Interesting beh 10*50 "Widefield"

[Eighty Eight]

Are these for real?
Look a bit Russian to me!
Aren't they 7*50 Oculars?

[Sgt Bilko]

Original and rare variant made late WW2 for sale by a top seller (and good egg!)

[Sgt Bilko]

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=780787

[Michael Downey]

Are these for real?
Look a bit Russian to me!
Aren't they 7*50 Oculars?

As has been already noted the binos on offer that you link to eBay are a recognised Leitz variant issued late war (and perhaps in part post-war).

The binos you reference look to have be repainted and refurbished at some time:

a. the paint should be tan (not rough black lacquer) in this serial range;

b. prism covers had only anodised finish, they were never painted

c. serial number and other markings were never highlighted in white paint.


.

[nzef1940]

Mine for comparison.

[nzef1940]

2

[nzef1940]

3

[nzef1940]

4

[benutzer]

I have some of them and not any of this is widefield. Widefield for example is the late 10x50 cxn

[Sgt Bilko]

"Wide field" is a relative term. They give a wider FOV than the standard Leitz / beh 10x50 Dienstglas but not as wide as the Zeiss / blc 10x50 Dienstglas. Nice one to have though - I enjoy my one.

[Eighty Eight]

So they are painted tan under leatherette/vulcanite?

[Mikedenmark]

You can see the tan at the center hinge and at the loops for the carrying strap.

[Wpgbinocular]

The Zeiss/blc 10x50 Dienstglas has an Erfle ocular with a 7.3 degrees field of view
which isn't unusual for a 10x with this type ocular. The Leitz 10x50 WA likewise has an Erfle type eyepiece: https://www.flickr.com/photos/binocw...n/photostream/ and to my eyes its FOV is the same as that of the blc 10x50. The optical differences between my examples are:
1) The blc's plastic eyecups have to be removed to appreciate the entire field of view while the Leitz's field of view is visible with its eyecups in place.
2) The Zeiss has much better definition further off center than does the Leitz.

[MOLEHUNTER]

The Zeiss has much better definition further off center than does the Leitz.

I wonder if they're all the same quality?

In examples I have tested the Zeiss is not sharper near the margins. Robert Gregory.

[Wpgbinocular]

Considering they're late war binoculars quality control may not have been up to snuff as well as there being a shortage of skilled labor and materials like certain types of optical glass so I think it's very possible there could be differences in optical quality between examples. Also, I'm guessing that Zeiss may have gotten first choice and preferential treatment as far as materials and labor went. For what it's worth optical performance of my blc 10x50 is also quite a bit better than that of my cxn 10x50 which is reported to have a 7.4 FOV.