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.

Comparing Zeiss and Swarovski 32 /30 models

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Friday 19th April 2019, 21:35   #26
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swissboy View Post
I'm puzzled by their designation of "watertight". I take it, that is not the same as waterproof?
watertight
/ˈwdərˌtīt,ˈwdərˌtīt/
adjective
closely sealed, fastened, or fitted so that no water enters or passes through.
"a watertight seal"
synonyms: waterproof, water-repellent, water-resistant, weatherproof; More
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 06:20   #27
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
i recently bought a Swarovski SV 10x32 even though I have always heard 10x32's aren't that great. It surprised me how good it is for a 10x and I bet the Zeiss 10x32 FL is very good also. I think if you get an alpha 10x32 they can be quite good with the advantage of being nice and small and compact like an 8x32.
I believe it because I recently reviewed Meopta's B1 10x32, the first bino of this format I have tried, and found it delightful and easy to use if a little unsteady compared with a 42. After a bit more practice I seem to have got around this minor downside and as you point out it can be great to have 10x firepower in a compact package.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 06:30   #28
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swissboy View Post
I'm puzzled by their designation of "watertight". I take it, that is not the same as waterproof?
When native languages get translated into English for international use and the translation is performed by folks who are fluent in English but not in bino tech there can be all manner of errors. In this case there is probably nothing sinister in 'watertight' except that it is not the term usually used and so excites suspicions.

I am just waiting for the first bino to be described as 'trauma-proof' instead of shock-proof............

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 06:41   #29
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry link View Post
Hi Ron,

Hopefully Zeiss will be putting an end to speculation about this soon. In the meantime I'll just add a few more cards to my house.

Check out the specs for the Leica 8x32 and 10x32 Ultravids below. Leica used to include the number of lenses in each model, so we can see that there are two extra lens elements in the 10x32 compared to the 8x32. What could those be if they're not a Smyth/Barlow type doublet for increasing the magnification? The eye relief also takes a tiny hit just like in the Zeiss 10x32 FL. True, the Ultravid isn't the FL, but I wouldn't be surprised to find a similar approach in both.

Henry
Neat detective work Henry.

Just after my conversation with my product development contact I tried a few searches on the internet to find out if any sectional drawings (schnitt) of the FL10x32 had been released by Zeiss but all I found were the same drawing of what is presumably the 8x.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 07:24   #30
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,088
Mystery solved

I did some more internet searching, more in hope than expectation and to my surprise found this:

Go to: https://shop.zeiss.co.uk/ZEISS-Victo...d4047006323104

Scroll down and look on the left for the pic of a Pied Kingfisher and title Newly Developed Ultra-FL Lens, and you will find the paragraph below. Note the final sentence:

"The innovative Ultra-FL lens system provides outstanding image quality and light transmission of 92 %. Fluoride lenses made from the highest-quality SCHOTT glass ensure even better colour reproduction and high detail resolution. A seven-lens eyepiece with field flattener ensures sharp focus all the way to the edges".

Lee

Last edited by Troubador : Saturday 20th April 2019 at 07:28.
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 08:40   #31
NoSpringChicken
Registered User
 
NoSpringChicken's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: East Norfolk
Posts: 26,106
Lee, that sentence is also in the description of the 8x32 FL, so it seems that they are both the same. Incidentally, the 8x32 is out of stock at the Zeiss site and just about everywhere else in the UK. Are they being discontinued?

Ron
NoSpringChicken is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 2011 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 10:39   #32
John A Roberts
Registered User
 
John A Roberts's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Perth
Posts: 173
FL 10x32 CONSTRUCTION

The FL 10x32 has 11 lenses per side (along with the 2 prisms)
The construction is specifically noted by Zeiss in this page about Lens Concepts - see the last paragraph:
https://www.zeiss.com/sports-optics/...#lens-concepts

In contrast the FL 8x32 has 9 lenses per side, as can be seen in the attached cross-section

And as indicated by Henry, it's likely that the extra 2 lenses would be used as an eyepiece doublet

John

p.s. the 8x32 image clearly shows the space where the extra 2 lenses could be placed
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Zeiss FL 8x32.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	96.2 KB
ID:	692711  

Last edited by John A Roberts : Saturday 20th April 2019 at 10:49.
John A Roberts is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 11:01   #33
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoSpringChicken View Post
Lee, that sentence is also in the description of the 8x32 FL, so it seems that they are both the same. Incidentally, the 8x32 is out of stock at the Zeiss site and just about everywhere else in the UK. Are they being discontinued?

Ron
My contact said there was no field flattener in the 8x and the drawing shown elsewhere in this thread (see below) demonstrates that. Probably the webmaster who put the FL details together had never heard of Zeiss having different designs in 8x and 10x and assumed this paragraph applied to both.

I have no information that suggests FL32s are being discontinued.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 11:05   #34
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by John A Roberts View Post
FL 10x32 CONSTRUCTION

The FL 10x32 has 11 lenses per side (along with the 2 prisms)
The construction is specifically noted by Zeiss in this page about Lens Concepts - see the last paragraph:
https://www.zeiss.com/sports-optics/...#lens-concepts

In contrast the FL 8x32 has 9 lenses per side, as can be seen in the attached cross-section

And as indicated by Henry, it's likely that the extra 2 lenses would be used as an eyepiece doublet

John


p.s. the 8x32 image clearly shows the space where the extra 2 lenses could be placed

Thanks John, a very neat stitching together of what has emerged.

And weren't those sectional drawings that Zeiss published back in the day really terrific.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 15:25   #35
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
I did some more internet searching, more in hope than expectation and to my surprise found this:

Go to: https://shop.zeiss.co.uk/ZEISS-Victo...d4047006323104

Scroll down and look on the left for the pic of a Pied Kingfisher and title Newly Developed Ultra-FL Lens, and you will find the paragraph below. Note the final sentence:

"The innovative Ultra-FL lens system provides outstanding image quality and light transmission of 92 %. Fluoride lenses made from the highest-quality SCHOTT glass ensure even better colour reproduction and high detail resolution. A seven-lens eyepiece with field flattener ensures sharp focus all the way to the edges".

Lee
Lee,

The Zeiss Product Lines shown in the link include the introduction to the Terra Series so this "flat field" must be a very recent addition.

I have a Zeiss Catalog I picked up from Anacortes Optics in the state of Washington in 2006 that shows all the Victory FL series binoculars and nowhere is there mentioned any one of them having a "Flat Field."

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 16:09   #36
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,376
These negative eyepiece field lenses have been used to increase magnification at least as far back as the original Leica Trinovids. While they accomplish some degree of field flattening that wasn't their main purpose. The degree of field flattening most likely varies and is probably never as good as something like a Swaro SV. I can see from old spec sheets that the Trinovid/Ultravid lines used them in the 10x32 and 12x50, but curiously not in the 10x42. Whether they're called "Field Flatteners" or not is purely a matter of marketing semantics.
henry link is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th April 2019, 16:19   #37
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,787
As I recall the big complaint against the larger Zeiss Victory FL T* binoculars was that they had "astigmatic" edges.

In any case, none of these things ever bothered me. My Zeiss Victory 7x42 FL T* Lotutech is still the best binocular I have ever owned!

(And that includes my new Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 B which I am currently raving about!

Bob

Last edited by ceasar : Saturday 20th April 2019 at 16:26.
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 21st April 2019, 14:42   #38
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,860
I asked Zeiss again about field flatteners on the Zeiss 10x32 FL mentioning the additional lenses in the 10x32 FL and they are quite sure the Zeiss 10x32 FL does not have field flatteners. Here is the email to Zeiss and response. I think we can assume there are no field flatteners in any of the Zeiss FL's. The only Zeiss binoculars that utilize field flattener's are the new SF's which are a big selling point for them.

"I'm not sure about your lens count but the FL does NOT employ field flatteners.
In fact they are renowned for their depth of field.
Best Regards,
Everett Sherman
Customer Care Representative
Zeiss Consumer Optics

Your original inquiry:
Email: [email protected]
Subject: Zeiss 10x32 FL Binoculars and field flatteners?
Comment:
On Bird Forum which is an online binocular forum we are getting into an argument about whether the Zeiss 10x32 FL has field flatteners or not. The Zeiss 10x32 FL have 11 lenses per side and the Zeiss 8x32 FL have 9 lenses. If the extra 2 lenses in the 10x32 FL are not field flatteners what are they for? Please confirm that the 10x32 FL does not have field flatteners. Thanks!
"

Last edited by [email protected] : Sunday 21st April 2019 at 15:33.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 21st April 2019, 17:19   #39
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,282
This line, Dennis......''In fact they are renowned for their depth of field'', should tell you all you need to know - you are speaking to a PR / Marketing dude, not someone with actual optical knowledge.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 23rd April 2019, 15:04   #40
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,114
To anyone reading this thread with high interest, if you search old threads for detailed discussions on these topics, you will find ample explanation that having a flat field (i.e. low curvature of field) is not the same thing as astigmatism correction. So-called field flattening lenses can correct one problem, the other, or both. Field flattening does not inevitably lead to rolling ball, nor does it have anything to do with depth of field, except that curvature can make foreground to background in better focus when its curvature from edge to center is aligned with the planar dimension of that view.

It's been a long time since I tried the 10x32, but I have the Zeiss 8x32 and know it very well. The 8x32 has plenty of off-axis astigmatism but it also has a _very_ flat field. In fact, back in the day (before the Swarovski SV, and Nikon EDG), Steve Ingraham, in his capacity as Zeiss spokesperson, claimed that the Zeiss 8x32 FL had the flattest field available in an 8x32 roof with the exception of the Nikon 8x32 LX/HG. I was very skeptical at the time, but after some testing and some learning about the difference between field curvature and astigmatism, I found that he was correct.

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 23rd April 2019, 19:48   #41
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,860
From Scopeviews review on the Zeiss 8x32 FL.
http://scopeviews.co.uk/Zeiss8x32FL.htm
"Flat field?
Like most Zeiss binoculars (the new SFs excepted), the field drops off at the edge more than in binos with field flatteners. The field is so wide that this isn’t a huge problem during the day and it does make for more comfortable panning."

http://scopeviews.co.uk/Zeiss7x42FL.htm
"Flat field?
The field has a large perfect sweet spot, but the field does curve off a lot at the very edge, where it is only good for context. This typical of most Zeiss binoculars"

https://www.allbinos.com/191-binocul...x32_T*_FL.html
"Astigmatism Very slight. 8.8/10.0"

I have never heard of the Zeiss 8x32 FL's or 7x42 FL's having a flat field. How could they if they don't have a field flattener. According to Allbino's they do not have very much astimatism either. I have always thought their softer edges was due to field curvature. That is new one on me if it is true.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 23rd April 2019 at 20:35.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 23rd April 2019, 21:41   #42
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
From Scopeviews review on the Zeiss 8x32 FL.
http://scopeviews.co.uk/Zeiss8x32FL.htm
"Flat field?
Like most Zeiss binoculars (the new SFs excepted), the field drops off at the edge more than in binos with field flatteners. The field is so wide that this isnt a huge problem during the day and it does make for more comfortable panning."

http://scopeviews.co.uk/Zeiss7x42FL.htm
"Flat field?
The field has a large perfect sweet spot, but the field does curve off a lot at the very edge, where it is only good for context. This typical of most Zeiss binoculars"

https://www.allbinos.com/191-binocul...x32_T*_FL.html
"Astigmatism Very slight. 8.8/10.0"

I have never heard of the Zeiss 8x32 FL's or 7x42 FL's having a flat field. How could they if they don't have a field flattener. According to Allbino's they do not have very much astimatism either. I have always thought their softer edges was due to field curvature. That is new one on me if it is true.
Not sure what you are doing here Dennis. If you are asking for an explanation for the above quoted statements, I'd say that in the case of statement #1 that the reason for the "field dropping off" is that the FL suffers from astigmatism towards the edges, that statement #2 is an incorrect attribution of the resolution fall off to field curvature rather than astigmatism, and that statement #3 is either incorrect, is correct in the grand scheme of things (compared to all bins) but not in comparison to a bin that is well corrected for astigmatism, or is somehow a measure of astigmatism averaged across the view or only near the center of the view rather than a measure from the outer portion of the FOV.

How can a bin have a flat field without having a field flattener? By building such performance into the combined result of the interactions of the other lens elements. You don't have to trust me about the degree of curvature versus astigmatism in the 8x32 FL. Obtain a unit, focus the center on something with both horizontal and vertical detail, view that same something off-axis, and see if you can touch up the focus to make it look better overall. You'll find that you can't, and that instead, only the resolution of vertical or horizontal lines improves (but not together).

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 23rd April 2019, 22:32   #43
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,860
John. How many lenses per side do the Zeiss SF's have? If they have more than the FL that for sure would be an indicator of field flatteners.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 23rd April 2019 at 22:46.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 23rd April 2019, 22:42   #44
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,860
Alexis. It is just the first time I have ever heard of the Zeiss 8x32 FL having a flat field. When I had my Zeiss 8x32 FL I remember distinct field curvature and soft edges and low astigmatism. All the FL's I owned were pretty much the same in that respect. Have you ever star tested your 8x32 FL for astigmatism? That would be a good way to see if it had it. The concentric rings would be oval. I star tested my FL's when I had them and they did not show a lot of astigmatism.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 23rd April 2019 at 22:56.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 23rd April 2019, 22:51   #45
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
...I remember distinct field curvature...
You either misunderstood what you saw or you are not remembering accurately.

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 23rd April 2019, 23:22   #46
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexis Powell View Post
You either misunderstood what you saw or you are not remembering accurately.

--AP
" The 8x32 has plenty of off-axis astigmatism but it also has a _very_ flat field." I never found the Zeiss FL to have plenty of off-axis astigmatism and I remember it well and I know what astigmatism is. Albino's never observed it either so I guess they agree with me. I think you should star test your FL. It could very well be a bad sample. Maybe you are confusing astigmatism with distortion. From Allbino's reviews.

Zeiss 8x32 FL
Astigmatism Very slight. 8.8/10.0

Zeiss 8x42 FL
Astigmatism Very low. Almost point-like images of stars. 8.8/10.0
Distortion The distance of the first curved line from the field centre compared to the field of vision radius: 34% +\- 5% 3/10.0

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 23rd April 2019 at 23:27.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 24th April 2019, 01:20   #47
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,376
Figure (c) below from page 168 of "Telescope Optics" by Rutten &van Venrooij shows the kind of high astigmatism, combined with low field curvature that Alexis is talking about.

The authors describe it this way: "the tangential and sagittal focal surfaces are symmetrically placed with respect to a plane perpendicular to the optical axis, thus avoiding field curvature altogether."

In the FLs the problem is that there is a wide spread between the tangential and sagittal foci at the field edge, so even though the midpoint between them falls close to the plane of the center focus the image at the field edge can only be focused on either the tangential or sagittal focus, not both simultaneously. In other words there is high astigmatism at the edge.

Allbinos tests for axial astigmatism only, not off-axis astigmatism.

