Some times it take time and re-reading to get things right. Did you ever re-write some things?
And I edited it before I read your comment.
Bob
-
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.
Why are you keeping your 7x binoculars? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter spiralcoil
- Start date
Some times it take time and re-reading to get things right. Did you ever re-write some things?
And I edited it before I read your comment.
Bob
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Our students--God bless 'em--hmm...
I rewrite everything. My dumb editors insist upon it. God bless them too.
As for 8x and 7x, well, have it your way. I'll take 8x.
Mark
Sorry about that.
I have 4 7 x 42's going back to the early Leitz 7 x 42 BA Trinovid which I used for a long time and I have preferred using 7x 42 since then. I upgraded it to a Leica Trinovid. 2 others I own have been discontinued; the Swarovski SLC B and the Zeiss Victory FL T*. I got them both at good prices after they were discontinued. Sort of like protecting an endangered species, I guess. I like the Zeiss best now.
The Swarovski is also a pleasure to use but it is rather heavy. I got a 2x extender for it and it also works very well as a 14 x 42 monocular if you hold it vertically with both hands. I saw a woman using a large 50mm Swarovski SLC that way at Cape May a few years ago and she had no trouble holding it. She had a patch over one of her eyes. (As a matter of re-writing this, I should clarify that she was not using an extender, the binocular was either a 12x or a 15x.)
I have also been using the new Zeiss 8 x 42 Terra ED lately. It's pretty good for the price but I'd rather use 32mm in 8x. You can't find much in 7x at 32mm or in 35m if you want a Roof Prism.
Bob
Last edited:
Torview
Well-known member
I was keen to purchase a Slc 7x42 back in 06 but it was a real stretch financially back then so bought an ex demo Dba 8x42 for half as much.
I never really bonded with that pre Oasis Dba and with hindsight had I found a way to afford the Slc I`d probably still be loving it.
I`v learnt my lesson though, its definitely better to go without then to compromise !
I never really bonded with that pre Oasis Dba and with hindsight had I found a way to afford the Slc I`d probably still be loving it.
I`v learnt my lesson though, its definitely better to go without then to compromise !
The last production of the 7 x 42 SLC might have been in 2006? There might have been some later ones. I don't know. At least mine, which I purchased a couple of years ago as a Demo from Eagle Optics is a 2006.
Bob
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Mark:
I also like 8x or 8.5 x as my favorite size, since it works well with
distance viewing, is bright, especially with the 42mm objective.
It is interesting in most binocular models of all makes and price
ranges, the 10x42 for example is usually priced a bit higher than
the 8X.
Why is that? I suppose 10X is better, and is harder to make, etc.
Jerry
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Mark:
I also like 8x or 8.5 x as my favorite size, since it works well with
distance viewing, is bright, especially with the 42mm objective.
It is interesting in most binocular models of all makes and price
ranges, the 10x42 for example is usually priced a bit higher than
the 8X.
Why is that? I suppose 10X is better, and is harder to make, etc.
Jerry
Hello Jerry,
The excuse is that tolerances are tighter with a 10x glass.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
I'd be interested to hear from those still have the 7x binos, why they like it, and what mostly they use their 7x binos for?
Well, the Ultravid and the Zeiss FL 7x42 are awesome binoculars. I also tried the Swarovski 7x42 Neu, and it is also excellent albeit felt heavier and not as bright as either the Leica or the Zeiss. The latter two, side-by-side, are superb stable platforms for long hours of viewing, both with a second-to-none field of view, and are amenable for use in long hikes as well. It took me a long time to decide on the Zeiss; its forgiving eye placement characteristics, user-friendliness to myopic users, and its brightness made the day.
In a nutshell, it is a pleasant format that allows its user to gather optical information very comfortably and efficiently. Enjoy in good health.
Over recent times I've realised that the detail I'm able to see depends on a number of factors including light levels, weight and balance of the binoculars, and the quality of the optics (resolution). I wouldn't count my hands as particularly unsteady, but I definitely do better at higher powers with a heavy well balanced models.
Just a quick backyard test of some of my binos showed some interesting results. I just pinned up a USAF chart and read off the smallest pattern I could clearly see with each pair hand held. Rather than convert to arcseconds I'll just report the width of the lines.
7x26 (light reverse porro) 0.5mm
7x36 (mid weight roof) 0.45mm
9x28 (light roof) 0.5mm
10x56 (heavy roof) 0.4mm
12x50 (heavy, well balanced porro) 0.25mm
I've left out the results for my cheap 8 and 10x pairs I have as I know the optical quality doesn't match the others and adversely biased the results.
Slightly over interpreting the results, it is consistent with my impression trying out very many pairs in stores and at bird shows that I can see as much detail (if not more) with my mid weight 7x36 as I can with with the majority of 8 and 10x pairs. However increasing the weight of the higher powers swings the advantage in their favour. The 10x56 and 12x50 are roughly twice the weight of my 22 oz 7x36. The 12x50 is particularly well balanced. I may see more marginally more detail with some heavier 8 or 10x pairs but the 7x36 is much kinder on the neck. My 12x50 gets a lot less use but is very useful for distance.
Of course different eyes and hand shake will give different results.
David
Just a quick backyard test of some of my binos showed some interesting results. I just pinned up a USAF chart and read off the smallest pattern I could clearly see with each pair hand held. Rather than convert to arcseconds I'll just report the width of the lines.
7x26 (light reverse porro) 0.5mm
7x36 (mid weight roof) 0.45mm
9x28 (light roof) 0.5mm
10x56 (heavy roof) 0.4mm
12x50 (heavy, well balanced porro) 0.25mm
I've left out the results for my cheap 8 and 10x pairs I have as I know the optical quality doesn't match the others and adversely biased the results.
Slightly over interpreting the results, it is consistent with my impression trying out very many pairs in stores and at bird shows that I can see as much detail (if not more) with my mid weight 7x36 as I can with with the majority of 8 and 10x pairs. However increasing the weight of the higher powers swings the advantage in their favour. The 10x56 and 12x50 are roughly twice the weight of my 22 oz 7x36. The 12x50 is particularly well balanced. I may see more marginally more detail with some heavier 8 or 10x pairs but the 7x36 is much kinder on the neck. My 12x50 gets a lot less use but is very useful for distance.
Of course different eyes and hand shake will give different results.
David
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello Spiracoli,
I am keeping my 7x42 Zeiss ClassiC because it is such a pleasure to use: wide field, great resolution, bright and contrasty. It may be big but it handles well. I suspect that the Zeiss FL may have better colour rendition but the ED glass may only compensate for the increased chromatic aberration caused by it shorter focal length.
However, as I usually watch birds, after some other early morning business, I generally carry an 8x. My ideal is carrying the Classic and a 10x32.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:
I am keeping my 7x42 Zeiss ClassiC because it is such a pleasure to use: wide field, great resolution, bright and contrasty. It may be big but it handles well. I suspect that the Zeiss FL may have better colour rendition but the ED glass may only compensate for the increased chromatic aberration caused by it shorter focal length.
However, as I usually watch birds, after some other early morning business, I generally carry an 8x. My ideal is carrying the Classic and a 10x32.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:
A bit of a mystery really. It's clearly from the same series as the United Optics BM2 but I've never seen a 12x50 offered elsewhere. I just happened to spot it in the bargain section of a UK store and recognised it from Holger's review of the Loava 10x50 HG. My guess it was sent from China as a speculative sales sample but the retailer never opened the box. Strathspey sell the 7x and 10x50 here. Mine is optically exceptional!
http://www.united-optics.com/Products/Binoculars/Military_Binoculars/BM2_Series/BM2_Series.html
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/loava10x50.html
http://www.strathspey.co.uk/
David
peter kitchener
Well-known member
Why am I keeping my 7x42 Nikon EDG (II) binoculars? Because I've only had them for about 10 months and they are the best bins I've ever owned.
See my review at
http://www.birdforum.net/reviews/showproduct.php/product/385/cat/9
For birding I use the 7x42 Nikons, but they only focus down to 2.1 metres. When used in combination with my Swarovski ED65 scope, I never miss the higher magnification of x8 or x10 binoculars.
For insects I use my Viking MD 6.5x32 which focus down to 1 metre.
