Zeiss "Binoct" 7X50 - Really a faked Leitz?

[Wpgbinocular]

Have a look at this binocular currently available on eBay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEWAX:IT
To all appearances this is a Leitz 7X50 with faked markings on prism plates. I can find no evidence that Zeiss ever made a "Binoct" 7X50 Porro II. Their civilian model 7X50 Porro II was called the Septarem (CF) of which only 499 were made.
If you have Gubas' book ' An Introduction to the Binoculars of Carl Zeiss Jena 1893-1945' see pages X 10 - X11. On it there is another 7X50 Porro II binocular similarly marked Carl Zeiss "Binoct" but which in this case appears to be a Ross Binoprism No. 5. It would be interesting to know who produced these binoculars and about how many were made. The markings seem very well done.

[behblc]

Looks very much like leitz to me.

[AndyC]

Well i have stayed away from those binos and only go to text book examples


Andy

[behblc]

Likewise.

[Stew]

7x50 CZ Binoctar -Form

I have a few observations - there were a few CZ contracts I think to Sweden and Finland in Nov 1938, and Jan - Dec 1940 which are referred to as D.F 7x50 in Binoctar Form. (See Seeger page 468) Were these 7x50 H (Poro11) or Porro1 prism systems(7x50 dienstglas) ?
During WW2 even after the 3x letter codes were introduced the manufacturers continued to uses their commercial logos and commercial model names like Binoctar on contracts such as to Sweden, Finland and Romania
See also P97 Rohan A Guide to Hand Held Binocular for a pic of a CZ 7x50H Septar which looks pretty much the same as the binocs under discussion.

[Wpgbinocular]

All examples of Zeiss Septar/ Septarem that I've seen including the ones in Rohan's book have much narrower objective caps and the ocular adjustments rings are much narrower than on the eBay one. Forslund in "Swedish Military Binoculars" pages 22-23 illustrates 5 Septars 7X50H Porro II purchased by Sweden, three of which are marked Septar and two with the Swedish Crown. In all cases the Zeiss emblem and Septar or Crown are marked underneath the outside prism plate screw not in between as on the eBay binocular. On page 20 Forslund shows some CZJ Binoctars Porro I with Swedish markings. In spite of this, I would still be open to the remote possibility the eBay binocular might be a Zeiss were it not for the other Binoct in Gubas' book which is obviously a fake.

I have a few observations - there were a few CZ contracts I think to Sweden and Finland in Nov 1938, and Jan - Dec 1940 which are referred to as D.F 7x50 in Binoctar Form. (See Seeger page 468) Were these 7x50 H (Poro11) or Porro1 prism systems(7x50 dienstglas) ?
During WW2 even after the 3x letter codes were introduced the manufacturers continued to uses their commercial logos and commercial model names like Binoctar on contracts such as to Sweden, Finland and Romania
See also P97 Rohan A Guide to Hand Held Binocular for a pic of a CZ 7x50H Septar which looks pretty much the same as the binocs under discussion.

[Stew]

CZ 7x50H

Hi Wpgbinocular, useful info thanks.
I agree that the objective rings and the ocular assembies are different between the Septar 7x50H on page 97 of Rohan and the Ebay example. What is the same though is the the body and the placement of the hinge attachments to the body. The Ebay example - the body and hinge attachment to the body looks exactly like a CZ 7x50 H and very different to the early leitz/beh (T) 7x50 (Poro 11) .

I agree with the comments above - I too prefer to sink my money into standard textbook items . Contoversial Ebay items like the 7x50H Binoctar are certainly interesting and generate healthy debate on this forum...

[Wpgbinocular]

Seeger on page 291 (Military Binoculars ...) shows a later Leitz Kriegsmarine w/o rubber covering, and hinge placements on this one look identical to the eBay one. I wonder if the eBay bino may not have parts from several different model Leitz's confusing us. I now recall that about a year ago a similar binocular sold on eBay - the seller was a knowledgeable collector who described it as a "fake Zeiss". I'm pretty sure that one had a Binoct marking too but I think it was in cosmetically better shape. That seller also mentioned the similarity of his to the one in Gubas' book. It seems that possibly a fair number of Binoct Zeiss were turned out by somebody. When is a good question because it probably wouldn't have occurred until binoculars of this sort became valuable collectables.

Hi Wpgbinocular, useful info thanks.
I agree that the objective rings and the ocular assembies are different between the Septar 7x50H on page 97 of Rohan and the Ebay example. What is the same though is the the body and the placement of the hinge attachments to the body. The Ebay example - the body and hinge attachment to the body looks exactly like a CZ 7x50 H and very different to the early leitz/beh (T) 7x50 (Poro 11) .

I agree with the comments above - I too prefer to sink my money into standard textbook items . Contoversial Ebay items like the 7x50H Binoctar are certainly interesting and generate healthy debate on this forum...

[AndyC]

Here is some pictures of my "Swedish" Zeiss septar


Andy

[AndyC]

2

[AndyC]

3

[behblc]

I remember that set ......... Andy that is a seriously great binocular , thanks for showing it.

[globbitz]

Good Evening All,

As a follow-up to Wpgbinocular's comments regarding his recollection of a 'Fake Zeiss' for sale on eBay, I happen to have saved the details of that particular sale, and the seller's eBay name (which I won't publish here, but if anyone wishes to contact the vendor of the pair which sold on 28th October 2010 then I will provide the name).

Here's the seller's Description of his pair:

'ZEISS 7 x 50 "BINOCT" Binocular

This beautiful Zeiss Porro 2 Binocular is a Fake, it is a WW 2 period Leitz 7 x 50

The "BINOCT" is shown in LARRY GUBAS' fine book, The Binoculars of Carl Zeiss Jena - 1893-1945, as a Prototype for the classic 7 x 50 SEPTAREM, however I have it on the very highest authority that the Binocular in Larry's book and the one in my cabinet are fakes, although why anyone would fake a LEITZ 7 x 50 to make it appear to be a Zeiss is beyond me - its like putting a Rolls Royce badge on a Bentley.

The body of the glass is good, better than most of the period that I have seen, the lenses and prisms are fine, no chips or cracks but dirty although in alignment and useable.

This may not be one of the rarest Binoculars in the world which I thought it was when I bought it, but possibly the rarest fake binocular, you can wait 5-10 years for another to turn up or buy this one.

Please contact me direct if you want any further information, I'd be pleased to talk to you'

As a matter of record, the pair sold for £147.55

Personally, the condition and certainly the engravings on the pair currently up for sale are very much better than those depicted in the sale described above in October 2010.

I won't upload and publish the photos that I saved, as they are Copyright of the original seller, however the binoculars are virtually identical to those for sale with the exception of the quality of the engravings mentioned above, and the fact that the upper prism covers were brass.

So, when I first started typing this post they were sitting at $510 with 6 bids, but I've just checked again, and it's back down to $400 and 5 bids, so we've done some good fellas!

Best regards,
Paul

[AndyC]

Paul if i were you i whould upload the pictures so that we other collectors could know some more


Andy

[globbitz]

OK, here's some links to copies of the original photos:



NOTE: These are Copyrighted Material, and not mine.

They might be smaller than originally saved, owing to Flickr scaling them down, but you'll get the gist.

Regards,
Paul