46 replies to this topic

[Corcaroli78]

Wonderful! Since I'm not very knowledgeable about the Zeiss brand I'm starting to feel the onset of analysis paralysis the more I dig into the literature. It looks like counterfeiting of the brand is not unusual. Am I correct in understanding that the Jenoptem line is more likely to be counterfeited than the Dekarem line? If that's correct, do I still need to be wary of the Dekarems I'm seeing on ebay?

Hi Leatherneck15,

 

The "counterfeit" version of the Jenoptem was actually an agreed Japanese outsourced version to compensate the demand not covered by Zeiss Jena. Until today, i have not seen in real life a japanese Zeiss Jenoptem, and, considering the Dekarem /Jenoptem quantities produced, it is very likely that the Dekarem that you saw in Ebay is legit.

 

Holger Merlitz has an article (with material from Claudio Manetti) which describes how to identify the "fake" Jenoptems. 

 

https://www.holgerme...e/jenoptem.html

 

Now, what is important is that in paper, Dekarem and Jenoptem are the same binocular with (quote from Zeiss Jena) "improvements to reduce cost keeping the same quality". In the practice, the Dekarem and Jenoptem 10x50W are essentially the same binocular (*)  while the 8x30 Deltrintem and 8x30 Jenoptem do have differences.  I own both Dekarem Multicoated and Jenoptem Multicoated and both are very good, but there were also sample variations in the Jenoptem line. 

 

Go for the Dekarem, you will love it.

 

Carlos

 

(*) I have noticed small differences like the coating on the internal metal parts, the blackening of the baffles and the blackening of eyepiece lenses, none of this differences affected the performance of the binoculars when i compared them side by side.

[ExempliCausa]

I've got some of the old Zeiss West porros, among them the 8x30, the 8x50 B and the 10x50. I also have a Jenoptem 10x50 and a Deltrintem 8x30 (both with T3M coatings). And quite frankly, while these binoculars are well-made, especially the Zeiss West porros, they simply can't compete with modern binoculars for a very simple reason: The quality of the coatings isn't anywhere near as good as those of modern binoculars. The differences in brightness and contrast are immediately visible in the field.

 

If you want a high-quality porro with CF, you need to be thinking for instance about one of the Swarovski Habicht line-up of recent vintage. If you don't need CF, you might e.g. also consider one of the Fujinons.

[Scott99]

I've got some of the old Zeiss West porros, among them the 8x30, the 8x50 B and the 10x50. I also have a Jenoptem 10x50 and a Deltrintem 8x30 (both with T3M coatings). And quite frankly, while these binoculars are well-made, especially the Zeiss West porros, they simply can't compete with modern binoculars for a very simple reason: The quality of the coatings isn't anywhere near as good as those of modern binoculars. The differences in brightness and contrast are immediately visible in the field.

Compete?  Which modern bino that costs $100 can compete with an 80's Zeiss or Nikon porro?  how about levelling the playing field

 

I've actually run through quite a few modern binos trying to find a sub-20 ounce glass for birding.  None of the ones I've tried can touch my Nikon 7x35E and 7x35 Action 1980's porros.  I have tried Swaro CL 30mm, Zeiss SFL 8x30's, Swaro 8x32 EL's, Nikon MHG 8x30. Curio 7x21.  Zeiss 8x25.  They all got returned to vendor or quickly sold off.   The only one I liked was the Zeiss SF 8x32, which costs north of $2000 and still has prism spikes. 

Edited by Scott99, 30 December 2024 - 02:05 PM.

[Vertigo]

I've got some of the old Zeiss West porros, among them the 8x30, the 8x50 B and the 10x50. I also have a Jenoptem 10x50 and a Deltrintem 8x30 (both with T3M coatings). And quite frankly, while these binoculars are well-made, especially the Zeiss West porros, they simply can't compete with modern binoculars for a very simple reason: The quality of the coatings isn't anywhere near as good as those of modern binoculars. The differences in brightness and contrast are immediately visible in the field.

 

If you want a high-quality porro with CF, you need to be thinking for instance about one of the Swarovski Habicht line-up of recent vintage. If you don't need CF, you might e.g. also consider one of the Fujinons.

I used the Zeiss Octarem 8x50 and the Zeiss Dodecarem 12x50, at this time they were high-end binoculars, but optical development has continued and high-quality, modern binoculars have become noticeably better in some areas.

 

Even the Swarovski Habicht, which have a long tradition, have been continually improved over time; a Habicht from the 70s or 80s is simply not on the same optic level as a Habicht from 2024, the rest remains nostalgia.

 

Andreas

[bknop]

I have some vintage Carl Ziess Jenna Pentekar individual focus 15x50 binos. They are sharp, have nice widefield eyepieces. Their only downsides are a little less contrast, I'm guessing because of the older mgf2 type coatings or the glass not being perfectly clean,there is a very slight haze when shining a bright light through. Also they require you to not use glasses, which I never do looking through a scope. What I do like is the very sharp images, and the widefield eyepieces. Unlike alot of modern binos, the eyepieces are small enough in diameter that I don't have to contemplate surgery to remove my nose just to fit those monster sized eyepieces with their useless adjustable eyecups seen on some modern binos. The other Zeiss are 6x30 size. Sharp, but uncoated lenses, I'm Guessing a hundred years old. So yes, vintage gear is definitely worth considering. I have not been able to compare to modern Zeiss yet due to price. $10-20 at thrift stores as mine were purchaced is affordable, but they are a rare find.

[glittledale]

of the older zeiss and zeiss jena porros my preference is for the zeiss jena nobilem super and spezial, but none of these older porros match the transmission of the newer zeiss - which really shows up on the night sky.  they are still wonderful to use imo. 

 

on the other hand, i'm surprised at how my 10x 40 dialyts hold up.  they are reasonably bright in comparison with my wife's 10x 42 conquest hd.  few binoculars have transmission to match the zeiss ht series.  i find the 10x 54 to be absolutely wonderful,  but edges are sharper on many of the older porros.  

 

not zeiss, but an interesting comparison can be made with the swaro habicht series which has been produced continuously for a couple of years less than forever.  design has not changed, but the coatings have.  the new ones are soooooo much brighter and whiter.

Edited by glittledale, 12 January 2025 - 08:51 PM.

[glittledale]

I used the Zeiss Octarem 8x50 and the Zeiss Dodecarem 12x50, at this time they were high-end binoculars, but optical development has continued and high-quality, modern binoculars have become noticeably better in some areas.

 

Even the Swarovski Habicht, which have a long tradition, have been continually improved over time; a Habicht from the 70s or 80s is simply not on the same optic level as a Habicht from 2024, the rest remains nostalgia.

 

Andreas

agreed, but the case of the old habichts was so much nicer!!!  

[Erik Bakker]

But no matter how you slice it, the Habicht 7x42 is a special, bright 7x lightweight instrument, with the current iteration providing the finest images in their long history. 

 

Even a very low element count instrument like this Habicht improves in light transmission and contrast across the visible spectrum. Let alone if they’ve implemented better glass elements over time (which they may or may not have done).

[Erik Bakker]

Wish Zeiss would stil produce the Dialyt 7x42 and 8x56, but with improved glass and coatings. Especially the Dialyt 8x56 has quite significant chromatic aberration, making the Pleiades look embedded in bright blue nebulae under any sky. I still remember that after decades, but also their otherwise excellent views. Loved the overall concept of the Dialyt 7x42 the most. Improved and update versions of both would be a real treat!

[glittledale]

Wish Zeiss would stil produce the Dialyt 7x42 and 8x56, but with improved glass and coatings. Especially the Dialyt 8x56 has quite significant chromatic aberration, making the Pleiades look embedded in bright blue nebulae under any sky. I still remember that after decades, but also their otherwise excellent views. Loved the overall concept of the Dialyt 7x42 the most. Improved and update versions of both would be a real treat!

agreed that the A-K aspect of those dialyts and the focusing mechanism are lovely.  maybe one day i will have a pair in hand.  but i'm also extremely pleased by the form of my 10x 40 T*P* dialyts.  

[Scott99]

Wish Zeiss would stil produce the Dialyt 7x42 and 8x56, but with improved glass and coatings. Especially the Dialyt 8x56 has quite significant chromatic aberration, making the Pleiades look embedded in bright blue nebulae under any sky. I still remember that after decades, but also their otherwise excellent views. Loved the overall concept of the Dialyt 7x42 the most. Improved and update versions of both would be a real treat!

also the light weight of the 8x56 was unique - I think only 35 ounces?  I think 42 ounces is the lightest 56mm roof today?  I could be wrong....

[jarrodeu]

also the light weight of the 8x56 was unique - I think only 35 ounces?  I think 42 ounces is the lightest 56mm roof today?  I could be wrong....

Pre-war Hensoldt were even lighter, the 8x56 weighing only 24.5oz. Though over time, the paint didn't stick to the bodies very well...

 

Jarrod

[Mark Y.]

Re: my own personal vintage Zeiss  Jena Octarem 8x50 B.......Obviously, I don't have much experience with many Zeiss models  (I do have experience having owned 20 binos and wound up with 14 in my current collection....some new and some vintage).

 

The 10x50B is so darn good that I just don't care if there's better. Obviously just a "me" thing.

