Zeiss 15x45 BT Conquest Bins

[canonman77]

Hello everyone. I have just received my Zeiss 15x45 BT Conquest Bins & they are fantastic. They are surprisingly light, look & feel superb, the optics are sharp, clear & can be handheld for long periods, especially being a 15x binocular are very easy to keep In focus. I would highly recommend these bins for birding, without a doubt. Fantastic.

Sean. Oh, nearly forgot. Zeiss customer services are A1. I telephoned them about purchasing a Zeiss harness & they have sent me one with their compliments & are contacting their Germany headquarters to get me some objective lens covers. Now thats what I call customer care 100%.

[John Russell]

I think you're going to need a support for prolonged viewing with 15x magnification. I usually have my 12x45 Conquests on a monopod but they are even better on a tripod (see the thread on the 12x45 Conquests). The Leica tripod adapter does a good job - don't get the Zeiss tripod adapter, it's better made, more expensive but functionally a disaster.
Objective covers were not available for the 45mm models when I bought mine and, according to the German Zeiss website, are still only available for 40mm and 50mm models. However the covers for 42mm Swarovski SLCs fit perfectly.

John

[canonman77]

HI John, thats just It, I dont need any support with these bins at all, I can see through them, hold them for prolonged periods even though they are 15x. I was dubious about holding them at 15x, but I was & still am surprised that I dont need any support. I love my new bins.

Regards.
sean.

[Nessus]

I'm right now trying to decide between a pair of conquest 12x45 or 15x45. I'm leaning towards the 15's because I'm looking for more power than my Monarch 10x42 as well as greater clarity.

I tried out both and the 12's were too small of a jump up in power, the 15's could really reach out there. I'm just concerned that out in the real world I may not be able to hold the 15's as steady as I was at the store and that maybe 12 is more practical. What I want to avoid is getting the 12's and then still wishing for more power and wanting a pair of 15's anyway.

[ceasar]

You will be giving up alot in Field of View with either of the 2 mentioned. About 25% less in the 12x and 33% less in the 15X. The FOV of the 15x is under 200 feet at 1000 yards. (20 feet at 100 yards) Your current Monarch is 315 feet at 1000 Yards. (31.5' at 100 yards) That is a significant difference. It will make it harder for you to find your bird. The smaller exit pupil will also make a difference in the ease of use in centering it over your own pupils. Both the 12x and 15x will be harder to hold steady over longer periods of time than a 10x.

If you really need more power you should consider Canon's 12 x 36 IS (Image Stabilized) binocular. It will be much easier to hold steady and your view will be sharper as a result. And they don't cost as much either. http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/canon/canon-image-stabilized-12x36-ii-binocular
Bob

[Nessus]

Of course I'm giving up field of view, that's what higher magnification is. If the field of view was larger the bird wouldn't appear so big. I can't find the FOV on those Cannon's but on a 12x36 I would think it would be pretty poor and I doubt they are visually in the same league as the Conquests. I have a pair of Conquest 8x30's now and don't have any trouble centering the image, the ocular lens looks the same size on the 8-10 Conquests as on the 12-15 so it should be the same.

The reason I'm leaning so strongly for the Conquests is that all things considered there is nothing that has their image quality without going into the really expensive bins, especially at the high magnifications.

[ceasar]

The FOV is around 264' at 1000 yards. See www.eagleoptics. com. They are a porro prism design as opposed to a roof prism. Most people who use them say their image quality is as good as, or better than top quality roof prisms. You can review these comments in a number of threads in the Canon Forum.
http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/canon/canon-image-stabilized-12x36-ii-binocular
Bob

PS: Canon also makes 15 x 50 and 18 x 50 IS binoculars. The announcer who calls the races at Belmont Park, NY uses these binoculars.

[Alexis Powell]

Here's another vote for the Canon 12x36. I'm quite sure they'd show more detail than any nonIS handheld 12 or 15x.

