I never met a 7x I liked until I met the Zeiss FL 7x42. (1 Viewer)

[jan van daalen]

Eerlijk punt meneer! If only I had an accurate watch to time it.



View attachment 1596041

Beware, I am certain Dennis will sell you the best of the best watch to perform your tests in depth AND time.

PS

Is this the Solex watch, sold as best of the rest for endurance tests?????

 

[PatR]

Beware, I am certain Dennis will sell you the best of the best watch to perform your tests in depth AND time.

PS

Is this the Solex watch, sold as best of the rest for endurance tests?????

I think so....I bought it off a bloke in Colorado who told me it was the best watch he had ever owned and that there were none better........ until he saw an advert for a glare-free Timex.

 

[tenex]

At least evaluation of binoculars has a modest objective component.

 

[[email protected]]

I had one of those junk Rolex's, but I sold it and bought a Google watch. Now I can google what binocular has the most glare, a Swarovski or a Zeiss. Can you guess what the answer is?

 

[Buff1ehead]

Why do you think the Leica UVHD+ 7x42 is the gold standard? It only has an 8 degree FOV, compared to the 8.6 degree FOV of the Zeiss FL 7x42, and not nearly as good of CA control.

These days most of my summer birding is within old-growth forest in the Pacific Northwest of Washington state. FOV is everything in such a three-dimensional environment, and I find the FL 7x42 to be far more immersive that the Leica UVHD's. I am the original owner of my FL's and although I use newer, lighter bins when I'm working more open expanses during winter birding, I'm amazed at how well the FL's have held up over many years of heavy use. (I did send them back to Zeiss about 20 years ago because of fogging, but I had been using them under extreme conditions that created the fogging while I was leading a trip.) A shame Zeiss won't make 7x bins with some of the newer, lighter technology. I'd buy them in a snap.

 

[[email protected]]

These days most of my summer birding is within old-growth forest in the Pacific Northwest of Washington state. FOV is everything is such a three-dimensional environment, and I find the FL 7x42 to be far more immersive that the Leica UVHD's. I am the original owner of my FL's and although I use newer, lighter bins when I'm working more open expanses during winter birding, I'm amazed at how well the FL's have held up over many years of heavy use. (I did send them back to Zeiss about 20 years ago because of fogging, but I had been using them under extreme conditions that created the fogging while I was leading a trip.) A shame Zeiss won't make 7x bins with some of the newer, lighter technology. I'd buy them in a snap.

I would to. I would like to see a Zeiss SF 7x42 with about a 10 degree FOV. There is something special about the FL 7x42's and they are certainly durable. They almost seem like they have a 3D view like a porro maybe due to their excellent DOF being a 7x.

 

[Scott98]

These days most of my summer birding is within old-growth forest in the Pacific Northwest of Washington state. FOV is everything in such a three-dimensional environment, and I find the FL 7x42 to be far more immersive that the Leica UVHD's. I am the original owner of my FL's and although I use newer, lighter bins when I'm working more open expanses during winter birding, I'm amazed at how well the FL's have held up over many years of heavy use. (I did send them back to Zeiss about 20 years ago because of fogging, but I had been using them under extreme conditions that created the fogging while I was leading a trip.) A shame Zeiss won't make 7x bins with some of the newer, lighter technology. I'd buy them in a snap.

Those 7x42 FL are only 740 grams....26.0 ounces, that's light for a 42mm binocular. Some 7x35's or 7x32's would be nice though, that would offer a significant weight savings.

I would love to see Zeiss add 7x back into the SFL and SF's, I would buy them. How about a 7x30 SFL. The reason I don't buy the 8x30 is because of the difficult eye placement with the small exit pupil in 8x30's....a 7x42 SF would also offer easier eye placement than the 8x's

 

[[email protected]]

Those 7x42 FL are only 740 grams....26.0 ounces, that's light for a 42mm binocular. Some 7x35's or 7x32's would be nice though, that would offer a significant weight savings.

I would love to see Zeiss add 7x back into the SFL and SF's, I would buy them. How about a 7x30 SFL. The reason I don't buy the 8x30 is because of the difficult eye placement with the small exit pupil in 8x30's....a 7x42 SF would also offer easier eye placement than the 8x's

I don't like 8x30's either because they are too finicky for eye placement. I really appreciate the light weight of the FL 7x42 because it gives you the aperture advantage without the weight of most 42mm's. A 7x42 SF would be sweet. It is too bad more people don't buy 7x's. My FL 8x32 is nice, but it not quite the FL 7x42.

 

[Declan Joseph Deasy]

SF 7x42 would tick a lot of boxes. 🤞🤞

 

[[email protected]]

Those 7x42 FL are only 740 grams....26.0 ounces, that's light for a 42mm binocular. Some 7x35's or 7x32's would be nice though, that would offer a significant weight savings.

