• 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 DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Zeiss 10 x 42 FL, a birding review (1 Viewer)

An update, after a couple hundred hours on the bins.

Still wonderful, focusser that seemed a bit finicky at first now seems clinically precise, almost sublime in its ability to hit the sharp spot instantly.

Try as I might to find the edge performance an issue, still can't. I still have one of the best centrefield views I have ever seen, with a small falloff at the edge, a complete and total non-issue when birding. I only notice any aspect of the edge performance when I go looking for it, tilting the bins and twisting my eyes to the corners.

Oh, and we finally have snow and cold and I can attest that the focus is no slower or stiffer at -10C and the eye-cup design seems ideal as I have yet to get lens misting or fogging in the field.

Best of all, the flawless reproduction in whites make winter birding a delight, I have never seen a cleaner, sharper and more 'true' view. Every other roof I have tried gives snow a slightly brownish or yellow look [no, not THAT type of yellow] but with the FL's, just incredibly pure white. Very satisfying, addictive.
 
Hello,

I agree 100% , once more, with James about the Z FL 10x42. I have an use intensely mine since I purchased it in 2004.

Regards

PHA
 
I think out of all of the 10x's in the world the Zeiss 10x56 is the absolute best. It doesn't feel that heavy in the hands, It's well worth it to me. I'd take it over certain 12x's. Those are the bins I really want.
 
Last edited:
Hi James,
I am new to this forum and only joined today.
Thank you for your honest and "real" observations using the Victory,
I think you have tipped the scales for me purchasing one.
best regards
Twoe
 
twoe said:
Hi James,
I am new to this forum and only joined today.
Thank you for your honest and "real" observations using the Victory,
I think you have tipped the scales for me purchasing one.
best regards
Twoe
Click to expand...

Twoe,

You will not be dissapointed. I still go out daily, even in horrible weather, because I want to feel the bin in my hand and enjoy the view....even when the birding is poor, trees and rocks become the subject's. Sometimes I find I do far too much 'glassing' and not enough birding!
 
10x42 FL

I've had mine for 3 years and they are used daily (well they were until I had to return them to Zeiss because something nasty happened to the exit lenses - not Zeiss' fault) and they are FAB. As soon as I tried them I understood what people meant when they say 'There's nothing between you and the bird'. Try as I might, I can't find anything wrong with them…
 
Hi -Optically how far away are the Zeiss 10x42 fl's, from say the binoculars i have, the Zeiss 10x50 Jenoptems in mint condition.
Cost wise i could not afford the 10x42's,and i some times wonder if keeping up with the pack,some times cost us enthusiasts far more than we would like to pay.
I compared these old Jenoptems with a pair of a pair of Lieca trinivoids 10x50 recently,and i much preferred the Jenoptems?(£1000)App.
Whilst i appreciate,weight,waterproofing,LOOKS,all have a bearing factor?. I feel Binoculars are a bit like Camera's are, and with the pressure of good advertising, and the get the latest pack,sometimes a cost that could be avoided.
 
Hi woody57,

The optical performance of the old Jenoptems is still very respectable.
The light transmission of the newer designs is perhaps 10-20% better, thanks to better coatings and better glass.
Field of view and eye relief are basically unchanged. So you've not missed much.
The improvements have been mostly on peripheral aspects such as waterproofing..
 
etudiant said:
Hi woody57,

The optical performance of the old Jenoptems is still very respectable.
The light transmission of the newer designs is perhaps 10-20% better, thanks to better coatings and better glass.
Field of view and eye relief are basically unchanged. So you've not missed much.
The improvements have been mostly on peripheral aspects such as waterproofing..
Click to expand...

Thank you Jim.
 
Nessus said:
I used these daily for quite some time and I agree with all of the OP's points but one. Contrast. I never found them to have that rich color of Nikon or Leica. My 8x32FL are slightly cold but they have a beautiful color rendition where as my 10x42FL while really bright just never had as much richness as other bins. Mine was a few years old now, is everything still the same as 2006-2007?

Anyway, even without the color richness they were still an all around great bin, decent night owl too.
Click to expand...

I think I'm not as good at discerning what it is tath I see and like in a binocular as you guys, but I did compare my 10x42 SE to a 10x42 FL a couple years ago when I bought the SEs. I found that I prefered the look through the SE even though CA was more evident in certain high contrast situations. I also compared my 8x42 Leica Ultravids to the 8x42 FLs and 8x32 SEs to the 8x32 FL, in all comparisons I had the same preference. I think there might be something in the way the Leicas and Nikons reveal color that is pleasant to me in an almost psycological way.

