In 2009, after much research, I purchased my first pair of really good binoculars - the Zeiss Dialyt 10x40 B/GA T*P*. After consulting with Zeiss I learned that my pair was built in 2004 - the second to the last year of production.
At the time I was very happy with them and couldn’t imagine a better pair of binoculars. Needless to say I had little experience with other brands or models.
Eventually, I would own a number of lesser Nikon models, the 7x42 T*P Dialyt, 7x50 Dialyt, 7x42 FL, 8x40 Conquest T*, 8x20 Conquest T*P*, 6x30 Swarovski Habicht, and the Leica 8x42 Ultravid. I have since sold all the aforementioned binoculars for one reason or another. I still have a pair of 8x30 B/GA T*P Dialyts and 8x30 B/GA Safaris.
I still have the 10x40 Dialyt, and there is something about the 10x40 Dialyt that makes it one of my favorites. That something is what I intend to place my finger on.
The Dialyt’s colors are very rich and vibrant, the depth of field and field of view are large, the eye relief and eyecups work perfectly for me, at 25oz they are light weight, the diopter adjustment is precise and out of the way, I find the ergonomics very agreeable, and stray light is controlled extremely well. The Dialyts excel in their ability to see in tricky light situations - backlit, shadows, stray light, etc. It’s probably due to the extensive internal baffling. It is rare when I am unable to see details and color in harsh backlight. It has taken me years and many hours behind glass to appreciate optical performance in tricky lighting.
These binoculars are tough - they have traveled all over the West, accompanied me on numerous backpacking trips in Colorado (some as long as 10 days), been hunting more than a few times, dropped once due to a strap failure, subjected to humidity and precipitation, and have never failed.
Over time I have developed a strong sense of nostalgia for the Dialyts that my other binoculars do not have. My rare birds and favorite optical experiences have been through the Dialyts - Ross’s Gull (Colorado), Aplomado Falcon (Texas), my first Peregrine Falcon, and many lifers along the way. Not to mention airshows, celestial events, an Attack Submarine off Point Loma in San Diego, and firework shows etc.
To sum it up, I feel like the rich colors, small size, and their excellence in harsh light are the strong points of the 10x40 Dialyt.
Now for the shortcomings: the focus leaves something to be desired with a certain amount of play and tension that changes with temperature; the resolution isn’t on par with the FL, HT, or SV; the close focus is 13 feet or so; my sample has truncated pupils; and there is off axis CA with backlit targets.
In the last three years, I have had an opportunity to compare my dad’s Zen Ray ED2 10x43’s to the Dialyts for hours at a time. To the untrained eyes they might appear equal; but after much comparison, the Dialyts are smaller, have better color rendition, have a larger depth of field, and are noticeably better with tricky light situations - particularly with backlit subjects. The ZR’s flare quite badly in direct light and the image falls apart when backlit. The ZR’s have a smooth focuser, focus close, and have modern, adjustable eyecups.
Even though the venerable 10x40 Dialyt has been surpassed by more modern offerings I’m keeping the 10x40 Dialyts. I suspect that in a few years I will buy a pair 10x42 HTs or SFs for I’ve tested both at the big box sporting good stores and I am impressed. I’m particularly drawn to the HT for its reported harsh / tricky lighting performance.
I’m curious to hear about other people’s experiences with the 10x40 Dialyt.
At the time I was very happy with them and couldn’t imagine a better pair of binoculars. Needless to say I had little experience with other brands or models.
Eventually, I would own a number of lesser Nikon models, the 7x42 T*P Dialyt, 7x50 Dialyt, 7x42 FL, 8x40 Conquest T*, 8x20 Conquest T*P*, 6x30 Swarovski Habicht, and the Leica 8x42 Ultravid. I have since sold all the aforementioned binoculars for one reason or another. I still have a pair of 8x30 B/GA T*P Dialyts and 8x30 B/GA Safaris.
I still have the 10x40 Dialyt, and there is something about the 10x40 Dialyt that makes it one of my favorites. That something is what I intend to place my finger on.
The Dialyt’s colors are very rich and vibrant, the depth of field and field of view are large, the eye relief and eyecups work perfectly for me, at 25oz they are light weight, the diopter adjustment is precise and out of the way, I find the ergonomics very agreeable, and stray light is controlled extremely well. The Dialyts excel in their ability to see in tricky light situations - backlit, shadows, stray light, etc. It’s probably due to the extensive internal baffling. It is rare when I am unable to see details and color in harsh backlight. It has taken me years and many hours behind glass to appreciate optical performance in tricky lighting.
These binoculars are tough - they have traveled all over the West, accompanied me on numerous backpacking trips in Colorado (some as long as 10 days), been hunting more than a few times, dropped once due to a strap failure, subjected to humidity and precipitation, and have never failed.
Over time I have developed a strong sense of nostalgia for the Dialyts that my other binoculars do not have. My rare birds and favorite optical experiences have been through the Dialyts - Ross’s Gull (Colorado), Aplomado Falcon (Texas), my first Peregrine Falcon, and many lifers along the way. Not to mention airshows, celestial events, an Attack Submarine off Point Loma in San Diego, and firework shows etc.
To sum it up, I feel like the rich colors, small size, and their excellence in harsh light are the strong points of the 10x40 Dialyt.
Now for the shortcomings: the focus leaves something to be desired with a certain amount of play and tension that changes with temperature; the resolution isn’t on par with the FL, HT, or SV; the close focus is 13 feet or so; my sample has truncated pupils; and there is off axis CA with backlit targets.
In the last three years, I have had an opportunity to compare my dad’s Zen Ray ED2 10x43’s to the Dialyts for hours at a time. To the untrained eyes they might appear equal; but after much comparison, the Dialyts are smaller, have better color rendition, have a larger depth of field, and are noticeably better with tricky light situations - particularly with backlit subjects. The ZR’s flare quite badly in direct light and the image falls apart when backlit. The ZR’s have a smooth focuser, focus close, and have modern, adjustable eyecups.
Even though the venerable 10x40 Dialyt has been surpassed by more modern offerings I’m keeping the 10x40 Dialyts. I suspect that in a few years I will buy a pair 10x42 HTs or SFs for I’ve tested both at the big box sporting good stores and I am impressed. I’m particularly drawn to the HT for its reported harsh / tricky lighting performance.
I’m curious to hear about other people’s experiences with the 10x40 Dialyt.