Of course I'm giving up field of view, that's what higher magnification is.

And just for the record, no, magnification is not equivalent to field of view (it is about how magnified the view, however wide or narrow it may be, is) so, for example, it is quite possible for a wide 10x to have a wider view than a narrow 7x. The FOV of 12x and 15x binos are quite narrow in practice, a fact some folks aren't aware of, so Bob's caution was a prudent one. Actually, the loss of FOV (as a percent in terms of area) is much larger than his numbers (as percents of diameter across view) might make it seem.

--AP

[Tero]

Nessus, consider a portable light weight scope. You can get pretty cheap scopes that are 20x and very small. Sports stores carry them.

[John Russell]

Nessus,
I would agree with Caesar and Alexis that the Canon 12x36IS work very well but would personally have misgivings about the robustness of IS bins and the need to feed them with batteries. The 12 & 15x45 Conquests are analogous to the 8 & 10x30 Conquests, just having objectives with 1,5x the focal length and diameter. Many are of the opinion that the 8x30 and 12x45 are the preferred versions. See also the thread on the 12x45 Conquests.
I own the 12x45s but there is not much point in buying 12x or 15x bins if you are intending to use them exclusively hand held. In this situation I cannot discern much more detail than with my 7x42s. On a monopod, or better still, on a tripod they really come into their own.

John

[Kevin Purcell]

Remember Canon IS bins work fine as non-IS bins when the batteries go flat. If you like 12x or 15x or 18x non-stabilized bins that is.

[Nessus]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I thought about the
Cannon Is series and read many of the reviews on them and a constant complaint was that they fell apart. The battery usage is also a concern as I use binoculars for more than just birding. I live in NYC and often find myself on rooftops or in offices with nice views as well as being near wetlands for birding and the rivers for boat watching. I use my current bins a lot to where battery usage would be an issue, and it doesn't seem batteries last all that long. Plus if I were to go for the stabilized I would absolutely get the 15's at the least and they are 41 ounces. All things considered I just don't think they're for me although they do look good, I'd love to borrow a pair.;)


I used both of the Conquests and was able to hold the 15's steady in the store but I just don't know if in the real world it would always work out that way. The jump in image size for the 10x42's I have up to the 12x45 is only about 11% in real terms, I don't want to spend near a thousand bucks and wish I had more.

I think I may have to see if I can take both home and buy the one I like, Cameraland and B&H are close enough that I could shoot over there on a day off.

[canonman77]

Hi Nessus, Get the 15x45 Conquests. I have them & they are fantastic. Forget what you hear about not being able to handhold them because of the magnification, thats poo. They can be handheld, they are also light as a feather, yes theres only a small sweet spot, but when you get It, you get IT. Its like this, If you can handhold them In the shop, you can handhold them anywhere. Some say they look & feel cheap & plasticky, nonsense, they are a simple design, plain, but what exactly do you want from a pair of Bins other than to see through & anyway Its the glass that counts & they have quality glass.. So Nessus, whats It gonna be m8.

Regards.
Sean..

[John Russell]

Sean,
Have you ever stopped to consider why the majority of binoculars on offer have magnifications of 10x or less or why military non-IS bins are mostly 7x or 8x?
The Zeiss 15x45 Conquest is a good product but have you taken the trouble to compare the distances you can read newsprint with and without a support or conducted a handheld comparison with a quality bin of 10x or less magnification?
If you had you would probably have come to the conclusion that less is more and would not dismiss opinions contrary to your own as "poo".
Compared to a 10x42 (similar dimensions) the 15x45 has smaller exit pupils, which leads to diminished viewing comfort and brightness, it has a FOV at 1000m of 64m as against 100-110m for a good 10x42 and it has rather less than half the depth of field.
It may seem contra-productive to put a 670g bin on a support weighing considerably more but this is the only way to realize the potential of its 15x magnification.

