• 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.

A binocular mystery (3 Viewers)

Bencw said:
Hi John, a good thread, the 7x35 is indeed a most useful and comfortable configuration and I am surprised it is ignored, but then I am also puzzled why the top manufacturers do not produce a modern 6x25 compact, which I think would be far more useful as a compact design
Click to expand...

I have some 60 year old 6x24 Leitz Amplivids (I did post abt them)......good BF folk who forgot that binoculars are just 'things and not people' were yowling about not using them due to their fragility and age...well I have been using them and they're a fantastic bino and format. I have never looked through such small but brilliant binoculars. They've had 60 unsuccessful years to come up with something matching this performance to size ratio. A couple of weeks back I went to a well known Oratorio. For extra fun, I was going to be a complete ass and take the 15x60 bgat dangling around my neck. My better half rightly put her hoof down (we fluked second row seats) and I took the amplivids. Just perfect.



A question might be - what would it take to manufacture, today, a smaller lighter modern version of the FPO Fuji/Bushnell 10 deg wide angle 7x35? John didn't name names, and rightly focused on the 5mm exit pupil, but an even better and modernised FPO is one of the things we really want isn't it?

I'd love to know how many man hrs went into each of those binoculars.

Rathaus
 
Last edited:
Most people buy from large outdoor stores here in the USA and the buyers order 10x and even above, in addition being Americans we all want the most so 10x or larger it is in magnification.
As technology has improved it is easier to make glasses with more power and decent eye relief (hear that Leica, for your 8x32's).
Technology limited binocular powers to 7x35, 7x42 and 7x50 for many years (the 9x63 military glass was an exception because the US military needed them during WWII and was willing to pay the price which the civilian market could not do).
Twenty years ago 10x32 wouldn't have worked very well but now it is a accepted format along with 10x42's, 10x50's and 12x50's and bigger magnification.
I have found for myself that I can't hold anything much over 8x steady for long periods of time and like the wider field of view and depth of field that the lower powers provide.
As a whole our population is also larger in body size, this makes holding a heavier higher power glass easier.
So technology that has made higher power possible along with a desire to have the highest power available has caused the lower powers to wither away.
To paraphrase a famous Hollywood type, "If I am not selling, you won't be buying" meaning if the public wants more power in a binocular then that is what you should be producing.
Remember, optical companies are businesses and are required by their stockholders and directors to make the most profit.
The 7x42 format is just barely hanging on, Zeiss has dropped it altogether because it simply did not sell and many other medium priced brands have dropped it for the same reason.
Call up any optical company and offer to buy 25,000 7x35 binoculars and I am sure they would make them.
Selling them however would be a problem, make that 25,000 10x35's and they would probably sell very well.
Art
 
Rathaus said:
A question might be - what would it take to manufacture, today, a smaller lighter modern version of the FPO Fuji/Bushnell 10 deg wide angle 7x35?

Rathaus
Click to expand...


A smaller, lighter 10º wide angle 7x35? That is 525'@ 1000 yards.

Probably a miracle!

You need large prisms and large oculars (preferably both) to get a 7x35 with a 10º FOV.

Consider that you need a 20mm eye piece just to get 7x from an f4 35mm objective lens. Wider is a bigger and heavier eyepiece for a start.

Bob
 
Is it possible/practical/beneficial to build an f2 binocular?
The camera world is awash with f1.4 or faster optics, the manufacturing tech part is in hand. It should allow much more compact designs, so what is the problem?
 
gulf1263 said:
Most people buy from large outdoor stores here in the USA and the buyers order 10x and even above, in addition being Americans we all want the most so 10x or larger it is in magnification.
As technology has improved it is easier to make glasses with more power and decent eye relief (hear that Leica, for your 8x32's).
Technology limited binocular powers to 7x35, 7x42 and 7x50 for many years (the 9x63 military glass was an exception because the US military needed them during WWII and was willing to pay the price which the civilian market could not do).
Twenty years ago 10x32 wouldn't have worked very well but now it is a accepted format along with 10x42's, 10x50's and 12x50's and bigger magnification.
I have found for myself that I can't hold anything much over 8x steady for long periods of time and like the wider field of view and depth of field that the lower powers provide.
As a whole our population is also larger in body size, this makes holding a heavier higher power glass easier.
So technology that has made higher power possible along with a desire to have the highest power available has caused the lower powers to wither away.
To paraphrase a famous Hollywood type, "If I am not selling, you won't be buying" meaning if the public wants more power in a binocular then that is what you should be producing.
Remember, optical companies are businesses and are required by their stockholders and directors to make the most profit.
The 7x42 format is just barely hanging on, Zeiss has dropped it altogether because it simply did not sell and many other medium priced brands have dropped it for the same reason.
Call up any optical company and offer to buy 25,000 7x35 binoculars and I am sure they would make them.
Selling them however would be a problem, make that 25,000 10x35's and they would probably sell very well.
Art
Click to expand...

Art:

I agree in your history of how binoculars have changed over
the years. The military used a lot of 6x30 also.

The remaining alpha 7x42 models are the Nikon EDG and the Leica
Ultravid.

The marketplace is supreme, and 8-10X are the largest sellers.

Jerry
 
Have to agree Jerry , the marketplace dictates what is produced, my experience of life in general is, if you follow the majority you will find yourself heading in the wrong direction more often than not, so as much as I hanker for a new Alpha 7x35 or a wonderfully practical and useful 6x25 compact, I know I won't see one.
 
etudiant said:
The camera world is awash with f1.4 or faster optics, the manufacturing tech part is in hand. It should allow much more compact designs, so what is the problem?
Click to expand...
Compare, for example, the latest M-mount Leica Summicron 50mm (f2) vs the Noctilux 50mm (f0.95) - or even the equivalent Summilux (f1.4). I think you'll find the faster lenses something other than "more compact".

...Mike
 
Last edited:
mfunnell said:
Compare, for example, the latest M-mount Leica Summicron 50mm (f2) vs the Noctilux 50mm (f0.95) - or even the equivalent Summilux (f1.4). I think you'll find the faster lenses something other than "more compact".

...Mike
Click to expand...

I take your point, the 1.4 is close to a pound and sizes at 4x4x4 inches, not compact in any way.
However, that Summilux also has to give a sharp image across a full 35mm frame, while a binocular only needs to serve a 5mm pupil opening. I'd hoped that would ease the requirements enough to allow for a more compact design and smaller prisms.
 
Unfortunately, the current batch of 50/58mm f/1.4 lenses are enormous. supposedly to work with 42/50mp full frame.cameras.

Since 1967 my standard lens was either 50/58mm f/1.4 or f/1.2. They were not large and I often used them wide open and got great photos. I still use them or 85mm f/1.4 Samyang on digital, often wide open.

Who really needs an A0 size print? Perhaps professionals.

There are 7x35s from Nikon, Olympus etc. But cheaper offerings.
I use old Nikons or Minolta 7x35s.
 
[email protected] said:
I would bet the 10x42 overall is the most popular format for binoculars in general.
Click to expand...

Dennis, this got me to wondering whether the 10x42 format really is the most popular. One quick (and probably not-so-accurate) way of doing this is to count the number of reviews for various binocular models in their different formats. Sticking with one size format (eg, 42mm) is a good idea, because Zeiss, for example, tends to introduce the 42mm bins before the 32mm models and so the 42mm models have been out longer and could have more reviews as a result. Checking the review counts on Eagle Optics' website:

Eagle Optics Shrike 8x42: 49 reviews
Eagle Optics Shrike 10x42: 9 reviews

Eagle Optics Denali 8x42: 113 reviews
Eagle Optics Denali 10x42: 29 reviews

Eagle Optics Ranger ED 8x42: 40 reviews
Eagle Optics Ranger ED 10x42: 17 reviews

Eagle Optics Golden Eagle HD 8x42: 11 reviews
Eagle Optics Golden Eagle HD 10x42: 4 reviews

Leica Ultravid HD 8x42: 4 reviews
Leica Ultravid HD 10x42: 1 review

Leica Ultravid HD+ 8x42: 2 reviews
Leica Ultravid HD+ 10x42: no reviews

Swarovski EL Swarovision 8.5x42: 50 reviews
Swarovski EL Swarovision 10x42: 30 reviews

Swarovski SLC 8x42: 6 reviews
Swarovski SLC 10x42: 4 reviews

Zeiss Terra ED 8x42: 43 reviews
Zeiss Terra ED 10x42: 17 reviews

Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42: 18 reviews
Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42: 25 reviews

Zeiss Victory HT 8x42: 11 reviews
Zeiss Victory HT 10x42: 9 reviews

Zeiss Victory SF 8x42: 3 reviews
Zeiss Victory SF 10x42: 4 reviews

In summary, the 8x42 binoculars had more reviews than the 10x42 in 10 cases, and the 10x42 had more in 2 cases.

I believe Eagle Optics primarily caters to birders, so it would be interesting to look at more general places like BH Photo or Adorama. Maybe another day.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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

R
Choosing pocket binoculars
2 3
Replies
55
Views
7K
forent
forent
D
The case for the 8x56.
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
Scott98
S
T
Juggling with Magnifications
Replies
10
Views
2K
William Lewis
W
looksharp65
EDG 7x42 and Meostar B1.1 8x32 head to head
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
Scott98
S
dorubird
Swarovski Swarovision EL 8x32 vs Nikon Monarch HG 8x30
2 3
Replies
45
Views
5K
Owlbarred
Owlbarred

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top