7x42’s; High end versus mid range (oldies but goodies) (1 Viewer)

denco@comcast.n · Sep 10, 2019

dwatsonbirder said:
Hi Dennis, thanks for your thoughts, I suspect those Habicht are really good binoculars. Unfortunately they fall down in 4 main areas as I see it: Waterproofing (depending on how much and what type of birding you do), eye relief (probably fine if you don't wear glasses) fov (seems a bit skimpy in comparison to most other roofs of the same specifications) and finally price! Yes, $700 for a well built binocular offering one of the best views available may be a bargain to some, but it is still a fairly significant outlay to those with less disposable income, or for whom it would be a secondary tool for the job. I suppose if you look at it as giving at least 25 years service it would only work out at $28 per year, which is excellent value!

The Swarovski Habicht's 7x42 are totally waterproof and fog proof unlike a lot of porro's, the eye relief is fine if you don't wear glasses, the FOV is narrower than some of the other 7x42's but it makes up for it by being amazing bright and sharp. As far as the price I think you would have to at least pay twice as much to get a roof prism of the same quality and the Habicht's will not lose value over the years from depreciation. There is not a roof prism available of the same quality for $700.00. The Habicht's are really alpha porro's with EL glass and coatings. Meaning some of the best. That is why their transmission is over 95%. There is no 42mm roof that will equal their brightness. They are as light as most 32mm roofs and you have the advantage of a 42mm aperture plus the much underrated and not talked about fact of a 3D view versus the poster board flatness of most roof's. I had the Nikon EDG II 7x42 and the Habicht 7x42 is a much more WOW binocular. I got rid of the EDG even though it has a bigger FOV it is not nearly as bright as the Habicht and it is way heavier. The Habicht's FOV is incredibly bright.

dries1 · Sep 10, 2019

I guess some folks like me can see a lot with 89-90% transmission and not needing 95%.

Andy W.

ceasar · Sep 10, 2019

[email protected] said:
Don't forget the Swarovski Habicht 7x42. It is lighter, brighter and has better 3D than any of the roof's for less money. None of the roof's will touch their transmission. They are just as sharp on-axis as any of the alpha roofs and you wouldn't believe how with their great 3D how much easier it is to see birds in bushes and trees. They "Pop" the birds out from the back round branches. I think they are better built than most roof's now days also. They keep their value. Buy one for $700.00 and in 5 years you can probably sell them for $700.00 because they don't change.

See the Four accurate but less than enthusiastic individual reviews in Allbinos below.

It's overall Specifications are not impressive even with its well known very high transmission.

It has a very narrow FOV of 341' @ 1000yds and Short Eye Relief of 14mm and a long minimum focusing distance of 3.5 meters.

https://www.allbinos.com/270-Swarovski_Habicht_7x42-binoculars_specifications.html

In short, it is not a very practically designed 7x42 binocular for general use and "General Use" is what 7x42 binoculars excel in! (For example almost every 7x42 binocular will come with a FOV 8º [420'@1000yds] or close to it. The eyepieces used in them also have long eye relief to go along with their wide fields.)

Bob

Pinewood · Sep 10, 2019

ceasar said:
See the Four accurate but less than enthusiastic individual reviews in Allbinos below.

It's overall Specifications are not impressive even with its well known very high transmission.

It has a very narrow FOV of 341' @ 1000yds and Short Eye Relief of 14mm and a long minimum focusing distance of 3.5 meters.

https://www.allbinos.com/270-Swarovski_Habicht_7x42-binoculars_specifications.html

In short, it is not a very practically designed 7x42 binocular for general use and "General Use" is what 7x42 binoculars excel in! (For example almost every 7x42 binocular will come with a FOV 8º or close to it.)

Bob

Hello Bob,

Yes. That Austrian binocular is simple and robust. A simple eyepiece, with few elements helps provide high transmission but at the cost of the FOV of oculars with more elements. It is rather old design, perhaps the company's oldest model, suited to Alpine hunters and hikers.

I once owned the Austrian 7x42 bur I still have two 7x42 glasses: Leica BA and the Zeiss Dialyt. The latter is my favourite. Because it uses Abbe-Koenig prisms, the Dialyt actually provides some stereopsis.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:

dries1 · Sep 10, 2019

What 7X42, past and present has the largest apparent FOV.

Andy W.

wdc · Sep 10, 2019

dries1 said:
What 7X42, past and present has the largest apparent FOV.

Andy W.

That is an excellent question Andy. I was looking at AFOV regarding a thread a few weeks ago about the Noctivid. Here's a few of of them:

1. Nikon 7x42 EDG 52°
2. Leica Ultravid 7x42 BR 52°
3. Swarovski Habicht 7x42 43.3°
4. Opticron 7x42 Discovery 50.5°

I'm using an online calculator to generate these:
https://astronomy.tools/calculators/binoculars

For all the love and praise that 7x42's garner for better depth of field, wide field of view, less pronounced shake, etc. I would say the AFOV could be improved on every binocular in this format by a fair amount. If the Opticron is the NEWEST incarnation of this format, I'd say they're going the wrong direction with regard to AFOV, though the price is good. The rest of the bins are either no longer made, or will likely NEVER be upgraded with regard to this issue.