[Guillermo Abel]

I have a pair of Carl Zeiss JENOPTEM 10x50W Multi Coated binoculars, and they are exceptional. They offer great contrast and sharp images, with flawless edges. They are ideal for those seeking clear and precise views. However, one thing to note is that they do not have the threading for a binocular adapter, as they were not manufactured with that feature at the time.

Despite this drawback, I highly recommend them.

[Corcaroli78]

I fell in love with the vintage Zeiss binoculars around 30 years ago when, as a teenager, a friend handed to me a single coated Deltrintem 8x30.  The experience comparing it against the binoculars that i had a that time (an unnamed japanese binocular and a Meade TravelView) still remains etched in my memories. It was a very natural connection and the binocular just disappeared, opening a window to the world...

 

Years later, living in Germany, (Zeiss-land  )  I started using and acquiring some Zeiss Jena and modern Zeiss binos from Oberkochen and soon i realized that, while the optical quality of the vintage Zeisses is very high and competitive to many mass produced mid-tier binoculars, the nostalgy factor plays a huge role here. Honestly, there is no way how my vintage Zeisses would beat e.g. my Nikon M7 (and not to mention the modern high end binos): Eye relief and field correction being the most key factors for me, but i would say that it is nice to own what it was the very best at some point of time. 

 

Today, I have no plans to add more vintages to the collection, therefore, i would only put my money in a modern binocular like the Zeiss SFL 8x40 which covers "almost" all my requirements... except for the price  .... so the place for new binoculars has been filled by Nikon.  I treasure and frequently use my Nobilem, my Dekarem, the little Oberkochen 8x30B, for the satisfaction that they bring, for the quality of the views but also because the admiration to an iconic optical company. 

 

Thanks for reading,

Carlos

[Corcaroli78]

Re: my own personal vintage Zeiss  Jena Octarem 8x50 B.......Obviously, I don't have much experience with many Zeiss models  (I do have experience having owned 20 binos and wound up with 14 in my current collection....some new and some vintage).

 

The 10x50B is so darn good that I just don't care if there's better. Obviously just a "me" thing.

The 10x50B removes the issue of the short eye relief found in the Dekarem and the Jahrhundert. Actually it is very usable with glasses, it has a "smaller" FOV, but the gain in visual comfort compensates the drop from 7,3 to 6,8 degrees.

 

Carlos

[LoveWillSteerTheStars]

Today, I have no plans to add more vintages to the collection, therefore, i would only put my money in a modern binocular like the Zeiss SFL 8x40 which covers "almost" all my requirements... except for the price 

Carlos

When the SFL came out, I recall the optical specs are exactly the same as the Conquest HD.  The SFL is lighter & has a different shaped frame.  ???

[Erik Bakker]

When the SFL came out, I recall the optical specs are exactly the same as the Conquest HD.  The SFL is lighter & has a different shaped frame.  ???

Different specs, different shapes, different instruments:

 

SFL:

 

 

 

Conquest HD:

 

[fftulip]

The 10x50B removes the issue of the short eye relief found in the Dekarem and the Jahrhundert. Actually it is very usable with glasses, it has a "smaller" FOV, but the gain in visual comfort compensates the drop from 7,3 to 6,8 degrees.

 

Carlos

We are talking about the Jena (and Docter) made 10x50B right?  A very fine wide angle binocular though not quite enough eye relief for comfortable use with glasses IMO.

I'm not aware that Zeiss Oberkochen ever made a "B" version of a 10x50 porro - their standard version has very short eye relief (sold mine), though it is nicely compact (uses tele-objectives).

Edited by fftulip, 15 January 2025 - 04:57 PM.

[LoveWillSteerTheStars]

Different specs, different shapes, different instruments:

 

SFL:

 

IMG_3222.jpeg

 

 

Conquest HD:

 

IMG_3221.jpeg

Ah, its the "SF" that is pretty much the same.

[Gumball]

Pre-war Hensoldt were even lighter, the 8x56 weighing only 24.5oz. Though over time, the paint didn't stick to the bodies very well...

 

Jarrod

The problem that the pre-war and WW2 era Hensoldt (bmj) binoculars had, the body was made of "elektron" which was part magnesium.  

Consequently, they were prone to corrosion.  (they were primarily issued to tank crews)  But, in good condition, they are excellent glasses.

[Universe XY]

https://www.cloudyni...-dekarem-10x50/

 

Over 2 decades ago/

Revisiting & taking out those old binos again. Ser dates them 1936.

 

Be nice to get a pair in the 60's to 80's +/ Zeiss 10X50's.

 

Have an 1 C Zeiss Jena 10X50 Monocular from late 50's...really like that...it's special to me as I really only have one good eye so binoculars are wasted on me.