I would love to see Zeiss add 7x back into the SFL and SF's, I would buy them. How about a 7x30 SFL. The reason I don't buy the 8x30 is because of the difficult eye placement with the small exit pupil in 8x30's....a 7x42 SF would also offer easier eye placement than the 8x's

I don't like 8x30's either because they are too finicky for eye placement. I really appreciate the light weight of the FL 7x42 because it gives you the aperture advantage without the weight of most 42mm's. A 7x42 SF would be sweet. It is too bad more people don't buy 7x's. My FL 8x32 is nice but it not quite the FL 7x42.

SF 7x42 would tick a lot of boxes. 🤞🤞

Yup! Especially with a 10 degree FOV and a field flattener. Your talking Nikon WX 7x50 in a portable package for 1/2 the price.

 

[CharleyBird]

"Denco... I really appreciate the light weight of the FL 7x42 because it gives you the aperture advantage without the weight of most 42mm's."
-----

FL are not particularly light.

Here's an equal comparison weighed with eyepieces and strap:
FL 7x42... 835g
SF 8x42... 857g
UV 7x42... 828g
(Source Binoculars Today)

Nor are the FL7x42 small or compact when compared to the Leica 7x42UV+. I own both and haptically they each have plusses to prefer; but the Leica is a noticeably smaller and slightly easier to carry and gives a more pleasing view on an overcast day.
However on a fine day, optically to my sight (FWIW) the FL is a bit better overall.

So buy a twenty year old FL if you wish, or buy a new UV+ which admittedly is also an older design.

No question for me though, of the three (and notwithstanding the 0.77oz/22g difference) considering both optics and haptics, I'd buy the SF 8x42.

 

[[email protected]]

"Denco... I really appreciate the light weight of the FL 7x42 because it gives you the aperture advantage without the weight of most 42mm's."
-----

FL are not particularly light.

Here's an equal comparison weighed with eyepieces and strap:
FL 7x42... 835g
SF 8x42... 857g
UV 7x42... 828g
(Source Binoculars Today)

Nor are the FL7x42 small or compact when compared to the Leica 7x42UV+. I own both and haptically they each have plusses to prefer; but the Leica is a noticeably smaller and slightly easier to carry and gives a more pleasing view on an overcast day.
However on a fine day, optically to my sight (FWIW) the FL is a bit better overall.

So buy a twenty year old FL if you wish, or buy a new UV+ which admittedly is also an older design.

No question for me though, of the three (and notwithstanding the 0.77oz/22g difference) considering both optics and haptics, I'd buy the SF 8x42.

Thanks for that information! Very interesting. I know the UV 7x42 is small and light, but they never worked for me. I wish they would have because I love their build quality and small size. The FOV on the 7x42 UV is a little small for me also at 8 degrees. If you want a 8x, no doubt the more modern SF 8x42 is one of the best out there and probably the best all-rounder of the three. I know I have the SF 10x32. I just really appreciate 7x now since I have been using it for the DOF and the ease of holding it steady, and the AK prism seems to bring something extra to the table in clarity and brightness. Likewise, I wish Zeiss made an SF 7x42 with a 10 degree FOV. Can I put in a request? They probably wouldn't listen.

 

[Paultricounty]

I had one of those junk Rolex's, but I sold it and bought a Google watch. Now I can google what binocular has the most glare, a Swarovski or a Zeiss. Can you guess what the answer is?

I’ll bet the answer was, whichever one your selling 🤭✌🏼

 

[Paultricounty]

I would to. I would like to see a Zeiss SF 7x42 with about a 10 degree FOV. There is something special about the FL 7x42's and they are certainly durable. They almost seem like they have a 3D view like a porro maybe due to their excellent DOF being a 7x.

Or an SF 7x35 and NL 7x35 with 10 degrees, or what would be my all time favorite, a Noctivid in 7x35, doesn’t need a WFOV, although that would be insane.

 

[[email protected]]

I’ll bet the answer was, whichever one your selling 🤭✌🏼

I had a bunch of regular watches, but I got tired of always having to reset them when the month wasn't 31 days, and I like the fact with the Google watch I can do just about everything I can with my phone, and it is always on my wrist. The only trouble is my wife can call me at any time.

 

[[email protected]]

Or an SF 7x35 and NL 7x35 with 10 degrees, or what would be my all time favorite, a Noctivid in 7x35, doesn’t need a WFOV, although that would be insane.

I agree an SF, NL or Noctivid 7x35 with a 10 degree FOV would be great. I wonder if the Noctivid would lose some of the properties you like about it if they increased the FOV to 10 degrees. A lot of the older binoculars were 7x35 and they were great.