Questions on Leitz Wetzlar bino missing ep collar Trinovid(?) (1 Viewer)

Joker9937 · Oct 4, 2019

I picked up my first set of Leitz Wetzlar. According to a few serial number lists that were posted here and other places, they look to have been manufactured in 1972. The collar for the left ep is missing, for some reason.

So, I am not sure if they are Trinovids or something else. I am learning as I go, so forgive me if this is obvious. From the serial number list, I am pretty sure that this is what they are, but am open to correction.

I did discover that there is some significant fogging on the prisms. Is that something that is fairly simple to clean off, or is that a death knell?

They came with the original leather case, strap, neck strap, and are in over-all good condition. Some paint loss on the edges, but the fogging is the worst of it. I guess there is some coating loss from someone cleaning it previously, but barely noticeable.

Thank you in advance.

Binastro · Oct 4, 2019

Joker,
Looks like a Trinovid.
I have a beat up one. I'll have a look at the serial number.
There are logo variations.

Suddarth Optical can probably clean the moisture deposit for you.
Ask them.

Regards,
Batman.

P.S.
Mine is a 10x40 wide angle 122m/1000m Trinovid.

Your one has longer eyecups, and maybe shorter thinner barrels, so maybe an 8x32 normal angle?
Or could it be 7x35?
Germany c.1976?
My one has a red logo, yours black, but these may not be original. My 10x40 WA maybe Portugal c.1977?

The serial number here is 798xxx, so maybe just a bit later than yours, although I don't know if serial numbers come in batches or are sequential.
My one has dirt in the eyepieces, and was not as described by the seller, so I never bought again from this shop, which previously was very good.

B.

tenex · Oct 4, 2019

Definitely a Trinovid; I think that by the mid-70s the logo was red, so early 70s sounds right. You can measure the objective diameter, and determine the magnification by comparison with other binos. It could surely be cleaned by Leica (or others?), there might even be a replacement ring for the other ocular. But nearly 50-year-old glass won't have multicoating or phase-coated prisms, which were major advancements in brightness and sharpness. The big question will be whether the trouble or expense is worthwhile to you, either as a collector or for use (compared to binos available today)? That's up to you. Enjoy it either way.

Joker9937 · Oct 6, 2019

Thank you both. I appreciate the input.

I had intended on measuring the objective end, but, honestly, I had misplaced my calipers. LOL. So, at the time of my last post, I was hoping there was an alternative way to figure it out. But...found my calipers. ID of the objective end "dewshield" is 35mm. So, 7x35? No other options, right?

Now, the "fogging" I mentioned, is better described as a haze. After closer examination, and a bit of research, I am afraid that the issue exists internally. I think it is between the prisms, as in, where they are glued together.

SOR has done wonderful things with a set I have sent to them. No worries about them at all. But, I am not sure that these are worth sending to SOR. Primarily, the fact that they have no sentimental value to me negates the idea. If the cost is less than I have read elsewhere, for this specific correction, I might reconsider. I will email them, and see what they have to say.

Do either of you, or anyone else for that matter, know if the prism cluster needs to be replaced, re-silvered, or just internally cleaned? I MIGHT be willing to attempt cleaning them myself, but this would be a very serious undertaking with many opportunities for failure.

Is it worth it? Is it better to just leave them as is? Is the potential improvement so significant that taking a chance like this would prove to be minimal vs the benefit?

I could never sell these to someone without disclosing this defect. So, I doubt I could ever get my money back. I am actually currently negotiating a resolution with the seller. They are claiming ignorance, and are probably truthful. However, I asked them about this issue specifically prior to purchasing them. They had originally wanted $200 for them. I talked them down, and made a deal to buy these and a set of Zeiss Diafun (think this is the model name) 10x30s. The Zeiss have an issue with the focus knob falling off. The diopter adjustment is so stiff that it is almost useless. Anyway, they sold both for $300. The ratio, based on the original prices, would end up around $100 for the Leitz and $200 for the Zeiss. Since they made a package deal, I am not expecting to get a full $200 refund for the Zeiss. I do not want to take advantage of the seller. However, I want to return the Zeiss, because they sold both of them to me as "used, like new". NEITHER of them are remotely close to "like new". The guy is demanding BOTH be sent back, neither sent back, or else he will not negotiate. I want to keep the Leitz, and work on it for $125. Am I wrong? I could never resell it for more than that, could I? I would NEVER withhold the info on the haze, so I just do not think they are worth more than that. So, would I be better off sending BOTH back for a full refund? I cannot really criticize the seller, except for being rigid. I do understand that he made a "package" deal with me.

