[Talisker]

Are 1960s & 70s glasses worth the money?

I need a spare 7x35/8x40 for general countryside use (conservation work).

I've seen a Nippon Kogaku 7x35 (7.3deg) and a Bausch & Lomb Zephyr 7x35 (poss. military) at rather attractive prices (<£100 GBP). Both are in excellent condition; however, there's a possibility that either may need cleaning, and this would add around £40.

In addition, I own a pair of quite light-weight Pentax 7x35 CF porros that are pretty good and very 'handy', but they ideally need cleaning - they cost me half a days' wages in 1976.

Two key questions are:

• are such old 'non-premium' glasses worth this sort of money (£100/$150) nowadays, especially when new models, such as Nikon Action EX, would cost about the same?
  
• do the better class of older binoculars have redeeming qualities that compensate for the lack of modern features?

Certainly I'd like to own the Nippons, but I do use Nikon Action EX 7x35 daily and they are really good for general countryside use. Sadly, I can't justify a premium brand glass for my needs.

Do you have any thoughts please? Many thanks, Alan.

[Kevin Purcell]

For collectors I'd say they're probably worth the money.

But for day to day use you can find better bins for this sort of money. Things really have moved on a lot: in design especially EP design and in coating technology.

The problem though is finding better 7x35 bins which I still think might be close to the ideal combination. Though with today's wide EP designs the 8x40s give them a run for their money: one reason for 7x was wider field though slightly reduce shaking (along with slightly reduced acuity was part of the trade off).

But if you want to spend £100 to £150 on a bin a well chosen new bin (probably a porro) would be your best bet.

For example, the not yet shipped Vortex Raptor 6.5x32 ($110 so expect £110) are light, waterproof and will (probably) beat these old bins optically too. There are plenty of other examples to choose in addition to the Nikons you mention: the heavy Bushnell Legend 8x42 porros, Hawke Black Watch (I think) porros that go for £90, Leupold Yosemite 6x30 and 8x30 (not so easy to get in the UK). And there are others too. I'm sure Opticron have a competitor here too (SGA? HR WP is rather more pricey).

The only possible exceptions to this rule would be "alpha" porros of the last half of the 20th century. But you aren't going to find them for £100 to £150.

[Steve C]

I pretty much agree with Kevin on this one. For example, there are quite a few Bausch & Lomb Zephyr binoculars on #bay auctions. Sometimes they are pristine and often they will need cleaning. The Zephyr is a good example of a classic older binocular which is competitive optically. But their value is toward the collector or to somebody who wants a backup to their older original instrument.

But if you are just looking for a spare glass, just get a decent new one in your price range. There will be at least some warranty and service.

Another good one to consider for a spare binocular is the Swift Aerolite. in 7x35 you get a 500' fov and in the heavier 8x40 it is 472. Neither have any waterproofing, but should work. Another option is just get another Nikon 7x35, since you know what you will get.

[Talisker]

Thanks for the wisdom, Kevin & Steve. You both make pertinent points that help to keep me on the right track.

The older glasses have a certain 'sex-appeal', and I'm an old fuddy-duddy so I don't really care much for the looks and size of modern glasses, but the performance is bound to be better in many ways.

I'm convinced that classic porros are the way for me, hence 7x35 or 8x40 as noted - so Nikon Action EX 8x40 is a very logical choice to give some flexibility. E2s would be nice tho' ...... but the weak £ has made them pretty expensive here.

I'll have a look at the other suggestions, particularly the Hawkes: I've just found a webshop with info on the Black Watch and they are well under my budget - thanks for the suggestion, Kevin. I've seen a few comments on this make - mostly very positive.

This of course raises the question of how they compare wth, say, Nikon EX. ... the short answer is 25% cheaper!

I tried some mid-range Bushnells a while back and wasn't very impressed: maybe the Legends are an improvement. I find the Opticron range is rather confusing, but I'll have another look at those too. Leupold apparently haven't made it over here yet ... but neither have Fujinon!

