• 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.

David Attenborough Binoculars (1 Viewer)

kkokkolis

Περίεργο&#
I am a fan of David Attenborough since I first saw the Life on Earth when I was 11. He introduced me in natural history as Sagan introduced me in astronomy and cosmology. Now the Internet gives me the opportunity to enjoy most of his shows and I've seen many full series the last year.
I noticed thet he used to carry binoculars very often. They are always roofs, 32-42mm wide. He uses several pairs throughout the 60 years he is active. Some seem metallic and carry battle wounds. Other, recently, seem rubber armored. They are always without caps. I tried to see the red circle or the blue rectangular or the flying bird on them but not once they were obvious. They might be of a British maker I don't know of course. In one of the recent shows one 32mm pair looked like a Swarovski but I'm not sure.
The facts that his shows lived the Konrad Lorentz geese studies, Miller's experiment, the double helix model discovery and then the human genome project, the continental drift theory establishement, the first filming of birds of prey and Snow Leopard , the SCUBA invention, infrared camera and other filming techniques first use and so many science and technology advancements are much more interesting but I can find much information on these. There's no info on which binoculars he preferred and used throughout his career that hasn't stopped yet. I guess that if there's info on that, this is the place to find it.
So? What do you know about David Attenborough's binoculars?
 
FWIW I saw a documentary over the W/E and he was using Zeiss 10x40BGAT (Classic), and I have seen him use Swaro 8x30SLC's of unknown mark.

I would imagine he now uses a Swaro of some sort like most people who don't particularly endorse anything.
 
I though that eagle eyed members of this forum might have a clue, provided they would have seen the documentaries (and why wouldn't they, with all those beautiful birds and other animals they show).
 
For Attenborough's fans, there is an amazing offer in Amazon. Most of the Life series (24 DVDs) for around 40 pounds.
 
I am a fan of David Attenborough since I first saw the Life on Earth when I was 11. He introduced me in natural history as Sagan introduced me in astronomy and cosmology. Now the Internet gives me the opportunity to enjoy most of his shows and I've seen many full series the last year.
I noticed thet he used to carry binoculars very often. They are always roofs, 32-42mm wide. He uses several pairs throughout the 60 years he is active. Some seem metallic and carry battle wounds. Other, recently, seem rubber armored. They are always without caps. I tried to see the red circle or the blue rectangular or the flying bird on them but not once they were obvious. They might be of a British maker I don't know of course. In one of the recent shows one 32mm pair looked like a Swarovski but I'm not sure.
The facts that his shows lived the Konrad Lorentz geese studies, Miller's experiment, the double helix model discovery and then the human genome project, the continental drift theory establishement, the first filming of birds of prey and Snow Leopard , the SCUBA invention, infrared camera and other filming techniques first use and so many science and technology advancements are much more interesting but I can find much information on these. There's no info on which binoculars he preferred and used throughout his career that hasn't stopped yet. I guess that if there's info on that, this is the place to find it.
So? What do you know about David Attenborough's binoculars?

David's stuff is great. But, is his ability to judge bino flesh any better than YOURS? I think not. There are arguably 3 ranges of "quality" in binoculars. All of the instruments in that range differ very little.

In my old age, I relish the many fine "Alpha" electric guitars that have passed through my hands. The one I liked best was the "boat paddle" (Fender Telecaster) I had last. It was a guitar I wouldn't touch in my stupid youth, for fear of talking Fender "germs" back to my Rickenbacker collection.

I was a slow learner and it cost me THOUSANDS!

Bill
 
FWIW I saw a documentary over the W/E and he was using Zeiss 10x40BGAT (Classic), and I have seen him use Swaro 8x30SLC's of unknown mark.

I would imagine he now uses a Swaro of some sort like most people who don't particularly endorse anything.

Those might be the metal pair and the 32mm Swarovski I thought I identified and mentioned earlier. But I saw that over the years he used many other pairs, disimilar to those two. It makes sense since even if we rule out the Zoo Quest and others before Life on Earth, there still is a 35 year span. He started before modern lens and phase correcting coatings.
Binoculars never played the lead role in his films. Cameras did the job and it seems that he used them for spotting animals and then for his own enjoyment.
 
David's stuff is great. But, is his ability to judge bino flesh any better than YOURS?
I don't know. I guess yes, because he sure has more experience using them than I have. But that's not the reason I am asking. My interest is historical.
I think that there's good chance that my Terra are better than what he used during the Living Planet and that Canon's flat field and steady handheld viewing was unimaginable during the Trials of Life and that Papilio's close focus three dimensional images were unheard in the Life on Earth years. But what he used when filming was made with 16mm handheld manual cameras and even later, when I was a young man with just a pair of borrowed Nikon Porros has a historical significance for me.
 
I don't know. I guess yes, because he sure has more experience using them than I have. But that's not the reason I am asking. My interest is historical.
I think that there's good chance that my Terra are better than what he used during the Living Planet and that Canon's flat field and steady handheld viewing was unimaginable during the Trials of Life and that Papilio's close focus three dimensional images were unheard in the Life on Earth years. But what he used when filming was made with 16mm handheld manual cameras and even later, when I was a young man with just a pair of borrowed Nikon Porros has a historical significance for me.

Historical preference separates the situation from all other criteria.

In 1964, Paul McCartney was asked what kind if bass strings he used, the inquisitor thinking they must be of some SPECIAL make. McCartney's answer:

"Long, shiny ones."

To him, the strings were just a tool, not a way of life.

Bill
 
A good musician will be a good musician even with mediocre equipment, but I bet his bass tech sets his instrument up with top notch strings. Did they have guitar techs in 1964 ? :h?::-O

Historical preference separates the situation from all other criteria.

In 1964, Paul McCartney was asked what kind if bass strings he used, the inquisitor thinking they must be of some SPECIAL make. McCartney's answer:

"Long, shiny ones."

To him, the strings were just a tool, not a way of life.

Bill
 
A good musician will be a good musician even with mediocre equipment, but I bet his bass tech sets his instrument up with top notch strings. Did they have guitar techs in 1964 ? :h?::-O

They NEEDED to be Hofner. How many Novices put Rickenbacker or Finder strings on, only to find the neck being warped under the tension?

Bill
 
My elderly neighbor had a WW2 era Martin D18 with a rare irregular spruce top that he left in full tune when not being played resulting in a warped neck. He traded it for a Gibson model ? in the seventies even up. While the Gibson is virtually worthless today, the Martin would be worth a small fortune I'm sure. Now back to binoculars before I'm banned. |=)|

They NEEDED to be Hofner. How many Novices put Rickenbacker or Finder strings on, only to find the neck being warped under the tension?

Bill
 
I don't know. I guess yes, because he sure has more experience using them than I have. But that's not the reason I am asking. My interest is historical.
I think that there's good chance that my Terra are better than what he used during the Living Planet and that Canon's flat field and steady handheld viewing was unimaginable during the Trials of Life and that Papilio's close focus three dimensional images were unheard in the Life on Earth years. But what he used when filming was made with 16mm handheld manual cameras and even later, when I was a young man with just a pair of borrowed Nikon Porros has a historical significance for me.

Hi, you sound as though it is important for you to find this information, my own guess is that he would have probably have had good binoculars provided for him over the years by the film makers, and they, I expect would have some kind of record, so a start point might be to write a polite letter quoting your historical interest, to the BBC, who may or may not point you in the right direction?
Best wishes.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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