John

[ceasar]

I believe the great majority of the binoculars issued to the European Armed forces in the 2nd World War era and later were 6 x 30 IF. The Swiss even issued 6 x 24's. Weight, brightness and ease of use were important concerns. Of course, there were specialized binoculars issued for special conditions and marine use, but the average infantry officer almost always had a 6 x 30. Lives depended on it.

Birding, of course, does not have this existential concern but the reasons for the popularity of the 8 x 32 and 8 x 42 formats in this pursuit are basically the same: Weight, brightness and ease of use. These are not attributes found in 15x binoculars but some people are content to use them and can find pleasure in their use. People new to this hobby are best advised to begin with the accepted standards first and then experiment with other formats at their leisure.
Cordially,
Bob

[canonman77]

hi Nessus, I am open to other peoples opinions, but If you read what I referred to as poo you will see that it was the handholding ability at 15x thats what I was referring to. Yes other bins are probably better, all I was saying Is the 15x45 are good In my opinion, very good & are handholdable without the need of a monopod, tripod or the side of a tree & can be held steady enough to be able see clearly. I have used 8x32, 10x42, 10x50 & now 15x45 & the 15x45 are clearly the best for me & my use. I mainly use a camera & all I want these for Is a quick check to see whats about & thats where the 15x helps me.

[Claymore]

hi Nessus, I am open to other peoples opinions, but If you read what I referred to as poo you will see that it was the handholding ability at 15x thats what I was referring to. Yes other bins are probably better, all I was saying Is the 15x45 are good In my opinion, very good & are handholdable without the need of a monopod, tripod or the side of a tree & can be held steady enough to be able see clearly. I have used 8x32, 10x42, 10x50 & now 15x45 & the 15x45 are clearly the best for me & my use. I mainly use a camera & all I want these for Is a quick check to see whats about & thats where the 15x helps me.
Hi Sean, What you forgot to tell them is you have arms like Arnie Swartz.................. LoL they sound great!
I'll be back!
Brian

[Steve C]

Is the 15x45 are good In my opinion, very good & are handholdable without the need of a monopod, tripod or the side of a tree & can be held steady enough to be able see clearly.


Enjoy the binocular, but recognize that there is you and maybe 11 other people on the planet who can handhold 15x. Probably there are more who just think they can.

You need to keep in mind just how unusual the ability to use them as you do is.

[canonman77]

I will & I do enjoy the binoculars, If I can ask you one thing, whats unusual about the ability to use them as I do. I use them as I would use any other binocular.

Regards.
Sean..

[Steve C]

We've discussed this a bit before, but the mortal human shakes so bad at much over 12x that no detail can be discerned. I guess if you can hold 15x steady this is a foreign concept. The rest of us understand that quite well. It is rather like trying to use binoculars from a moving vehicle over a rough road. Actually I could be envious of your ability. Look at it this way. more magnification magnifies any movement, heat waves, or flaws in the binocular.

[Alexis Powell]

I think "...the mortal human shakes so bad at much over 12x that no detail can be discerned..." is going a bit far, but I'm no proponent of using nonIS 15x handheld, at least for birding. For checking the occasional small detail, especially of stationary objects, 15x can be employed productively by most people. Sometimes all you need is a glimpse, which can be achievable during a moment of relative steadiness. But for general birding, the loss of FOV and DOF are not worth the gain in magnification, especially since most birds can be identified with 8 or 10x at the distances at which they usually initially attract attention. The conventional wisdom is that the pleasingly steady view of 8 and 10x binos compensates for their lower maginification, such that a birder can acquire as much or more usable detail as they can through a shaky 15x view. I think that is true, but I've met a very few birders who still prefer the visual experience of a big shaky image over a steady lower mag one, even after we've established that they can't see birds any better for ID than I can with 8x.