I used Swift Grand Prix 8x40s for 20 years. but they were very soft at the edges - I still have some 'weight-trainer' Newport 10x50s but they too are misty and probably not worth cleaning.

Thanks again. Alan

[James Bean]

Talisker: I'm sure Kevin and Steve are right, if you want to go for the practical solution. However, if you're like me, common sense doesn't always prevail; sometimes I like to buy old binoculars, not just as a collector but for the fun of using them, for birdwatching or otherwise. I too have Nikon 7x35 Action EX, which is very good, but I find I enjoy my old Nikon 7x35 A series even more, though not in the rain! Also, my recent Pentax 8x36 HS, a roof prism model with excellent ergonomics and optics for around £100, is a delight to use, but I still like my old 1970s 'fat porro' Pentax 8x40W (model 566) with wide 9.5' fov, bought mint on eBay for less than £50 (sharp optics, resembles Swift Audubon). I don't even mind using 'antiques' like my 6x30 (IF) US Navy BuShips Mk.XXXIII made in 1943 by Universal Camera Corp.(NY) which has incredibly sharp optics, the bonus being we share the same age! So don't be put off buying better class oldies; redeeming qualities usually include solid build and sometimes surprisingly good views. Get a good 'un and the world could be your lobster...

[Steve C]

Well, I've been known to keep an eye out for various Swift porro binoculars. Many of their old porros are still top notch. You see Nighthawks, Triton's, Saratoga, Skipper, Newport, Kestrel and older Audubon's, as well as other interesting older models, quite a bit. Here in the US there is a top notch repair source (Nicholas Crista, former Swift head repairman), so for now repair and maintenance is reliable.

It is just good to have an idea of what your are dealing with with older glass and how you handle the uncertainty of ensuring you are getting what you think. A lot of those older porros are still really good and I do not feel optically disadvantaged when I decide to take one out the door with me. Also if you know of a reliable source for repair. A bad repair can really mess things up beyond redemption

[Talisker]

Back again ....

With Hawke BW 8x42 at just £90 here I could try to haggle on the old Nippons and stay just within budget ....... Nah! I'd be embarking on the course of becoming a collector! I collect various old cameras and other "junk" - Permission would not be granted to extend this to bins!. (IYKWIM)

Steve - what's the reputation of the (10x50s) Newports? Mine are 'reasonable' but do need cleaning. They're not especially sharp (probably partly due to lowered contrast) and aren't great with strong backlight (e.g. waterbirds) either, but handle very well for big glasses. £40 for a service isn't a lot, but is it a waste?

Hi James - I might use "The world is my lobster ..." ...... I have a pair of 1947 Kershaw 7x30 (short type) - my age too: good, but rather weird shape (bins, not me!).

A

[Steve C]

The Newport is a pretty decent glass. They would be worth the cleaning if they were mine. The first binocular I ever bought was a Swift Nighthawk 8x40 back in 1968 or thereabouts. I still have it and really could not believe how much a good cleaning helped that old binocular. Some of the non waterproof porros have a habit of letting in dust which accumulates over the years. Also some of the old greases stiffen up, hinges loosen, and prism glue deteriorates.

Take a look at the Swift section here in the forum. Lots of stuff there.

[John Dracon]

Alan - you can often pick up a good used Bushnell Custom binoculars or some of the featherlights models at a very reasonable price. The Swift Neptiure Mark II is a dandy 7x35 older model. The best 7x35 I have had is the Canon model before Canon started to produce stabilized binoculars. It is really optically superior to the old B&L Zephyr, but heavier. Older Zeiss, Leitz, and Nikon stuff is really quite good. To me, anyway, the big improvements have been made in the coatings, waterproofing, and rubber covering. Many of the recent stuff has a lot of plastic parts. I won't be around 50 years from now, but I'll predict that the mechanical reliability of many of these newcomers flooding the market will not be able to stand the test of time. Wait until hyper inflation starts to hit the world and we will see folks looking to the old classic stuff. By the way, I love the mechanical quality and ergonomics of the old Leitz Trinovids, but frankly, from an optical viewpoint, they are very marginal glasses. Most inexpensive porros produce better viewing images. Yellowstone

[etudiant]

had been quite pleased with the old Zeiss Deltrintem 8x30 porro. Not waterproof but good optics and often well under $200 on ebay. Of course, usual caveats for used porros re alignement and cleanlyness of surfaces, but that is so for any older glass.

