review: Swarovski Habicht 8x30 from 1961 - incredible (1 Viewer)

[Tobias Mennle]

I have put up a review of this fantastic binocular sample from 1961 here:

http://www.tmfilmpro.com/alleseiten/reviews/binoculars/swarohabicht8x30/habicht8x301961.html

I even had two samples, both from 1961, both identical! The quality is simply incredible. Beaten up, probably never serviced, but an impeccably transparent image. WOW. Far far away from the "10 years and then garbage cycle". Wish all my other optics were built have as durable as this one.

 

[JabaliHunter]

Very nice! Lovely photographs and website too

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Toibas Mennle,
I can share your judgment of the quality of the 1961 Habicht, I was also pleasantly surprised by its quality. If you can obtain a brandnew 8x30 Habicht to compare it with the 1961 copy, I would take a chair to avoid falling over by your impressions, since the quality of this new one is really excellent and blows many new other binoculars away. I have compared it with the Nikon 8x32 SE and the Habicht is brighter and I can not observe differences in sharpness, the Habicht looks even better as far as central sharpness is concerned.
Gijs.

 

[[email protected]]

I have put up a review of this fantastic binocular sample from 1961 here:

http://www.tmfilmpro.com/alleseiten/reviews/binoculars/swarohabicht8x30/habicht8x301961.html

I even had two samples, both from 1961, both identical! The quality is simply incredible. Beaten up, probably never serviced, but an impeccably transparent image. WOW. Far far away from the "10 years and then garbage cycle". Wish all my other optics were built have as durable as this one.

Do the eyecups just come off? I was thinking about taking mine off on my new Habicht's 8x30.

 

[plyscope]

Thank you Tobias for your interesting review. I bought a new Habicht 8x30 last year and really enjoy it. It is old fashioned but delightful to use. I tend to be a bit precious with it, but after reading your review I guess I should relax and just use it more. :t:

 

[Tobias Mennle]

to G. van Ginkel, I will compare the new 8x30 with the 8x32 S.E. soon... which one has less eyestrain in close-ups... and how does the Nikon 8x30EII fit in...and I try to sit down anyway before having a look through them.

to denco, I can just unscrew the plastic eyecups.

to plyscope, my sample has surely not been treated preciously, that´s the amazing thing about this performance.

 

[robert kirk 9765]

I have put up a review of this fantastic binocular sample from 1961 here:

http://www.tmfilmpro.com/alleseiten/reviews/binoculars/swarohabicht8x30/habicht8x301961.html

I even had two samples, both from 1961, both identical! The quality is simply incredible. Beaten up, probably never serviced, but an impeccably transparent image. WOW. Far far away from the "10 years and then garbage cycle". Wish all my other optics were built have as durable as this one.

Sorry for the late reply I just saw this.
I have an old pair of Habicht 8x30 tirol serial number 912563 (I don't know how old they are) in very good condition and they are wonderful, the center sharpness for an old binocular is VERY impressive I know not if they have ever been serviced (EBAY) not quite as bright as my Deltrentims or as sharp to the edge but they are very, very good dead center.
I wish I could get hold of a Brand-new-unused pair of Hartmann 8x30 porlerim 117's because the ones I have are really very good for a 70-year-old Bin and I think an unused one would give the Habicht a run for its money.
Take care my friend.

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi Robert,

Some history and info about your Habicht . . .

In 1948, Swarovski KG (the crystal company established in 1895) commenced commercial binocular production,
at a new purpose built factory at Absam. Then in 1949, the company Swarovski Optik KG and the Habicht brand were registered.

Over time the number of Habicht models increased, with each assigned its own 5 digit serial number range.
However, the numbering soon started to overlap.

So in 1955, Swarovski Optik introduced 6 digit numbering across the Habicht line, with the first digit differing for each model.
See the attached table from post #7 at: Habicht 7x42 Question *

As can be seen your unit #912,563 is an 8x30N model dating from the early 1960’s.
The 8x30N differs from the more common 8x30W version in having an eyepiece of simpler optical construction,
that resulted in a narrower field of view and shorter eye relief.

The difference between the two can be externally verified by comparing the rear of the eyepieces:



Left #909,764 from a 2016 listing by verkaufer on Willhaben (an Austrian sales site), and;
Right #819,642 from a 2015 listing by timeless1 on ebay.


John


* Rubber armoured versions of the Habicht were progressively introduced from 1971, using 4 and 5 digit numbering,
and that led to the pre-1955 problems being repeated!
Then in 1991 a new form of numbering with both letters and digits was adopted across all product lines.
See: Swarovski's Alpha-Numeric Numbering Explained
And in September 2020 the numbering across all product lines was again changed. See: Swarovski serialnumbers changed

 

[John A Roberts]

Some more about the 8x30N in the Habicht lineup . . .

