• 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.

And now for something completely different: The Habicht 7x42 (1 Viewer)

The Habicht 7x42 is the one I grab in the low light early morning to look out at the feeders. The narrow FOV isn't an issue there.
 
Excellent review Hermann! Thanks you! It made me want one.. and now I have to make my mind: the leather one or the armored one.. ?? ;)

PS. My Swarovski catalog from 2003 shows the weight difference being only 80 grams (680 vs 760)
 
Last edited:
I have a Habicht 10x 40 serial number 174078. I do not know its year of manufacture, but would imagine it was sometime in the 70's or 80's. It does have the yellow cast, which I gather was an intentional move on Swarovski's part to emphasise reds and browns in low light, to the benefit of hunters.

If I only had one pair of bins, I would not want it to have the colour bias of my Habicht 10x40. However, given that that I have other colour neutral bins, the Habicht is quite nice to have, as something classic and a little different. I certainly cannot fault its sharpness, build quality and comfortable handling.
Then of course there is the price. These old timers ( with the warm cast ) can be had, in good condition for around £200. Now that is a bargain for the quality on offer, if one can get accept the non neutral colour bias.
 
All the Swarovski porros we can currently order in the U.S. The Green Armor 7x42 and 10x40, and the Black 7x42, 8x30, 10x40.
 
Excellent review Hermann! Thanks you! It made me want one.. and now I have to make my mind: the leather one or the armored one.. ?? ;)

I went for the leather one, simply because it's lighter. Plus it's significantly cheaper, at least over here in Germany.

And before you get one: Do make sure you can try it out, ideally in the field. The view *is* narrow and somewhat tunnel-like, there's no denying it. Only you can decide if you can live with that. I got the 7x42 because I wanted a light binocular with a large exit pupil and excellent transmission, and was pretty amazed that I didn't find the small field of view as difficult to cope with as I had thought.

But I'll definitely have a look at the new generation of roofs in the (hopefully) not too distant future. My two go-to binoculars (Leica 8x32 BA from 1992 and Zeiss Victory 10x40 from 2000 or 2001) are getting a bit long in the tooth by now. The Zeiss SF 8x42 looks interesting, even though I'd be more interested in an 8x32 with a field of view of 150m/1000m. Weight has been becoming more and more important to me lately.

Hermann
 
Hermann, Thank so much for the review of the Swaro 7x42!! This makes me want to go visit Proudpapa! I think it is only about 30 miles from my place. I should take Brock if I do, or do I dare.:-O

Jerry, I think with post #26 he answered your question.
 
Brock,

The Habichts survived because they have been, for all practical purposes custom made by Swarovski and available by special order from Swarovski dealers for quite a few years now.

Nikons SEs, as you know, were never available that way. I suspect that if they were there still would be a small market for them. About the size of the market for the Habichts. Maybe bigger?

Bob

The Habichts are built in batches, I suspect only every other year or so, and so were the SEs… "custom made" would be crazy expensive.
 
A quick update: I used the Habicht this summer during my holidays in Sweden as well as a birding trip to the North Sea. Just in case I also took my old Leica 8x32 BA on my trip to Sweden as I wasn't sure how I'd get on with the Habicht in woodland, but in the event I only used the Habicht.

The focusing is still pretty stiff (although it loosened up a bit), but that didn't really present any problems, not even in fairly dense woodland. The large depth of field of the Habicht (due to its low magnification) made things pretty easy in the woods, even in situations where I had to be quick to get on the bird. And the focusing is very precise, like it should be. Hitting exactly the spot of maximum sharpness is easy, much easier than with some other binoculars I've used over the years.

The optical quality still amazes me. I used the Habicht in all sorts of lighting conditions, and I didn't find any problems at all. I'd go as far as saying that in difficult conditions the Habicht is just about the best pair of binoculars I've used so far. No CA, no colour cast, very bright, very high contrast and sharpness, excellent resolution, no veiling glare, no ghosting.

The only thing that takes some getting used to is the narrow field of view. Yes, it is narrow (about the same as a "normal" 10x40), yes, it feels tunnel-like. I got pretty much used to it over the three weeks in Sweden, but it would sure be nice if it were at least a bit bigger, say 130m/1000m.

