Victory SF: Condensation on ocular lens (2 Viewers)

[J899]

Hi all,

Is it normal for condensation to form on the ocular lens of a nitrogen-filled binocular? I had condensation/fog form on the ocular lens of my Victory SF today that persisted for quite some time. I was under the impression that they wouldn't fog over. Is this a normal occurrence?

 

[Pileatus]

Hi all,

Is it normal for condensation to form on the ocular lens of a nitrogen-filled binocular? I had condensation/fog form on the ocular lens of my Victory SF today that persisted for quite some time. I was under the impression that they wouldn't fog over. Is this a normal occurrence?

Did you go from air conditioning to the great outdoors?

 

[Maljunulo]

Did you go from air conditioning to the great outdoors?

And then put your nice warm, moist, eyeball right up close to the lens?

I'm presuming that "on" means on the outside of the ocular.

 

[John Dracon]

It is very common for condensation to collect on exterior lens going abruptly from a colder to a warmer environment. Whether your binocular is nitrogen filled will make no difference. Put your binocular in a deep freeze for a while and then pull it out and see what happens.

 

[brocknroller]

This happened to me two days ago. We had a very steamy day, with fog burning off in the morning. Temps were in the low 80s, but the humidity was really high. I put the bins up to my eyes and "WHO TURNED ON THE SHOWER?" Couldn't see. The left EP was fogged (on the outside). I twisted the eyecups down and left the bins on the porch chair for a few minutes so the glass could reach thermal equilibrium with the outside temps, and then the EPs didn't fog anymore.

Apparently, the hydrophobic LotuTec coatings on the SF are not scared of steam caused by body heat.

Brock

 

[mooreorless]

I hope that wasn't a SE. I thought yesterday[7-30-15] early morning into the afternoon was the worst.

 

[Pileatus]

Hi all,

Is it normal for condensation to form on the ocular lens of a nitrogen-filled binocular? I had condensation/fog form on the ocular lens of my Victory SF today that persisted for quite some time. I was under the impression that they wouldn't fog over. Is this a normal occurrence?

This is simple condensation. Take a glass from the freezer and watch what happens. On a humid day, the water in the air will condense on the cold surface of the glass. Same goes for a lens. In the winter, a cold lens placed near a warm moist body (i.e. your face) may also fog due to condensation.
http://www.komonews.com/weather/faq/4347291.html

 

[Binastro]

. Many times after buying a binocular delivered by mail or courier, in my eagerness to see if it is any good, I have opened the parcel to try out the binocular. I then have immediately tried to look through the binocular.
This is often a mistake, as it has spent a long time being cold outside, and I'm trying it in a warm room.
Often I can't see anything at all, and have to put the binocular down and wait 15 minutes, maybe more, until it warms up.

 

[james holdsworth]

Key point will be if it was on the exterior or interior of the lens. Exterior - normal, interior - defect.

 

[J899]

Hi all,

Thanks for the replies. In answer to some of the issues noted:

- the finish of the binocular is tops. The photo with a flash really doesn't do it justice. I read in other threads that a few people had complained about loose armor. However, the armor and finish on this sample is secure. Nothing is loose, etc.

- the fog/condensation was on the outside of the ocular lens. It was only on the left side, though, which
concerned me. I wiped it, but it kept occuring for 10 minutes or so, creating a persistent haze.

- I do notice that, if I look through the objective lens, there appears to be differences in internal oil/paint. I'm assuming this is normal variation, but I've attached images of each objective tube. Notice the darker/oil-looking coatings in each. Any ideas?

 

[Binastro]

. Hi J899,
. If you get any unusual reflections from one barrel of the binocular only, then I would perhaps show it to the person who sold you the binocular.

 

[Rathaus]

Hi all,

Thanks for the replies. In answer to some of the issues noted:

- the finish of the binocular is tops. The photo with a flash really doesn't do it justice. I read in other threads that a few people had complained about loose armor. However, the armor and finish on this sample is secure. Nothing is loose, etc.

- the fog/condensation was on the outside of the ocular lens. It was only on the left side, though, which
concerned me. I wiped it, but it kept occuring for 10 minutes or so, creating a persistent haze.

- I do notice that, if I look through the objective lens, there appears to be differences in internal oil/paint. I'm assuming this is normal variation, but I've attached images of each objective tube. Notice the darker/oil-looking coatings in each. Any ideas?

What are the white specks in the left photo? They look like they're behind the lens? Hard to tell from the photo...its probably on the lens but check it out.

That internal finish isn't what I'd expect.

 

[james holdsworth]

The SF - the most ridiculously over-scrutinized binocular in history.

People seem to care more about the look of the bin, rather than the look through the bin.......

 

[perterra]

The SF - the most ridiculously over-scrutinized binocular in history.

People seem to care more about the look of the bin, rather than the look through the bin.......

I think now days people prefer to look at their binoculars instead of through them.

 

[[email protected]]

. Hi J899,
. If you get any unusual reflections from one barrel of the binocular only, then I would perhaps show it to the person who sold you the binocular.

They look like magnesium flakes or threads possibly from the tubes. That finish looks rough and uneven too me. Very inconsistent. The staining on the inside looks almost like some kind of cooling oil from the thread cutting procedure. Sloppy QA again from Zeiss if you ask me. I looked in my Swaro tubes and they look perfect. Not at all like the Zeiss SF. I really think Zeiss brought these binoculars to market too soon. It is going to take a couple of years to work out all these problems.

 

[[email protected]]

What are the white specks in the left photo? They look like they're behind the lens? Hard to tell from the photo...its probably on the lens but check it out.

That internal finish isn't what I'd expect.

That is weird that the fog was only on one ocular. Condensation should have been on both oculars if both sides were at equal temperatures. It is almost like their is something going on with the binoculars.Could be there is a leak of some sort in the side that is fogging up causing it to be cooler hence more condensate. Is all that oil staining inside the objective on the ocular side of the binocular that is fogging up?

 

[[email protected]]

The SF - the most ridiculously over-scrutinized binocular in history.

People seem to care more about the look of the bin, rather than the look through the bin.......

It is hard to look through a fogged up ocular lens.

 

[stereotruckdriver]

The SF - the most ridiculously over-scrutinized binocular in history.

People seem to care more about the look of the bin, rather than the look through the bin.......

Well James, as a resident fanboy have you had a chance to put the SF through a thorough testing?

Curious, because I haven't spent alot of time on here lately.

Bryce...

 

[Troubador]

I looked in my Swaro tubes and they look perfect.

I looked in 'my' Swaro tubes too, with a light shining up from the objective ends and it was like Christmas Tree lights in there.

False pupils they are called Dennis and they represent light that ought to reach your eyes as part of the image but doesn't because it gets diverted and reflected due to poor finishing inside the tubes where you can't see.

But did I mention these in my SF vs EL test?
No because it would have been too childish as I couldn't detect any effect on the image.

You could learn something from that.

Lee

 

[Troubador]

I really think Zeiss brought these binoculars to market too soon.

There speaks someone with absolutely no first-hand knowledge of SF at all.

Here is what folks who have bought one say:

Not only is the SF's field of view extraordinarily wide, but it's also sharp edge to edge.

Colour reproduction and contrast are also excellent.

The SF is really faster in focus: easy focusing on flying birds
-The balance and grip is excellent

Sharpness across the field of view- the 8x42 is outstanding

For me the SF is the perfect binocular

Got mine a few days ago I can say that the Victory SF 10x42 binoculars are exceptional.
- Optics are stunning
- The usability and focusing are fantastic
- very light

because of the balance and weight distribution of the SF it "feels"lighter and that is immediately obvious when you take an SF in your hands.

I was surprised by how light in weight the pair were, and well balanced they are, despite the length of the barrels

I consider the Victory SF 10x42 spectacular bins and I have never used anything better

However everything about the bino is flawless, Fast focus is a real delight to get on birds FAST! Flat field across the view Colors simply real

We have gotten no SF's returned from any customer for any reason

At this moment we received 6 SF's which are sold to very satisfied customers.

Surely the finest 8x42 roof currently available.

the sharpness of our 10x42 SFs is equal to our 10x42 Swaro SVs.

I find that the SF has very natural colours and brightness

SF has an edge as sharp as they come

Did a comparison between SF 8x42, SV 8,5x42, FL 7x42 and SV 8x32 today.
The overall winner to me is clearly the SF:s.

I use my SF 8x42 for astronomy, and I haven't noticed any central astigmatism.

OMG! The field of view is amazing—much wider than my Nikon.

The weight distribution is a huge improvement—because they naturally tilt upwards, they feel lighter than they really are.

The more I used them, the more they impressed me. And then, of course, there's the Zeiss optics. Brilliant, yes. At the end of the weekend, I really did not want to give them back.

They really are everything Zeiss says they are. And more.

delightful instruments and a pleasure to use. Optically they are stunning

SF is Sharp, very Sharp almost to the limit of FOV

SF has the most real color reproduction of any bin i ever tried (including my 10x42 SV )

Is very VERY well corrected for CA far away of my leica ultravid

for me SF is even better than SV

the best on this Zeiss is the 3D and Pop in the view…It has some of the character that only can be found in the best porro bins, For me this 3D and huge FOV are the big advantages of SF

The focus on the Swaro was excellent, but in my opinion, the SF was even better. can't remember a more precise and yet smooth focusing mechanism. the SF felt noticeably lighter than the Swaros, more so than the actual 45g difference in specs.

If something happened to your 10X42 Swarovision, would you replace it with another of the same or would you change over to the the Zeiss SF 10X42? Thanks, good question. In my opinion the SF has technical 2 pros which I like : it is sharper and has a larger FOV


The thing that will absolutely astound you is the pronounced 3d effect,the most i have ever seen in a binocular,bags more than my zeiss nobilem 10x50 porro.Makes everything else seem flat in comparison and leaves a very vivid impression ,you just want to keep picking them up and use them on anything.


The Nikon EDG is still an excellent binocular but I prefer the SF for some of the same reasons that I prefer the SF over the SV.​

Lee