Why not make a widefield binocular more immersive?

I assume that eyepiece design needs to be more complex, or perhaps larger, in order to generate and correct a wider apparent field, while maintaining usable eye relief.

Maybe the new widefield Kowas will handle this much better. We'll know in a few more weeks, I expect.. ;-)

-Bill

dries1 · Sep 10, 2019

Thanks for the info Bill, it just conforms my lack of enthusiasm for the 7x42 format. The only 7X I felt that has a nice open view is my 7X40 NVA IF glass, that has an apparent FOV of 60 degrees; so much more open than my Meopta 7x42 B1, however it is not suitable for birding.

Regarding the eyepiece design, it would probably look like the WX 7X50.

I too am looking forward to the new WF Kowa models.

Andy W.

ceasar · Sep 11, 2019

Andy,

The Zeiss Victory 7x42 T* FL uses an 8x eyepiece with shorter objective tubes to get 7x with a wider 8.5º FOV than the normal 8º FOV a standard 7x42 has with its perceived but "inadequate" AFOV.

I don't know what the new AFOV of this Zeiss Victory 7x42 is after this change but one of the results of making its FOV wider in this manner is astigmatic edges in the view.

I own this Zeiss 7x42 and I like using it very much (it is my favorite binocular) but I don't find its view more "immersive" than what I see when using my Swarovski SLC Neu 7x42 B; nor, for that matter, my Leica 7x42 Trinovid BN.

I think that all of the the proposed optical manipulations and changes needed to change the AFOV or other specifications of any 7x42 will have effects on the views it will offer to the users.

I think that the same goes for other binocular formats. They all have "ideal" specifications where they work best

Bob

Pinewood · Sep 11, 2019

ceasar said:
The Zeiss Victory 7x42 T* FL uses an 8x eyepiece with shorter objective tubes to get 7x with a wider 8.5º FOV than the normal 8º FOV a standard 7x42 has with its perceived but "inadequate" AFOV.

Bob

Hello,

The Zeiss 7x42 ClassiC, also has an 8.5º FOV.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

ceasar · Sep 11, 2019

Pinewood said:
Hello,

The Zeiss 7x42 ClassiC, also has an 8.5º FOV.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Thank you Arthur.

I have never had the opportunity to use the 7x42 ClassiC. I note that Allbinos lists 10 enthusiastic reviews from some fortunate owners and that the ClassiCs were manufactured from 1981 to 2004. The 7x42 Victory was made from 2004 until 2013. It has an excellent bloodline!:t:

Bob

wdc · Sep 11, 2019

ceasar said:
Andy,

The Zeiss Victory 7x42 T* FL uses an 8x eyepiece with shorter objective tubes to get 7x with a wider 8.5º FOV than the normal 8º FOV a standard 7x42 has with its perceived but "inadequate" AFOV.

I don't know what the new AFOV of this Zeiss Victory 7x42 is after this change but one of the results of making its FOV wider in this manner is astigmatic edges in the view.

I own this Zeiss 7x42 and I like using it very much (it is my favorite binocular) but I don't find its view more "immersive" than what I see when using my Swarovski SLC Neu 7x42 B; nor, for that matter, my Leica 7x42 Trinovid BN.

I think that all of the the proposed optical manipulations and changes needed to change the AFOV or other specifications of any 7x42 will have effects on the views it will offer to the users.

I think that the same goes for other binocular formats. They all have "ideal" specifications where they work best

Bob

Hi Bob, Interestingly your Zeiss pushes the envelope in a good way: a wider FOV by half a degree, and a wider AFOV by 3°, compared to the rest of the 8° contenders. That stands out from the pack, at least on paper. It makes me wonder why it went out of production.

The only 7x42 I own is an Ultravid BR, which is, in my mind, 'less immersive' than some of the other bins I own. I attribute some of that effect to AFOV. Do you think you would find the 7x42 Habicht at 43° AFOV equally immersive to your Zeiss at 55°?

I'm not slamming the format, or the bins, but I've observed that AFOV seems a bit low in the 7x42 format, with the exception of the Zeiss FL, compared to other formats.

-Bill

Pinewood · Sep 11, 2019

ceasar said:
Thank you Arthur.

I have never had the opportunity to use the 7x42 ClassiC. I note that Allbinos lists 10 enthusiastic reviews from some fortunate owners and that the ClassiCs were manufactured from 1981 to 2004. The 7x42 Victory was made from 2004 until 2013. It has an excellent bloodline!:t:

Bob

Hello Bob,

I have a very late model, purchased after the FL line was announced. It has rather long barrels, suggesting a long focal length which supresses chromatic aberration. The 7x42 Fl uses fluoride lenses to handle CA and thus shortened the binocular. The FL probably has a different and more pleasing colour rendition.
In spite of its size, the 7x42 ClassiC is easy to handle but it does not focus as closely, because it lacks internal focussing.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

dries1 · Sep 11, 2019

I have viewed many 7X42s and 7X50s, save the WX - they all appear to me like looking down a tube. Additionally I have used the FL 7X42, and I own many other FL configurations. I am not downgrading the configuration, but 8X or more to my eyes just offers more.

