Today I received an old Meopta 6x30, single-layer coated and with center focus. They are in very good used condition. By the look of the logo I can tell it was made somewhere between 1947 to 1956.
This is not going to be a full-scale review. I'll mention about my initial impressions and make some superficial comparisons to a couple of other binoculars.
Complementary posts may be added.
The short story: This is a gem! I have preferences that never will be met by vintage binoculars, but in every respect they did meet or surpass my (admittedly low) expectations.
Let's start with its shortcomings:
1) Since I have the Vortex Fury 6.5x32 and usually wear spectacles, the Meopta was bought for the intended use with contact lenses. I was after a binocular with short eye relief. My wish was granted, by a very small margin against too low eye relief.
Another millimeter higher the rigid eyecup, and I would not be able to see the field stop. For me it's OK, for someone else they may have too little eye relief.
2) It does suffer from considerable ghosting in less favourable circumstances.
When the Sun is low, reflections become bothersome. Then again, not so at noon or (obviously) when looking away from the Sun.
3) Possibly as a result from restauration, the diopter moves too easily.
4) The close focus is around 3.5 meters
Then, here come the good things:
1) When I carried the parcel home, I harboured a gnawing suspicion that there's an empty leather case within. Luckily, I was wrong!
The binoculars are very lightweight, but not to the extent that they lack that reassuring solidity one has come to expect from vintage bins.
2) They are surprisingly small and svelte - much smaller than I remember that the Jenoptem 8x30s were. The ocular lenses are about 10-11 mm in diameter, but even the outer diameter of the oculars is liberatingly thin.
3) Apart from the freely turning diopter the mechanics are superb.
The central hinge is very stiff and the focus wheel - which of course goes clockwise towards infinity! - is easy to turn. It is surprisingly fast for such an old binocular. I haven't measured it, but it seems negligibly slower than the Fury's wheel. Everything seems very solid - imagine a Jenoptem with unnecessary bulk and weight removed. The central bridge can be rocked by about a millimeter but moves back promptly.
These look and feel more field-worthy than the sleek and delicate pre-war porros.
4) These are sharp! When boosting them 2.5x, on-axis CA is nonexistent.
The Furys show considerably more. The edge sharpness suffers from some curvature of field, but about 70% of the FOV can achieve full focus.
Unfortunately there is no clear sky now to provide any pin-point star test conditions. I'll get back about that.
5) The field of view is only a smidgeon narrower than the Fury's. I'd guess it's around 8.3 degrees or 145 m/1000 m or 435 ft/1000 yds but this may be proved wrong.
Their AFOV though, is visibly smaller than the Fury's due to their lesser magnification - probably around 50 degrees. In that sense, these can't be called wide angle binoculars. Anyhow, the low magnification grants a wide TFOV.
6) Their colour renditon is only slightly warm. I would say that the Zeiss (West) 10x40 BGAT* is marginally more yellow than the Meopta.
This is a real relief after having tried the Swift Newport MkII (very blue), the IOR Valdada 7x40 (heavy green tint) and the Jenoptem (considerably brown/yellow).
7) Despite the fact that they are single-coated, colour saturation and brightness is a lot better than I had dared to hope for.
Admittedly, the (FMC) Fury is brighter. But even though the difference is clearly visible, the Meopta isn't annoyingly dark.
On the contrary, it once again performs strikingly similar to many modern binoculars.
8) If it matters, the looks of the Meopta porro may be the most "classy" of all binoculars I have ever seen.
It is not only their looks, but also how the engineering has been exercised.
If these were to be used beneath a camera, the only possible one would be the Leica M3 or M4.
That is how I perceive these - solid but svelte, precision engineered and simply classy in a most modest way.
That said, they are undeniably dated. But still, they have aged with grace.
To be continued...