Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home page

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Binoculars

Pages: 1
KennyJ

*****

Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10162
Loc: Lancashire UK
Brock's Choice
      #42362 - 01/18/04 03:58 AM

Hi again Brock,

Thanks for your ongoing posts , which seem never to fail to include at least one point of particular interest to me !

The most recent of these being your expressed desire to obtain ether a Zeiss 10 x 40 Classic or Swarovski 10 x 42 SLC.

I know that both of these are indeed very very good binoculars , and I presume you have a preference for exit -pupils in the 4mm range , which at your proximity to a "free bus pass" I can well understand

However , given the shining reviews of more recent equivalent offerings from these two companies (v.i.z modified Victory and ELs respectively , and the Duovids from that other great front-runner Leica , all of which include the desired quality of being considerably lighter, I wondered if there was any particular reason why you highlighted the two models you did rather than what are in effect both "modern replacements and current company flagships" ?

Incidentally , once upon a time some very fine binoculars used to be made in Britain ! -- sadly not any longer.

Regards --Kenny.

--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton





Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
brocknroller
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 10/16/03
Posts: 1517
Loc: Liberal, Kansas
Re: Brock's Choice new [Re: KennyJ]
      #42475 - 01/18/04 12:56 PM

Kenny,

i'm glad you took my post in good humor, as it was intended. with the differences in culture you never know. i'm still trying to figure out that stoppard play. not sure i'm deserving of self-named thread, but since i have at least one person interested, here goes....

what's missing in my collection is a 10X42 for birding and casual stagazing. my nikon 10X35 E2 filled this gap, but i traded it in on the 8X32 SE. i thought about replacing it with a 10X42 SE. however, given the increasing number of rainy/foggy/shirt-soaking humid days in central PA, i would have more opportunities to bird with a WP bin, and the bin would have greater longevity if it were fully sealed. although i prefer porros because they fit my budget better (went from high-paid tech writer to low-paid teacher during this downturn), and for the more comfortable grip (i find most roofs too small for my XL-sized hands), the number of fully sealed weatherproof/fogproof porros, while growing, is still relatively small compared to roofs.

also, the oversized eyecups on some of the new WP porros and roofs are too large for my eyesockets so a Classic with its rubber eyecups would be preferable. the SLC eyecups, though hard, appear small enough to fit (i have tried the 7X42 Swaro, and liked the image quality, but it was the older version with rubber eyecups). and both bins have broad central hinges that would probably fit my hands more comfortably than slim-bodied roofs like the victory or pentax DCF. also, steve ingraham from BVD said that the victories smell like tire rubber (and he works for Zeiss so you know it must be bad), and they are too slim (the original version also had those nasty strap attachments).

while the EL would probably fit my hands nicely because i could wrap them around the barrels, and they also have small eyecups, they are VERY expensive, and i'm not likely to find a used one at an affordable price.i've seen the 10X40 Zeiss sell for $400 used on A-mart. also, ingraham said the EL was not as bright as the SLC, and the 10X42 SLC is the roof alternative to the nikon 10X42SE in the BVD high-power binoculars reference set and is supposed to be as sharp on-axis as the SE. i know that's just one reviewer's opinion, but given the price, i have not researched the EL more thoroughly, and my own tastes seem to match ingraham's for the most part.

although it's perhaps more of a brit trait than american, i like the idea of a traditional design like the Zeiss Classic that has resisted and persevered in a market driven by the latest gimmicks and innovations.

while i still have 15 years before i qualify for a free bus pass, indeed, the smaller exit pupil will suit my eyes better, and it's also better for for stargazing from my moderately light polluted skies.

on the flip side of the traditional Classics, the duovids intrigue me more than any other roof design innovation, because the limiting factor of any bin compared to a spotting scope is its fixed magnification. this is why i bought the nikon XL Zoom, it's like having a low power, handheld spotting scope. however, it has some of the same limitations as all zooms, though less bothersome because of its wider FOV and better image quality. my heart skipped a beat when i saw the 8+12X42 Duovid advertised in the B & H Photo catalog for $399! took me a few seconds to come to my senses and realize that they had accidentally dropped the "1" in front of the first "3". i have not read any detailed reviews on the Duovids (if you've seen any, please email me), but on paper, they look very good, and if money were no object, they might be the "flagship" of my collection.

until (and if) i get my Ph.D. and make a three-fold increase in salary (or hit the lottery), i'm either stuck looking for a bargain-priced Zeiss Classic or settling for a "cheaper, faster, acceptable" non-Aryan 10X42 WP FP bin. maybe now that the Chinese have put a man in orbit, and the US has thrown down the gauntlet for the Second Moon Race, we might be saying in 15 years, if China can send a man to the moon, why can't they make a high quality bin?



--------------------
Oscar Zoroaster Diggs
"O.Z."

#########################################

"And remember, my sentimental friend....a heart is not judged by how much you love,
but by how much you are loved by others."



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 07/22/03
Posts: 1517
Loc: Wisconsin
Re: Brock's Choice new [Re: brocknroller]
      #42820 - 01/19/04 09:36 AM

Quote:

what's missing in my collection is a 10X42 for birding and casual stagazing.

slim-bodied roofs like the victory...

although it's perhaps more of a brit trait than american, i like the idea of a traditional design like the Zeiss Classic that has resisted and persevered in a market driven by the latest gimmicks and innovations.




The Zeiss Victory sells as an older, price reduced, model and a newer "II" model. The Newer "II" model has cured the strap problem, and the edge correction problem, supposed to be rather good.

The Zeiss 7x42 classics have been around so long because they are optically so good. Many consider their new price to even be a steal, in comparison to other high-end binos at least. Also, they may look retro, but the reason i think the body design has not been changed is the way they balance in the hand, with the finger naturally falling on the focus ring.
Their durability is also very good. They are central focus, not internal focus, yet waterproof. Zeiss has only called them waterproof for a few years. Before that, word-of-mouth was that they were. A number of years ago Living Bird (published by the Cornell Ornthology Lab), soaked 'em in a bucket, sprayed them with a high power hose, put them in a freezer, then later, took them out. No internal fogging.

I got mine new in the 80's, (they say "made in west germany on them )Used alot. 110 to -30 degrees F. Only mechanical quirk i have found is when hot, the focuser turns faster, and slower when very cold.
jay

--------------------
"Gosh, you've... really got some nice toys here"

Dual mount/ambient temperature Hominid Widefield Photon Collectors®
Pleistocene™ ˝ watt Wetware Integration Unit.
entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
brocknroller
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 10/16/03
Posts: 1517
Loc: Liberal, Kansas
Re: Brock's Choice new [Re: moynihan]
      #42904 - 01/19/04 02:51 PM

Jay,

Steve at BVD panned the original Victories for the reasons you mentioned, and i have big hands so the slim body and nasty attachments would be bothersome even if i could find them for a reasonable price used. also, i have an aversion to the smell of rubber for some reason. i have asthma, so that may play a role, and having them next to my nose all day would be irksome. so i've ruled those out, even the newer model.

you're probably the 20th person who has recommended the 7X42 Classic to me, including Kenny, who started this thread, and i can't in good conscience ignore all these glowing personal recommendations. in truth, i lusted after the 7X42 Classics before reading about exit pupil limits for middle-aged folks (new to that club). however, the daylight-adapted pupil is 2 to 3mm diameter so the 6mm shouldn't look any different than the 4mm on my 8X32 SE during the day, and the eye positioning would be less critical. at night, it's another story, i might lose some aperture with my exit pupil fully open, and i will lose contrast under my light polluted skies.

i was hoping to get a "two-fer" with the 10X40 Classic (birding and astronomy) or a chinese/jap 10X42 roof. for the most part, i find 7X too limited for stargazing, i have a 7X50 and a 7X35 but rarely use them for astronomy. 10X-12X seems better to me. so i was leaning toward the 10X42 meade montana, because of rave reviews, premium-like features, and low price ($250), HOWEVER, Lee, who bought one and sang its virtues last week, has changed his opinion upon closer comparison (see Roof Prism Bins for Astronomy thread). so he returned them and bought a pair of Swarovski 8.5x42 ELs. His application for SOBs is pending his survival after his wife finds out how much he spent.