--AP

[Nessus]

Hi Sean, What you forgot to tell them is you have arms like Arnie Swartz.................. LoL they sound great!
I'll be back!
Brian

But you're forgetting these weigh 21 ounces! They are lighter than most 10x42 binoculars. The conquest line is very lightweight. They are light enough that to steady them I can put my thumbs on my cheekbones and myforefingers on my forehead and make a bracing bridge out of my fingers so that wherever my head moves the binocular goes with it.

I'm still trying to decide in my head if the 12's are enough because I know they will be no problem keeping steady enough for me. Remember this will not be my only pair, just my high power pair.

[Steve C]

We've discussed this a bit before, but the mortal human shakes so bad ....

Alexis,

You are right in that the mortal human shakes bit was going a bit far. Actually it was more or less intended to. I should have added a big old grin I suppose. What needs to be in context is a couple of chats back and forth that cannonman and I have had, where we jested with each other over his Yorkshire and my Scottish Highlander ancestry. One of his comments in that was about his Yorkshire arms of steel...or some such. I figured if he had those arms of steel and could hold those big magnification glasses steady..well then that must have rendered me a mere mortal. |:D|

Nessus,

There's a fella in history named Isaac Newton. One of his "Laws" is that; for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Another way to state that is; once an object goes into motion it tends to stay in motion". Those 21 oz binoculars are a whole lot easier to put into motion than a 31 oz binocular. Once they go into motion, the 15x magnifies that motion almost twice as much more than an 8x. Pretty simple actually.

I hereby leave this thread to the 15x hand holders and wish them full enjoyment of their choice.

[canonman77]

I would like to thank everyone who has taken part In this discussion & I am now going to get all my bits ready for tomorrow for some serious 15x handholding. LOL :-)

Take care guys & speak soon.
Sean..

[Nessus]

Ok so I went to Cameraland in NYC to check out both bins. I eliminated the 15x although I can see why someone would choose it, it was very powerful with a nice image. I took home the 12x45 and was testing it out next to my Monarch 10x42 and I was shocked how little of a difference there was. I was expecting a bigger jump in my ability to resolve an image and for the extra energy I was putting into steadying them I didn't really feel I was getting anything better. I could never quite get the focus as sharp and crisp as my Conquest 8x30's which have a center field image that's phenomenal.

So I called Mark at Cameraland about trading up to a Leica Ultravid 10x42 or Zeiss FL 10x42 and he said come on in. I tried both and liked the warmth of the Leica better but they didn't have the leather one I was trying only rubber which has deep thumbgrooves that were annoying when I put my thumbs straight to steady them. I bought them anyway but didn't leave the area and went sight seeing in Manhattan looking at building and crowds, I even went into a dark church. After a little while of that I was less impressed with the Leicas. The image is crisp and beautiful but when the chips are down they didn't overcome as well as thought they would, especially in low light or through my tinted windows on my car. And there was a about 1/16 of inch of travel in the focus knob, an issue I had seen mentioned before. That plus the thumb guards the ten year warranty as opposed to the Zeiss lifetime transferable and that the eyecups didn't come out as far and sometimes my eyelash interfered made me take them back for the Zeiss FL 10x42's.

I got the demo non Lotutec for $1450 USD and then took them back to the same places I was just at with the Leica. WOW Big difference. Yes the Leica can be slightly more pleasing with a richer color when it's sunny but in general the Zeiss just outperforms it. In the church or down shadowed blocks especially and even through my tinted windows. Overall I think the Zeiss is the better glass for my needs.

So my search for the best possible high magnification view I could get out of a sub 50 millimeter objective led back down to high quality ten power as opposed to more magnification.


I'd just like to add that Mark who I dealt with at CamerlandNY was fantastic and they were very generous with the testing times and returns. Some of you might know Doug from there already. They just got in about ten boxes full of high quality demos from a show or exhibition, if you're in the market and could use a break on the price you might want to check them out.

http://www.cameralandny.com/

Honorable mention to the Pentax DCF 10x50, it's very good.