• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Collecting Bushnell/ Bausch & Lomb binoculars (1 Viewer)

Thanks to both for this very interesting info. I found out that the Zephyr 9x35 I bought last year in a Wyoming pawnshop was made in 1948, wow it still looks new & the leather strap is almost untouched. I also have a 6x30 with just a serial number & no letters. Although it may not be a B&L, I also have a 7x50 with no markings at all, no serial numbers, just the lens cleaning sticker, so it does appear to be US Military?
 
This is an old thread, but I have 3 pairs of old B&L Discoverer binoculars, so I must be in the right place. I've checked each (a 7X35, an &X50 and a 10X50) against the list that John and James provided (thanks!) but they each have a 5 digit number, with no suffix or prefix. This is contrary to the 4 digit number with a double letter prefix or suffix.
Can anyone shed some light on this id problem? Thanks.
 
This is an old thread, but I have 3 pairs of old B&L Discoverer binoculars, so I must be in the right place. I've checked each (a 7X35, an &X50 and a 10X50) against the list that John and James provided (thanks!) but they each have a 5 digit number, with no suffix or prefix. This is contrary to the 4 digit number with a double letter prefix or suffix.
Can anyone shed some light on this id problem? Thanks.

Hate to raise your concern, but in the past, there were Zeiss Jena copies produced in Japan post WW2 (not entirely illegitimately apparently, long story) that usually had 6 digit serial numbers, while the authentic ones had 7 digit numbers. B&L was also a highly regarded brand, so I'd wonder if there was an effort to create copies there as well.

Hopefully one of the better informed members of the forum can shed light on this.
 
Folks - My understanding of the B&L info I started is that it pertains only to the Zephyrs made in the US, not the B&Ls made in Japan nor the thousands of B&Ls made in the Second World War. Very tricky getting accurate info on any binocular today. I believe Zeiss keeps the most accurate record on serial numbers.
 
Adding to the confusion was the name "Zephyrs" on some of the B&L brand binoculars made in Japan. They are excellent binoculars but heavier than the Rochester Zephyrs, and not on the list I furnished.
 
Folks - My understanding of the B&L info I started is that it pertains only to the Zephyrs made in the US, not the B&Ls made in Japan nor the thousands of B&Ls made in the Second World War.

I believe the table applies to some if not all B&L marked binoculars made during WW II beginning in 1941. I have several B&L military binoculars from this period all of which have a letter prefixed serial number stamped on the hinge end cap which corresponds to the probable date of manufacture. For example, there is a Mark 28 in the collection having a V prefixed number indicating 1944 manufacture. Interestingly, the binocular is marked 1943 and although the year markings on US WW II binos are usually assumed to be the years of manufacture, I think they are the year of contract for a batch of binoculars which may not have been completely filled until the next year. The 1944 V marking supports this idea.
 
Last edited:
Alert! Old thread revival post. :)
I recently picked up a set of Rangemasters made in Japan.
This set came with the original warranty card so I believe this information may be useful to those wishing to help establish an approximate date theirs.
Serial number 0416091 was sold January 14, 1979 so likely manufactured in 1978.
 
It is always interesting to pick up used binoculars in their original cases including the sales slips. One Bushnell Rangemaster 7x35 in my collection (the Fuji made silver ring one which Fan Tao prefers), which I have found the best of any 7x35 wide angle I have looked through was sold in Denver, Colorado in 1963 for $153.90. That was 52 years ago, and I think it is a reasonable inference to make that it may have been made in the late 1950s or a few years later. The serial # is 315066

Using the annual inflation indicator at 4.01 %, that would cost close to $1,200 today new. Nothing in that price range today comes even close to its wide FOV(525 feet), huge sweet spot, quality mechanics, and comfortable viewing, Its view is as natural a one that could be expected.

If the reader believes I am exaggerating, find someone who has one and try to buy it from him, A few collectors buy everyone they can find. One fellow I am told has over 30 pairs, which makes little sense to me since he may some day have a heart attack and the Rangemasters will find themselves in pawn shops collecting dust, or worse being used by "knuckle draggers" who don't understand what they have and use their shirt tails to grind away the coatings.

I am surprised that the alpha manufacturers have not resurrected this model, since no patents are still around to hinder production. Remember, you optical snobs, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, even with binoculars.
 
It is always interesting to pick up used binoculars in their original cases including the sales slips. One Bushnell Rangemaster 7x35 in my collection (the Fuji made silver ring one which Fan Tao prefers), which I have found the best of any 7x35 wide angle I have looked through was sold in Denver, Colorado in 1963 for $153.90. That was 52 years ago, and I think it is a reasonable inference to make that it may have been made in the late 1950s or a few years later. The serial # is 315066

Using the annual inflation indicator at 4.01 %, that would cost close to $1,200 today new. Nothing in that price range today comes even close to its wide FOV(525 feet), huge sweet spot, quality mechanics, and comfortable viewing, Its view is as natural a one that could be expected.

If the reader believes I am exaggerating, find someone who has one and try to buy it from him, A few collectors buy everyone they can find. One fellow I am told has over 30 pairs, which makes little sense to me since he may some day have a heart attack and the Rangemasters will find themselves in pawn shops collecting dust, or worse being used by "knuckle draggers" who don't understand what they have and use their shirt tails to grind away the coatings.

