-
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.
New Leica September 4 2017 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Boris Flaccus
- Start date
"Pathetic" fields of view seem to be a feature of most old 10x40 roofs, not just the modern ones. Zeiss Jena Notarem 10x40 had 105m, Swift Trilyt 10x40 approximately 104m - slightly less than the 110m of the old/re-released Trinovids and Dialyt 10x40Bs. (I haven't been able to find out the field of view of the 10x40 or 10x42 Bausch & Lomb Elites.) Indeed the modern 10x40 class binoculars seem to have increased fields of view, albeit not by a great deal. The Zeiss SF and the Nikon Monarch HG 10x42 (121m) seem to be the only 10x40 class roofs that a 110m field of view might feel "restrictive" in comparison to, and both are modern.
10x50 porros are quite a different kettle of fish being much larger and bulkier.
Maybe the best instrument for Binastroing already exists...the Nikon WX 10x50?
Last edited:
Dorian Gray
Well-known member
100 m for the 10x42 according to the 2003 catalogue.
My Bausch and Lomb 10x42 P is marked 5.6 degrees. 98m at 1000m. I can't remember my star measure but about the same.
A very nice binocular. Quite big and fairly heavy. I do use it as it just stays ready for use.
The problem with the WX is weight. Even when young I might have had a problem, but I could hand hold the Celestron 20x80 at about 2.4 kg for 20 minutes without a problem.
I see no point in tripod mounting a WX. It is impossible to get some angles with tripod mounted binoculars.
Pentax 20x60 2.2 degrees. How ridiculous. Also my one is poor optically with lousy resolution.
Selected Soviet 20x60 3.5 degrees.
A very nice binocular. Quite big and fairly heavy. I do use it as it just stays ready for use.
The problem with the WX is weight. Even when young I might have had a problem, but I could hand hold the Celestron 20x80 at about 2.4 kg for 20 minutes without a problem.
I see no point in tripod mounting a WX. It is impossible to get some angles with tripod mounted binoculars.
Pentax 20x60 2.2 degrees. How ridiculous. Also my one is poor optically with lousy resolution.
Selected Soviet 20x60 3.5 degrees.
Robert Wallace
Well-known member
My CZJ 10x50 Dekarem (porro) FOV 128m@ 100m.Bought February 1975.
JabaliHunter
Well-known member
Around here it has been Swarovski ELs for ages, but now increasingly Geovids
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
Henri, post 188 and 221, Hermann, post 193, Holger post 230,
Dear all,
I will try to address some things that were discussed before.
* Henry, the Leica/Kern 8x30 with relatively low transmission for its day of birth, is indeed equipped with laser filters, yielding a rather low transmission for a porro from the year 2000.
* To all others mentioned.
I have investigated the phase correction problem for roof prisms a little further and I found the following:
Dr. Joos published his paper about :"Die Bildverschlechterung durch Dachprisman und ihre Behebung" in a 7-page paper in German in 1943 (I wrote 1941, but that was wrong). The paper describes in detail the cause of the phase problems. He also remarks, and I quote: "Die von Herrn Werkmeister Wendland gemachte Beobachtung, dass durch Versilberung der Fläche ein wesentliche Verbesserung zu erzielen ist, gab den Anlass, der Ursache dieser Bildverschlechterung nachzugehen.....
So the roof prism problem was recognised and a possible solution was reached from the "working class" coworkers in the Zeiss plant. It would take until 1988 until Zeiss implemented phase correction coatings in its roof prism binoculars and other producers followed quickly.
Gijs van Ginkel
Dear all,
I will try to address some things that were discussed before.
* Henry, the Leica/Kern 8x30 with relatively low transmission for its day of birth, is indeed equipped with laser filters, yielding a rather low transmission for a porro from the year 2000.
* To all others mentioned.
I have investigated the phase correction problem for roof prisms a little further and I found the following:
Dr. Joos published his paper about :"Die Bildverschlechterung durch Dachprisman und ihre Behebung" in a 7-page paper in German in 1943 (I wrote 1941, but that was wrong). The paper describes in detail the cause of the phase problems. He also remarks, and I quote: "Die von Herrn Werkmeister Wendland gemachte Beobachtung, dass durch Versilberung der Fläche ein wesentliche Verbesserung zu erzielen ist, gab den Anlass, der Ursache dieser Bildverschlechterung nachzugehen.....
So the roof prism problem was recognised and a possible solution was reached from the "working class" coworkers in the Zeiss plant. It would take until 1988 until Zeiss implemented phase correction coatings in its roof prism binoculars and other producers followed quickly.
