dalat
...
Just a few I found with a little googling:
http://www.rspb.org.uk/joinandhelp/otherwaystohelp/donateoptics/index.aspx
http://aba.org/bex/items/
https://www.facebook.com/OpticsfortheTropics/timeline
-
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!
Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
What 3 binoculars do you USE the most for birding? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
Just a few I found with a little googling:
http://www.rspb.org.uk/joinandhelp/otherwaystohelp/donateoptics/index.aspx
http://aba.org/bex/items/
https://www.facebook.com/OpticsfortheTropics/timeline
Excelled idea Temmie. The biggest problem is finding ways to get them delivered. A few years ago I was able to send a spotting scope and tripod and three pairs of binoculars with a group from a local University who were going to Africa. Recently a guide in Belize told me that he would let me know when a client travels to Belize so I can send some audio equipment. My experience has been that it's quite amazing to see the skill level of some of the guides using substandard equipment. Be nice if we could get an ongoing thread about transporting optics, fieldguides, and gear to needy countries. Sorry, don't want to support thread drift.
John Dracon
John Dracon
Florian - Thank you for the links.
John
John
Sandy Leng
Well-known member
The Audubon gives such a lovely wide relaxing view, that if it was next to the E11 and an interesting bird flew into the garden, it would be the Audubon I'd pick up
Having said that the E11 is brighter, and colours do stand out better, no doubt a result of the more advanced coatings
They both have a great FOV, and I wouldn't like to say which was better in this respect.
The Audubon is a heavy old beast, but great for keeping by the window at home, and the E11 is half the size and weight. Both very good and I would never part with either of them
Sandy
temmie
Well-known member
heartwarming reactions on my post that didn't mean to make anyone feel guilty about possessing more than 3 binoculars! But I felt there is that thin line between being a binocular fan and a binocular snob. Sometimes we forget that people are reading this forum without even possessing one binocular, and some of us are in the market for a cheap binocular because they cannot afford more than e.g. 100$ for one.
Like Florian indicated, there are some ways to distribute used binoculars. Some end up in national park offices for the rangers, some in schools, some at local NGO's.
Probably the most rewarding way to get rid of those never-used and not-costing-an-arm-and-a-leg binoculars would be to take them as a spare on a birding trip, and giving them to your birding guide after a good trip together, considering first if your binoculars would be an upgrade for him, of course ;-) .
ps: I only have a pair of 7x42 T*FL. I bought them in 2008. I bought my previous pair (Optholyth Alpin 10x40B) in 1998, and those reside at my parent's place. I will buy a pair again in 2018, or sometime when I reach 5000 on my lifelist.
Like Florian indicated, there are some ways to distribute used binoculars. Some end up in national park offices for the rangers, some in schools, some at local NGO's.
Probably the most rewarding way to get rid of those never-used and not-costing-an-arm-and-a-leg binoculars would be to take them as a spare on a birding trip, and giving them to your birding guide after a good trip together, considering first if your binoculars would be an upgrade for him, of course ;-) .
ps: I only have a pair of 7x42 T*FL. I bought them in 2008. I bought my previous pair (Optholyth Alpin 10x40B) in 1998, and those reside at my parent's place. I will buy a pair again in 2018, or sometime when I reach 5000 on my lifelist.
Last edited:
brocknroller
A professed porromaniac
Those are/were my favorite binoculars, too, although I had the 804 MC HR/5 model, which weighed less than you older model, @ 29 oz. it didn't feel heavy due to its excellent balance and ergonomics. It was my favorite pair for stargazing due its WF, large sweet spot, low astigmatism, and coma being far out toward the edges.
The 8x30 EII was my favorite birding bin for similar reasons, plus it had a close focus of 7 ft. and unlike the SE, it didn't show overlapping barrel shadows at close focus.
Alas, both are arriving at the new owner's house today. I didn't think I would ever part with either of them either. I hope you never have to, they are among the best of the best.
Brock
David Swain
Well-known member
This is bittersweet, as many of us have read your long love affair with these venerable bins. But those we love come first.
David
Sandy Leng
Well-known member
I really hope that your fortune changes soon Brock, I have had my share of financial kickings in the past.
As the song goes, life is a rollercoaster, just got to ride it!!