I normally hate to discuss price and such, but I do NOT want to take advantage of this guy, but also do not want taken advantage of myself. I really perceive that I was pretty screwed on the deal, and now with the only options the guy is offering. But, on the other hand, he could have just ignored me after the sale. So...

They are very interesting binoculars, and even with the haze, potentially impressive. Without the haze, I bet, they would be jaw-dropping for their size. I like the old binoculars, even though this one is as old or older than I. Just a "thing" not a justifiable affinity. I am not a true collector, but more of a very dense student who learns by experience, but ... very slowly.

So, all of that nonsense being said, anyone here ever disassemble this cluster, clean it, and successfully reassemble for a dramatic improvement? Should I just give up and return both?

Attached is, perspective-wise, a better (I hope) photo of their relative proportions. Thanks, again.

dries1 · Oct 6, 2019

Send them both back, get your money back.

Andy W.

Binastro · Oct 6, 2019

Hi Joker,

I expect one in three of my purchases to be a dud.
I rarely if ever return them.
My time is worth more than the hassle.
It amazes me the lengths some here go to to get problems resolves.
But we are all different and have different priorities.

In actual fact only about one in five are actually duds, so I have done better than my odds.
I factor in the price.
Many non specialists really believe the binoculars they sell to be good, even when clearly out of alignment and with other faults.

If the balsam or cement is at fault a skilled astro worker could fix it. But aligning prisms might be beyond most folk.
I don't know if Trinovid prisms are cemented or not.

For Horace Dall such repairs or making new optics would more or less be done in his sleep. But there are very few with these skills nowadays even when awake.

I don't think that you could recement prism. but I don't know.
It may not be the cement and just surface problems.

Frankly $100 is quite good even with the faults and missing collar.
It is up to you whether you return both, or talk nicely on the phone to the seller and agree a compromise.

I don't fret about these things nowadays, but you youngsters might.
It is good news when I wake up to see a new day.

Regards,
B.

Joker9937 · Oct 6, 2019

Thanks, Andy. I am still tossing the idea around.

Binastro said:
Hi Joker,

I expect one in three of my purchases to be a dud.
I rarely if ever return them.
My time is worth more than the hassle.
It amazes me the lengths some here go to to get problems resolves.
But we are all different and have different priorities.

In actual fact only about one in five are actually duds, so I have done better than my odds.
I factor in the price.
Many non specialists really believe the binoculars they sell to be good, even when clearly out of alignment and with other faults.

If the balsam or cement is at fault a skilled astro worker could fix it. But aligning prisms might be beyond most folk.
I don't know if Trinovid prisms are cemented or not.

For Horace Dall such repairs or making new optics would more or less be done in his sleep. But there are very few with these skills nowadays even when awake.

I don't think that you could recement prism. but I don't know.
It may not be the cement and just surface problems.

Frankly $100 is quite good even with the faults and missing collar.
It is up to you whether you return both, or talk nicely on the phone to the seller and agree a compromise.

I don't fret about these things nowadays, but you youngsters might.
It is good news when I wake up to see a new day.

Regards,
B.

I appreciate what you said, "B". Thanks.

I wish my record was 1 in 5. LOL. Alas, I seem inclined to "learn the hard way". This transaction just happened to be the one where I decided, "I am going to fight for what is right". Usually my mistakes are $25 here or $50 there. This time, though, 300 smackers...not pocket change to me.

BUT...I am not going to go hungry. Maybe the seller will. So, I want to be fair. I just wanted to keep the Leitz, because they are at least "ok" with all of their defects.

Also, I am not getting them for $100, although that was the split between the two of them. $100 for one, and $200 for the other. Regardless, since it was a package deal, I do not expect to get a full refund.

If I could get the Leitz for $125, I think that would be fair. He did agree to $150, but I think that is $25 too much. The haze is evident at the ep, and glaringly obvious when looking backwards.

Oh well...

Thanks, again.

gunut · Oct 6, 2019

I ordered a new collar for one of my 60/70s vintage Trinovids about 5 years ago....think it was from Company Seven......

Binastro · Oct 6, 2019

I tended to buy from optics people, who know their stuff, or the eight local charity shops where I could go through as many as twenty binoculars in half an hour. Only about one in ten binoculars are good from charity shops.
The internet has destroyed the British high street, so it is food stores, restaurants, betting shops and charity shops now.
Lately, I have tried to buy nothing. I really don't need any more optics.

I always carried a torch to look inside the binocular, and ball bearings for star tests in sunshine.
Or distant street lights or the moon or planets at night.

In many cases, a proper repair costs more than the binocular is worth, so the commercial value is zero or nothing, or even minus something.
A broken worthless binocular needs storage, so is worth less than nothing. Unless one removes eyepieces and objectives and uses them later.
Some repairs I could do myself.

With old cameras I also went on the premise that one in three would be a lemon.

A good deal to me is when the item costs one third of its resale value.
This takes care of the mistakes, time spent etc.

In real terms very few binoculars keep their value as they age.
In dollars or pounds it might seem that they keep their value, but there is a hidden inflation of 2.5% on top of what we are told is inflation.
My Mini in 1959 cost about £490 new.
A new car now is probably 20 times that in pounds.
My first job paid £6 a week.
With the way the pound is going I expect even more devaluation.

However, collecting as a hobby one should not consider something as an investment. Rather something to enjoy.
It is usually unexpected items that do well in monetary terms.

B.

John A Roberts · Oct 7, 2019

Hi Joker,

First the easy part. It’s a 7x35 B - with the B indicating longer eye relief, suitable for spectacle use - and dates from 1972 +/-

For the details as to dating see here: https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=370117
And although the thread evolves, to get the main points: start at post #1; then go to the revised tables in #37, and; keep in mind Gary Hawkins’ caution in #45

As for DIY cleaning?
For information as to construction and disassembly of the Trinovids, see the flow of 5 pages about a 7x42 B from forum member Frank/ LPT at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/binocwpg/8103356727/in/photostream/
I’ve attached 2 images (n.b. collimation is done at the eyepieces rather than as is much more commonly done at the objectives)

While disassembly and then cleaning of the prisms may be relatively easy for someone who has knowledge, experience and appropriate tools e.g. see Frank’s comments in the second page in the sequence,
unless you know what you’re doing . . .

For information about another possible cause of prism problems, see 2 pages by Frank about an 8x32 at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/binocwpg/8255011151/in/set-72157623234405689/
And of course it's possible that the cause of your prism problem may be something else, not so easily fixed

So taking into account what you paid, and depending on your skill, are you willing to take on a project with an uncertain outcome?
Or is it better/ easier/ more certain to just return both the units and get a refund? (there's always Leitz Trinovids on the main binocular sales sites)

All the best
John

Joker9937 · Oct 7, 2019

John A Roberts said:
Hi Joker,

First the easy part. It’s a 7x35 B - with the B indicating longer eye relief, suitable for spectacle use - and dates from 1972 +/-

For the details as to dating see here: https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=370117
And although the thread evolves, to get the main points: start at post #1; then go to the revised tables in #37, and; keep in mind Gary Hawkins’ caution in #45

As for DIY cleaning?
For information as to construction and disassembly of the Trinovids, see the flow of 5 pages about a 7x42 B from forum member Frank/ LPT at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/binocwpg/8103356727/in/photostream/
I’ve attached 2 images (n.b. collimation is done at the eyepieces rather than as is much more commonly done at the objectives)

While disassembly and then cleaning of the prisms may be relatively easy for someone who has knowledge, experience and appropriate tools e.g. see Frank’s comments in the second page in the sequence,
unless you know what you’re doing . . .

For information about another possible cause of prism problems, see 2 pages by Frank about an 8x32 at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/binocwpg/8255011151/in/set-72157623234405689/
And of course it's possible that the cause of your prism problem may be something else, not so easily fixed

So taking into account what you paid, and depending on your skill, are you willing to take on a project with an uncertain outcome?
Or is it better/ easier/ more certain to just return both the units and get a refund? (there's always Leitz Trinovids on the main binocular sales sites)

All the best
John

Thank you for your informative post. I like knowing exactly what they are. I have noticed that they have nice eye-relief.

I have attached a photo, taken through the objective, of the haze. I believe that the haze is actually inaccessible. If the pic allows a better assessment, I am open to thoughts on it.

It is looking like I should just return them. While I am aware that this hobby, as referenced by "B", is not an investment strategy, I still prefer not to flush my cash down the toilet. If the seller was reasonable, and willing to allow me to return just the Zeiss, I would keep them. I still have a few days to think about it. I hate to let them go, because … well, I am a sucker, I guess. LOL.