I am surprised that the alpha manufacturers have not resurrected this model, since no patents are still around to hinder production. Remember, you optical snobs, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, even with binoculars.

Yes people are on to these. I've found They're quite tricky to find in good condition. ive got an FPO custom 7.4 deg and I can say, when the nitpicking is done, it's virtually as good as anything. Built like an alpha fuji! It is pin sharp with outstanding contrast. Huge depth of field. It's not really a coincidence that it reminds me of a small 7x50 Fujinon. In some ways a world apart, but there is something familial to the view...no doubt. I've got the wide 10deg fov rangefinder on the way.

Does anybody have experience of the Tamron rangefinder 11deg fov?

Cheers
Rathaus
 
Last edited:
I have a Bushnell 7x35 WA GlassesOn from, I think, the mid '80s. Just come back FOC from Bushnell with a replaced focus wheel rubber. Does anyone have any info on these, opinions or would collectors want them?
 
Alert! Old thread revival post. :)
I recently picked up a set of Rangemasters made in Japan.
This set came with the original warranty card so I believe this information may be useful to those wishing to help establish an approximate date theirs.
Serial number 0416091 was sold January 14, 1979 so likely manufactured in 1978.

I recently had occasion to send my Rangemasters back to Bushnell for repairs. I was informed that since mine were made in 1978 they were no longer eligible for warranty repairs.

I expect they could provide dates for most Customs and Rangemasters.
 
Jim - the Internet is ruining many postal systems. Wonder how long before our governments figure out a way of taxing our use of it. FYI, I'm a wee bit of an authority on the Custer Battle, inasmuch as I was a lecturer for the National Park Service as a seasonal historian back in the 1960's. But my knowledge is dated today. Same birds in Montana today as there were in 1876. The binoculars back then were pretty primitive compared to what we have now. Lewis & Clark did have a telescope (Galilean) on their trek. That must have been a highly prized item back then. John

Hi John:

Have you read Libby's "Boots and Saddles?

We were supposed to stop there on our cross-country genealogy vacation, last summer. Got caught up in buying a house in Twin Falls. But, we're closer, now. Maybe next year.

Bill
 
Jim - the Internet is ruining many postal systems. Wonder how long before our governments figure out a way of taxing our use of it. FYI, I'm a wee bit of an authority on the Custer Battle, inasmuch as I was a lecturer for the National Park Service as a seasonal historian back in the 1960's. But my knowledge is dated today. Same birds in Montana today as there were in 1876. The binoculars back then were pretty primitive compared to what we have now. Lewis & Clark did have a telescope (Galilean) on their trek. That must have been a highly prized item back then. John

Take a close look at the left side of Goff's picture of Lt. Col. Custer and Libbie in their study at Fort Abraham Lincoln 1873 and you'll see two binocular cases hanging on the wall beside the bookcase underneath a sword and some powder horns. His rifle and gun rack is in the right side of the picture giving historians some information about his arsenal.
 
Bill - Read "Boots & Saddles?" Of course. Elizabeth Custer spent almost her entire life memorializing her husband, George Armstrong Custer, and she was very good at it. She was well-educated, intelligent, photogenic, and a "true believer" in her husband's military ability. Interestingly, they had no children, and she never remarried. She in fact had a flair for publicity like her husband and lived a long life, dying at age 91 in 1933.

If you get back to Montana in the near future, contact me, and I'll give you a preview what to expect at the Battlefield.

John
 
Tamron Rangemaster 11deg

I received this in the post today and rejoiced when I found it to be in virtually mint condition.

I can't seem to find much about Tamron on here. I might try more advanced searches.

I'm trying to think of a binocular built quite like this. I joked with John Dracon that it's eyepieces and focuser could possibly be used in place of a car jack. I happen to be buying some cheap new digital kitchen scales this week and I'll be weighing these things. If there is a heavier 7-8x35mm out there anywhere I'd be very surprised.

Then there's the view. That view. 77deg apfov with a fat sweet spot. Razor sharp. Bright. Barring the short eye relief and weight which is no problem for me, these are probably the best wide angle binoculars I've ever looked through. Mid 1960s onwards according to Fantao. Not sure how long these were made.

Does anybody else have experience with the Tamron Rangemaster 11deg?

Cheers
Rathaus
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    182.8 KB · Views: 152
Last edited:
I'm not sure what Bushnell/Tamron were thinking when they made these. What was the market for this binocular? Schwarzenneger was probably too small and weak to lift them back in 1965. There is a heap of over-engineering going on here contributing to the massive weight and size. I can see these bins will not suit all. What is the name of the two arms which attach the eyepieces to the centre pivot? Those things that often flop about on cheap porros? I read somewhere they called them the 'feather'. On the Tamron they are massive thick rigid slabs of a weighty metal of some kind. Outrageous. Here -
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    151.7 KB · Views: 154
Last edited:
I can't seem to find much about Tamron on here. I might try more advanced searches.
I don't know anything about Tamron in the context of binoculars, but they've certainly been a supplier of photographic lenses (under their own name and others; sometimes top-end, sometimes 2nd-tier or worse) almost since back in the days when Pontius was a pilot...

...Mike
 
Warning! This thread is more than 3 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top