The enduring allure of the 7x50 Porro (1 Viewer)

[yarrellii]

I've been wanting to post about this for quite a while, and the current thread about marine 7x50 roofs has given me the last push.

In most areas of human activity there are items that end up becoming classics, and for a reason. Yes, you can enjoy the last trend in music, clothing, cars, painting, you can feel the vibrancy and relevance of something new and see how it relates to the current world. However, almost invariably, there will be times where you will look back and look for comfort in things that had stood the test of time, to tried and tested ideas that need no introduction, that we even take for granted and forget about. Say, no one needs to say how great Johann Sebastian Bach is and yet, you sometimes marvel in awe when rediscovering a sonata or a variation. Somehow I find 7x50 Porro prism binoculars are the J. S. Bach of binoculars: they're understated, timeless, sometimes overlooked and left aside, but still have a lot to offer.

Over time I've learnt to love binoculars, not only for what they can provide when watching birds or stars or the world around, but also by their sheer inner beauty as optical engineering marvels (the same way others love cars, watches or fountain pens). I have and have tried many different formats, some are my default/go-to/grab-n-go, like the 8x32... but I always go back to the good old 7x50 Porro. I've had several, fancier, more expensive, but for the time being I've settled for the inexpensive Vixen Ultima (I think it was also sold as Celestron). Not the brightest, not the fanciest... but able to provide indeleble images: deep, immersive, sparkling and full of detail glances of the everyday. I keep it by the kitchen window (because a) I spend an awful lot of time in the kitchen and b) the kitchen overlooks the garden) and use it almost on a daily basis, albeit in short sips, like a strong spirit full of character.

We are lucky to have an incredible choice of hi-quality optics to choose from. The price/performance ratio is really amazing in some cases, and you don't need to spend a fortune to enjoy amazing views. But somehow I feel the humble 7x50 is overlooked, although you can get a battered but trusty 2nd hand for peanuts and enjoy the relaxed view that the 7x50 can offer. Because the objectives are spaced wide apart, the stereoscopic sensation is amazing, and being a 7x the depth of field makes you take on a lot of what you see without need for refocusing (like if you had superpowers in your eyesight), the huge exit pupil makes using them a breeze. And finally, being a low-magnification device even moderately priced units can give an impressive level of detail, offering great experiences of plumage, texture of plants as well as placid view of the landscape (actually, to my eyes, they're the easiest way to get an almost "alpha-esque" view for little money). If someone had a pair of binoculars and was looking for a versatile and inexpensive 2nd pair, I'd recommend the joys of the 7x50. Yes, probably not for everyone, but so capable: relaxed view and easy to use as a loaner, great in low light...

So, here's to the good old 7x50 Porro (yes, your grandpa was wise enough!).
Any other 7x50 Porro lovers around? What's your pick? Any hidden gems? Any memories of that 7x50 you had and let go?

 

[Binastro]

My first binocular was a Nipole 7x23 that served me well for years.

My next and first serious binocular was a Swift 7x50.
This was expensive for me.
However, when I pointed it skywards the focus drifted continuously under gravity.
I was not wise enough to know I should have just returned it.

So the Swift was not used and I bought a Japanese fairly low price10x50, the best of about twelve that I tested in a shop.

10x50 and 12x50 became my standard binoculars.

I did much later buy a very nice secondhand Nikon Marine 7x50 binocular, which has a lovely relaxing view, but it isn't used.

So yes, 7x50s can give wonderful views, but they are not for me.

Regards,
B.

