Which binoculars have aged better? … and worse! (A guide for young binocular fans) (1 Viewer)

[yarrellii]

I'm sure you all know and have experienced what I’m talking about.
It’s just like with movies or cars. Some of them drove us crazy 20, 30, 40 years ago, we thought they were unsurpassable; it seemed that there was no point beyond, that no matter how hard they tried, no one would ever come up with anything better.

And, oh well, this is until you revisit the movie/car in question to discover with horror that your idol from yesteryear has not aged very well, to put it mildly… Or, on the contrary, you look at a GTO or an F40 and you think that in many cases they can keep up (at least in some areas) with current production. It might be that they were actually ahead of their time or simply put, there’s something about them: ease of use, handling, comfort that simply has not been surpassed, even if the pure performance of the newest and greatest is obviously better.

Why am I writing all this? Well, it is not the first time I feel the same way about some binoculars in particular. I’ve been using a 7x42 Leica BA and I’m frankly quite amazed about the view (yes, it weights more or less like the Titanic and it should come with discount vouchers for a physiotherapist specialised in neck injures). But this 20 year old view leaves you in awe; at least it leaves me in awe: so sweet, sharp and overall pleasant and easy. Something similar can be said about the Zeiss Dialyt 7x42 BGATP 7x42, the 1998 Nikon SE or the 1999 Nikon EII, to name a few very well known examples. On the other hand, devices like the Zeiss Diafun don't seem to have aged well, they're hardly ever used as a reference and they seem almost gone from the classified ads and auction websites.

So, for those of you who have been around for long time… as a special treat for young (at heart) binocular fans who might not have all that expertise: which would you say are the binoculars that have aged really well, and which have aged poorly.

As an example to set the ball rolling: in my humble opinion, the Leica 7x42 BA has a pretty convincing performance (weight aside).

Thank you all for your contributions!

 

[etudiant]

Imho, the Leica 8x32 BA (or BN, which was pretty much the same glass retuned for closer focus) would deserve a place.
They are optically excellent and superb mechanically. Plus they fit the hand exceptionally well. A classic glass, still very serviceable today.

 

[Pinewood]

Hello Yarelli,

I would not argue with Étudiant but the model in red has more eye appeal. I would add the Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt ClassiC with phase coating. Both are still worth using.

Stay safe,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:

 

[dries1]

Yarrellii,

Regarding commercial non military glass I would agree with the BA/BN as I have two BA models and the views are still a pleasure. The Dialyt models are also an extremely well made glass also and have aged quite well, I have an 8X56 phase coated model.
To tell you the truth many of the premium glass from the big three in Europe and Nikon have lasted/aged quite well.
It is the new sub-premium glass (non repairable, but replaced) that will end up in the landfill in time. How about the Steiner D12 8X30 for one.

Andy W.

 

[wllmspd]

Bushnell Rangemaster, bought multiple hand, wide, sharp and easy to use. Limited eye relief and heavy, but great views. Plenty older than I am.

Peter

 

[jring]

Hi,

actually my Leitz 7x42 BA - the one before the brick - is still quite nice and would be even more so if it had been upgraded to multi- and phasecoatings... but for some reason they designed the brick...

Then of course the SE is still the best glass I have around...

Joachim

 

[Alexis Powell]

I'd agree to Zeiss 7x42 BGATP, Leica 8x32 BA/BN, Nikon SE series, as well as B&L 7x26 Custom (prior to the plastic housing version), and I agree that many of the past best models from the big 3 hold up well, but some are better than others. My original Swarovski 8.5x42 EL from 1999 are in beautiful condition, including the original armor, despite many years of heavy use. I've seen others of the same model that are completely trashed. I don't have a good feeling for the very plastic feeling Zeiss 8x40 and 10x40 Victory models, whereas the Victory FL seem to hold up very nicely.

Some otherwise very capable recently classic bins that I don't endorse, based on their fragility as observed from multiple samples, are the Nikon Venturer LX/HG roof series (fragile armor and model labeling), Bushnell Discoverer roof series (fragile diopter), and Swift 804 Audubon (fragile alignment, too sensitive to water).

--AP

 

[dries1]

That is odd, I find the Nikon HG/LX as one of the most durable glass out there. The armor is more durable than the newer HG L and premier series. Optically they are a bit behind mostly in color rendition and a bit more CA for some to handle, however IMO they are very durable. The biggest gripe by many is the weight, especially the 8 and 10X42 models. I own all four models and they all continue to function perfectly, with perfect focus.

Andy W

 

[chill6x6]

Quite frankly there are quite a few out there that have aged very nicely!

1.Practically ANY Zeiss FL. All still among the best.
2. Swarovski Habichts and SLCs.
3. Nikon E and E-II
4. Leica Trinovid, Trinovid BA/BN, and all Ultravid models.
5. Could probably add the Swift porros. I've never had one. I'd buy one just to have one if I knew which to get! LOL!
6. Docter Nobilem porros

I'm sure I missed some...

