-
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.
Previous Gen Alpha "Mystique" (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jremmons
- Start date
WJC
Well-known member
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
I never considered the B&L Elite to be a true top-end bin. Its construction is simply not to the same standard as Leica, Zeiss, and now Swarovski in terms of styling or parts finishing. It's just a decent quality Japanese bin of the time. Steve Ingraham gave the waterproof version very high marks (it became his reference standard for a while), but I've never understood his enthusiasm for it. The color was not as neutral as the best contemporaneous models from Zeiss and Leica, brightness and contrast were not impressive, and it although the field is flat, it suffers from a lot of astigmatism immediately outside the very center of the view. Despite everything I've just written, I got the 8x42 model because it was so well suited to butterflying+birding (4 ft close focus). It is still a good choice for that, though several other good close and rapid focusing bins are now available.
--AP
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
I would disagree about the build /style comments [very personal of course] but found the very slim and smooth styling of the gen 2 42mm's [1st with PC coatings] to be, aesthetically, my favourite roof of all time. And the build was right up there with anything made at the time. I still have the 7x36 and it's form / function / fit and finish are at least the equal of any of my Zeiss Classics from that era.
The non-armoured gen 1's are works of art, both in form and construction although I do realize they are likely a Kamakura design.
The restyled waterproof version I found unattractive and optically inferior to the previous generations - with poor contrast and inferior sharpness.
Last edited:
peterginsburg
Well-known member
I both agree and disagree with many points given. First, however, it needs to be pointed out that the B&L Elite has gone through massive changes over the years so using that general term has little value. When people talk about comparing e.g. different iterations of the Swarovski EL models over time those changes are absolutely miniscule in proportion to the changes undergone by the Elite. When the Elite first came out it was absolutely top-of-the-line or “alpha” and its competition among birders seemed to be the Zeiss 10X40 of that vintage. It stayed near the top of its class for several years and in that time changed form rather radically. My first excursion into that class was their 7X36 which had near leading class in both close focus and field of view. Like James, I still own it but disagree with the ergonomics especially the focus toward the objective end, but still great glass. I then got a somewhat newer version of the 8X42 which I still use to great extent. Yes, there are now many binoculars with brighter images, etc. but for me the ergonomics are the best of any binocular I’ve ever tried, owned or used. The fast, buttery-smooth focus is great for me. I’m sure others will find it too fast or find other features they don’t like. In that same vein I see many reviews lauding the ergonomics of the Sightron Blue Sky ii which I find not to my liking at all. The bottom line is, of course, there are “different horses for different courses” and one needs to try an instrument to see if it fits one’s needs, face, hands, etc.
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
I have to apologize. My negative comments should have been targeted only at the waterproof version of the B&L Elite. I agree that the earlier versions were much nicer in construction and had elegant design. I liked the optics better too (curved field but low astigmatism). Unlike most, I liked the forward placed focus knob (easier to use under a hat brim, allowed for a wrap-around grip on the front barrel).
--AP
bluespiderweb
Great Grey Looking Out
This is not even remotely accurate at present.
Currently on evilbay, there is (8x42 models only) a Trinovid BA for $800 BIN, $855 BIN, and a Trinovid BN 8x42 for $160 w/ 6 days left and no BIN.
In 10x42, there is a BA for $600 BIN (rough shape), $965 BIN, and a Trinovid BN for $1150 BIN.
There are two 7x42 Trinovid BAs; one is $430 w/ 3 days left and no BIN, the other has a BIN of $750.
Similar findings for Swarovski. The previous generation (i.e. non Swarovision) has one 8.5x42 option, BIN of $1800. There are several 7x42 SLCs w/ BIN prices of $850, $1179, and $1189 - one auction, currently at $585 w/ three days left.
And for the Zeiss Victory T*FL, they have a 8x42 for $1101, a 10x42 for $1176 and $1270, and a 10x32 for $1265 and $1600 BIN.
Last edited:
Buy it now in most cases seem to be priced 10% or more above what can be found by diligent Evilbay bidding/hunting. I guess that's the price of convenience.
I use the Dialyt 10x40 B/GA T*P* as my regular 10x and although I thoroughly agree with the comments above re its handling - it really is an excellent compact package which I find very easy to hold steady - I have to say that in terms of optical performance it is definitely outperformed by the 8.5x42 SV FP which my brother owns and which I have had plenty of opportunity both to look through and to compare against in the field. Time and again my brother has been able to follow or re-acquire birds (to be fair, very distant high flying birds) that have blinked out from me against grey English skies or into thin cloud. Fortunately, my last trip was not one of those situations - the birds were relatively close and the brilliant Canary Islands sunshine made the Dialyt just as bright. That however is emphatically not the case most of the time.
Attachments
Last edited:
bluespiderweb
Great Grey Looking Out
Can anyone say why Ebay is so disrespected?
JR, I'm not directing this at you, but since you use this practice, I really would like to know why Ebay is so disrespected at times, that they can't actually be referred to as Ebay, and acknowleged as one of today's major sources for goods? Where would we be without Ebay? They are a buying and selling source, and measure of all things that hold value for us, yet so many disrespect it and collude to refer to Ebay in so many other names, that it just doesn't make sense to me. Evilbay? And other terms that hide the true identity of Ebay, and I am wondering really, why all the effort to exclude the name from our references, even though we use them all the time? Why, really? Do references to their business actually hurt us to mention, and multiply their earnings? Could be, but I just don't see it.
All I know is that I have found so many things on Ebay that I can't find elsewhere, and often at better prices, so that is why I shop there, regularly! Is it the fact that it has become so big, that people don't want to support big business? Seems kind of silly to me, and I really don't understand why it is treated as such. Sure, every business goes through periods of adjustment, and as such is unpopular at times, but these people provide a world wide buying and selling service that you can't match anywhere else, so what gives? Why is is so popular to evade the name in our references to Ebay?
I don't get it! Can you explain?
JR, I'm not directing this at you, but since you use this practice, I really would like to know why Ebay is so disrespected at times, that they can't actually be referred to as Ebay, and acknowleged as one of today's major sources for goods? Where would we be without Ebay? They are a buying and selling source, and measure of all things that hold value for us, yet so many disrespect it and collude to refer to Ebay in so many other names, that it just doesn't make sense to me. Evilbay? And other terms that hide the true identity of Ebay, and I am wondering really, why all the effort to exclude the name from our references, even though we use them all the time? Why, really? Do references to their business actually hurt us to mention, and multiply their earnings? Could be, but I just don't see it.
All I know is that I have found so many things on Ebay that I can't find elsewhere, and often at better prices, so that is why I shop there, regularly! Is it the fact that it has become so big, that people don't want to support big business? Seems kind of silly to me, and I really don't understand why it is treated as such. Sure, every business goes through periods of adjustment, and as such is unpopular at times, but these people provide a world wide buying and selling service that you can't match anywhere else, so what gives? Why is is so popular to evade the name in our references to Ebay?
I don't get it! Can you explain?
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello Barry,
That electronic auction site does not police itself. There are many fraudulent sellers, ill informed sellers and there are a number of scammers, as well. Buyer beware!
When a seller writes "I know nothing about" his merchandise, I get the feeling that he knows very well that he is selling sub par goods.
I last bought a binocular from ebay, years, ago. It was a seventy year old collectors' item, which I correctly assumed needed professional care.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
That electronic auction site does not police itself. There are many fraudulent sellers, ill informed sellers and there are a number of scammers, as well. Buyer beware!
When a seller writes "I know nothing about" his merchandise, I get the feeling that he knows very well that he is selling sub par goods.
I last bought a binocular from ebay, years, ago. It was a seventy year old collectors' item, which I correctly assumed needed professional care.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
Last edited:
BSW,
I did not mean that as a negative, I was just under the impression that we were not allowed to directly mention eBay as it is another forum for purchasing, competing with the seller forums here. This is common on many of the other forums I frequent, so I just figured it was a rule here as well.
I buy many optics from eBay and that is why I am in strong disagreement with others on pricing of these older alphas as I literally check each day for my saved searches (e.g. Trinovid, 8.5x42 Swarovski, etc.) to hopefully find one at a decent price. I have no issues with using that website so long as you do it sensibly (check seller reviews, properly read conditions, etc.).
Justin
dries1
Member
BSW,
I did not mean that as a negative, I was just under the impression that we were not allowed to directly mention eBay as it is another forum for purchasing, competing with the seller forums here. This is common on many of the other forums I frequent, so I just figured it was a rule here as well.
I buy many optics from eBay and that is why I am in strong disagreement with others on pricing of these older alphas as I literally check each day for my saved searches (e.g. Trinovid, 8.5x42 Swarovski, etc.) to hopefully find one at a decent price. I have no issues with using that website so long as you do it sensibly (check seller reviews, properly read conditions, etc.).
Justin
+10, Spot on, what I always thought.
A.W.
I did not mean that as a negative, I was just under the impression that we were not allowed to directly mention eBay as it is another forum for purchasing, competing with the seller forums here. This is common on many of the other forums I frequent, so I just figured it was a rule here as well.
I buy many optics from eBay and that is why I am in strong disagreement with others on pricing of these older alphas as I literally check each day for my saved searches (e.g. Trinovid, 8.5x42 Swarovski, etc.) to hopefully find one at a decent price. I have no issues with using that website so long as you do it sensibly (check seller reviews, properly read conditions, etc.).
Justin
+10, Spot on, what I always thought.
A.W.
