The folding rubber eyecups are less appropriate by modern standards and so is the close focus. In particular I remember an occasion when I brought the Dialyt and found snow buntings in the frosty winter grass about 10 feet ahead. I had to take several steps backwards to get them into clear focus.
I love the shape and the ridges that make this a superb instrument to hold. Its focus knob should be three times wider by modern standards, though.
It is also very comfortable to look through, a very easy view.
My main objection to the Dialyt is the colour representation which is decidedly yellowish. But so are the Meostar 8x32 and the older Conquests.
Let us also not forget Holger's comparative review of the Dialyt, a newer Docter and a Chinese 10x42:
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/dialyt10x40.html

It would, however, be foolish to dismiss them as obsolete since many experienced birders continue using theirs and don't plan to swap them. However, one of them confessed that he stubbornly avoids to touch any of the newer offerings since he would probably get stuck with it. As for me, I could think of getting a Terra ED to let the Dialyt finally retire, but that is probably conspicuous consumption. Maybe if I had a car, I'd rather leave the Terra ED in the glovebox than my old man's glass!


//L
Click to expand...

Looksharp

I've never had a Dialyt. (I do still have it's lesser rival, a Leitz 7 x 42 Trinovid BA and use it on occasion) But after what I have read about the Dialyt over the years, I would not replace it with my new Terra ED which I just reported on favorably. I would get the Terra ED to keep in my car though.:t:

Which, come to think of it, is what I intend to do with the one I just reported on.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 3 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.

Similar threads

P
Zeiss Dialyt 10x40 B T * price
Replies
2
Views
260
NorthernHarrier
NorthernHarrier
A
Zeiss Victory 10x42 T* FL Rubber Armouring
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
PYRTLE
PYRTLE
C
Victory Pocket owners...focus wheel tightness?
Replies
16
Views
2K
chipito
C
mgp13
Zeiss SFL 8x40 review from Australia
Replies
7
Views
3K
GrampaTom
G
M
Zeiss 8x30B TP Dialyt hinge tightening
Replies
4
Views
813
mercedes_sl1970
M

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top