 

[[email protected]]

I remember a YouTube video from just a normal guy who didn't seem like he was an optics expert, extolling the virtues of the 7x50 format in binoculars. He basically said forget the rest, the 7x50 is the best, and in many ways he was right. For a lot of reasons, the 7x50 will punch way above its price point. It has a huge exit pupil, so eye placement is super comfortable. You just put them up to your eye and bam the view is there with NO finickiness like a compact binocular and no black-outs. The view is super bright in all situations because of the big exit pupil, and they are easy to hold steady because of the 7x magnification. Don't forget DOF also. The 7x50 has wonderful DOF again because of the moderate 7x magnification. The 7x50 format is often times a bargain because you can get a 7x50 porro for well under the costs of a good 8x32 or 8x42 roof prism binocular. Their only weakness is because of that big 50 mm aperture they are going to be heavy and many of them are IF focus so that limits their usefulness for birding but if you want a bargain, and you are willing to put up with those shortcomings they are an amazing value in binoculars in most cases. One of the best is the Fujinon FMTR-SX 7x50, but it is IF. A moderately priced central focus pair that only weighs 38 oz. is the Nikon OceanPro 7x50 for $239.00. These are great for astronomy also.

Binoculars rankings - 7x50 - AllBinos.com

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-7440-OceanPro-Waterproof-Binocular/dp/B00006C2M4#

 

[jafritten]

Great thread, yarrellii! The first binoculars I looked through were a pair of 7x50 porros from the 70s. They were my dad's and I remember the days when I sat there looking through them (and, as a child, turning them upside down for funny effects). They were MiJ and good quality. In my 20s I picked up some Vixen 7x50s (Ascot?) and I really liked the view but the eyecups were literally painful, so I parted with these and tried a number of other 7x50s. Some were badly balanced (Zeiss Jena Jenoptem e.g.) others were of less than enjoyable quality. I still own one pair (see pictures below). I received them from my late grandfather-in-law (if such a concept exists). They are very similar to the ones I remember from my childhood, so I kept them. It's a shame they don't have the same retro photographica smell but the same great build and amazing optics: great center and edge sharpness, hardly any aberrations and perfect panning behaviour. The colours are a bit dull and, having coated optics only, they lack contrast. BUT their 3-D effect is absolutely unrivalled. They have an axial offset of some 14 cm at my IPD of 67-68mm. That's much better than my son's Kowas (YF 6x30) or even the Nikon E2. I have never really used them in the field because they're bulky and heavy. They sit on the cupboard in my garden room and sometimes even at the breakfast table...I wish there were more quality porros on the shelves (or breakfast tables) these days.

 

[yarrellii]

@Binastro I see, you are more of a Haendel person
Just kidding, but yes, we all have different preferences and what wows someone doesn't necessarily work for others. I really like reading your observations and comments about binoculars, and I understand you have a wealth of experience with optics and also in binocular astronomy. My understanding is that for quite a while 7x50 was de default recommendation for handheld astronomy, although the most usual comment is that it only shows its strength in really good/dark skies. What are your thoughts about 7x50 and astronomy? I must confess that I don't use my 7x50 for astronomy, I rather use something with more power to go a bit deeper.

... For a lot of reasons, the 7x50 will punch way above its price point...

Yes, I can relate to that. Somehow, the mix of depth of field, stable view and lower mag makes for a really pleasing image, with surprising "perceived sharpness", that's why I have the impression that a decent 7x50 can give a nearly "alpha-esque" view that can wow you.

@jafritten Now, those are some stunning pictures and a lovely story, that's exactly what I was hoping to read The first picture shows the binoculars in such an "sculptural way" that I don't find they'd be out of place in a Fine Arts museum. By the way, we share nearly the same IPD and just checked the objectives offset of my Vixen Ultima 7x50, and it's only around 12,7 cm, so those Commander must be really stereoscopic, wow. Thanks for posting those lovely pics!

 

[jafritten]

[...] By the way, we share nearly the same IPD and just checked the objectives offset of my Vixen Ultima 7x50, and it's only around 12,7 cm [...]

12.7 or 12.8 cm is the offset of the E2 at IPD 67.5. If I remember correctly, the YF has around 10.8 cm. I can check that later.

EDIT: I was speaking from memory earlier today. I've just measured the offset of the E2 and the YF: It is 112mm for the YF and 130mm for the E2. No scientific accuracy here but the figures should be accurate to within 2 mm.

 

[yarrellii]

12.7 or 12.8 cm is the offset of the E2 at IPD 67.5. If I remember correctly, the YF has around 10.8 cm. I can check that later.

