Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New Old Trinovids

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Friday 22nd November 2019, 17:38   #76
tenex
Registered User
 
tenex's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve C View Post
I wonder some about the SP prism. The top tier makers seem to be lauded for being on the forefront of innovation. There has been a century and a couple of decades come and go since the SP first saw life. Did we see a new, innovative Zeiss SF prism, a Swarovski SV prism, or a Leica UV prism? Nope...
The general lack of technical innovation over the years is my primary impression here. Only regarding coatings (and to some extent glass types) do I see real improvement, and still problems are allowed to persist like phase interference that even the alphas left quietly unsolved for decades, and dual-duty prism surfaces that coatings can't fix. Even Zeiss who were applying AK prisms widely have backed off from them now, which is my criticism of the SF, which is easily large enough to accommodate them. I suppose the obvious conclusion is that most consumers, even those looking for top-tier instruments, don't really know or care about these things, or they value convenience (perhaps even appearance) more, so manufacturers have to act accordingly. But I don't think that theory has ever been tested very well, simply because technically superior alternatives aren't produced, so instead it's more of a doubtful assumption. One certainly doesn't hear a lot of complaints about the size of the FLs or HTs...
tenex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 22nd November 2019, 18:58   #77
42za
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Africa
Posts: 93
Hello,

Perhaps Leica is using the same prisms that they use in their Ultravid binoculars for the "new / old" Trinovids , and they do not want to change the setup of their production lines , it would be much cheaper for Leica to do this.

Or , they cannot make , or source Uppendahl prisms at this time.

I agree that the "new/old" Trinovids do not appear to be targeted towards knowledgeable binocular users , but towards the "Glitterrati" , witness the sales outlets.



Cheers.
42za is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 22nd November 2019, 19:00   #78
PYRTLE
Registered User
 
PYRTLE's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: North Norfolk
Posts: 6,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve C View Post
It should be easy enough to water proof this new/old Trinovid. I do wonder about the degree of water proofing though. Slight contradiction, no? Should be "easy" but not totally proof, puzzling.

I will take Leica to task for selling only through the Leica Stores. Bad move, unless they know already this will not be a big seller.
An exercise similar to Nikon and the WX porro, 1000 units in each configuration, most sold to collectors and optic enthusiasts. I'm sure the 7 x 35 will sell well wherever it is offered.

I once looked through a very good 7 x 35 Trinovid, but didnt purchase it but a colleague who did, uses them every day as his back garden bino.

P
PYRTLE is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 22nd November 2019, 19:57   #79
Hermann
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenex View Post
The general lack of technical innovation over the years is my primary impression here. Only regarding coatings (and to some extent glass types) do I see real improvement, and still problems are allowed to persist like phase interference that even the alphas left quietly unsolved for decades, and dual-duty prism surfaces that coatings can't fix. Even Zeiss who were applying AK prisms widely have backed off from them now, which is my criticism of the SF, which is easily large enough to accommodate them.
Reasons why most manufacturers use SP over AK:

- SP allow for a shorter, more compact binocular.
- SP are lighter than AK (check Holger's article on the Nikon WX: http://www.holgermerlitz.de/nikon_wx/nikon_wx.html)

Another reason may be that SP are readily available from different manufacturers, you can basically buy them off the shelf. At least that's what I read somewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tenex View Post
I suppose the obvious conclusion is that most consumers, even those looking for top-tier instruments, don't really know or care about these things, or they value convenience (perhaps even appearance) more, so manufacturers have to act accordingly. But I don't think that theory has ever been tested very well, simply because technically superior alternatives aren't produced, so instead it's more of a doubtful assumption.
Quite right. There's still no birding binocular with Perger prisms ...

Hermann
Hermann is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 00:49   #80
Patudo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: London
Posts: 436
Hermann, Henry - thanks for your informed observations. I've re-read Holger's writeups on his site and in Birdforum and in particular, where he notes that multi-coating the prism faces of the Schmidt-Pechan separated by that narrow air gap reduces contrast; single-coating results in the best contrast, but at a small cost in transmission (apparently something like 2%, since only two surfaces are in play).

The next question I'd like to ask is - are those differences in contrast and/or transmission evident under field conditions when those prism systems are installed in binoculars of comparable build quality? The impression I have is that contemporary users considered the great rival of the Leitz Trinovid - Zeiss's Dialyt - quite well-matched optically... maybe this was because only single coatings existed in that era, and the small differences in contrast and transmission between the Leitz's Uppendahl system and the Schmidt-Pechan system in the 10x40 and 8x30 Dialyts might not have been apparent given that max transmission of the Dialyt 10x40 was only 80% (per allbinos) and the Trinovid probably not much more (do any figures exist - maybe from Gijs's data?). Whether today's more advanced coatings would show up differences that might not have been apparent when single coatings were all that was available is another interesting avenue of speculation...

I do agree with everyone that my inner binocular geek would love to see these "new old" Trinovids with the original prism system (which would also hit the right elitist notes!). I wonder why the Uppendahl system was not more used - are Uppendahl prisms really as expensive to manufacture as the (in)famous web review by Ken Rockwall suggests?

PS. John, thanks also for your Geovid diagram. I'd thought that series were all Perger prismed, but it would seem not so?
Patudo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 09:55   #81
John A Roberts
Registered User
 
John A Roberts's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Perth
Posts: 319
Hi Patudo,

There have been 3 series of Geovids:

Generation 1
From 1992, 7x42 BD and BDA - the A version has an integral electronic compass
These are Porro prism and IF, and are rebadged Vector rangefinders (and some production is marked 'Leica Vector') *
As can be seen from the image they are large; and they weigh around 1.4 kg/ 50 oz

Generation 2
From 2004 in 8x42 and 10x42; and from 2005 in 8x56 and 15x56
These are Uppendahl prism and CF. There are a number of versions, some of which include HD glass; a non-HD version is still in production
An original Leica design

Generation 3
From 2013 in 8x42 and 10x42; and from 2016 in 8x56
These are Perger prism and CF and have HD glass as standard. The come in 2 versions, one of which has ballistic curve calculation functions
Also an original Leica design


John


* Vectors are the de facto standard for western military hand held rangefinder binoculars
Because of current model capabilities private sales are controlled
e.g. maximum ranges of 6 km to 25 km; some include night vision technology; and, all include a triangulation function,
which among other things enables indirect fire to be accurately called down on targets


Photos:
A) Gen 1 7x42 BD vs Zeiss 8x45 Victory rangefinder (not the current generation Zeiss) from: http://www.gunsandammo.com/gear-acce...er-revolution/
B) Gen 2 8x42 HD vs Leica 8x42 Ultravid HD binocular from: https://www.allbinos.com/245-binocul...8x42_HD-M.html
C) Gen 3 8x42 HD-B vs Zeiss 8x45 Victory and Swarovski 8x42 EL Range rangefinders from: https://technodocbox.com/70087467-Ca...usrustung.html
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Gen 1 vs Zeiss 8x45 RF.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	128.9 KB
ID:	710746  Click image for larger version

Name:	Gen 2 8x42 vs Leica 8x42 UV HD .jpg
Views:	28
Size:	85.1 KB
ID:	710747  Click image for larger version

Name:	Gen 3 vs Zeiss 8x45 & Swarovski 8x42 RF's.jpg
Views:	38
Size:	138.3 KB
ID:	710748  

Last edited by John A Roberts : Sunday 24th November 2019 at 01:27.
John A Roberts is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 13:48   #82
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,487
Does anyone actually have the said binocular IN HAND?
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 15:43   #83
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,434
Patudo,

I don't think much can be discovered about Uppendahls vs. SP by comparing old Trinovids to old Dialyts. The eyepiece designs and AR coatings were too different.

The old Trinovid design had beautifully minimalist optics, mostly limited only the available optical coatings of the time (AR, mirror and phase correcting). We know that the optical elegance of the old design is already compromised by the prism change. Now we need to see what other shoes will fall in the new design. Is the ingenious eyepiece focuser also gone? Will there be anything left but generic mid-grade modern optics in a retro housing?

Henry
henry link is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 17:05   #84
Renze de Vries
Registered User
 
Renze de Vries's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Groningen, Netherlands
Posts: 501
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenex;[I
[Edit][/i] Actually here's another interesting question. The Leica blog alludes to their "Eye of Apollo" Trinovid monocular that went to the moon, though (unlike the famous Hasselblad) I'd never heard of it. Why didn't even NASA want a porro model that would have been sharper?
The Apollo Trinovid can be found on page 2 of Gary Hawkins' massive and beautiful binocular collection: https://pbase.com/g_hawkins/binocular_pictures

Why NASA chose for the Trinovid instead of a porro? Because binocular design is not about perfection, it's about optimisation. The Trinovid must have been good enough for the task.

Renze
Renze de Vries is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 17:27   #85
Renze de Vries
Registered User
 
Renze de Vries's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Groningen, Netherlands
Posts: 501
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar View Post
I remember reading somewhere in this website about Bushnell (I think) roof prism binoculars which used Uppendahl prisms that had phase coatings. Also, didn't some late model Leitz binoculars with Uppendahl prisms made in the late 1980s also have phase coatings?
No, the Leitz Trinovids did not have phase coating, right up to the end of production.

The reference to Bushnell / Bausch & Lomb is quite interesting in this thread because for reasons yet to be elucidated Bausch & Lomb once issued a 7x35 which was an exact copy of the Leitz Trinovid (not counting some minor cosmetic features). It came with Uppendahl prisms and a FoV of 8.5 deg (150/1000M).
The successor to this binocular was the 7x36 Elite, which came with SP prisms and a FoV of 8 deg. (140/1000m).

See pics.

Renze
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	B&L 7x35 Classic (5).jpg
Views:	74
Size:	290.1 KB
ID:	710807  Click image for larger version

Name:	B&L 7x35 Classic (2).jpg
Views:	46
Size:	269.6 KB
ID:	710808  Click image for larger version

Name:	Elite 7x36 type2 (1c) (2).jpg
Views:	42
Size:	65.9 KB
ID:	710809  Click image for larger version

Name:	Elite 7x36 type2 (1d).jpg
Views:	30
Size:	47.5 KB
ID:	710810  
Renze de Vries is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 17:47   #86
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,434
This is probably the old thread Bob was referring to. It discusses the various iterations of the Trinovid derived B&L Elites and another clone sold under the Browning brand name.

https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=216171
henry link is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 23rd November 2019, 22:16   #87
John A Roberts
Registered User
 
John A Roberts's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Perth
Posts: 319
To my knowledge Uppendahl prisms have only been used in the following binoculars:

A) Leitz/ Leica
- The original Leitz v2 Tinovids, and
- The Leica 2nd generation Geovids
as have been discussed previously in this thread


B) Bausch & Lomb 7x35 Classic and Browning 7x35 (a rebadged B&L)
Henry links to a comprehensive thread on them in post #86, which includes Renze’s images in post #85


C) Swift HCF Trilyte Compacts in 7x35 and 9x35
see the attached images from a pamphlet at Bensbins: https://www.flickriver.com/photos/95...7/30699311486/
interestingly the prisms are referred to as ‘Erfle’


D) Bushnell Broadfield Compacts in 7x25 and 8x30
see the images from a 1973 pamphlet from that great resource Miniature Binoculars at: http://www.miniaturebinoculars.com/part3/Page21320.htm


John
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Swift 1.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	287.4 KB
ID:	710819  Click image for larger version

Name:	Swift 2.jpg
Views:	21
Size:	86.3 KB
ID:	710820  Click image for larger version

Name:	Broadfiled 1.jpg
Views:	53
Size:	227.8 KB
ID:	710821  Click image for larger version

Name:	Broadfield 2.jpg
Views:	49
Size:	252.7 KB
ID:	710822  
John A Roberts is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 24th November 2019, 05:17   #88
galazie1
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Ho Chi Minh
Posts: 30
to me it's good that Leica releases another 7x binos. and close to 30mm diameter. I want a high-end 6x30 binoculars, which is nowhere to buy. the new Leica will be the closest to it.
galazie1 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 24th November 2019, 09:46   #89
42za
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Africa
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry link View Post
Patudo,
-------snipped-------

The old Trinovid design had beautifully minimalist optics, mostly limited only the available optical coatings of the time (AR, mirror and phase correcting). We know that the optical elegance of the old design is already compromised by the prism change. Now we need to see what other shoes will fall in the new design. Is the ingenious eyepiece focuser also gone? Will there be anything left but generic mid-grade modern optics in a retro housing?

Henry
Hello,

Henry , you are probably right with your forecast.
Sadly this appears to be the direction that the modern world is moving towards.

Cheers.
42za is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 24th November 2019, 12:28   #90
Mike F
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Finland
Posts: 217
I’m wondering whether the modern version with SP prisms and modern coatings will be optically worse that the original? It may not be what it perhaps could have been, optically, but will it actually be worse? And I don’t mean FOV, but the actual image.
Mike F is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 24th November 2019, 14:49   #91
Hermann
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
I’m wondering whether the modern version with SP prisms and modern coatings will be optically worse that the original? It may not be what it perhaps could have been, optically, but will it actually be worse?
Definitely not. It will be better, by quite a large margin.

The old version didn't have phase coatings, that alone had a huge detrimental effect on the image quality. In fact, basically *all* roofs without phase-coating aren't even worth trying nowadays. And the other coatings were pretty simple and far less effcient than modern coatings.

By today's standards the image quality of the old Trinovid was mediocre at best.

Hermann
who had a look through the one Trinovid
10x40 still in the family just yesterday
Hermann is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 24th November 2019, 14:59   #92
Mike F
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Finland
Posts: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermann View Post
Definitely not. It will be better, by quite a large margin.

The old version didn't have phase coatings, that alone had a huge detrimental effect on the image quality. In fact, basically *all* roofs without phase-coating aren't even worth trying nowadays. And the other coatings were pretty simple and far less effcient than modern coatings.

By today's standards the image quality of the old Trinovid was mediocre at best.

Hermann
who had a look through the one Trinovid
10x40 still in the family just yesterday
Well, that’s good news at least. But again, speaking as a layman (relative to the experts here) where binoculars are concerned, I would think that in that case the vast majority of potential buyers will be more than happy, even though I understand the frustration of many here.
Mike F is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 24th November 2019, 15:11   #93
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by John A Roberts View Post
D) Bushnell Broadfield Compacts in 7x25 and 8x30
see the images from a 1973 pamphlet from that great resource Miniature Binoculars at: http://www.miniaturebinoculars.com/part3/Page21320.htm


John
Wow, the Bushnells are very interesting: Uppendahls, air-spaced objective lenses, very wide fields, a reasonably sophisticated eyepiece, internal focus of some sort, perhaps a moving eyepiece field group like the Trinovids. I'd like to see those binoculars revived with modern coatings.
henry link is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 24th November 2019, 23:24   #94
John A Roberts
Registered User
 
John A Roberts's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Perth
Posts: 319
Hi Henry,

I thought that you might have been intrigued by the features and spec’s of the Broadfields

It turns out that there was also a 10x40 version, see the page from a 1976 pamphlet from Elkcub at: https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=184322

Strangely Ed indicates an external bridge/ focusing, which is in contrast to the text of both ad’s and the cross section image - so perhaps some confusion with other models?
(he also notes the lack of either multicoating or phase coating, which would be as expected in 1976)

All 3 of the Uppendahl models must have been rare, since there are very few images of 2nd hand units on the ‘net


There is also an 8x Mini in the 1976 ad. While it’s part of the Compact ‘family’ in terms of styling, it clearly does not share the body (and hence prisms) of the others
It most probably had S-P prisms


John
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Bushnell 1976 catalog p15.jpg
Views:	50
Size:	148.2 KB
ID:	710900  Click image for larger version

Name:	Bushnell 1976.jpg
Views:	36
Size:	68.6 KB
ID:	710901  

Last edited by John A Roberts : Monday 25th November 2019 at 00:51.
John A Roberts is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 25th November 2019, 17:16   #95
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,434
Thanks John. The $120 price for the Bushnell 8x30 in 1973 ($720 in 2019 US dollars) got me interested in looking up some old Trinovid prices and converting them to 2019 US dollars.

I found a price of $290 for a Trinovid 7x35 in the October 1970 issue of "Popular Science" magazine ($1740 today). A 1987 US dealer price list had the 8x40 Trinovid at $749 ($1722 today), the 10x40 at $798 ($1835 today) and the 7x35 at $473 ($1088). I recall that the 7x35 was often, for no apparent reason, discounted below the other models in the 80s, at least in the US.

Henry

Last edited by henry link : Monday 25th November 2019 at 17:31.
henry link is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th November 2019, 23:51   #96
Patudo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: London
Posts: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
I’m wondering whether the modern version with SP prisms and modern coatings will be optically worse that the original? It may not be what it perhaps could have been, optically, but will it actually be worse? And I don’t mean FOV, but the actual image.
I second Hermann's earlier comment - mid-grade modern optics are pretty formidable these days. Holger Merlitz has noted in his site that if the Leitz Binuxit, a highly praised classic of yesteryear, were made with modern glass and coatings it could compete in today's mid-range (not top-line) market. A couple months back I took my 10x40 Dialyt (P model) to the UK Birdfair for side by side comparisons with a number of 10x42s I was interested in. This binocular, which I'm really familiar with and still enjoy a great deal, was once, until the early 1990s or so, the best 10x Zeiss could make, but I was struck by how the binoculars I tried - especially Meopta's 10x42 HD and Zeiss's Conquest HD - were superior in pretty much every department: brightness (especially), colour rendition, sharpness, and even in most cases how steadily I could hold them. A Leitz Trinovid body with that kind of mid-range optics would be very nice indeed, significantly better than the probably 30+ year old 10x40 I tried at the same location, of which the gentleman at the InFocus stand commented would be outperformed by any 300 quid Opticron.

I remain however, somewhat doubtful just how commercially successful the "new old" series will be, given that there are a lot of really good binoculars around now, which wasn't the case when the original Leitzes were about. I guess only time will tell.
Patudo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th November 2019, 00:15   #97
galazie1
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Ho Chi Minh
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patudo View Post
A Leitz Trinovid body with that kind of mid-range optics would be very nice indeed, significantly better than the probably 30+ year old 10x40 I tried at the same location, of which the gentleman at the InFocus stand commented would be outperformed by any 300 quid Opticron.,
I have the Zeiss 10x40 as well. good one, lovely one. image is pale now but solid, smooth, high level of beauty. I disagree with that guy. 300-500$ optics now can be brighter, better coloured and better in other technical terms, but still far far behind in the beauty terms. I tried a Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42 yesterday - much worse image compared to the old 10x40 to my eyes.

I look forward to the new trinovid 7x35. I need a great 6-7x 30-35mm binos. I haven't found one. I missed a new Fujinon FMT SX 6x30 on ebay recently. And the new Kowa 6.5x failed my expectation.
galazie1 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 29th November 2019, 06:08   #98
eronald
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Paris
Posts: 165
I still don't get it: Bins will get made, people will look thru them and hold them, if the image quality is as good as that of the HD (can it be expected to do worse?) it will sell well as a skeuomorphic novelty item for the racecourse.

Anyone on this forum who wants a portable about town binocular presumably has already got a Zeiss in their Pocket. I know I do.

Edmund

Last edited by eronald : Friday 29th November 2019 at 06:24.
eronald is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 29th November 2019, 12:28   #99
MandoBear
Registered User
 
MandoBear's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Hereford UK
Posts: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by eronald View Post
...it will sell well as a skeuomorphic novelty item for the racecourse.

Edmund
Edmund - thank you for introducing me to a new word. I've never come across the word "skeuomorph" before - I had to look it up.

One can learn about so much more than just binoculars on this forum. :-)
MandoBear is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 29th November 2019, 22:52   #100
eronald
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Paris
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by MandoBear View Post
Edmund - thank you for introducing me to a new word. I've never come across the word "skeuomorph" before - I had to look it up.

One can learn about so much more than just binoculars on this forum. :-)
Now you have the word, but how do you pronounce it? :)

Overlarge active vocabularies are a diagnostic criterion for Asperger's.


Edmund

Last edited by eronald : Friday 29th November 2019 at 22:54.
eronald is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New old Trinovids... SVS Leica 4 Monday 18th November 2019 23:06
Trinovids 42za Leica 41 Thursday 31st October 2019 13:40
New Trinovids chiffchaff123 Leica 4 Friday 14th October 2016 20:09
Trinovids Disappearing ? jimtrader11 Leica 11 Wednesday 17th December 2008 21:26
slc v's bn trinovids matt green Binoculars 8 Wednesday 16th November 2005 22:29

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.28317499 seconds with 39 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:06.