Still, it's quite an amazing binocular.

Hermann

Hermann, apart from the flare stuff I feel just the same about the 8x30, also vs. the SE. The Habicht is really a friend for life, for everyday joy and and as amazing as on day one…
 
The Habichts are built in batches, I suspect only every other year or so, and so were the SEs… "custom made" would be crazy expensive.

I qualified that by saying "for all practical purposes."

They are probably built on an as needed basis to keep a small inventory of them available for sale. The special order requirement helps Swarovski estimate how many will be needed for future sales. It shouldn't be unduly expensive to do this because they have been unchanged for years and the parts needed to make them have to remain in Swarovski's inventory.
 
Tobias,

I agree, also. I have had 2 Habicht 8x30 and 5 10x40. From almost all eras. Now I have one of the latest samples of the 10x40 W GA. This last one has the latest coatings, for a very neutral colour rendition.
In spite of the classic yellow tint of the earlier ones I like them ALL! They are fantastic instruments extremelly well made! The first one, bought used in 1980 was with me for the next 20 years. My only binocular used for all: Works in the Patagonia rangeland, Big Game Hunting, Birdwatching, and general use. It ends with a very "rough" look...No leatherlike cover, knocks everywhere, but the optics without ANY mark and the function practically like when new. And never fogged inside...Great binoculars, indeed! It was stolen some day in 2000...
Today I have and use the new Habicht a lot, along my Meopta Meostar 8x32 and the new Zeiss Victory HT 10x42. All very good, of course.

PHA
 
The Habichts might be built in batches but not every couple of years. While we don't order them every day, we are fairly regular and the serial #s are usually recent and usually not more than about 4 months old. Same with the Extendable Spotting Scopes.
 
Over the years the Swarovski Habicht has received quite a lot of attention on this forum, even though it is in several ways one of the most old-fashioned binoculars on the market nowadays: It is one of the few remaining porros made by one of the major manufacturers now that Nikon has finally decided to stop production of the Nikon SE and Zeiss the production of the 7x50 BGAT*, and its basic design hasn’t changed for some 60 years. It does not have most of the features many people take for granted nowadays like internal focusing and close focus, it only has simple fold-down eyecups and is not really suitable for eyeglass wearers.

Of the different Habicht models still in production the 8x30 has received by far the most attention here. There are several threads about this model, including some detailed reviews:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=222503 (Giorgio, 8x30)
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=278276 (Tobias Mennle, 8x30)
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=251846 (stephen b, 8x30)

These threads are all well worth reading for anyone who is interested in the basic properties of the Habicht series, including some high quality photos of the Habicht 8x30 in Stephen B's review.

By comparison, the Habicht 10x40 and the 7x42 have received far less attention here. There are several posts on the performance of the 10x40, especially those by PHA, and the 7x42, mainly those by Mallot, and a review by mikeymo:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=278225

There are also a few reviews on the web, for instance by Allbinos (10x40), Binomania (7x42), Kikkertspesialisten (7x42, 10x40) and Holger Merlitz (7x42) as well as a detailed review of the 7x42 on the German forum.

I have been interested in the Habicht series for well over 25 years now, as I generally prefer porros over roofs. In the 1980s I came close to buying a Habicht 10x40, but I could not cope with the yellowish tinge of the image. So, after reading some of the reviews here, especially Stephen B's, and the astonishing transmission figures Gijs van Ginkel found for the Habicht porros, I finally decided to get a Habicht myself to see what it is like in the field. After some thoughts I settled for the 7x42 rather than 8x30 or the 10x40, despite its small AFOV.

Why the 7x42? Mainly because I do not own a lightweight binocular with large exit pupils, so the Habicht actually fills a gap. In addition, the focusing of the Habicht porros is quite stiff due to them being sealed, so the 7x42 with its greater depth of field is somewhat easier to handle than the 8x30 and especially the 10x40. And while the 10x40 and especially the 8x30 have some problems when viewing against the light and/or with veiling glare, the 7x42 does not (cf. eg Holger Merlitz review: http://www.holgermerlitz.de/swaro7x42.html). Ghosting and veiling glare are among my pet peeves and I have a very strong dislike of veiling glare in particular, so the 7x42 seemed more suitable to my requirements than either the 8x30 and the 10x40. It also has slightly more eye relief, a point I will come back to later.

My 7x42 is from November 2012, so it is quite recent and has (probably) up-to-date coatings. So far I have used it for some 80 hours in the field in different weather conditions, both during the day and in low light. I have also done some comparisons with a Nikon 8x32 SE (serial number 550xxx) I will refer to when looking at the optical quality. Even though the binoculars are not strictly comparable because of the smaller objectives and the higher magnification of the Nikon, it is a binocular many people here will know, so it can serve as a reference point.

Optical quality
The Habicht has got excellent image quality. The resolution on axis is about as good as it gets. To my eyes I would say it is even better than the Nikon SE, with even more fine detail, for instance in the plumage of Reed Buntings viewed at a range of about 20-30m. That is no mean feat, considering the optical quality of the Nikon SE. The Nikon is sharp and the Habicht is tack sharp. Even when used with the Zeiss 3x12 tripler the image looks pretty good, although I did not do any formal resolution tests. The sweetspot is sufficiently large; I estimate about 75-80% of the image is sharp, with a soft transition towards the edge. The Nikon is of course better here, as the the Habicht does not have field flatteners. CA is no problem at all, at least I couldn’t see any, but I am perhaps not the best person to judge this as I am not very susceptible to CA at all. The 3D effect is of course pronounced and one of the nice features of this binocular.

Transmission and contrast are also excellent, with no colour cast whatsoever. In fact, when I first compared the Habicht to the Nikon SE, I was almost disappointed with the view because the image looked almost flat compared to the Nikon with its reddish colour cast. Once I got used to the Habicht, however, I found I could perceive small differences in plumage coloration more easily through the Habicht. Of course the higher transmission of the Habicht that is obvious even in bright daylight also helps. The image is extremely bright with very high contrast and no colour cast whatsoever; it looks absolutely neutral. In fact, the difference compared to the Nikon SE is so obvious the Nikon SE’s image looks almost “mushy” in a direct comparison. That is something I never thought I would have to say about the Nikon SE. In low light and at night the Habicht also obviously works very well with its high transmission.

Ghosting, stray light and veiling glare: The Nikon SE is already very good as many here will know from personal experience, especially compared to most roofs, but the Habicht is even better. I could not see any veiling glare, not even on bright, overcast days, and bright lights at night did not cause any ghosts. There are obviously also no spikes caused by the prisms, something I find highly distracting with many roof prism binoculars. The only stray light I found was when viewing against the sun at sunset, with the light coming from the side.

The field of view is at 114m/1000m small, very small in fact, especially if you compare it to, for instance, the well-known Zeiss 7x42 BGAT*P with its field of view of 150m/1000m. An apparent field of view of ~46 degrees is not really a lot, and as a result the view “feels” tunnel-like. There is no denying that, the view through the Nikon SE feels better, even though it is not a “real” wide-angle binocular. Even a standard 7x50 with a field of 130m/1000m does not feel as claustrophobic as the Habicht. However, 114m/1000m is still about the same as a standard 10x42 binocular and wider than most compacts. I will come back to that later in the conclusion.

Ergonomics and handling
The Habicht basically handles just like any medium-sized porro. I have got fairly small hands for a man, and the Habicht just feels right in my hands. One of its great advantages is its weight, at 620gr (!) it is quite a lot lighter than virtually all the other 42mm binoculars on the market.

The Habicht has got some peculiarities though: The focusing is, like others have said before, pretty stiff (but in my opinion not too bad). It is very precise with no play at all, as might be expected from a simple focuser. The Nikon with its smooth focuser is, however, better. That is presumably the price one has to pay for the waterproofing. Still, I find I can focus the Habicht quite easily, even though the focusing may be a problem in winter. I may have to use two fingers then (right index finger and left thumb work quite well for me). The focus wheel has markings, a nice feature in my opinion because it is easy to set the binocular to infinity.

The eyecups are small and perhaps a bit too short, I would prefer them to be about 2mm longer. In an ideal world Swarovski would offer three different sets of eyecups for the 7x42: One for spectacle wearers, one like the current eyecups, and one that is slightly longer. The slightly greater eye-relief compared to the 8x30 and the 10x40 (14mm vs. 12mm) surprisingly makes a difference – with the 8x30 I find I soil the lenses with my eyelashes quite easily, with the 7x42 that is much less of a problem.

Conclusion
The Habicht is an interesting binocular with excellent optical quality and several quirks. It is certainly not a binocular for everyone, and there are definitely quite a few binoculars that are better for birding overall for most people. I was initially mainly worried about the AFOV, and in the field I still often wish it were wider, but the small AFOV is probably the price one has to pay for the low weight and maybe also the optical quality of Habicht. However, after a few hours in the field I found the small field of view was something I can live with. Yes, it does feel narrow, but because I am used to 10x42s with a field of view of 110m/1000m I do not lose any field of view.

To me it looks as though Swarovski originally designed this binocular to have a very high optical quality in all sorts of lighting conditions by keeping the construction as simple as possible (the eyepieces are reversed Kellners with just three elements) and minimizing problems with stray light by limiting the field of view. They certainly succeeded in doing so.

So, if you cannot cope with a smallish, almost tunnel-like AFOV, a binocular without close focusing or a somewhat stiff focuser, if you wear glasses or just do not like the handling of porros, the Habicht is definitely not for you.

If, however, you want excellent optical performance in a lightweight package and at a price well below that of top roofs, the Habicht 7x42 is a binocular you might want to have a look at.

Hermann
I had the Habicht 7x42 and the 8x30. The eyecups are small and hard and it takes a vise-grip to turn the focus and they are short on ER. I got rid of them long ago. Get the SV.
 
I had the Habicht 7x42 and the 8x30. The eyecups are small and hard and it takes a vise-grip to turn the focus and they are short on ER. I got rid of them long ago. Get the SV.


This was not thread asking for opinions on other binoculars, and was not about the SV. It was a review about "something completely different".

We know you like your SV, and it is spectacular; but so is the Habicht- and that was the gist of this thread.
 
I had the Habicht 7x42 and the 8x30. The eyecups are small and hard and it takes a vise-grip to turn the focus and they are short on ER. I got rid of them long ago. Get the SV.
So you are in agreement with paragraphs 2 and 3 of the section on 'ergonomics and handling' and paragraph 3 of the 'conclusion', but what was the relevance of quoting the rest of the review?
 
Thank you Hermann, for giving the Habicht 7x42 the attention they deserve so much.

I was an avid Habicht 7x42 myself from 2009 till summer 2014.

In the summer 2014 I bought myself new glasses, which where quite bigger (read; more rugged since my lovely 2 kids demolished the more fragile more tiny models) and created a larger distance between eyes and glasses.

This gave the effect of watching trough two black pipes. In an instance they weren't the best pair of binoculars anymore for me.

But for anyone who lacks a budget of the regular alpha's should take the Habichts in consideration. They are simply the best bang for your bucks.

I mainly use my binoculars for watching badgers in dusk or even at night and some birding and the 7x Habicht did a perfect job for this manor.

In the summer of this year I sold my Habicht and I bought a pair of Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 8x42.
Also very nice binoculars, but in dusk they performed quite poor and at night they were useless, but I expected that I could excepted that.

Off course I didn't excepted that and today I went to my dealer for a trade in of the Legends and my scope.
The plan was to take a look at the Meopta Meostar 8x56.

But I got a really nice trade in price for my optics which gave me the opportunity of going up one level of quality.

After looking at several really nice bins. I got stuck with two. The Zeiss Conquest 8x56 and the Swarovski SLC 8x56. The Zeiss HT was simply way to expensive for me and ergonomically a disaster.

The Zeiss was within budget and the Swaro wasn't. The image in daylight was for me quite similar. But the reputation of after sales is a way lot better the Zeiss in the Netherlands and in specs the light transmission of the Swaro was quite a bit higher and that is one of the specs I find really important. So in the end I left the store with a SLC 8x56. :D

But if I had the same, smaller glasses I would happily remained using my beautiful pair of Habicht 7x42.

I honestly think that the Habicht 7x and 10x leather versions are the most beautiful binoculars I have ever seen.
 
The Habicht was AFAIK the first binocular they made, and it has been (and probably still is to some extent) the traditional binocular used in the Austrian Alps.

The Swarovski company made 6x30 binoculars for the German Wehrmacht during WWII. It was this experience that led to the foundation of Swarovski Optik after the war.

I own a vintage pair of Habicht 7x42s and a more modern pair of 8x30s. I love the 8x30s, which have overtaken my Nikon Superior E 10x42s as my "daily driver" as the Nikons have succumbed to years of abuse. I only received the 7x42s recently, an gift from my wife ($130 off eBay). These are single-coated from the 70s(?) Despite their age when I compared them to the 8x30s I was blown away with the amount of light transmission. The difference is not apparent in daylight but in twilight just after sunset the 7x42s performance was astonishing. They can resolve an amazing amount of detail that I thought would have been impossible. I enjoy the wide field of view of the 8x30s, but I found myself wanting to use these more! The 8x30s are going to be dropped off at Swarovski for collimation, so I will try these out while they are in the shop. I do not see these replacing my 8x30s, but I see them coming in handy if I want to extend my birding beyond sunset, say for watching woodcocks, looking for nightjars or owling.

Here are a couple pics of the markings, does anyone have a clue as to the date of these? Swarovski says that it only has serial number data available going back to 1980.
 

Attachments

  • 532934_10205539901999444_4144136940710361897_n (1).jpg
    532934_10205539901999444_4144136940710361897_n (1).jpg
    12 KB · Views: 84
  • 1466165_10205539901919442_1866147020004256484_n.jpg
    1466165_10205539901919442_1866147020004256484_n.jpg
    9.7 KB · Views: 41
Just a quick update: The more I use the Habicht, the more I like it. The optics are truly excellent, IMO better than, for instance, those of the Nikon 8x32 SE, with slightly better contrast, a slightly brighter image and more natural colours and even fewer problems when viewing against the light. The 7x42 seems to be pretty immune in that respect, it's quite clearly better than the Habicht 8x30. The focusing is still pretty stiff, although it loosened up somewhat since I got the pair, but it's not too bad. The low magnification with the resulting larger depth of field definitely helps as well.

But the real killer as far as I'm concerned is the combination of light weight and a 6mm exit pupil. I always found small exit pupils (below ~4mm) pretty uncomfortable in binoculars, but now I find the step up from 4mm to 6mm quite noticeable. And the weight is a big advantage, expecially when using the binocular all day. Not sure I want to carry something heavier with a smaller exit pupil in the foreseeable future ... ;)

And the field of view ... Well, it's larger than die field of view of the 10x40 I used for God knows how many years. Sure, the AFOV is small, but so what? I find I can live with that.

Hermann
 
Last edited:
Hello Hermann,

I once owned this glass but found the FOV too constricting. The eye cups on the 7x42 have the reputation of popping up, from the turned down position, without warning.

The Zeiss 7x42 BGAT*P was, for me, a much happier choice.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Hi Arthur,

I think I would be happier with the 7x42 BGAT, too, since I tend to suffer from claustrophobia. In fact, that's what kept me from graduating Clown School. For the final exam the instructors wanted all eight of us to pile into a VW bug together, but I couldn't do it (and it wasn't because they served us franks and beans the night before). 3:)

I saw a 7x42 Dialyt for sale on eBay the other day, and I thought I felt some money burning a hole in my pocket, but it turned it to my groin burning from Ben Gay that had migrated from my hip. :smoke:

The 7x42 Dialyt is on my Bucket List, I just have to make sure I don't kick the bucket before I get to the bottom of the list. (symbol crash would go here if we had that smilie).

Brock
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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