With my IPD just measured the offset of the E2 8x30 at around 13,1 cm and the 8x30 YF around 11,3 cm (well, more or less, not very scientifically measured). Out of curiosity, measured the 10x35 E (C) at almost exact 13,1 cm. The lovely 7x35 Nikon Gold Sentinel are even wider, at around 13,4 for my IPD. The biggest roof I have at hand, the Abbe-Koening Vixen New Foresta 8x56 has a mere 8,4 mm offset.
This is really interesting. I wonder if there is a point in porros when "too widely spaced tubes" can create a strange effect.

 

[jafritten]

I wonder if there is a point in porros when "too widely spaced tubes" can create a strange effect.

I guess that'll depend on the subject distance.

I think my Ultravid 8x20 will have an offset that is equal to my IPD but I cannot say that it has the weakest 3D-effect...hmm?

 

[yarrellii]

@jafritten This is really interesting. I just measured the offset on the UV 8x20 and got 70 mm, just like in the Swaro Habicht 8x20 B... does that mean that my IPD is actually 70? I assumed it was around 68 because that's what I got in most binoculars with an IPD scale. I'd say the UV is very strong in sharpness, and this gives the feeling that objects pop up from the background, somehow mimicking that perception of depth. I got the same in the 8x32 SW EL SV, that not only is a compact roof, but has field flatteners, but it gives me a perception of depth, it's hard to explain. However, when comparing any porro to any roof by watching a bird in close branches/bush, the difference is staggering. I had always thought that the 7x42 FL (with it's Abbe-Köening prisms) produced a quite pronounced "3D effect" until I compared it to a Porro.

 

[Binastro]

Hi Yarrellii,

Patrick Moore's books guided me when I was fifteen and we met when I was sixteen and I started using my 3 inch refractor.

He emphatically said 7x50 binoculars were the astronomer's binoculars.
Also that the minimum useful telescope was a 3 inch refractor or the equivalent performance 6 inch Newtonian.

I found out later, as did numerous others that both these statements are usually wrong.

Most astronomers consider the 10x50 binocular is standard. The increased magnification more than compensates for the very relaxed view of the 7x50.

A good 6 inch f/8 Newtonian far outperforms a good 3 inch f/15 refractor.
A good 4.5 inch Newtonian is about equal to a good 3 inch refractor.

There are many other instances were Patrick's strong views are contentious, but he did help numerous young astronomers.

It was only when I had twenty years extensive experience that I considered myself a mature enough astronomer to contribute useful observations that resulted in peer reviewed papers.

In very dark skies a 7x50 binocular is indeed wonderful.
But few see really dark skies nowadays.

An observer in Belgium about 1950 reported seeing M31, the Andromeda galaxy, a full 5 degrees long in a 7x50 binocular.

Regards,
B.

Note: this post was dupicated and Liked by Yarellii

 

[jafritten]

@jafritten This is really interesting. I just measured the offset on the UV 8x20 and got 70 mm, just like in the Swaro Habicht 8x20 B... does that mean that my IPD is actually 70? I assumed it was around 68 because that's what I got in most binoculars with an IPD scale. I'd say the UV is very strong in sharpness, and this gives the feeling that objects pop up from the background, somehow mimicking that perception of depth. I got the same in the 8x32 SW EL SV, that not only is a compact roof, but has field flatteners, but it gives me a perception of depth, it's hard to explain. However, when comparing any porro to any roof by watching a bird in close branches/bush, the difference is staggering. I had always thought that the 7x42 FL (with it's Abbe-Köening prisms) produced a quite pronounced "3D effect" until I compared it to a Porro.

Yarrellii, the barrels of the Ultravid 8x20 seem perfectly straight and there seems to be no offset at all. That's why I thought the space between (the centre of) the objectives and the IPD would be exactly the same. My IPD is 68 on most scales, on some closer to 67.

 

[Harrybongo]

I've been wanting to post about this for quite a while, and the current thread about marine 7x50 roofs has given me the last push.

