• 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.

7X42 ClassiC (1 Viewer)

teircel

Well-known member
What are the chances of the Zeiss 7X42 Classic binos ever being offered for sale again. I just had the good fortune to use a pair for the first time this weekend in very trying circumstances; heavy overcast, deep cover and a nice fallout of furtive spring warblers. The performance of these binos under the before mentioned conditions blew me away!!! I own 8.5 EL's but the Zeiss where clearly better in close quarters and poor light.
 
Last edited:
I would think there is no chance, unfortunately as the model range has been replaced by the FLs. Try to get a used example from the end of the production run. Mine are very late, numbered 2601*** with the last T*P* coating. Optically, they are simply outstanding. I would imagine the coatings were probably being 'tweaked' right to the end although I have no proof of this. There is a nice looking pair available for worldwide shipping ending in a couple of hours on a well known auction site.

Dave
 
What are the chances of the Zeiss 7X42 Classic binos ever being offered for sale again. I just had the good fortune to use a pair for the first time this weekend in very trying circumstances; heavy overcast, deep cover and a nice fallout of furtive spring warblers. The performance of these binos under the before mentioned conditions blew me away!!! I own 8.5 EL's but the Zeiss where clearly better in close quarters and poor light.

i think theres a pair on a well known [u.k.] internet site, for, i think £550.00.
 
Last edited:
Teircel

As a Swarovski owner why not look at the SLC 7X42, I think that they will also "blow you away" in the same circumstances. Also try the Leica 7X42 BN.
All of the top gun 7X42's are great!

Paul
 
Teircel

As a Swarovski owner why not look at the SLC 7X42, I think that they will also "blow you away" in the same circumstances. Also try the Leica 7X42 BN.
All of the top gun 7X42's are great!

Paul

if you gonna use it for birds, 7x is not the way to go, !!!!! take at least a 8x , but the best is 10x42 !!! or 10x40 classic
 
if you gonna use it for birds, 7x is not the way to go, !!!!! take at least a 8x , but the best is 10x42 !!! or 10x40 classic


Could not disagree more. Have you tried a quality 7 x bino ? Better FOV, less shake, even brighter image. I also have quality 8 x bins and find there is little real difference between 7 & 8X in terms of perceived magnification. 10 x gives you a bigger but often shakier image of the bird with a much narrower FOV.

Dave
 
Could not disagree more. Have you tried a quality 7 x bino ? Better FOV, less shake, even brighter image. I also have quality 8 x bins and find there is little real difference between 7 & 8X in terms of perceived magnification. 10 x gives you a bigger but often shakier image of the bird with a much narrower FOV.

Dave
Hi Dave,

My ideal is both a 7x42 and a 10x32. Sometimes one glass is not enough, but I am happy using a 7x42, alone and in my case the 7x42 Dialyt does nicely.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:
 
if you gonna use it for birds, 7x is not the way to go, !!!!! take at least a 8x , but the best is 10x42 !!! or 10x40 classic

Sorry, but I think you're comment is without much foundation ( I was going to say garbage!) - there is no best , its what suits the individual and the circumstances around the use of a pair of binos.

Many people on this forum praise specifications and models like the 7 x 42 Dialyt / Leica Trinovid 8 x 32 BA or BN etc.

Some days I personally use an 8 x 32 FL, other days a 7x42 Dialyt. I rarely use a 10 anymore. All this purely when birdwatching.

8 x 42 is still the benchmark for a good allrounder.....for wildlife observation. From this we can then consider or deviate to a x 10 OR x7.
 
Sorry, but I think you're comment is without much foundation ( I was going to say garbage!) - there is no best , its what suits the individual and the circumstances around the use of a pair of binos.

Many people on this forum praise specifications and models like the 7 x 42 Dialyt / Leica Trinovid 8 x 32 BA or BN etc.

when you serious about birdwatching (migration also) you want a 10x power,
7x and 8x32 are for good big animals but for birds , don't make me laugh, that is garbage !!!!
 
here's something to think about when you al talking about more power , greater shake and weight !!!!

Leica 8x42 Br = 790 gr
10x42 Br= 710 gr
 
when you serious about birdwatching (migration also) you want a 10x power,
7x and 8x32 are for good big animals but for birds , don't make me laugh, that is garbage !!!!

If you take a look at posts on this forum you will probably find that a great deal of 'serious' birdwatchers prefer a 7x or 8x magnification to a 10x and vice versa.