Andy W.

denco@comcast.n · Sep 11, 2019

dries1 said:
I guess some folks like me can see a lot with 89-90% transmission and not needing 95%.

Andy W.

You don't need it but it sure is nice!

denco@comcast.n · Sep 11, 2019

ceasar said:
See the Four accurate but less than enthusiastic individual reviews in Allbinos below.

It's overall Specifications are not impressive even with its well known very high transmission.

It has a very narrow FOV of 341' @ 1000yds and Short Eye Relief of 14mm and a long minimum focusing distance of 3.5 meters.

https://www.allbinos.com/270-Swarovski_Habicht_7x42-binoculars_specifications.html

In short, it is not a very practically designed 7x42 binocular for general use and "General Use" is what 7x42 binoculars excel in! (For example almost every 7x42 binocular will come with a FOV 8º [420'@1000yds] or close to it. The eyepieces used in them also have long eye relief to go along with their wide fields.)

Bob

Bob. Have you ever actually looked through a Habicht? You can't always go by specifications. A lot of times binoculars will perform better than their specifications would indicate. It does have tube like FOV but the interesting thing about it is how bright the tube is. I agree that it is not the ideal general use birding binocular. An 8x32 is better for that. The Fujinon FMTR SX 7x50 is kind of like the Habicht 7x42. Both are very bright.

denco@comcast.n · Sep 11, 2019

dries1 said:
I have viewed many 7X42s and 7X50s, save the WX - they all appear to me like looking down a tube. Additionally I have used the FL 7X42, and I own many other FL configurations. I am not downgrading the configuration, but 8X or more to my eyes just offers more.

Andy W.

Andy. I agree with you. That is the reason I didn't like the Nikon EDG II 7x42 or most 7x42's. The Nikon WX would probably be the only one that would WOW me. Maybe the new Kowa BDII XD 6.5x32 with a 65 degree AFOV would be ok. I am not sure until I try it in a couple weeks. The Habicht has a tube like FOV also but it is a bright tube. It's WOW comes from the brightness and very even field illumination. It's true that it was probably designed as an Alpine Hunting binocular for low light situations and spotting game and also has the advantage of being light and easy to carry with a simple eyepiece design. Like most 7x42's the Habicht does not have an immersive FOV. Your right most 8x and 10x binoculars are going to have a bigger AFOV and more WOW. My biggest WOW is my SV 12x50 and I think yours is your UVHD+ 10x50. Your UVHD+ have an AFOV of 67 degrees. That is lot of WOW. I think anything above a 60 degree AFOV is going to pretty good but WOW starts happening after 65 degrees.

chill6x6 · Sep 11, 2019

ceasar said:
I own this Zeiss 7x42 and I like using it very much (it is my favorite binocular) but I don't find its view more "immersive" than what I see when using my Swarovski SLC Neu 7x42 B; nor, for that matter, my Leica 7x42 Trinovid BN.

Bob

I agree, same here. I don't notice a lot of difference between the SLC, the UVHD+, or the FL. One is just as "immersive" as the next. Now throw the Meopta B.1 7X50 and the Habicht 7X42 into the mix with their 7.21 degree and 6.5 degree FOV respectively and the difference is quite noticeable, especially the Habicht.

Boogieshrew · Sep 11, 2019

I have owned or still own Meopta, Zeiss FL, Ultravid +, SLC 7x42s and I never noticed any difference in immersive ness. They all feel wide to me. And I see the whole fov with my glasses on.
I did look through the opticron 7x42 roof once, with a 7* fov, that felt narrow and tubelike. I imagine it is the same with some of the old porro 7x42s with 6.5*

temmie · Sep 11, 2019

Dennis, do you have a link to the transmission curve of the 7x42 Habicht?

denco@comcast.n · Sep 11, 2019

temmie said:
Dennis, do you have a link to the transmission curve of the 7x42 Habicht?

Sure, here it is. You have to open it also. Below is the methodology used.
https://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=695397&d=1558116954

There is detailed explanation with pictures:
original: http://astro-talks.ru/forum/viewtopi...p=54991#p54811

in Google translate:
https://translate.google.com/transla...54991#p54811

The main measurement equipment is DSLR Canon 400d. It allows to make measurement through the color filters of the Bayer matrix on the chip of the Canon Eos. And there are some measurements through narrow band filters (Baader SC, Lumicon OIII and H-beta) are also available. It is not quite the common wavelength of RGB of a human eye. But better than nothing.

I believe that all data are correct and useful.

7x42’s; High end versus mid range (oldies but goodies) (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

New York correspondent

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

New York correspondent

Well-known member

Well-known member

New York correspondent

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread