-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Cabelas Euro HD 8x32 vs. Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ZDHart
- Start date
stereotruckdriver
Well-known member
It is a very good binocular, no field flattener in its design though.
Its not a pseudo el sv!
Totally different design in all aspects.
Bryce...
brocknroller
porromaniac
To me, the Meostars look like psuedo neudo SLC ALTs. Don't have pix of the ALT version, but they are still similar looking to the SLCneu.
I don't think that is a coincidence.
Brock
Attachments
FrankD
Well-known member
Curious. I know we had this discussion before but I don't believe we came to a consensus. My understanding was that there was a field flattener element in the design and I posted as much but then there was a long discussion afterwards. From what I remember of the image I would be surprised if there wasn't a field flattener element.
Brock,
I have vague recollections of the SLC Alts. They weren't too much different "overall" than the SLC Neu from what I remember. I will grant you that, in pictures, the two look similar. If you have them side by side though they are actually very different. The fact that Meopta utilizes large oculars and a similar green coloration in their armor is what I think triggers the comparisons. Comparing them side by side though the Meopta is shorter and fatter than any of the SLCs I have compared them too (assuming the same configuration of course).
Cycleguy,
I would be curious to hear further comments from you as to why you don't think the Euro HD and the Conquest HD are in the same class. Are you referring to the optics, build quality or both? What specifically?
Frank,
Meopta does write that the Meopta MeoStar B1 32mm "eyepieces provide an incredibly wide and flat field of view. (my emphasis) See the 2nd sentence below:
http://www.meoptasportsoptics.com/shop/us/32-mm-series/MeoStar-B1-32mm-binoculars/ctgBus.html
Bob
Frank,
Did you see my earlier post, #9? I think i explained it there.
I'm specifically referring to the 8x32 hd, and even more specifically the sample i have had the opportunity to handle.
My impression was that the 8x wasn't at the same level optically as the 10x offerings, primarily in sharpness.
I'm eager to hear ZDHart's comments once he has had time with both, and I continue to seek a second sample for further consideration.
CG
Last edited:
Conquest HD 8x32's arrived today. They are like the twin brother in character, view, and quality to my Conquest HD 10x42's that I've been using for a week or so, and that's a high compliment, indeed.
I will take them to Cabelas to do a comparo with the Euro HD 8x32 and, hopefully, with a pair of Victory 8x32 FL's.
So far, I'm so impressed with these bins that I probably shouldn't even bother doing a comparison... I should just get on with my life, enjoying these amazing bins! They are of exceptional quality, especially for the price.
I will take them to Cabelas to do a comparo with the Euro HD 8x32 and, hopefully, with a pair of Victory 8x32 FL's.
So far, I'm so impressed with these bins that I probably shouldn't even bother doing a comparison... I should just get on with my life, enjoying these amazing bins! They are of exceptional quality, especially for the price.
(Also posted in a thread in the Zeiss folder.)
I went comparing and I'm glad I did.
Certainly the in-store comparison is neither exhaustive nor comprehensive, but after weeks of buying and returning a lot of bins and living with a number of them, this in-store comparison was enough to bring me to some selection conclusions.
Compared the Conquest HD 8x32 to Cabelas Euro HD 8x32 and Swaro EL 8x32. It wasn't an extensive comparison... just in-store. My impression was that the image quality with the Conquest HD was on par with that from the Swaro EL 8x32 and just edged out the Cabelas Euro HD 8x32. The Zeiss looked brighter and crisper to me than the Cabelas Euro HD 8x32's.
After eliminating the Cabelas Euro HD from the running, I spent some more time between the Conquest HD and the Swaro EL.
For my interests, the Conquest HD had a comparable image quality, though slightly less focused at the edges. And sharp focus at the edges is not something of much, if any, importance to me. I don't view things carefully at the edges of the glass... when I want to look at something, I bring the glasses to center on the object. The Conquest HD had good enough focus at the edges to catch objects in the periphery, which is all I need from the edges of bins.
Further, the focus wheel on the Swaro felt a little cheesy to me compared to the focus wheel on the Conquest HD which felt smoother, and more even in both directions. I tend to use the focus wheel CONSTANTLY while using bins, so the feel of the focus wheel is something that I consider a very important selection criterion. Feel in the hand... for me, the nod goes to Zeiss.
So... $825 for the Conquest HD 8x32 vs. $2200 for the Swaro EL 8x32. My mind was made up in a heartbeat. I appreciated the slightly lighter weight of the Swaros, but for the price difference, that wasn't a significant factor.
I was unable to find a pair of 8x32 FL's to look at and from all that I've read now about them, I have no plans to bother with trying to do so. I believe the only benefit I would appreciate with the FL's is slightly lighter weight, which isn't a big factor for me. I get the impression that sharpness and view quality with Conquest HD is on par with the FL and that the HD may have a less "cold" color quality. I prefer a touch more warmth in color quality and so it sounds like Conquest HD is the Zeiss 8x32 bin for me.
Ruled out Swaros, Leicas, and Meoptas. Conquest HD 8x32 is it for me. At this point, I've looked around enough to know that they're the ones I want to go through time with. No more nagging desire to do comparisons with the intent of returning the Zeiss. Now all I have to do is use them and enjoy them! That's a happy place to be.
I went comparing and I'm glad I did.
Certainly the in-store comparison is neither exhaustive nor comprehensive, but after weeks of buying and returning a lot of bins and living with a number of them, this in-store comparison was enough to bring me to some selection conclusions.
Compared the Conquest HD 8x32 to Cabelas Euro HD 8x32 and Swaro EL 8x32. It wasn't an extensive comparison... just in-store. My impression was that the image quality with the Conquest HD was on par with that from the Swaro EL 8x32 and just edged out the Cabelas Euro HD 8x32. The Zeiss looked brighter and crisper to me than the Cabelas Euro HD 8x32's.
After eliminating the Cabelas Euro HD from the running, I spent some more time between the Conquest HD and the Swaro EL.
For my interests, the Conquest HD had a comparable image quality, though slightly less focused at the edges. And sharp focus at the edges is not something of much, if any, importance to me. I don't view things carefully at the edges of the glass... when I want to look at something, I bring the glasses to center on the object. The Conquest HD had good enough focus at the edges to catch objects in the periphery, which is all I need from the edges of bins.
Further, the focus wheel on the Swaro felt a little cheesy to me compared to the focus wheel on the Conquest HD which felt smoother, and more even in both directions. I tend to use the focus wheel CONSTANTLY while using bins, so the feel of the focus wheel is something that I consider a very important selection criterion. Feel in the hand... for me, the nod goes to Zeiss.
So... $825 for the Conquest HD 8x32 vs. $2200 for the Swaro EL 8x32. My mind was made up in a heartbeat. I appreciated the slightly lighter weight of the Swaros, but for the price difference, that wasn't a significant factor.
I was unable to find a pair of 8x32 FL's to look at and from all that I've read now about them, I have no plans to bother with trying to do so. I believe the only benefit I would appreciate with the FL's is slightly lighter weight, which isn't a big factor for me. I get the impression that sharpness and view quality with Conquest HD is on par with the FL and that the HD may have a less "cold" color quality. I prefer a touch more warmth in color quality and so it sounds like Conquest HD is the Zeiss 8x32 bin for me.
Ruled out Swaros, Leicas, and Meoptas. Conquest HD 8x32 is it for me. At this point, I've looked around enough to know that they're the ones I want to go through time with. No more nagging desire to do comparisons with the intent of returning the Zeiss. Now all I have to do is use them and enjoy them! That's a happy place to be.
Last edited:
Thanks. I appreciate all the input that everyone gave. I know that whatever model I selected from the final group would be a great choice. It was down to personal reaction to the bins and their ergonomics. All wonderful choices, really.
And, this is a wonderful forum and resource! Thanks.
And, this is a wonderful forum and resource! Thanks.
Had mine out today after mostly sittimg for the last couple months. Still a wonderful view and great handling binocular.
Was messing with the IDP and found if i set it too small, i'm able to bow the image noticably.
Don't think anyone would do this... Was just messing around.
CG
Was messing with the IDP and found if i set it too small, i'm able to bow the image noticably.
Don't think anyone would do this... Was just messing around.
CG
Last edited:
I've been alternating between the Conquest HD 10x42 and 8x32, back and forth, for a number of days now. I keep them both at hand while I'm enjoying our bird sanctuary into the desert off of the back porch. It's wonderful how alike they are, aside from magnification and field of view... like twins.
I tend to prefer the reach that I'm getting with the 10x42. If I were to keep just one of the two, it would most likely be the 10x42's. That said, I am enjoying the 8x32's nearly as much... owing to the wider field of view, more stability of image, lighter weight, and smaller size. You just can't go wrong with either model.
I tend to prefer the reach that I'm getting with the 10x42. If I were to keep just one of the two, it would most likely be the 10x42's. That said, I am enjoying the 8x32's nearly as much... owing to the wider field of view, more stability of image, lighter weight, and smaller size. You just can't go wrong with either model.
Last edited:
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Two are better than one
Hello ZDHart,
I think that you may have discovered that there is no single binocular, good for all occasions. I almost always carry two binoculars. It used to be a 7x42 and a 10x32. Of late, I carry a 6.5x32 and a 10x32. In New York's Central Park, the need for a 10x is not great because there are few open vistas, certainly, no deserts. However, if I were obliged to carry only one glass, it would be an 8x32.
Good luck with your latest addition.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:
Hello ZDHart,
I think that you may have discovered that there is no single binocular, good for all occasions. I almost always carry two binoculars. It used to be a 7x42 and a 10x32. Of late, I carry a 6.5x32 and a 10x32. In New York's Central Park, the need for a 10x is not great because there are few open vistas, certainly, no deserts. However, if I were obliged to carry only one glass, it would be an 8x32.
Good luck with your latest addition.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:
Arthur... yes, you are so right. No single pair on bins can cover all needs. At least two should do the job! I can see how you would value the 8x32 format as a great all-around solution. Especially with a venue like Central Park as your playground. Nice!
On any given day, I might give the nod to my 8x32's over the 10x42. But, then again... :-O
On any given day, I might give the nod to my 8x32's over the 10x42. But, then again... :-O
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hello ZD, if I may be familiar,
In fact, I cannot use a 10x for extended periods. It becomes even more problematic when I am standing and looking well above the horizon. On Friday, I used my 10x32 to get a better view of a wood duck, across Central Park Lake. Today, I was content to use the 6.5x32 to look at phoebes, at somewhat shorter distance. Phoebes are nice, but a male wood duck is always worth a closer look.
On occasions, I do use a 12x50, on a monopod, for shore excursions. Even a 10x is not up to distinguishing among different species of egrets, several hundred metres, away.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