 

[Pinewood]

Hello Chuck,

I understand liking the Nikon EII line.

Neither you, nor anyone else mentioned any Nikon SE. Was that purposeful?

Stay safe,
Arthur

 

[dries1]

The SE is still a world class glass today, it has not left the building yet. I will have the 12X50s on the night sky tonight, well at least before the moon rises.

Andy W.

 

[Alexis Powell]

Nikon E are fragile for alignment; some production of EII sheds body coverings.

In my experience, a very large percentage of Nikon HG/LX have body armor that lifts and the hard plastic model labels fall off. They also have a tendency to develop low hinge tension and unfortunately must be sent for service from what I understand (not a do-it-yourself job). I know they can hold up with the right treatment (I have a 10x42 LX in pristine condition), but they can also deteriorate with the wrong care. By contrast, bins like the BA/BN or FL are hard to mess up.

--AP

 

[dries1]

Alexis the HG/LX are 20 years old and mine are still going strong. By the way, the Hinge is easy to tighten up, I explained how in a previous thread. One thing for sure the HG/LX are better built to handle moisture intrusion much better than the BA/BN, the Achilles heel of the series.
I agree with you on the FL series, a very durable glass.

Andy W.

 

[Alexis Powell]

...the Hinge is easy to tighten up, I explained how in a previous thread...

Ah yes, thanks for the reminder, I'll give it a go sometime soon. I think I got my LX in 1999.

--AP

 

[dries1]

I think my 10x42s are pre 2000, so likely the last premier glass from Nikon made with lead - along with some of the older SE 10X42s also, I think I have one of those too.

 

[Kevin Conville]

One thing for sure the HG/LX are better built to handle moisture intrusion much better than the BA/BN, the Achilles heel of the series.
Andy W.

Huh? Achilles Heel? What is this about? Did you have an isolated incident and went about casting aspersions?
Personally, I've washed a half dozen BA/BNs under a faucet, repeatedly, and still do one pair.
No issue. Where does this here Achilles Heel business come from? Why is this the first I'm hearing of this?
And how do YOU know Nikon HG/LX are better sealed than the Leicas? Can you cite instances that are known other than (maybe) your personal experience?
I've used BA and BN Leicas since 1991 w/o any such incident.

One thing IS for sure and that this is NOT "One thing for sure"

 

[dries1]

Brand bias sorry, I own both. I know you are a Leica fan of the BA/BN so the retort is understandable.

 

[chill6x6]

Hello Chuck,

I understand liking the Nikon EII line.

Neither you, nor anyone else mentioned any Nikon SE. Was that purposeful?

Stay safe,
Arthur

Good morning Arthur,

I like the SE. I almost included it in my list. I guess longevity and maybe serviceability is why I picked the E model. Best I could tell the "E" series has been in production since 1978 and the E-II picked up in 1999 until present. That's a period of time very few binoculars can duplicate. Also I'm pretty sure Bill or Cory could repair the E series with their eyes closed. ALSO even in this world of an abundance of binocular choices the E-II in particular remains the favorite binocular of even some of the most ardent binocular critics.

 

[normjackson]

Quite frankly there are quite a few out there that have aged very nicely!

1.Practically ANY Zeiss FL. All still among the best.
2. Swarovski Habichts and SLCs.
3. Nikon E and E-II
4. Leica Trinovid, Trinovid BA/BN, and all Ultravid models.
5. Could probably add the Swift porros. I've never had one. I'd buy one just to have one if I knew which to get! LOL!
6. Docter Nobilem porros

I'm sure I missed some...

Re. #6 if heavier or bulkier devices are to be included maybe include the Zeiss 15x60 BGAT and the Design Selection "Night Owl" models which have their devotees; and detractors, of course...

Looks like Joachim isn't a fan |=)| but think I'd agree with those who would suggest the Leica BA series which became the BN is still very much serviceable. Was quite an impressive package when introduced : internal focusing elements, lubricant-free focuser mechanism, pop-up eyecups, innovative dioptre adjustment, tough armouring that lasts and a good quality wide angle view with phase correction and good multi coatings all back in beginning of 1990s. Mind you, anyone put their then price through an inflation calculator?

Looking over time since phase coating came on the scene which I see has been argued here (by Holger amongst others) as being the most recent "big step" in binocular technology then we have a selection of features which may not be present on some older glasses which one would need to assess as to their importance :

Internal focusing to assist waterproofing
Eye relief sufficient for glasses (though often present among the top models at lower powers)
More advanced coatings for improved transmission/reflection and better colour
Twist-up eyecups
Reduced weight
Improved correction of colour aberrations possibly down to use of more "exotic" glass
Various ergonomic innovations as with open bridge, dioptre adjustment mechanism, head rest...
and no doubt others.

Not sure such a good idea to try to call out the turkeys remembering one man's turkey is another man's Dulcinea.

 

[PHA]

Agree with chill6x6 about the first two, switching the order in my opinion.
Nr.1 is the Habicht. Any era!
And I put as Nr. 3 the Leicas.

Best!

PHA