Binastro said:
I tended to buy from optics people, who know their stuff, or the eight local charity shops where I could go through as many as twenty binoculars in half an hour. Only about one in ten binoculars are good from charity shops.
The internet has destroyed the British high street, so it is food stores, restaurants, betting shops and charity shops now.
Lately, I have tried to buy nothing. I really don't need any more optics.

I always carried a torch to look inside the binocular, and ball bearings for star tests in sunshine.
Or distant street lights or the moon or planets at night.

In many cases, a proper repair costs more than the binocular is worth, so the commercial value is zero or nothing, or even minus something.
A broken worthless binocular needs storage, so is worth less than nothing. Unless one removes eyepieces and objectives and uses them later.
Some repairs I could do myself.

With old cameras I also went on the premise that one in three would be a lemon.

A good deal to me is when the item costs one third of its resale value.
This takes care of the mistakes, time spent etc.

In real terms very few binoculars keep their value as they age.
In dollars or pounds it might seem that they keep their value, but there is a hidden inflation of 2.5% on top of what we are told is inflation.
My Mini in 1959 cost about £490 new.
A new car now is probably 20 times that in pounds.
My first job paid £6 a week.
With the way the pound is going I expect even more devaluation.

However, collecting as a hobby one should not consider something as an investment. Rather something to enjoy.
It is usually unexpected items that do well in monetary terms.

B.

I see your points and appreciate them. Not sure why I am such a sucker for this stuff. Came into the hobby late in life, and that is odd, because I have used "optics" most of my life. They were more corollary to my job(s). Now, telescopes and binos are a direct hobby.

I keep trying to quit...HONEST. LOL

I guess it is a good thing that there aren't many (Any, locally) stores that specialize in new/used junk like this. At least for me, it is a good thing. My kids need shoes.

ceasar · Oct 7, 2019

Joker9937 said:
Thank you both. I appreciate the input.

I had intended on measuring the objective end, but, honestly, I had misplaced my calipers. LOL. So, at the time of my last post, I was hoping there was an alternative way to figure it out. But...found my calipers. ID of the objective end "dewshield" is 35mm. So, 7x35? No other options, right?

Now, the "fogging" I mentioned, is better described as a haze. After closer examination, and a bit of research, I am afraid that the issue exists internally. I think it is between the prisms, as in, where they are glued together.

SOR has done wonderful things with a set I have sent to them. No worries about them at all. But, I am not sure that these are worth sending to SOR. Primarily, the fact that they have no sentimental value to me negates the idea. If the cost is less than I have read elsewhere, for this specific correction, I might reconsider. I will email them, and see what they have to say.

Do either of you, or anyone else for that matter, know if the prism cluster needs to be replaced, re-silvered, or just internally cleaned? I MIGHT be willing to attempt cleaning them myself, but this would be a very serious undertaking with many opportunities for failure.

Is it worth it? Is it better to just leave them as is? Is the potential improvement so significant that taking a chance like this would prove to be minimal vs the benefit?

I could never sell these to someone without disclosing this defect. So, I doubt I could ever get my money back. I am actually currently negotiating a resolution with the seller. They are claiming ignorance, and are probably truthful. However, I asked them about this issue specifically prior to purchasing them. They had originally wanted $200 for them. I talked them down, and made a deal to buy these and a set of Zeiss Diafun (think this is the model name) 10x30s. The Zeiss have an issue with the focus knob falling off. The diopter adjustment is so stiff that it is almost useless. Anyway, they sold both for $300. The ratio, based on the original prices, would end up around $100 for the Leitz and $200 for the Zeiss. Since they made a package deal, I am not expecting to get a full $200 refund for the Zeiss. I do not want to take advantage of the seller. However, I want to return the Zeiss, because they sold both of them to me as "used, like new". NEITHER of them are remotely close to "like new". The guy is demanding BOTH be sent back, neither sent back, or else he will not negotiate. I want to keep the Leitz, and work on it for $125. Am I wrong? I could never resell it for more than that, could I? I would NEVER withhold the info on the haze, so I just do not think they are worth more than that. So, would I be better off sending BOTH back for a full refund? I cannot really criticize the seller, except for being rigid. I do understand that he made a "package" deal with me.

I normally hate to discuss price and such, but I do NOT want to take advantage of this guy, but also do not want taken advantage of myself. I really perceive that I was pretty screwed on the deal, and now with the only options the guy is offering. But, on the other hand, he could have just ignored me after the sale. So...

They are very interesting binoculars, and even with the haze, potentially impressive. Without the haze, I bet, they would be jaw-dropping for their size. I like the old binoculars, even though this one is as old or older than I. Just a "thing" not a justifiable affinity. I am not a true collector, but more of a very dense student who learns by experience, but ... very slowly.

So, all of that nonsense being said, anyone here ever disassemble this cluster, clean it, and successfully reassemble for a dramatic improvement? Should I just give up and return both?

Attached is, perspective-wise, a better (I hope) photo of their relative proportions. Thanks, again.

FWIW, according to Allbinos, the Leitz Trinovid 7x35B was manufactured between 1965 and 1983. If you had the one pictured below, which was made for the 1972 OLYMPICS, it might have had some collector's value.

https://www.allbinos.com/1638-Leitz_Trinovid_7x35_B-binoculars_specifications.html

Bob

garymh · Oct 7, 2019

John A Roberts said:
I’ve attached 2 images (n.b. collimation is done at the eyepieces rather than as is much more commonly done at the objectives)

John

Hi,

On the Leitz Trinovid binocular being discussed in this thread the collimation is carried out via eccentrics around the objectives.

The later Leica Trinovids were collimated via the oculars.

Gary.

Binastro · Oct 7, 2019

Is the problem shown in the photo balsam separation?

B.

garymh · Oct 8, 2019

Hi,

The prism group in this binocular is basically 3 prisms cemented together.

It looks as if the condensation on the pictured prism has actually got between the cemented surfaces and when this happens if is impossible to clean.

Gary

Joker9937 · Oct 8, 2019

ceasar said:
FWIW, according to Allbinos, the Leitz Trinovid 7x35B was manufactured between 1965 and 1983. If you had the one pictured below, which was made for the 1972 OLYMPICS, it might have had some collector's value.

https://www.allbinos.com/1638-Leitz_Trinovid_7x35_B-binoculars_specifications.html

Bob

Sadly, the ep collar is gone. Makes me wonder if it actually WAS an Olympics model, and someone cannibalized the collar for a similar aged but better condition non-Olympics model. Who knows.

Unless a specific serial number range is known to be the Olympics model, we will never know.

Interesting, nonetheless. Thank you!

Joker9937 · Oct 8, 2019

Binastro said:
Is the problem shown in the photo balsam separation?

B.

garymh said:
Hi,

The prism group in this binocular is basically 3 prisms cemented together.

It looks as if the condensation on the pictured prism has actually got between the cemented surfaces and when this happens if is impossible to clean.

Gary

To me, it does appear to be delamination of some type. I have disassembled far enough to ascertain that it is not on any exterior surface. I am sending to SOR for a legitimate diagnosis.

Likely not really worth the money, but we will see. Thanks.

Binastro · Oct 8, 2019

Thanks Gary.
That is what I thought.

It may be that the prisms could be soaked apart, cleaned and recemented.
But the prisms need to be accurately placed.
That is if the affected prism surfaces are not badly etched by fungus.

I think that the Russian optical workers probably do these things still quite commonly, but few do this here.

Alternatively prisms from a broken similar Trinovid could be used.
It may be that Suddarth Optical have such spares.

Joker,
In Poland there are folks who openly make special parts and produce fake gold plated Leicas etc.
I am sure they could do Olympic specials.
In France and Italy one can theoretically go to prison for buying fakes as well as selling.
Probably handling also.

But nowadays fake news and fake everything is worldwide.

Regards,
B.

Renze de Vries · Oct 8, 2019

Joker9937 said:
Sadly, the ep collar is gone. Makes me wonder if it actually WAS an Olympics model, and someone cannibalized the collar for a similar aged but better condition non-Olympics model. Who knows.

Unless a specific serial number range is known to be the Olympics model, we will never know.

Interesting, nonetheless. Thank you!

The special edition Leitz Trinovid 7x35, issued in celebration of the Olympic Games in Munich 1972, was limited to 200 pieces, numbered from #001 tot #200, corresponding to serial numbers 764001 to 764200. The models 10x40 and 8x32 were selected for special edition as well, in 200 resp. 600 pieces.

Renze

Foss · Oct 8, 2019

dries1 said:
Send them both back, get your money back.

Andy W.

I could not agree more! Don't reward this vendor for dishonesty or ineptness.

Questions on Leitz Wetzlar bino missing ep collar Trinovid(?) (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

reality-based

Well-known member

Attachments

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Registered Offender

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Binocular Engineer

Well-known member

Binocular Engineer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread