SuperDuty
Well-known member
-
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.
Zeiss Conquest 10X42 HD-AllBinos Review (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SuperDuty
- Start date
The-Wanderer
Well-known member
I suspect that I am not alone in bemoaning that sometimes Allbinos states that a binocular's apparent sharpness is referenced, including qualified opinion but, more often than not, Allbinos is silent on the subject.
I used to think more highly of their reviews than I do now, because I yearn for more consistency in their reviews.
I would also like them to measure eye relief both from the glass to the eye and from the eyepiece rim to the eye in the down position.
I used to think more highly of their reviews than I do now, because I yearn for more consistency in their reviews.
I would also like them to measure eye relief both from the glass to the eye and from the eyepiece rim to the eye in the down position.
That's a pretty strong review. Very compelling argument for the Conquest HD. In fact they found it pointless to buy the UV HD +, HT, and SLC. If that is so, wouldn't it be pointless to buy the Conquest HD when one may buy a Vanguard Endeavor ED II for less than half the cost of the Conquest HD? I don't believe it but if one looks at ratings ALONE.... Just saying...
I don't own a Conquest HD and I've never had one. But this review does present a good case. Not just this review but many here on BF as well and for quite a while.
One thing Zeiss does...and they do it better than anyone, and that's % light transmission. When it comes to transmission % they talk the talk but they back it up with some of the best numbers in the market. That's not the whole binocular game, but that DOES make up a HUGE part of it.
Hat's off to Carl Zeiss for three great reviews; the HT, SF, and now the Conquest HD.
I don't own a Conquest HD and I've never had one. But this review does present a good case. Not just this review but many here on BF as well and for quite a while.
One thing Zeiss does...and they do it better than anyone, and that's % light transmission. When it comes to transmission % they talk the talk but they back it up with some of the best numbers in the market. That's not the whole binocular game, but that DOES make up a HUGE part of it.
Hat's off to Carl Zeiss for three great reviews; the HT, SF, and now the Conquest HD.
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Hi Chuck
I would be very tempted to try these, but I doubt they would quite make the cut after seeing the SVs and HT.
I would be very tempted to try these, but I doubt they would quite make the cut after seeing the SVs and HT.
They are sure not going to be any BETTER.
I think the Conquest HD, Razor HD, Kowa Genesis, Meostar HD, and Trinovid (even though I wasn't personally a fan of this model) are all at the point that, while you may find minute improvements in the alphas, it is hard to justify their price if you are price
erformance conscious. I've looked through and owned several alpha models as well as the Genesis and Razor and you really have to nitpick to find faults. The one thing that some of the alphas (i.e. SV, EDG, SF) that these do not is flat-field technology, but Nikon appears to be changing that.
Personally I wish AB would do a review of the Razor HD as I've consistently found them better than the Conquest in apparent sharpness - although whether or not this is down to sample variation is hard to say.
J
erformance conscious. I've looked through and owned several alpha models as well as the Genesis and Razor and you really have to nitpick to find faults. The one thing that some of the alphas (i.e. SV, EDG, SF) that these do not is flat-field technology, but Nikon appears to be changing that.Personally I wish AB would do a review of the Razor HD as I've consistently found them better than the Conquest in apparent sharpness - although whether or not this is down to sample variation is hard to say.
J
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
At the risk of upsetting the diehard faithful, I thought the Conquest HD a completely 'meh', bland and unremarkable view.
Perhaps this was influenced by the top notch Alphas I viewed in comparison - the Zeiss 8x42 HT, and Swarovski 10x50 SV.
Don't take it too personally Blue Badge Boys, I was also not wowed by the 56mm A-K SLC's, the 42mm S-P SLC's, though they were streets ahead of the Conquest HD. In fairness I didn't really get along with the eye cups and ER setup. It was interesting that Allbino's describe the whiteness as greenish - to my eyes it was reddy-brownish and not at all attractive to me. I had no urge whatsoever to pick the Conquest up a third time ......
As a 2nd tier < $1K bin, I much preferred the surprising clarity of the Steiner 8x44 Peregrine XP, despite its creamy tinted view, though I wouldn't pay more than that ....
This Allbino's scorecard seems way too high in some values and categories and somewhat inconsistent .... Also I had an LOL chuckle at the "Produced in Germany" statement ......
However, kudos to Allbino's for working it's way through most of the current crop of bins - much appreciated :t:
hope all this makes sense !) :bounce:
Chosun :gh:
Perhaps this was influenced by the top notch Alphas I viewed in comparison - the Zeiss 8x42 HT, and Swarovski 10x50 SV.
Don't take it too personally Blue Badge Boys, I was also not wowed by the 56mm A-K SLC's, the 42mm S-P SLC's, though they were streets ahead of the Conquest HD. In fairness I didn't really get along with the eye cups and ER setup. It was interesting that Allbino's describe the whiteness as greenish - to my eyes it was reddy-brownish and not at all attractive to me. I had no urge whatsoever to pick the Conquest up a third time ......
As a 2nd tier < $1K bin, I much preferred the surprising clarity of the Steiner 8x44 Peregrine XP, despite its creamy tinted view, though I wouldn't pay more than that ....
This Allbino's scorecard seems way too high in some values and categories and somewhat inconsistent .... Also I had an LOL chuckle at the "Produced in Germany" statement ......
However, kudos to Allbino's for working it's way through most of the current crop of bins - much appreciated :t:
hope all this makes sense !
) :bounce:Chosun :gh:
Last edited:
A2GG
Beth
Conquest HD has built a stellar reputation here on BF and many other sources.
There's also that video of it taking shotgun blasts and being run over , etc and still working,
so it has earned a rep. for being very tough and rugged.
I really haven't read anything bad except the eye cup issues in the beginning.
I tried the 8x42, 8x32 and 10x32. The 42 is too heavy and a bit bulky to me and
I wouldnt ever consider it, but the smaller one I really liked.
What surprised me is how well both 32's worked with my glasses...even the 10x32 with its
small EP was good. I think the nice big oculars may help a bit with ease of view.
I really liked the feel of the 32 bins and the focus was nice albeit a little too fast for me.
The view seemed very slightly on the warm side if I remember correctly and contrast very good.
But overall I liked them quite a bit. If I was looking for mid priced 32mm bin these would be on the top of
my shortlist.
Looking forward to a Trinovid HD 32mm release and would love to see Razor 32. Vortex has no high quality 32 now...Viper 32 is being discontinued and maybe the whole Viper line , not sure. They only have Diamondback as their "best" 32mm. Or maybe they still have Talon available. I do hope a new Viper comes and especially a 32mm Razor, but maybe no luck on the latter since it should have been made available by now if they were planning on it.
There's also that video of it taking shotgun blasts and being run over , etc and still working,
so it has earned a rep. for being very tough and rugged.
I really haven't read anything bad except the eye cup issues in the beginning.
I tried the 8x42, 8x32 and 10x32. The 42 is too heavy and a bit bulky to me and
I wouldnt ever consider it, but the smaller one I really liked.
What surprised me is how well both 32's worked with my glasses...even the 10x32 with its
small EP was good. I think the nice big oculars may help a bit with ease of view.
I really liked the feel of the 32 bins and the focus was nice albeit a little too fast for me.
The view seemed very slightly on the warm side if I remember correctly and contrast very good.
But overall I liked them quite a bit. If I was looking for mid priced 32mm bin these would be on the top of
my shortlist.
Looking forward to a Trinovid HD 32mm release and would love to see Razor 32. Vortex has no high quality 32 now...Viper 32 is being discontinued and maybe the whole Viper line , not sure. They only have Diamondback as their "best" 32mm. Or maybe they still have Talon available. I do hope a new Viper comes and especially a 32mm Razor, but maybe no luck on the latter since it should have been made available by now if they were planning on it.
I think the Conquest HD, Razor HD, Kowa Genesis, Meostar HD, and Trinovid (even though I wasn't personally a fan of this model) are all at the point that, while you may find minute improvements in the alphas, it is hard to justify their price if you are price
J
I agree with you jremmons, after owning the Genesis, Meostar HD, SLC HD, and GR HD. You can put the new Tract Toric solidly in this lineup as well, as it is a fantastic piece of equipment.
I will say though, after using the 10x50 SV, I am very spoiled by the view.
Hey! Do you have one of the Tract Torics? This is the first I've here of those. I looks pretty GOOD!
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Thanks for posting SD! That is very impressive review from Allbinos for a just under $1K binocular. I've looked though them multiple times and decided I will be getting one. Zeiss was kind enough to gives me several hours of field viewing at a birding festival last year and that convinced me. In addition to the great view, it just felt right. It is next on the list. I know they are bright but I would not have guessed a 93% transmission for that class. Wow. Zeiss did a lot of things right with the Conquest HD. My only minor complaint is that the eye cup design could be a little more stout and slight longer (more so in the 8X42), but Zeiss does offer a slightly longer replacement just for the asking.
Chuck, I think you are right for having your doubts. I have the Endeavor ED II 10X42 and it is a very nice binocular for a mid price model, but it does not strike me as being in the same class as the Conquest. The Endeavor does not compare to me on brightness, color balance, fit and finish, and handling. Of course the Conquest costs more, but I guess you get what you pay for in this case.
The 8X32 Conquest HD is also impressive. I like it as much as the 10X42 but I have more use for the 10X.
Chuck, I think you are right for having your doubts. I have the Endeavor ED II 10X42 and it is a very nice binocular for a mid price model, but it does not strike me as being in the same class as the Conquest. The Endeavor does not compare to me on brightness, color balance, fit and finish, and handling. Of course the Conquest costs more, but I guess you get what you pay for in this case.
The 8X32 Conquest HD is also impressive. I like it as much as the 10X42 but I have more use for the 10X.
NDhunter
Experienced observer
The Conquest HD 10x42 is a very impressive binocular. I have had mine for almost 3 years now,
and it continues to impress, very bright and sharp, and it has a quality build that I like.
I agree with Allbinos on their review, they get things right in many ways.
I would add, you could have a Zeiss Conquest HD, as your only binocular.
You are very close to the top, it takes care of all your needs, and you don't need to update
Allbinos has a new review of the Zeiss Terra binoculars just posted. Now they have tried
most all of the newer Zeiss models.
Jerry
and it continues to impress, very bright and sharp, and it has a quality build that I like.
I agree with Allbinos on their review, they get things right in many ways.
I would add, you could have a Zeiss Conquest HD, as your only binocular.
You are very close to the top, it takes care of all your needs, and you don't need to update
Allbinos has a new review of the Zeiss Terra binoculars just posted. Now they have tried
most all of the newer Zeiss models.
Jerry
Last edited:
If I was ship-wrecked on a desert (it means deserted not sand without water :smoke
island and had to choose which pair of bins would reach the shore safely along with me, I would choose Conquest HD 8x32.Yes there are things HTs and SFs do better, but as an all-round do-it-all compact and tough instrument it would be my choice.
Lee
I've owned the 8x32, 8x42 and 10x42 and I've never been all that impressed with them. Build quality has never really struck me as remarkable and the view is very good, but just about right for the price point. I don't think they are as good as some make out.
Back in the day, I did a bit of resolution testing with the help of Typo - the Conquest HD weren't remarkable. I found other binoculars sharper. The Opticron Countryman HD and Hawke Frontier ED were both sharper. The colour of the Zeiss might be preferable to some, but they weren't sharper.
Back in the day, I did a bit of resolution testing with the help of Typo - the Conquest HD weren't remarkable. I found other binoculars sharper. The Opticron Countryman HD and Hawke Frontier ED were both sharper. The colour of the Zeiss might be preferable to some, but they weren't sharper.
I am not sure Jerry was saying Conquest HDs are remarkable. I wasn't. For me they are great honest performers with a focus speed that is a super compromise for getting onto nearby subjects then to far away ones and then back again, and all without overshooting focus unintentionally.
As for toughness, check out the Zeiss video of them being abused, run over and shot with a shot gun.
By all means feel free to be unimpressed, but those who enjoy them have a right to their opinions too.
Lee
I like the 10x42 Conquest HD a lot. I've used for a few years.
I make the field 6.65 deg measured on the stars. Allbinos say 6.51 deg +/- 0.4 deg. I don't know how they measure it.
I don't know about the truncated exit pupils.
I don't like the 8x32 HD because of ghosting/ light pillars, whereas the 10x42 HD is excellent here.
I make the field 6.65 deg measured on the stars. Allbinos say 6.51 deg +/- 0.4 deg. I don't know how they measure it.
I don't know about the truncated exit pupils.
I don't like the 8x32 HD because of ghosting/ light pillars, whereas the 10x42 HD is excellent here.
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
If there is one thing that Allbinos is pretty unambiguous on, it's the fine astigmatism [sharpness] scores of the two Conquest models. The samples they tested were, no doubt, very sharp - something that matches my own impression of my 8x32 HD - as sharp as my 10x42 FL, with a very positive focus ''snap'', that always indicates to me excellent optics.
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
I agree with you about the 8x32 HD, at least the stray light issues. It is not the best at handling scattered light - esp. dawn / dusk, although it is fine the rest of the time and the rest of the optical package is great. I think part of the problem is the reduced objective shrouding in the shorter package.
I have four 30 / 32 / 36 mm binoculars and not one of them is good with stray light so it might be a packaging issue. The 8X32 SV comes to mind here too.