Sandy
perterra
Well-known member
justabirdwatcher
Well-known member
My three at the moment:
Brunton 8.5x43 (birding)
Sightron Blue Sky 8x32 (hunting and loaners)
Bushnell Ultra HD 10x25 compacts (archery coaching/arrow spotting)
Brunton 8.5x43 (birding)
Sightron Blue Sky 8x32 (hunting and loaners)
Bushnell Ultra HD 10x25 compacts (archery coaching/arrow spotting)
I think we have all had the daydream of being able to send bino's to deserving students around the world.
Maybe if some of us could send a few pairs a year to various schools over seas, I was thinking of something tough and water proof like the Leupold Yosemites in 6x30 or another similar glass.
Maybe a list of the various schools members here have visited during their trips.
I am going to give a few pairs to some local grade and junior high schools with low income students.
It won't be a lot but some is better than none.
Lots to see here in Anchorage, Alaska just on a walk down our trails or down by the lagoon.
Art
Maybe if some of us could send a few pairs a year to various schools over seas, I was thinking of something tough and water proof like the Leupold Yosemites in 6x30 or another similar glass.
Maybe a list of the various schools members here have visited during their trips.
I am going to give a few pairs to some local grade and junior high schools with low income students.
It won't be a lot but some is better than none.
Lots to see here in Anchorage, Alaska just on a walk down our trails or down by the lagoon.
Art
justabirdwatcher
Well-known member
Or better yet, donate them to a nature park or wildlife refuge with a visitor center, so they can loan them out to school kids and visitors who don't already have them. That way they can be used over and over again and not just every now and then (or once, and then tossed aside).
John Dracon
John Dracon
There are IMO valid reasons for 6x & 7x binoculars being mentioned among the favorites. (1) long time US experience during war time on ships and on land demonstrated those powers were sufficient for the tasks required of them: 7x50 on ships and 6x30 on land. (2) Once civilian use started to dominate the market, the exit pupils of at least 5 mm became very important to birders. But to get an 8X requires a 40 mm objective lens and the increase in bulk, weight, and cost and loss of 1 mm Ten X either shrinks the exit pupil or at a 5 mm exit pupil now requires a 50 mm objective lens. Both see a reduction of FOV unless some very expensive ocular lens are incorporated. (3) Most people see very well with images magnified by 6X or 7X, and can handle the tremors better than at higher powers. It is no secret why experience birders prize their Zeiss 7x42 binoculars for the view they produce - wide field, bright colors, and a less fussy alignment with the 6 mm exit pupil.
(4) Experienced birders soon realize that under certain circumstances in birding (not all of course), 6 & 7 power binoculars do the job very nicely. One problem for birders is that there has been such a limited selection of these lower power binoculars available.
John
(4) Experienced birders soon realize that under certain circumstances in birding (not all of course), 6 & 7 power binoculars do the job very nicely. One problem for birders is that there has been such a limited selection of these lower power binoculars available.
John
Very well said, and succinctly!
May 7x make a comeback some day.
I collect 7x from the 'Zephyr/Featherweight' family, the Triton 748s, Bushnell Customs, and the Scope 3010s.
It's amazing what you can see when the design is optimized. It requires build precision, then and now.
Then you have a smaller package with big performance.
May 7x make a comeback some day.
I collect 7x from the 'Zephyr/Featherweight' family, the Triton 748s, Bushnell Customs, and the Scope 3010s.
It's amazing what you can see when the design is optimized. It requires build precision, then and now.
Then you have a smaller package with big performance.
Last edited:
I'd like to see more 6x and even 5x designs appear. It seems a company could "own" the low power market if they came out with some wide-FOV roofs. There is essentially no competition.
The 6x25 Bushnell Custom Compact is an excellent starting point...tremendous eye relief,
small size, super depth. They have a mini-Barlow in the middle. Nice x-wide, though..
it goes flat-field instead. Actually, many roofs already take advantage of the focuser lens
that way already.
A wide 6x30 with a meniscus front and a field flattener mid-body would be awesome.
Basically, the whole tube becomes an advanced eyepiece, sort of.
Lots of meniscus...hmm. Big money!
The technology was worked out for periscopes long ago.
I'm almost exclusively using 7x35 now, since carrying the Swift Triton Model 748s
and the Tower featherweights. I don't mind a regular field width when it's so
jam-packed with detail.
small size, super depth. They have a mini-Barlow in the middle. Nice x-wide, though..
it goes flat-field instead. Actually, many roofs already take advantage of the focuser lens
that way already.
A wide 6x30 with a meniscus front and a field flattener mid-body would be awesome.
Basically, the whole tube becomes an advanced eyepiece, sort of.
Lots of meniscus...hmm. Big money!
The technology was worked out for periscopes long ago.
I'm almost exclusively using 7x35 now, since carrying the Swift Triton Model 748s
and the Tower featherweights. I don't mind a regular field width when it's so
jam-packed with detail.
Last edited:
John Dracon
John Dracon
Optic - Am curious how many birders have never seen the binoculars you mentioned above in post 116? I suspect most of the younger folks simply haven't. I'll focus on what is called the Bushnell Custom 7x35. They were imported from Japan in large numbers as you know about a half century ago. I have three of these all with slightly different lengths of barrels.
My favorite ones were made by Fuji, and they will rival anything made in that era by Zeiss or B&L (or any other maker) in terms of pure optics and construction. We both know they don't have the latest coatings and coverings, but a careful user will find them quite adequate for most birding. How do you tell if Fuji made it? Look on the cap (the back one on the hinge). If a small engraved image like a volcano with FPO is on it, Fuji made it.
It is in the area of coatings and construction that the Customs show superiority in their own special way. B&L coatings in the Zephyrs are relatively soft and easily rubbed off. This is true of even one of my favorites, Zeiss's Classic 7x42. The Japanese coatings are much harder and durable.
But the construction of the Customs is where the true difference in durability is shown. All these cosmetically attractive binoculars flooding the market today, from really flimsy to super expensive models will not be without serious problems after 50 years of use. I say that dogmatically because every Custom I have had and used (numbering in the dozens of 7,8,9,and 10 power) have shown remarkable durability.
Reading all the comments on focusing problems of some of today's aphas, convinces me the designers have sacrificed function in favor of form. Almost every aspect of the American culture today exhibits what binocular designers are doing - image rather than substance. The Customs possess both, but they are ancient in the eyes of many users today. They focus correctly, i.e., the timing is accurate and they stay in collimation.
The only criticism I can make of the Customs is when someone introduced the Insta-Focus in later models, which in my opinion is the most God awful so-call improvement ever inflicted upon the binocular world. Avoid those. Choose a Custom with the proven design, a wheel moving the oculars and the diopter adjustment on the right ocular. Even eye glass wears will find the Custom friendly. An appropriate O ring can be glued (contact cement, not epoxy) to protect the eye lens, But the nylon cup has never damaged any of my eye glasses because of contact.
Many models of Zeiss porros from that era show haze on the prisms. If the Custom has not spent time in the fungus belt, it will remain unblemished for decades. Bill, the Navy guy, probably knows more about internal construction of binoculars than anyone alive today. B & L made the best for years. His opinions (shall I say experiences) are worth internalizing. Persons new to birding should pay close attention to what he writes.
Many users of Customs are in my age bracket and are simply dying, leaving to the vagaries of chance where the Customs will end up, on Ebay or in some pawn shop. Eventually, I predict, they will reach the status of Zeiss binoculars of that era.
Americans tend to forget it was the Japanese that helped reform the US automotive industry. Nikon press cameras are the standard of the world, not Leicas. The best Japanese optics match anything made today and even fifty years ago.
John
My favorite ones were made by Fuji, and they will rival anything made in that era by Zeiss or B&L (or any other maker) in terms of pure optics and construction. We both know they don't have the latest coatings and coverings, but a careful user will find them quite adequate for most birding. How do you tell if Fuji made it? Look on the cap (the back one on the hinge). If a small engraved image like a volcano with FPO is on it, Fuji made it.
It is in the area of coatings and construction that the Customs show superiority in their own special way. B&L coatings in the Zephyrs are relatively soft and easily rubbed off. This is true of even one of my favorites, Zeiss's Classic 7x42. The Japanese coatings are much harder and durable.
