• 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.

Mint Zeiss 7x42 B/GA T*P* Dialyt Brings $1,600.00 On Ebay! (1 Viewer)

I would think your 8x30 was made near the same time [or after] your 7x42, so no help there..........BTW, this thread puts a new face on ''pedantic.''

Actually, my 8x30B/GAT*P is earlier than my 7x42B/GAT*P*, based solely on the P* notation on the latter.

The serial numbers also point that out, with quite a large divergence.

It would seem there were a lot years between them, "if" the serial numbers were issued consecutively regardless of the models produced. Not sure of that though???

8x30B/GAT*P Serial # 423973

7x42B/GAT*P* Serial # 2340708

Zeiss sure produces a LOT of glass! :eek!:
 
Last edited:
...that design element by itself doesn't bother me as much as the choice to use composites (aka "plastic"?) for the eyepiece control arms...

On this point, I agree. I love the 7x42 Classic but one of its little defects is that the plastic control arms are not quite stiff enough to prevent some flex when focusing under very hot or cold temperatures (which can cause, I think, seals in the oculars to drag with more friction), as a consequence creating somewhat unstable synchrony in the focus (and sometimes requiring setting the diopter differently).

--AP
 
On this point, I agree. I love the 7x42 Classic but one of its little defects is that the plastic control arms are not quite stiff enough to prevent some flex when focusing under very hot or cold temperatures (which can cause, I think, seals in the oculars to drag with more friction), as a consequence creating somewhat unstable synchrony in the focus (and sometimes requiring setting the diopter differently).

--AP

Yeah, re: that control arm,......i'm still getting to know these binos, and still haven't been able to get the thought out of my head to not press the eyecups as hard into my sockets as i might otherwise like on my 8x30 B/GAT*P Classic, or any of thy older Leitz Trinovids with internal focusing. I don't know how much it can take, ....lol

I'd bet there are some talented CNC programers out there that could copy a set of Zeiss composite control arms, focusing wheel, and possibly the ocular cases,......and reproduce them in anodized aircraft grade aluminum!

They could make a fine living, I suspect.

Of course, you DO give up the lifetime Zeiss warrantee!!! :eek!:

I think I'd accept that risk for my pair. :t:
 
Last edited:
Joe - That lovely Zeiss leather case of yours (made from goat skin I believe) belonged to the generation of rubber covered binoculars of that era. I had several. When purchased second hand, that case often isn't included in the transaction and sold separately later.

The evolution of Zeiss case material and design has its own kind of evolution. Leather was a choice for obvious reasons, and older Zeiss cases for porros and roofs were well finished. But as you already know, leather dries out and becomes brittle - also hydroscopic.

The thinking going along with the change to rubber covered binoculars is obvious. Why create elaborate protection for something that is already well-protected, plus synthetic materials are far cheaper in crafting cases or pouches or whatever?.

Keeping your binocular and case together in the field, upzipping and zipping it, is a nuisance. I know, I have done that numerous times. You have a a rain guard to protect the oculars, but what about the objective lens? Keeping dust off them outside is not possible in normal use, but effective and inexpensive fixes in the way of covers exist - Butler Creek makes diameters of snap open lids that fit your Zeiss.

BTW, I have seen Zeiss 7x42s with the external coatings badly rubbed by careless cleaning. Yet when used in the field, one cannot see any difference whatsoever in optical performance.

Enjoy your Zeiss. They don't make them like that anymore.
John
 
Joe - That lovely Zeiss leather case of yours (made from goat skin I believe) belonged to the generation of rubber covered binoculars of that era. I had several. When purchased second hand, that case often isn't included in the transaction and sold separately later.

The evolution of Zeiss case material and design has its own kind of evolution. Leather was a choice for obvious reasons, and older Zeiss cases for porros and roofs were well finished. But as you already know, leather dries out and becomes brittle - also hydroscopic.

The thinking going along with the change to rubber covered binoculars is obvious. Why create elaborate protection for something that is already well-protected, plus synthetic materials are far cheaper in crafting cases or pouches or whatever?.

Keeping your binocular and case together in the field, upzipping and zipping it, is a nuisance. I know, I have done that numerous times. You have a a rain guard to protect the oculars, but what about the objective lens? Keeping dust off them outside is not possible in normal use, but effective and inexpensive fixes in the way of covers exist - Butler Creek makes diameters of snap open lids that fit your Zeiss.

BTW, I have seen Zeiss 7x42s with the external coatings badly rubbed by careless cleaning. Yet when used in the field, one cannot see any difference whatsoever in optical performance.

Enjoy your Zeiss. They don't make them like that anymore.
John

Thanks John,.....I had them out this morning as it's been the 1st day without rain and very heavy cloud cover (4 days now),.....not the best conditions to judge any binocular.

I guess i can be grateful the Zeiss leather case was included on this used purchase,.....( goatskin too? :),.....and it really is super soft. I usually include everthing I had picked up with a sale of something,....but i see your point. Bet they can sell for $30 or $40 easy, for a like new one.

I'll be ordering a set of objective covers at some point. Someone mentioned the ones coming with the Zeiss 7x42 FL fit these older 7x42's as well,....so maybe that one. Generslly when i go out I only unzip it once and leave it around my neck. A light jacket can usually cover it fairly well if the weather gets bad, or pushing through heavy brush.

The rainguard is pretty big,....i much prefer friction fit circular covers with a small rubber connection, lile I fitted on the 8z30 B/GAT*P. Have to take some measurments and get that taken care of soon.

I have to say, with the sunny day and wonderful fall leaves color changes,.....there was no question the 7x42B/GAT*P* was something special! I went back and forth between it and my recently acquired 8x30B/GAT*P (also impressive!),.....but i gotta say the 7x42 has a slight edge. Both have rich and contrasty images, and it was very hard to say one was any sharper than the other for sure. But my short time using both i'd say the 7x42 is a "smidgen" sharper.

They are SO close, however, that it's too soon to say for sure. Possibly the slightly steadier holding ability of the lower power glass is giving that initial impression. I'd like to bench these on a table with some test patterns and take any movement out of the equation. I suspect any difference would be trivial.

The view is mesmerizing,....almost like you've simply been moved closer to your subject. The lowely 7 power magnification almost as easy to steady as my Leitz 6x24 Trinovid,....but of course with a brighter and more contrasty image.

For sh*ts and giggles I also got out my 50 year old or so Zeiss 8x30B Dialyt, and she still holds her own. :t: Totally clean internals and pristine lenses help i'm sure. The sharpness of this i've never had any issue with,....it's right up there at least near the best. But there was definately a bit more flare present that was slightly noticable and a little distracting at times in certain lighting situations.

I even spent about a half hour making up a new leather strap for the 7x42B/GAT*P* I had picked up 2 nice 1/2" "black" Latigo leather strap material a week ago. I finally got around to cutting one down to length, drilling the holes and adding the razor slices to fit the double sided mushroom shape connectors. The brown one shown earlier in the pics i had just borrowed off an old Nippon Kogaku, but black matches this better.

The 1/2" Latigo strips are super soft and flexable,.....usually used for horse reigns and such. I fitted a 1-1/2" wide leather slide section on for comfort behind the neck, and i'm good to go. Nothing like leather around the neck if it's soft and wide!

.....off to the woods. ;)

cheers,
Joe T
 
Last edited:
Greetings. Can anyone please educate me of the difference in "view" between the 7x42B/GAT*P* and the Victory 7x42 FL model? Thank you very much.
 
Greetings. Can anyone please educate me of the difference in "view" between the 7x42B/GAT*P* and the Victory 7x42 FL model? Thank you very much.

I find that the FL has a flatter field but with more astigmatism. For me, that is the most important (practically relevant) difference.

--AP
 
I find that the FL has a flatter field but with more astigmatism. For me, that is the most important (practically relevant) difference.

--AP

Hello Alexis,

Do you notice any difference in colour rendition? The FL is shorter but is it any easier to handle.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
 
Hello Alexis,

Do you notice any difference in colour rendition? The FL is shorter but is it any easier to handle.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

I'm sure there were some, but I use a variety of bins with slightly different color characteristics, so I don't pay much attention to that unless it imparts an obvious non-neutral cast in normal use (e.g. the strong yellowish of older Swarovski, peach of the B&L Elite, yellow of some current cheap roofs and many older bins). It has been a long time since I last tried them side by side, so I only remember the details of astigmatism and curvature, which strongly affect my viewing pleasure. I like the 7x42 Classic better overall (I prefer curvature to astigmatism, and I didn't find brightness, contrast etc all that different), and since I already own it and don't use it much anymore (it was my primary bin before the 8.5x42 EL came along), I haven't been tempted to get the 7x42 FL or to compare the two more rigorously. As for the handling, I prefer the Classic because it has very slim barrels and the semi-open bridge allows for a quasi-wrap-around grip. When the EL came out, I felt the open-bridge design was intended to lure 7x42 Classic users to giving it a try, because it was the first alpha competitor in that ergonomic realm.

--AP
 
Last edited:
7x42 BGAT vs. FL views compared

Greetings. Can anyone please educate me of the difference in "view" between the 7x42B/GAT*P* and the Victory 7x42 FL model? Thank you very much.

I have owned several examples of the 7x42 BGAT and FL, both early and late, and I see very little difference between them regarding the view. Both are superb instruments, in my opinion.

Comparing two late examples, the field of view is the same, color rendition seems identical to me, and center-field sharpness is outstanding in both. I think the BGAT maintains its sharpness slightly further out than the FL, but then the FL seems to control lateral CA better than the BGAT. CA is very low in both, but it's almost not there at all with the FL, just at the far edge. Both show similar amounts of pincushion distortion; I see no rolling ball effect. I note that the image at the far edge of the BGAT's field seems to have a 'smoother' character to it than the FL; the FL's image seems a bit 'rougher' at the far edge, and possibly this is the result of astigmatism that others have reported in the FL. But with either instrument the overall view is outstanding to my eyes - wide, clear, bright, sharp, relaxed.

The FL is about two ounces lighter than the BGAT, and an inch shorter. Eye relief seems identical to me. I consider both instruments to be two of the best birding glasses ever made; I'm quite nuts about them both, and I've tried just about everything else out there. To me, the 7x42 FL represents a logical evolution of the BGAT - the same wide field of view, the same superb center sharpness, but smaller, lighter, tougher, and waterproof. I'm sorry they're no longer made.
 
I have owned several examples of the 7x42 BGAT and FL, both early and late, and I see very little difference between them regarding the view. Both are superb instruments, in my opinion.....................

.......................To me, the 7x42 FL represents a logical evolution of the BGAT - the same wide field of view, the same superb center sharpness, but smaller, lighter, tougher, and waterproof. I'm sorry they're no longer made.

That's one of the benefits of Zeiss and other Alpha's continuing to design and produce new product. Loyal fans will "upgrade" to the new, and often times release into the market their older but similar product. (which often become a "ClassiC") :-O

I have no problem waiting for a relative bargain to appear,.....which often turns out to be the binocular you dreamed about in your youth, but couldn't afford back then. ;)

.........rainproof is fine with me, as I avoid it whenever possible and much prefer to be out when it's pleasant. :t:
 
Last edited:
This is probably what that fine Italian commented on that i read awhile back (forget where i read it here?), that Zeiss moved from an "engineering mindset" to a "business mindset" ,....or something like that. An image that Zeiss built over 100 years or so, that the "best" product that could be produced using only the finest materials available,.....is not the corporate thinking any longer.

The realities of the modern world, i suppose.....and probably one reason i gravitate to older Zeiss production.

Joe,

I think you're quite right with that statement. That change from "engineering to business mindset" happens everywhere, not only at Zeiss and not only in optics. Those business men might generate an economical success here and there. But at the long run they ruin much if not most of the quality and knowledge we (the customers) once could benefitted from.

Steve
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 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