In most areas of human activity there are items that end up becoming classics, and for a reason. Yes, you can enjoy the last trend in music, clothing, cars, painting, you can feel the vibrancy and relevance of something new and see how it relates to the current world. However, almost invariably, there will be times where you will look back and look for comfort in things that had stood the test of time, to tried and tested ideas that need no introduction, that we even take for granted and forget about. Say, no one needs to say how great Johann Sebastian Bach is and yet, you sometimes marvel in awe when rediscovering a sonata or a variation. Somehow I find 7x50 Porro prism binoculars are the J. S. Bach of binoculars: they're understated, timeless, sometimes overlooked and left aside, but still have a lot to offer.

Over time I've learnt to love binoculars, not only for what they can provide when watching birds or stars or the world around, but also by their sheer inner beauty as optical engineering marvels (the same way others love cars, watches or fountain pens). I have and have tried many different formats, some are my default/go-to/grab-n-go, like the 8x32... but I always go back to the good old 7x50 Porro. I've had several, fancier, more expensive, but for the time being I've settled for the inexpensive Vixen Ultima (I think it was also sold as Celestron). Not the brightest, not the fanciest... but able to provide indeleble images: deep, immersive, sparkling and full of detail glances of the everyday. I keep it by the kitchen window (because a) I spend an awful lot of time in the kitchen and b) the kitchen overlooks the garden) and use it almost on a daily basis, albeit in short sips, like a strong spirit full of character.

We are lucky to have an incredible choice of hi-quality optics to choose from. The price/performance ratio is really amazing in some cases, and you don't need to spend a fortune to enjoy amazing views. But somehow I feel the humble 7x50 is overlooked, although you can get a battered but trusty 2nd hand for peanuts and enjoy the relaxed view that the 7x50 can offer. Because the objectives are spaced wide apart, the stereoscopic sensation is amazing, and being a 7x the depth of field makes you take on a lot of what you see without need for refocusing (like if you had superpowers in your eyesight), the huge exit pupil makes using them a breeze. And finally, being a low-magnification device even moderately priced units can give an impressive level of detail, offering great experiences of plumage, texture of plants as well as placid view of the landscape (actually, to my eyes, they're the easiest way to get an almost "alpha-esque" view for little money). If someone had a pair of binoculars and was looking for a versatile and inexpensive 2nd pair, I'd recommend the joys of the 7x50. Yes, probably not for everyone, but so capable: relaxed view and easy to use as a loaner, great in low light...

So, here's to the good old 7x50 Porro (yes, your grandpa was wise enough!).
Any other 7x50 Porro lovers around? What's your pick? Any hidden gems? Any memories of that 7x50 you had and let go?

Hi. Good thread! I, like you, have many sets of inexpensive, but, good quality binos, most of them porros! Being a keen amateur astronomer and birder, in my opinion, you can't beat a good set of porros! I have three sets of superb, soviet bins: 7x50 zomz, 8x30 komz and 7x35 Berkut/zomz, all in pristine condition, and also, presented in a lovely leather case! On average, I paid about, £40, a set. Optically, they are superb! I've tested them against a friends Ziess and leica, which, cost around, £700, each, and to be as honest as I can, there was hardly any difference in optical quality at all! They might be slightly bigger than the roofs, but for the price, you can't beat em!

Happy viewing.

Harry.

 

[yarrellii]

@Harrybongo I've never had any Komz/Zomz/etc. binoculars, but they get a lot of praise for being inexpensive and tough. I have to get me one some day!


@Binastro Wow, in Belgium? I understand that country lies in one of the most light-polluted areas of the world, I'm really impressed. I enjoy relatively good backyard skies for Europe, and 7x50 is usually too "milky" (for lack of a better term).

 

[Harrybongo]

@Harrybongo I've never had any Komz/Zomz/etc. binoculars, but they get a lot of praise for being inexpensive and tough. I have to get me one some day!


@Binastro Wow, in Belgium? I understand that country lies in one of the most light-polluted areas of the world, I'm really impressed. I enjoy relatively good backyard skies for Europe, and 7x50 is usually too "milky" (for lack of a better term).