For a combination of birding and insect watching I use my Nikon 8x32 HGs (MFD 1.8 metres)
If the 7x42 Nikons focused down to 1.8 metres I'd probably never use the 8x32s
See my review at
http://www.birdforum.net/reviews/showproduct.php/product/385/cat/9
For birding I use the 7x42 Nikons, but they only focus down to 2.1 metres. When used in combination with my Swarovski ED65 scope, I never miss the higher magnification of x8 or x10 binoculars.
For insects I use my Viking MD 6.5x32 which focus down to 1 metre.
For a combination of birding and insect watching I use my Nikon 8x32 HGs (MFD 1.8 metres)
If the 7x42 Nikons focused down to 1.8 metres I'd probably never use the 8x32s
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I'm keeping my 7x24 Bausch and Lomb Elites because even though I've been a loyal Leica customer for the last 30 years, they, and every other alpha binocular manufacturer, can't seem to get it in their heads that it's more difficult to hold small binoculars steady due their size and weight. A 6.5x or 7x 20mm binocular would out perform a comparable 8x model because of it's larger exit pupil, image brightness, field of view, and apparent image sharpness, not to mention the steadier view that comes with using a lower power. My Elites are heavy, have a narrow field of view, and not very good eye relief, but they still come in handy when I need a binocular that's won't shake if I pull over on a bike ride while trying to catch my breath. I would rather have a Leica in that circumstance, but I'm not holding my breath that Leica or any other Alpha company will make the kind of binocular I want.
Last edited:
A2GG
Beth
that is a great movie!...lots of hillarious lines. Best parts are when he barricades the door, but it opens the other way and when Donny's ashes blow in his face. haha !!
Last edited:
iveljay
Well-known member
With 7x (specifically an FL in my case) you have a relaxed view of the birds, their environment, how they are intereacting and can immerse yourself in their world. They provide a totally de-stressing feeling of involvement. The great dof with the wide fov just gives me the ultimate in pleasureable viewing.
On other occasions I am in the mood for something different or need a more detailed view and use other magnifications. I don't feel any one magnification is more right than any other, it just depends on what you are looking at and the reasons why you are watching it.
I too find having a 12x50 porro handy, in my case an Olympus EXPSI.
On other occasions I am in the mood for something different or need a more detailed view and use other magnifications. I don't feel any one magnification is more right than any other, it just depends on what you are looking at and the reasons why you are watching it.
I too find having a 12x50 porro handy, in my case an Olympus EXPSI.
Last edited:
John Dracon
John Dracon
I share Mr. Pinewood's experience with the Zeiss 7x42. A "Classic" in more than one way.
Jerry, regarding more cost for a higher power, I'll take a stab at the reason. Take Leupold's Cascade porro in 8x42 and 10x42. I have both of them. They weigh the same, look the same dimensionally, must have the same amount of optical glass, etc. Is is harder to grind a 10 power lens? Or is it a function of economics. Eight power outsells the ten power models. But without access to company records, we won't know. (and will never know.)
My discontinued Zeiss 15x60 B porro was very expensive. But Nikon, Pentax, etc. make spotting scopes with 65 mm, 80 mm, 100 mm lens which are HD at considerably less cost and equal to anything the alphas make. Evidentally, there are a host of variables relating to costs of optics that defy analysis.
John Dracon
Jerry, regarding more cost for a higher power, I'll take a stab at the reason. Take Leupold's Cascade porro in 8x42 and 10x42. I have both of them. They weigh the same, look the same dimensionally, must have the same amount of optical glass, etc. Is is harder to grind a 10 power lens? Or is it a function of economics. Eight power outsells the ten power models. But without access to company records, we won't know. (and will never know.)
My discontinued Zeiss 15x60 B porro was very expensive. But Nikon, Pentax, etc. make spotting scopes with 65 mm, 80 mm, 100 mm lens which are HD at considerably less cost and equal to anything the alphas make. Evidentally, there are a host of variables relating to costs of optics that defy analysis.
John Dracon
I used a Leica Ultravid 7X42 for many years and never once did I experience a more enjoyable DOF or FOV than I found with quality 8X bins. I think the mystique of 7X is out of whack with reality and is primarily based on the decrease in handshake due to the lower power. Heck, a 6X is almost image stabilized, something that fools the mind into believing all sorts of things. As it is, I find the DOF/FOV in my 8.5X42 Swarovision superior to any 7X I've encountered. The little 8X32 SV my wife owns has a very immersive FOV and its DOF is as good as it gets.