Gijs van Ginkel
Holger Merlitz
Well-known member
Thanks, Gijs!
In this context it may be worth mentioning that, independent of Joos (who's work had not been available in the English literature), the Indian Mahan had investigated the phase-shift problems in 1945:
A. I. MAHAN: Focal Plane Anomalies in Roof Prisms. In: Journal of the Optical Society of America. Volume 35, no. 10, 1. Oktober 1945, p 623–635
A solution, i.e. the p-correction coating, had been suggested by Maurer in 1966:
Paul Maurer: Phase Compensation of Total Internal Reflection. In: Journal of the Optical Society of America. Volume 56, no. 9, 1. September 1966, p. 1219–1221
Cheers,
Holger
Hermann
Well-known member
Zeiss West 10x50: 130m/1000m. Made from 1957-1969. My 10x50 was made in 1963. Eye relief is only 9mm though.
Hermann
U.S. prices are out. B&H has them starting at $1349 (7x35 black rubber armor) to $1699 (10x42 silver/black leather). Probably too rich for me.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/sear...fct=fct_brand_name|leica&ipp=100&N=4083534123
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/sear...fct=fct_brand_name|leica&ipp=100&N=4083534123
I guess that was the price that had to be paid for such a wide field of view, certainly back then. My Oberkochen 8x30 (non-B) has to be placed almost right over my eyes in order to take in its entire field of view. I gather the big 15x60 was developed into a B version over time: I would be interested to know how much (if any) field of view was sacrificed.
Minolta 10x50 Standard MK Extra Wide 7.8 deg 136m at 1000m 410ft at 1000yds. Multi coated.
In fact coatings are poor by modern terms. Also the easily seen field is 7.65 deg. Eye relief small.
Some seem to have better cases than mine. Nice brown square instead of soft black.
Hoya and Swift 10x50s similar fields.
All Japanese.
My old 15x60 Zeiss is from memory 4.4 degree field.
In fact coatings are poor by modern terms. Also the easily seen field is 7.65 deg. Eye relief small.
Some seem to have better cases than mine. Nice brown square instead of soft black.
Hoya and Swift 10x50s similar fields.
All Japanese.
My old 15x60 Zeiss is from memory 4.4 degree field.
B&H now has full descriptions with specs for each model up, with a zoomable pic of the different armor coverings . Really appreciate that a manufacturer is trying to bridge the gap with a small in hand, lightweight bin in the 7x format. The 450' FOV sounds great....fingers crossed that the 15mm eye relief is accommodating enough to glasses wearers. Can't wait to hear the first review.
henry link
Well-known member
It just occurred to me that this re-issue of the Trinovids should result in a new supply of spare parts at Leica that ought to fit the originals (possibly including some interchangeable eyepiece and prism parts that might fit the old 7x42 and 8x32). The biggest problem with the old ones was certainly the prism. It might now be possible to have Leica refurbish originals with new phase corrected Uppendahls. Since eventually the silver mirror coatings in the old ones will tarnish, rendering them optically useless, a dielectric coated replacement would also greatly increase the effective lifespan of the instrument.
Last edited:
Good luck with that, at least at Leica USA. It's Leica, not Swarovski service you're dealing with.......
A great opportunity for Leica to show that it has sharpened its focus on customer service.
Prism replacement/recoating is major surgery, which should not be free. That said, just offering the service would be a strong signal that Leica stands behind its products over the long term.
I've often wondered whether manufacturing replacement lenses and/or prisms for classic older binoculars would be a viable business proposition. There must be thousands of old 10x40 Dialyts (for instance) out there and although some of their current owners are probably still happy with them, a good number could well be willing to pay for ED glass lenses and dielectric prisms to be retrofitted into them.
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
To me this is like putting a new 3.0 turbo in a Carrera RS - sure performance increases but uniqueness / originality is lost. I think old classic binos should remain as is, as much of their value is their originality. All IMO of course and I can see why some want upgraded Dialyt's etc.
Omid
Well-known member
Well, Leica did as I had predicted:
It's sad actually sad to see my prediction has come true. Leading optical company is going backwards...
Every [smart] brand will start making a "commemorative edition" or a "limited edition" or an "anniversary edition" of an existing product once they realize they can no longer improve it or make a better product. It is a well-established marketing technique. Winchester markets some kind of "anniversary edition" of their Model 94 rifle every 2 or 3 yearLeica is similar.. They don't know how to make any meaningful improvements in their existing products so they make red editions, Japan edition or Zagato editions
It's sad actually sad to see my prediction has come true. Leading optical company is going backwards...