Hi Yarrellii. Yeah, you won't be sorry! Tough, inexpensive and very good optically......... treat yourself! 👍

 

[[email protected]]

Hi Yarrellii,

Patrick Moore's books guided me when I was fifteen and we met when I was sixteen and I started using my 3 inch refractor.

He emphatically said 7x50 binoculars were the astronomer's binoculars.
Also that the minimum useful telescope was a 3 inch refractor or the equivalent performance 6 inch Newtonian.

I found out later, as did numerous others that both these statements are usually wrong.

Most astronomers consider the 10x50 binocular is standard. The increased magnification more than compensates for the very relaxed view of the 7x50.

A good 6 inch f/8 Newtonian far outperforms a good 3 inch f/15 refractor.
A good 4.5 inch Newtonian is about equal to a good 3 inch refractor.

There are many other instances were Patrick's strong views are contentious, but he did help numerous young astronomers.

It was only when I had twenty years extensive experience that I considered myself a mature enough astronomer to contribute useful observations that resulted in peer reviewed papers.

In very dark skies a 7x50 binocular is indeed wonderful.
But few see really dark skies nowadays.

An observer in Belgium about 1950 reported seeing M31, the Andromeda galaxy, a full 5 degrees long in a 7x50 binocular.

Regards,
B.

I have had many telescopes and what I found was that even in the city glow, aperture rules. The best scope I ever had was the biggest, a 10-inch Orion Dobsonian Reflector. Dobsonians are easily the most bang for the buck in telescopes, IMO. I remember a few nights when the atmosphere and seeing were superb I had remarkable views of the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, the Orion Nebula and the Andromeda Galaxy. The Moon looked like I was orbiting it in a spaceship. It was incredible.

 

[dries1]

I think 7X50 was great for the night sky years ago, but now for many observers due to light pollution, they need more reach. There are those though who love them if they live under dark skies. I will take a wager that yarrellii lives under dark skies.

 

[jring]

Hi,

yes my Zomz 7x50 is quite nice and the 30€ I paid were well spent... not sure if it beats the 50€ surplus Hensold DF 8x30, but those are definitly better than anything else you can buy for less than 100€...

Joachim

 

[Swissboy]

............................ but I always go back to the good old 7x50 Porro. I've had several, fancier, more expensive, but for the time being I've settled for the inexpensive Vixen Ultima (I think it was also sold as Celestron). Not the brightest, not the fanciest... but able to provide indeleble images: deep, immersive, sparkling and full of detail glances of the everyday. I keep it by the kitchen window (because a) I spend an awful lot of time in the kitchen and b) the kitchen overlooks the garden) and use it almost on a daily basis, albeit in short sips, like a strong spirit full of character.

We are lucky to have an incredible choice of hi-quality optics to choose from. The price/performance ratio is really amazing in some cases, and you don't need to spend a fortune to enjoy amazing views. But somehow I feel the humble 7x50 is overlooked, although you can get a battered but trusty 2nd hand for peanuts and enjoy the relaxed view that the 7x50 can offer. Because the objectives are spaced wide apart, the stereoscopic sensation is amazing, and being a 7x the depth of field makes you take on a lot of what you see without need for refocusing (like if you had superpowers in your eyesight), the huge exit pupil makes using them a breeze. And finally, being a low-magnification device even moderately priced units can give an impressive level of detail, offering great experiences of plumage, texture of plants as well as placid view of the landscape (actually, to my eyes, they're the easiest way to get an almost "alpha-esque" view for little money). If someone had a pair of binoculars and was looking for a versatile and inexpensive 2nd pair, I'd recommend the joys of the 7x50. Yes, probably not for everyone, but so capable: relaxed view and easy to use as a loaner, great in low light...

So, here's to the good old 7x50 Porro (yes, your grandpa was wise enough!).
Any other 7x50 Porro lovers around? What's your pick? Any hidden gems? Any memories of that 7x50 you had and let go?