[Talisker]

Thanks for the contributions - my plan is coming together, with three streams:

First, get my Swift Newports cleaned - the cheapest option for glasses I only occasionally use. Second, buy a modern pair of 8x40s w/proof, etc, around £100-120-ish - these can stay in the glovebox in my Land Rover. Third, wait patiently for a pair of "classic" 7x35/8x40s (Zeiss have long been on my wish list, amongst others) - hopefully at a giveaway price(!).

That means I should now put my unwanted/unused stuff on EBay to strengthen finances.

So the focus is to go through your 'heads-up' suggestions on current ranges - and pick something modern to start with. As long as Hawkes don't fall apart in the next 5 years they'd do - but some Opticrons have a 30 year warranty (my eyesight will probably fail before that!)

Many thanks, Alan

[gnowellsct]

I had the unusual experience of buying some Canon 6x30 fully coated porro binoculars from the early 1970s; they were on ebay, they were some old store's stocks, were in original packing and completely sealed. I paid $120, and ended up giving them to a friend. This was about a year ago. Seeing all the packaging from the 70s and the black leather case which had that new leather smell (! incredibly, after 35 years) was like a little time warp.

Frankly the Leupold Yosemite blows them away. I have also come to have a jaundiced view about older instruments in general and telescopes in particular. But I think we need to face the facts modern optics production even at the low end can be extraordinarily good. So I would suggest you put $200 to $300 into a nice brand name (I would go for Leupold in that range but that's just me) and clean up your old pair "when the mood suits."

One of the things to bear in mind is that it isn't just the optics that have changed--even though they have. The world now has CNC machining. So the optics can be more precisely assembled and secured in the instrument. Your 1960s binoculars have more in common with WWII binoculars than they do with contemporary binoculars.

Good luck, Greg N

[Talisker]

My Swift Newport 10x50 and my 1970s Pentax 7x35 are going for a clean-up after Easter. The Newport's reputation (according to two repairers) is pretty good, and I can "ive with them" - and I really like the size/weight of the solid little Pentax glasses too much to part with them - the cost is affordable.

Today I unearthed a pair of Kershaw Renown 7x30's - possibly 1950's vintage - bought many years ago. These are pretty sharp, though there's a little haze, but boy they are 'uggerly' - very short and rather wide - but they handle nicely. I'll resist the temptation to have them cleaned, 'cos they just are so 'uncool'.

Unfortunately, Leupolds are difficult to get in the UK and with the declining number of good photo-optical shops, trying-out even the most popular brands isn't particularly easy. The Hawke Black Watch may be the answer for the 'donkey-work'.

Cheers, AC

[Kevin Purcell]

As I mentioned before (and I think Vortex have distributors in UK and Europe) the not yet shipped Vortex Raptor 6.5x32 ($110 so expect £110) is another possibility especially if you want something that's more 7x35ish (and much lighter than your 7x35 Nikons).

[Talisker]

Kevin, yes there are some Vortex models here (importer is www.marchwooduk.co.uk) but the Vortex Raptor isn't listed. There is an Audubon Raptor range though.

Incidentally, spending the weekend in the Cambrian mountains of South Wales, trying to spot red kites, showed up the advantage of wide-angle binoculars. My big 7deg 7x50s felt a bit squinty compared to the 9.3deg Nikon 7x35s, so 8x40 wide-angles would be about right for me.

[Kevin Purcell]

The Raptor is not available in the USA yet (though it's on the various retail sites) so it may not appear in the UK until later in the year.

[Hermann]

Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell

For collectors I'd say they're probably worth the money.
But for day to day use you can find better bins for this sort of money. Things really have moved on a lot: in design especially EP design and in coating technology. <snip>
The only possible exceptions to this rule would be "alpha" porros of the last half of the 20th century. But you aren't going to find them for £100 to £150.

The only "old" binoculars I still use from time to time are the old Zeiss West porros. The 8x30, the 8x50B and the 10x50 are - even by today's crazy standards - still quite nice. But even they can't really compete with modern binoculars; the contrast in particular is nowhere near as good as with modern binoculars. Centre resolution on the other hand is still up to scratch, and they still feel very good in the hand. The mechanical quality is far better than that of most modern binoculars, of course. My personal favourite is the 8x50B, my pair dates back to 1964. The 10x50 is essentially free of CA and has a wider field of view than any modern pair, but the contrast is pretty low compared to modern binoculars.

Hermann

[Steve C]

One of the things that sometimes has to be found only in older binoculars are particularly wide fields. There are some pretty decent older porros @7x with 10-11* fields. I have a Swift Nighthawk 8x40 (two actually) that have 9.5* fov that actually are bird worth even by today's standards, but they are arguably not as bright as modern inexpensive porros. But eyeglass wearers need not even go there.

Also, some of the old designs are pretty remarkable for workmanship.

[Talisker]

Thinking about the Newport 10x50s .... they are actually pretty wide and don't have much colour fringing. And .............

I've just learned that I'm probably going to do a couple of week's serious coast-watching (seabirds, porpoise & whale spotting) in early summer. So, I'm hoping the Newports would be a reasonable choice (alongside my Kowa TS914ED). I don't believe my cheapo 7x50 Nikon Actions are going to be particularly good for that job.

Sadly the coast-watching is unpaid, otherwise I'd be have a bit more money to spend on nice ED glass, etc ..... !

Thanks all.

[chartwell99]

Originally Posted by Hermann

The only "old" binoculars I still use from time to time are the old Zeiss West porros. The 8x30, the 8x50B and the 10x50 are - even by today's crazy standards - still quite nice. But even they can't really compete with modern binoculars; the contrast in particular is nowhere near as good as with modern binoculars. Centre resolution on the other hand is still up to scratch, and they still feel very good in the hand. The mechanical quality is far better than that of most modern binoculars, of course. My personal favourite is the 8x50B, my pair dates back to 1964. The 10x50 is essentially free of CA and has a wider field of view than any modern pair, but the contrast is pretty low compared to modern binoculars.

Hermann

The sad fact about those wonderful old Zeiss porro binoculars is that modern lens coatings would make them fully competive with anything available today. My basis for that view is ownership of an early 70's era Swarovski 10 x 40 Habicht and a modern Swaro "Traditional" 8 x 30 porro. Both are excellent binoculars but the difference between the two (which I understand to be optical coatings only) is breathtaking.

[orbitaljump]

Ill take a nice vintage binocular over a Nikon Action anyday.

[FrankD]

So if I was in the market to pick up an older style porro with good to excellent optics (low-mid priced) then which models should I be keeping an eye out for. I see the B and L Zephyr get mentioned repeatedly and I remember John Dracon mentioning Bushnell Ultralites? but what others would be worth investing in?

[Steve C]

Originally Posted by FrankD

I remember John Dracon mentioning Bushnell Ultralites? but what others would be worth investing in?

John also mentioned Canon porros. I bagged an apparently cherry Canon 7x35 for less than $50.00. I should have it by early next week.

You see Zeiss Deltrintem and Jenoptem for $100-150 pretty regularly. I might have to spend some curiosity there too.

Swift has a fair number of older binoculars that are usually pretty decent. Swift also was a master at very wide field binoculars

I smell a new thread here: Vintage binoculars, what is good?

[orbitaljump]

Ill share some advice, though I hate to drive the prices up. :)

Tommorrow.

[orbitaljump]

Ive spent a lot of time and money acquiring a knowledge of especially the second hand vintage Japanese binocular market.

I might not have time to post some suggestions for a couple of days. Till then.