The initial commercial offering in 1948 was the 6x30, with the 7x42 added later in the year.
Both used the same eyepiece and body, with the latter having a longer and larger diameter objective.

In 1952 the W (wide angle) eyepiece was introduced with the 8x30W, and in 1954 the 10x40W was added.
They shared the body and objectives of the earlier models.

And in 1954 the N eyepiece was introduced in the 8x30N, seemingly to offer a cheaper alternative to the 8x30W.

However, regardless of the eyepiece used, all the models were otherwise identical in terms of the quality of the materials used,
the fit and finish and the lens coating.

In 1956 Swarovski added the Falke series alongside the Habicht line, again as a cheaper alternative.
The Falke line differed in having EV/ single layer lens coating (as did most other binoculars at the time),
instead of the DV/ Dual layer coating used on the Habicht line.

The Falke line (with the markings varying depending on the market) was initially offered in 8x30N and 10x40N,
with the latter unique to this single coated series. And an 8x30W version was added later in production.
The Falke production was only available in centre focus. And all of the versions were discontinued around 1968.

The 8x30N Habicht was eventually discontinued in 1991 *


Based on the table in the previous post, I'd also previously posted one showing the information in terms of the production of the various models:


As can be seen, while the 8x30N was never a a big seller, it nevertheless became more popular than the 6x30 (which was discontinued in 1994).

However, what's most notable is the sales of the 7x42 compared to the other models!
It perhaps reflects the importance of the European market to Swarovski at the time - especially prior to introduction of the EL x42
roof prism line in 1999, which significantly helped to make Swarovski a global force in binoculars.
(For some information on later Habicht production see post #5 at: Changes to 7x42 Traditional / Habicht Porro )


John


* For completeness, a long eye relief eyepiece was introduced around 1985 as the 7x42B.
It has only ever been offered in an individual focus rubber armoured model aka the 7x42B O GA.
And it is still available on special order to government purchasers, see post #16 at: About The British Military's Binoculars Used In Post War?

 

[lmans66]

The optics are good but how fast is the focus as you adjust different focal lengths as you do normally in the field?

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi Imans,

In relation to the Habicht with the original body design from 1948 to 1984, the force required to focus is no different to that needed
for most other centre focus Porro prism binoculars e.g. the focuser on my 8x30W #815,884 (a near companion to Tobias' 1961 unit #813,298)
is comparable to that of my Nikon 8x30 E and EII.

In 1984 the Habicht body was redesigned to make it waterproof. It's immediately identifiable by the screws on the front bridge arms
that cover the purging ports:


(Note the black rubber ring inset in the eyepiece housing.)

However, this did not result in a firmer focuser e.g. the focuser on my 8x30W M GA (CF and rubber armour) #A6944 54282 from late 1999,
is similar to the three above.
(And FWIW, my two Nikons have slightly more 'drag' than the two Swarovskis.)


It seems that around 2000 the airtightness, and hence the focusing effort, was increased by altering the rubber rings in the eyepieces.
But it also seems that this is modifiable by Swarovski - so an 'Easy Focus' option?

For more detail, see post #82 at: Advice on Habicht please.
(As the post includes quotes, I can't use the quote function to add it here in full.)


John

 

[Isthatascratch?]

Hi Imans,

In relation to the Habicht with the original body design from 1948 to 1984, the force required to focus is no different to that needed
for most other centre focus Porro prism binoculars e.g. the focuser on my 8x30W #815,884 (a near companion to Tobias' 1961 unit #813,298)
is comparable to that of my Nikon 8x30 E and EII.

In 1984 the Habicht body was redesigned to make it waterproof. It's immediately identifiable by the screws on the front bridge arms
that cover the purging ports:

View attachment 1598650
(Note the black rubber ring inset in the eyepiece housing.)

However, this did not result in a firmer focuser e.g. the focuser on my 8x30W M GA (CF and rubber armour) #A6944 54282 from late 1999,
is similar to the three above.
(And FWIW, my two Nikons have slightly more 'drag' than the two Swarovskis.)


It seems that around 2000 the airtightness, and hence the focusing effort, was increased by altering the rubber rings in the eyepieces.
But it also seems that this is modifiable by Swarovski - so an 'Easy Focus' option?

For more detail, see post #82 at: Advice on Habicht please.
(As the post includes quotes, I can't use the quote function to add it here in full.)


John

John…this represents a close serial number to those you made reference to in this thread and your table..early 60’s.

It’s a nice example and usable.

Chase

 

[Maljunulo]

My 8X30 W requires considerable effort, but since I am an “infinity birder” I really don’t care.