But the construction of the Customs is where the true difference in durability is shown. All these cosmetically attractive binoculars flooding the market today, from really flimsy to super expensive models will not be without serious problems after 50 years of use. I say that dogmatically because every Custom I have had and used (numbering in the dozens of 7,8,9,and 10 power) have shown remarkable durability.
Reading all the comments on focusing problems of some of today's aphas, convinces me the designers have sacrificed function in favor of form. Almost every aspect of the American culture today exhibits what binocular designers are doing - image rather than substance. The Customs possess both, but they are ancient in the eyes of many users today. They focus correctly, i.e., the timing is accurate and they stay in collimation.
The only criticism I can make of the Customs is when someone introduced the Insta-Focus in later models, which in my opinion is the most God awful so-call improvement ever inflicted upon the binocular world. Avoid those. Choose a Custom with the proven design, a wheel moving the oculars and the diopter adjustment on the right ocular. Even eye glass wears will find the Custom friendly. An appropriate O ring can be glued (contact cement, not epoxy) to protect the eye lens, But the nylon cup has never damaged any of my eye glasses because of contact.
Many models of Zeiss porros from that era show haze on the prisms. If the Custom has not spent time in the fungus belt, it will remain unblemished for decades. Bill, the Navy guy, probably knows more about internal construction of binoculars than anyone alive today. B & L made the best for years. His opinions (shall I say experiences) are worth internalizing. Persons new to birding should pay close attention to what he writes.
Many users of Customs are in my age bracket and are simply dying, leaving to the vagaries of chance where the Customs will end up, on Ebay or in some pawn shop. Eventually, I predict, they will reach the status of Zeiss binoculars of that era.
Americans tend to forget it was the Japanese that helped reform the US automotive industry. Nikon press cameras are the standard of the world, not Leicas. The best Japanese optics match anything made today and even fifty years ago.
John
I think the memory of the high-precision Japanes binoculars was
sort of washed out by a very strong extra-wide period and then
the economic crush of the mid-70s through 80s.
I can give a dramatic example of coating hardness in Customs.
One of my two pairs had fungus and I removed it with Bon Ami.
The coatings survived...incredible. Just a few 'central vein ghosts' from the fungus.
Fujinon even builds for easy maintenance as well.
Interesting on the Zephyr coatings.
There is a Zephyr reprise, the Bushnell "Featherlight" (not featherweight), with
harder coatings.
I like the the SMC/Asahi amber multicoat inside and the UVC first coat
in later Customs. The Swift Trident #748 has that complement as well. Perfect
for good color rendition and fighting haze.
The Japanese flat/sharp designs seem to spread out from the Zephyr.
Seem like it's an ancestor. So many featherweights under different brands
are so good. I suppose I took a long time to discover them first because of my
x-wide phase, and then because the big shoulders and plain FOV seemed odd.
I think the big-shouldered one-piece chassis is actually handy for keeping
weight down, oddly, and also as a light trap and for the fantastic grip ergonomics.
On EBay, it looks like nobody's letting go of their Zeiss 7x42s!
sort of washed out by a very strong extra-wide period and then
the economic crush of the mid-70s through 80s.
I can give a dramatic example of coating hardness in Customs.
One of my two pairs had fungus and I removed it with Bon Ami.
The coatings survived...incredible. Just a few 'central vein ghosts' from the fungus.
Fujinon even builds for easy maintenance as well.
Interesting on the Zephyr coatings.
There is a Zephyr reprise, the Bushnell "Featherlight" (not featherweight), with
harder coatings.
I like the the SMC/Asahi amber multicoat inside and the UVC first coat
in later Customs. The Swift Trident #748 has that complement as well. Perfect
for good color rendition and fighting haze.
The Japanese flat/sharp designs seem to spread out from the Zephyr.
Seem like it's an ancestor. So many featherweights under different brands
are so good. I suppose I took a long time to discover them first because of my
x-wide phase, and then because the big shoulders and plain FOV seemed odd.
I think the big-shouldered one-piece chassis is actually handy for keeping
weight down, oddly, and also as a light trap and for the fantastic grip ergonomics.
On EBay, it looks like nobody's letting go of their Zeiss 7x42s!
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