The SF has 10 lenses per side, 7 in the eyepiece, 3 in the objective. The field flattener is a singlet.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0914.jpg
Views:	19
Size:	88.7 KB
ID:	693035  
henry link is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 24th April 2019, 01:23   #48
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
...I never found the Zeiss FL to have plenty of off-axis astigmatism and I remember it well and I know what astigmatism is. Albino's never observed it either so I guess they agree with me. I think you should star test your FL. It could very well be a bad sample...
I really think that you need to take another look through the FL. Although I fancy myself a philosopher of sorts, who wouldn't normally say such things, I think that there is an objective truth to adjudicate this disagreement, and since I own the Zeiss 8x32 FL and have used it almost weekly for about 15 years, I'm quite sure that I closer to that truth than is your memory. I "star tested" my unit many years ago, and I've tried at least a dozen 8x32 FL of various vintages over the years and I've not found them to differ in this respect. You will also find plenty of others who note the astigmatism in the FL in various BirdForum threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Maybe you are confusing astigmatism with distortion.
Uhhh...and maybe I'm not. But hold on, maybe you're on to a bold and provocative new hypothesis. Does the Zeiss 8x32 FL have a lot of distortion? I've never heard anyone say that, nor have I noticed it myself. Have you? I guess you must have or I suppose you wouldn't have suggested it.

Hold on, let me check........Nope, it seems like astigmatism and not distortion. But why trust my own eyes? The authoritative AllBinos website (maybe you've heard of it) says of the 8x32 "Even the distortion, which was a major complaint in the 10x42 model (and that set still managed to win our big test of binoculars of that segment, mind you) was corrected well here and is no longer a problem." It seems your explanation is contradictory to what AllBinos found.

Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
From Allbino's reviews.

Zeiss 8x32 FL
Astigmatism Very slight. 8.8/10.0

Zeiss 8x42 FL
Astigmatism Very low. Almost point-like images of stars. 8.8/10.0
Distortion The distance of the first curved line from the field centre compared to the field of vision radius: 34% +\- 5% 3/10.0
Yes, I saw this and I already responded to it (in a previous post). To reiterate, either the AllBinos measurement is incorrect, is correct in the grand scheme of things (compared to all bins) but not in comparison to a bin that is well corrected for astigmatism, or their measure is a measure of astigmatism averaged across the view or (most likely, I think) from near the center of the view rather than being a measure of the outer portion of the FOV.

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 24th April 2019, 01:27   #49
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry link View Post
...Allbinos tests for axial astigmatism only, not off-axis astigmatism...
Bingo!

Thanks, Henry, for this and for the rest of your post (sent while I was still writing my reply to Dennis).

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 24th April 2019, 04:53   #50
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,860
Still a lot more distortion on the Zeiss 8x32 FL versus a flat field binocular like the Nikon 8x32 EDG. I have had them both and I can substantiate that. The FL's I have had had soft edges compared to flat field binoculars like the EDG or SV. If it caused by off-axis astigmatism that is news to me. It could be other things also. There is no objective proof that it is. IMO astigmatism whether off-axis or not is not something to be desired in an optical system.

Zeiss 8x32 FL
Distortion The distance of the first curved line from the field center compared to the field of vision radius: 56% +/- 5% 6/10.0

Nikon 8x32 EDG
Distortion The distance between the first curved line and the field center compared to the field of view radius: 86% +\- 5% 10/10.0

Off-axis astigmatism must not be seen with a star test because the FL's I have star tested have been quite good. I usually star test most binoculars I have just to see if they are good performers or not. The only way you could tell if a binocular has off-axis astigmatism would be if you could not focus the edge or else I would think it would probably be field curvature. How do you know it is not Coma or even your own eyes causing the astigmatism? Isn't everybody eyes astigmatic to some extent? I just don't see how you can prove it is off-axis astigmatism. It is interesting that the Zeiss SF has less lenses per side than the 10x32 FL maybe that is an indicator that the 10x32 FL does have some sort of field flattener.

Last edited by [email protected] : Wednesday 24th April 2019 at 05:57.
denco@comcast.n 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
Any new Zeiss Diascope models planned ? Sagittarius Zeiss 2 Thursday 9th February 2017 02:09
Zeiss 15X56 New Models. gonz33 Zeiss 1 Tuesday 18th March 2014 04:35
Swarovski models - help please davidblades Swarovski 6 Monday 5th July 2010 21:25
New SLC Models from Swarovski tlb Swarovski 40 Wednesday 20th April 2005 05:52
New Swarovski EL models Andy Bright Swarovski 40 Saturday 16th August 2003 08:52

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.31349707 seconds with 38 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:57.