Your accolade about the 7x50 porros rings quite a bell. As a kid I first had a simple 8x30 porro, but when we wanted to observe foxes at their den in a forest, these were of very little use. So my brother and I both got a 7x50 (Kowa Prominar) and despite the weight, we dearly loved them. One great thing was the fact that one mostly did not need to refocus. Our young eyes did what little adjustment was needed. And as close focus was not possible anyway, I later even fixed the barrels with tape. Well, that was way over 60 years ago! What I also liked about that model was the very comfortable shape, unlike the traditional shape of porros at that time as seen in the pictured model above (post #4).
As time went by, we looked for more compact roofs, but I kept my 7x50s over the decades. Though they did not get much use any more. It was more kind of an emotional attachment that made me keep them. The reasons for replacing them were both the weight and the fact that roofs had become optically comparable thanks to multicoating. Though the 3-D effect was not the same. But I had long ago needed eyeglasses that I could not simply remove when looking through optics. And my 7x50s had fixed eyecups. So they became less and less comfortable. At some relatively early point, I had found special shorter eyecups. But my eyes kept needing more complex glasses. So the 7x50 simply got stashed away. For a while I had actually forgotten that I still had them. It was not until about 5 1/2 years ago that I finally put them up for sale. That's why I can still show them here in pictures. The eyecups were replaced with the original ones again for the sale.
At the time when we were kids, there was a famous Swiss optics manufacturer Kern that came up with a fancy (at the time) 7x50 (Focalpin I think) model that was way out of our financial possibilities. But for many years it was the model of my dreams. So it was kind of sobering when I found a review here on BF some decade or more ago about how bad that model actually was (at least by modern standards). I think it was Henry Link who published that.

 

[Binocollector]

At the moment I got only one 7x50 but it's really nice. It's labelled "Olympia" but most low to mid-priced binos sold in Germany during the 50's to probably the end of the 80's were made in Japan and sold under a myriad of different names -- often names of camera shops or stuff that was sold through catalogs (Revue, Beroflex, Porst, etc). Mine is a JB-22, I think those were also sold under the Tasco name. It's one of the wide angle models no longer made today with a claimed 173m/1,000m. That FoV is probably a bit exaggerated but it is still huge and has a fairly large sharp sweetspot. It has BK7 prisms but the truncated view is still so wide that it doesn't matter that the edges are a bit dimmer. The views are pretty great despite the old coatings but it's one heavy beast. I bought it used from ebay but it was in excellent condition and still has the original rubber eyecups that are missing on many of those. It's great for sweeping the sky at nights or watching ships go by (I live near the "Main-Donau"-Kanal). It easily beats my vintage 7x35 "Revue" made by Kamakura or even my modern 7x35 Aculon. And the view is sharper over a larger FoV but not as color neutral as with the excellent 6.5x32 Opticron.

 

[yarrellii]

@Swissboy What a lovely story, thank you very much for sharing it, I knew there had to be nice memories related to good-old 7x50. We are so lucky that you decided to take some pictures of them, like if they were the portraits of an old relative now long gone. Here's to the trusty Kowas!!

@Binocollector So nice, great! I usually check the German classifieds and you're right, there's an endless array of Japanese made binoculars from yesteryear to be had at great prices. However, being unable to test them, it's sometimes hard to decid which one to pick (I've had good and terrible experiences, I guess like anyone buying old binoculars). Regarding the Opticron Adventurer Porro, I've read in other thread that you are really happy with the 6,5x32 and that you were curious about the 8x32. Well, I can only recommend them! In my case it was the opposite, I got a very good experience with the 8x32, really surprised me when comparing it to the tried-and-tested Kowa YF 8x30, I found it had more contrast and the image was stunning for the price. So I ordered the 6,5... but it turned out to be a disappointment, I found the image nowhere as nice as the 8x32, the sweet spot was small and I found the distortion almost distracting (I'm not usually bothered by it). So, if my experience with the 8x32 and 6,5x32 Adventurers is anything to go by... you are in for a great surprise with the 8x32. Treat yourself!