As PYRTLE mentioned earlier, choosing a pair of binoculars depends on the individuals taste and type of usage. I myself have recently changed from a pair of Leica 10x42BR to 8x32BR because they offer lighter weight and a greater field of view. A pair of high quality 7x or 8x can often resolve just as much detail as a 10x - this is my experience anyway.
 
when you serious about birdwatching (migration also) you want a 10x power,
7x and 8x32 are for good big animals but for birds , don't make me laugh, that is garbage !!!!

If you are REALLY serious about birdwatching you bring out a top brand 7x AND a scope.

Greetings, Ronald
 
I have to agree with the folks who say the binos must fit the use. If you are serious you are likely not to rely on any particular flavor but likely have a few different binos and a scope around. I have to agree with the post above about 7x42 being great for overcast conditions and warblers at close quarters. On the other hand, I love 10x. But, I don't always want to follow warblers at close quarters with a 6deg fov. lol

I think you could get a few 7x42 that would be better than the 8.5 Swaros under those conditions. It allows you to rationalize buying another set of binos!

Cheers,
Craig
 
If you are REALLY serious about birdwatching you bring out a top brand 7x AND a scope.

Greetings, Ronald

Nice one Ronald!!............I do love my 7X. Sorry Black Lark, I am not averse to using a 10X I just prefer a lower power. Everyone is different, if not, we would all be using identical binoculars and a lot of companies would go out of business!! o:D

Paul
 
Who mentioned weight? 7 x gives less shake than 10 x because of the lower magnification.

Dave

I have no problems and many others with me, we have a few friends with 7x , and they heve always problems with some details in the feathers of birds and at migration watchpoints they are very quit.;
 
... we have a few friends with 7x ... and at migration watchpoints they are very qui[e]t.

Is it possible that they're just a bit more reserved than you are, generally speaking (personality wise)? Or that they're seeing so many more birds that they don't have time to list them all? :) Seriously though, few on this forum would question the value of magnification for seeing fine details at distance--in those situations a 10x has advantages over 7x. But once you get to know birds, very few IDs need be made on the basis of fine feather details, or on those alone. And in many types of terrestrial birding (shrubby areas, grassland, woodland), the vast majority of birds that are seen are spotted at distances at which most fine details are visible, in which case the much larger FOV and DOF of 7x binos may be a much bigger advantage than modestly higher magnification. I much prefer 7-8x binos over 10x, even in open country, mudflat, and seashore/lake situations. In these situations the extra 20-30% magnification of a 10x just isn't enough to satisfy for distant viewing, so out comes the scope. I wonder if some of the strong differences in opinion over the need for 10x relate to differences in visual acuity? My own vision is around 20/12, so by my rough reckoning, I guess I see about as much detail in a 7x as someone with 20/20 vision (the usual standard of "perfect" vision) sees in a 10x. If I had poorer vision, maybe I'd be more inclined toward 10x.
--AP
 
If you are REALLY serious about birdwatching you bring out a top brand 7x AND a scope. Greetings, Ronald


With due respect, may I submit another point of view: YOU might require a 7x bin and a scope. Others with equally exacting standards and different eyes might best be served by other offerings. I, for one, understand your use of 7's -- but for myself find them about as useful as my own unassisted eyes for scanning supplemented by 10's for seeing and identifying the little bugger in the bush when all is said and done.

I'm very serious about birdwatching, and hence would never consider a 7x. Nor would I require my preference for a 10x to be the holy grail for someone else. Serious birder or not, there is no "best". There is only "best for you", and even that can change over time or viewing circumstances.

PS. -- Zeiss ClassiCs in any configuration are wonderful binoculars. I have the 8x30s and the 10x40s, and for optics they're both right up there with my Ultravids, Duovid, and FLs.
 
Last edited:
W Others with equally exacting standards and different eyes might best be served by other offerings.
....
Serious birder or not, there is no "best". There is only "best for you", and even that can change over time or viewing circumstances.

I fully agree with Robert.
Choice of magnification is variable and personal.
For observations on a lake or the sea shore, which usually involve longer distances, 10x may actually be a minimum. In a dense forest 8x can be too much when trees are "condensing" in your line of sight.
The same is true for the light gathering power. A 30 mm instrument can be very satisfactory on the waterfront well after sunset due to wide skies and lots of reflected light from the water surface, but fail completely in a forest with a dense canopy on a bright summer's day.
etc.

Tom
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 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