Zeiss 8x40 BTP vs. Nikon Venturer LX on sale- please help (1 Viewer)

My local photo store has these 2 guys on closeout specials for about 500$ (the Nikon's are about 50$ cheaper). The Zeiss are the 8x40 BTP (Victory II's?) and the Nikons are the older/heavier LX's 8x42.

The Nikon seems to have slightly more intense color, but the Zeiss is a lot lighter and my do a little better in dimmer light.

It seems the Victory line has a bad rap, and it would be interesting to hear what Zeiss users think. I looked through both binoculars until I thought I would go crazy, and would really appreciate any opinions about these binoculars at these price points.

Thanks

You're able to handle these and look through them, right? If you like one, go for it! It shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks.

Curtis is right.

I responded on another Thread of yours about the Zeiss V2's.

Curtis Croulet said:

You're able to handle these and look through them, right? If you like one, go for it! It shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks.

Click to expand...

Curtis, you are essentially correct, but...
Part of really feeling confident about such a purchase is feeling like you have really done your research which might include exploring the opinions of other savvy and experienced binocular users. Maybe it is a weakness, but I do want to know what the most common community opinions are about these two and which deal has the most percieved value, if I feel more comfortable with one in spite its bad reputation etc. than so be it. At least I'll feel like I did my homework. Right now, I would say I am pretty equivocal on them, and any major opinions or experiences from users would be very helpful as a tiebreaker.

Besides, most would admit that looking through them in the store is not the same as a year or so of use.

I took the Zeiss 8x40's home ultimately because they are lighter, but I have 30 days to swap them for the Nikons. I keep thinking the Nikons had a little more "pop" in the colors, but the Zeiss look good too and are much lighter.
So I would still like opinions.

Is there a perception that the Victory line was somewhat not up to par for Zeiss and was a failure? Thanks.

Birmingham,

Have you read Kimmo's excellent Alula-reviews of binoculars (http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm)? The 1/2004 review has among others the Zeiss Victory 10x40 and the Nikon 10x32LX/HG which get the test's highest scores in optical quality. I agree with you that the Nikons have very nice and natural colours and contrast but the Zeiss may be slightly brighter.

I wouldn't personally want the 42mm version of the Nikons (because of the weight and narrow field-of-view) but I would also have hard time learning to focus the Zeiss counterclockwise. If I had to choose one over another, I probably would take the Zeiss. If you feel comfortable with handling and optics of the Zeiss, just forget that urban legend about the Victories not being "good" - because they certainly are.

Good luck,

Ilkka

iporali said:

Birmingham,

Have you read Kimmo's excellent Alula-reviews of binoculars (http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm)? The 1/2004 review has among others the Zeiss Victory 10x40 and the Nikon 10x32LX/HG which get the test's highest scores in optical quality. I agree with you that the Nikons have very nice and natural colours and contrast but the Zeiss may be slightly brighter.

I wouldn't personally want the 42mm version of the Nikons (because of the weight and narrow field-of-view) but I would also have hard time learning to focus the Zeiss counterclockwise. If I had to choose one over another, I probably would take the Zeiss. If you feel comfortable with handling and optics of the Zeiss, just forget that urban legend about the Victories not being "good" - because they certainly are.

Good luck,

Ilkka

Click to expand...

Ilkka, thanks for your advice. I found this very helpful. In the objective qualities of field of view, weight, and I believe close focus, the Zeiss wins which may even out what seems like great color rendition from the Nikons. My last concern, which you addressed, was that the Victory line was somehow not up to par optically for Zeiss. Although I might not be able to appreciate that with a few minutes of use, the thought might rob me of confidence and satisfaction. I appreciate your input. I am now leaning toward keeping the Zeiss.

Birmingham said:

My last concern, which you addressed, was that the Victory line was somehow not up to par optically for Zeiss. Although I might not be able to appreciate that with a few minutes of use, the thought might rob me of confidence and satisfaction.

Click to expand...

I understand your thoughts, but don't forget that you are about to get them at absolute bargain price. You could toss a coin and you wouldn't make a mistake.

The problems with the Zeiss Victory have sometimes been discussed on this forum. Perhaps the most serious issue is slightly above average longitudinal chromatic aberration (LCA), which may come from exceptionally "fast" optics (combination of prism design and compact size). The first generation Victories are also said to have some flare problems and their strap lugs were poorly designed - but they should be better in the Victory IIs (which, I assume, you have). Some people have complained about the feel and even the smell of the rubber armoring, but I think the earlier (non-FL) Victories just haven't "felt right" for some. If you can live with the LCA (BTW the Nikons have pronounced transverse CA), they are about the sharpest, brightest, lightest, most wide-angled binoculars ever. :t:

Ilkka


ps. I have the Nikon 10x32HGs myself...

I would also look at the warranty, if these are both bought with a USA warranty the Nikon has the no falt deal going. Optics are great in both.

I have the Victory I 8x40, a purchase I have never regretted. I have never perceived any problem with flare or with CA. The Nikons may have slightly higher resolution, but it is very marginally better. I love the weight, the wide field of view and the contrast of the Zeiss. The Victory II should be a little better. If you want confirmation from a Zeiss user, you have it, but it is your choice.
I knew someone who had both binoculars even though he loved the colour rendition of the Nikon, he preferred the Victory I for long excursions. The lighter Zeiss made a difference to him on a long trip.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :scribe:

Birmingham,

The Victories are a good choice, especially for the money. The 10X40 I have do show some CA (only outside of the center 25% where it is almost zero), but are very good in mid to low light. The 8X40 show have even less CA due to their lower power, and should be very good binos indeed. Another post #83 by mrmarklin discusses his Victories: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=38023&page=4

Best Wishes, You have one of the best!

Hogjaws

Birmingham said:

My local photo store has these 2 guys on closeout specials for about 500$ (the Nikon's are about 50$ cheaper). The Zeiss are the 8x40 BTP (Victory II's?) and the Nikons are the older/heavier LX's 8x42.

The Nikon seems to have slightly more intense color, but the Zeiss is a lot lighter and my do a little better in dimmer light.

It seems the Victory line has a bad rap....
Thanks

Click to expand...

Here is another vote for the Zeiss. We have the 10x40 Victory I, and except for the flare problem - which should be OK in the II model - they are great. I simply could not imagine that heavy Nikon around my neck for a longer period of time. By the way, my wife particularly loves the fine depiction of flower details through the Zeiss. It's a world of its own.
The reverse focus is a bit of a problem, but nothing to really base a decision on. Even my switching back and forth between models of both focus types has never caused more than a brief irritation.