so, my conclusion (this is like a Frilby gestalt) is that i probably should save my shekles and buy both a 7X-8X WP premium birding bin and a 10X or 12X premium astronomy bin.

okay, based on recommendations and reviews, and my personal experience, Brock's current choices are*:

WP birding bin: 7X42 Zeiss Classic
handheld (and well braced) astronomy bin: Nikon 12X50 Superior E

Total Budget: $1,200 to $1,600 (depending on discounts, new or used, and trade + cash deals).

if you check the online currency convertor you'll see that shekles do not hold up well against the dollar so it will take a loooong time before i can purchase these bins, unless i start stealing a lot of hubcaps or get involved in insider trading (Martha might give me a tip). i also have some bins to trade so i may work out a trade or trade + cash deal for one of these bins.

* choices subject to change without notice, some restrictions may apply



--------------------
Oscar Zoroaster Diggs
"O.Z."

#########################################

"And remember, my sentimental friend....a heart is not judged by how much you love,
but by how much you are loved by others."



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
KennyJ

*****

Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10162
Loc: Lancashire UK
Re: Brock's Choice new [Re: brocknroller]
      #42972 - 01/19/04 06:23 PM

Brock,

I don't think you'll go far wrong with the two models you mentioned.

Good combination for both intended purposes IMHO.

I hope you win the lottery !

Regards --Kenny

--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton





Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
KennyJ

*****

Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 10162
Loc: Lancashire UK
Re: Brock's Choice new [Re: KennyJ]
      #44458 - 01/23/04 02:38 PM

Brock,

Don't ask me why but suddenly today I started thinking about your " gang of four" dream binos , and particularly your ongoing longing for Zeiss 7 x 42 B GA Ts.

Although I'm almost tired of telling people how good these are , I must confess that IF I already owned as good as new Nikon SE 8 x 32s even I could not really justify adding this true classic Zeiss glass to my little collection.

I think that both binos more or less fill the same niche of bino viewing requirements , with the Zeiss of course providing that extra width of TFOV whilst surrendering what can ( in this range) seem quite a significant 1x extra magnification.

Amazingly ,to my eyes ,the 8 x 32 SEs actually match ( or very very nearly match )the brightness of the Zeiss 7 x 42s , which really is saying something about 8 x 32s.

I really love the awesome combination of maximum brightness with high clarity ,good contrast and notable sharpness found in only the very best binoculars.

Three other binos which have impressed me to a similar standard are the Nikon High Grade 8 x 42 ( Venturer or LX in the USA ), the Leica 8 x 50 BA , and the Swarovski 8 x 42 EL.

Not a single 10x bino I have ever looked through has impressed me QUITE so much , with the Swarovski 10 x 50 SLC and Leica 10 x 50 BA having come the closest.

I'm still keen to try the improved Zeiss 10 x 56 Victory, which may even drop in street price once these Fluorite versions get on the market.

Unlike you Brock , I think this "exit -pupil theory" for the over -50s business is overblown.

The word "theory" in that oft -quoted triad is not to be overlooked , under -estimated nor indeed misunderstood.

In addition to prefering that "easier to find" and "easier to hold" view that larger exit pupils provide, there is another good reason for selecting a terrestrial binocular with an exit -pupil larger than 4mm regardless of user age.

Hopefully "all" will be explained in great detail in a forthcoming article I have forwarded to Allister for consideration for the Bino Articles section.

This most interesting "paper" was not written by myself, as will become obvious if and when it is published :-)

BUT I am honoured and deeply flattered to be able to say that it was at least "inspired" by my rather persistent ramblings in "other places" , and has gone some way to "proving" that I was not quite so wrong after all !

Apart from the author ,and Allister of copurse ,to whom I have sent a copy ,I am currently in a most privileged postion of being the only person in the world to have possession of such a work.

I really hope it gets published --it is VERY interesting !

Regards Kenny.





--------------------
If everyone is thinking the same thing , no-one is thinking - General George S.Patton





Zeiss 7 x 42 BGAT
Captain's Helmsman 7 x 50
Nikon 10 x 42 Superior E
Swift Audubon Kestrel 10 x 50
Helios 15 x 70 Observation
Strathspey 20 x 90
Televue 76 APO
Zeiss 85 Diascope
Helios 102 f5 refractor
Various eyepieces barlows tripods mounts etc.
Panasonic Lumix DMC - TZ5 digital camera


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
brocknroller
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 10/16/03
Posts: 1517
Loc: Liberal, Kansas
Re: Brock's Choice new [Re: KennyJ]
      #44632 - 01/23/04 09:26 PM

Quote:

Brock,

...Unlike you Brock , I think this "exit -pupil theory" for the over -50s business is overblown.

Kenny,

When it comes to the "exit pupil theory", the "eyes' have it. I agree with you that for daytime use, exit pupil size is a non-issue, given that our eyes contract to 2-3mm, regardless of age, and the comfort of eye position is great. But, at night, I do see the difference -- a 7X35 looks as bright as a 7X50 to my eyes, and it makes perfect sense if my pupils can only open 4-5mm. I wonder if this is also the reason the 8X32 SE and 7X42 Classic look the same brightness to you, though the SEs are not a good example to compare because of their exceptional light throughput. But I'm very interested in reading the article, but doubtful that it will change what I see with my eyes.

As far as the 7X42 Classic being redundant for one who already owns an 8X32 SE, my chief purpose in wanting to buy it, besides curiousity since no-one I know has one I can try out, is for the waterproofing. The conditions often get damp here, and I'm squimish about taking my 8X32 SE out in very humid, misty weather, and I wouldn't use them in a light rain despite their "weatherproofing". I have no worries about dunking the Zeiss, since I don't bird over water, but I do want a bin that sealed well enough to keep out the moisture. And I like the wide TFOV (larger than the SE), the centerfield resolution (probably not as sharp as the SE, but close), and the Zeiss quality. All the rave reviews help too, and I like the traditional shape. Plus, it would be nice to "look through the bent back tulips, to see how the other half live."

You mentioned the 8X42 XL/HG, wonder why they give it different names? I saw a pair selling for a very good price, but was put off by the many comments I've heard about exessive false color, even among those who own and really like the bin. Despite the ergonomics, which might not be that great for my big hands, they still weight 36 oz. no matter how you distribute that weight. So for these reasons, the Venturer never made my Wish List, though I am a very big Nikon fan. But this is all heresay, I'd like to put one in my hands and try it out, and I might get that chance in the spring when I make a pilgrimage to an Amish shoe shop, about 50 miles away that, believe it not, carries premium Nikons and Swaros.

But my first goal is getting the 12X50 SE. I've had one before, know it will meet my expectations, and it's just on the cusp of what I can handhold while well braced, and I already have the proper adapters for my skywindow. I will probably buy a monopod for daytime use, I like the Bogen-Gitzo combo that bigbinoculars.com sells (for a quite reasonable price). The chief daytime use will be searching for birds of prey (there's a huge owl I have yet to ID because I cannot see it well with my lower power bins at twilight).

Truthfully, the 8X32 and 12X50 SEs and a FMC properly collimated Chinese 20X80 will take care of 80% my observing needs. The Classics are extravagances that I would not indulge in unless my ship came in (I'm not sure I'd see that ship even with the 20X80s since its still VERY far away). Frankly, with the weather we've been having here, I might be better served by using the $677 I would spend on the Zeiss to buy a "premium" acoustic guitar (Carvin Cobalt with rosewood sides and back). I too used to play in a band, but due to my asthma, I stopped playing "live", but getting fed up with my old Ovation, because the top keeps cracking due to the humidity. Okay, sorry, as Frilby would say, I'm waffling. Look forward to reading the article.

--------------------
Oscar Zoroaster Diggs
"O.Z."

#########################################

"And remember, my sentimental friend....a heart is not judged by how much you love,
but by how much you are loved by others."



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


Extra information
11 registered and 33 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  EdZ 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 637

Jump to

Home



Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics