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.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dr Owl" data-source="post: 3609597" data-attributes="member: 130540">If the OP will permit it, I'd like to ask a slightly different, but closely related, question about the 7x42 B/GA Classics.Why is it that, twenty years on, these bins inspire so much more affection than the other top-flight binoculars of the late 1990s?In 2002, at a photographic trade show, I broke that cardinal rule of optics: never look through binoculars you cannot afford.  And so, I had to commence a programme of saving and data gathering.Perhaps the review which influenced me most was one by Stephen Ingraham<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20161031234438/http://www.betterviewdesired.com:80/Leica-Brunton-Pentax.php" target="_blank">http://web.archive.org/web/20161031234438/http://www.betterviewdesired.com:80/Leica-Brunton-Pentax.php</a>with its picture of four top-flight bins on a bench in an approximate order of preference.(My summary of) the 2002 Internet zeitgeist was that* the Nikon HG (its UK name) was too heavy;* the new Zeiss BN was lovely, though a bit heavy;* the Swarovski EL was possibly even lovelier;* the first Zeiss Victory was dreadfully uncomfortable to hold;and that all four of these were optically better than the 7x42 B/GA Classic and the Bausch & Lomb Elite, albeit not by much.So why don't the Zeiss BN and the Swarovski EL, much respected as fine binoculars, inspire the same affection as the Zeiss Classics?Later,Dr Owl----------------------------John Owlett, Southampton, UK</blockquote>

Verification