I guess that to me color rendition, pop and contrast trump brightness. Another of those things that we all perceive differently. Glad you like your Zeiss and that was a very helpful review.
 
John M Robinson said:
I think I'm not as good at discerning what it is tath I see and like in a binocular as you guys, but I did compare my 10x42 SE to a 10x42 FL a couple years ago when I bought the SEs. I found that I prefered the look through the SE even though CA was more evident in certain high contrast situations. I also compared my 8x42 Leica Ultravids to the 8x42 FLs and 8x32 SEs to the 8x32 FL, in all comparisons I had the same preference. I think there might be something in the way the Leicas and Nikons reveal color that is pleasant to me in an almost psycological way.

I guess that to me color rendition, pop and contrast trump brightness. Another of those things that we all perceive differently. Glad you like your Zeiss and that was a very helpful review.
Click to expand...

As the light transmission curves of all the major brands seem pretty similar, albiet at somewhat different peak levels, I wonder if what people perceive as greater ''richness'' or ''vibrancy'' of colour is simply the result of a dimmer image?

I know that my wife's 10 x 36 Bushnell's show deeper colours than my FL, but [to my eye] this is only because everthing looks a bit darker [therefore deeper in shade] in the Bushnell.
 
james holdsworth said:
As the light transmission curves of all the major brands seem pretty similar, albiet at somewhat different peak levels, I wonder if what people perceive as greater ''richness'' or ''vibrancy'' of colour is simply the result of a dimmer image?

I know that my wife's 10 x 36 Bushnell's show deeper colours than my FL, but [to my eye] this is only because everthing looks a bit darker [therefore deeper in shade] in the Bushnell.
Click to expand...

Maybe; the Zeiss are for sure brighter than my Leica's but may be tied with the SEs which are also very bright. That wouldn't explain the difference between Leica and other brands of similar brightness though.

It may just be a perception thing that some people are more sesitive about. There are so many different factors, or qualities involved with these alpha bins, and none of us are exactly alike in what we feel is important. Some guys hate a narrow field of view while others don't even notice it, CA is a deal breaker for some while others don't see it at all, colors; some like warm, others cool, others pure natural and some really like their colors to pop, even if it is a little unnatural.

I could live happily forever with a Zeiss FL, but the one I really pine away for is the Zeiss Classic 7x42. I know the newer FLs beat it in almost every measurable catagorie, but there is something intangible about that older Zeiss and it's easy view that I prefer regardless of other issues. It sounds like you feel the same about the newer Zeiss and that's all that matters, no one can argue with you on that, it's a personal thing that doesnt need validation, you see it therefor it is true.

John

John
 
james holdsworth said:
As the light transmission curves of all the major brands seem pretty similar, albiet at somewhat different peak levels, I wonder if what people perceive as greater ''richness'' or ''vibrancy'' of colour is simply the result of a dimmer image?

I know that my wife's 10 x 36 Bushnell's show deeper colours than my FL, but [to my eye] this is only because everthing looks a bit darker [therefore deeper in shade] in the Bushnell.
Click to expand...

I think that's exactly right. It's easy to induce "richer" and more saturated colors in any binocular by simply stopping it down enough to dim the image a little.
 
brocknroller said:
Also, how did the FL's colors compare to your 10x42 SE?

B.
Click to expand...

I'll answer this from my own comparison. Although I think the FL an overall better bino the one thing that always got me a little was the lack of saturation. I think that's part of the reason they are so bright. The Nikons have a much more pleasing and rich color, no comparison. They also seem to have about .5 power less magnification. I'm sure some scientific instrument can prove to me otherwise but I notice it instantly when flipping between the two.

And although I didn't think it possible the Nikons are the slightest hair sharper. Doesn't really matter though, at least not to me.

As to edge sharpness I have no idea, I put what I'm looking at in the center of the circle.
 
henry link said:
I think that's exactly right. It's easy to induce "richer" and more saturated colors in any binocular by simply stopping it down enough to dim the image a little.
Click to expand...


My own personal gut feeling is that it's the different coatings giving the richer color and not a stop down but I'm just guessing.
 
As this thread is dealing with my impressions of my 10 FL, I will discuss what I see in the bin. in terms of edge characteristics, without starting another thread which would rehash a subject that has been beaten to death.

I think the narrower field of the 10 FL must reduce the amount of visible astigmatism, compared to the 7's and 8's, if user impressions of those models are accurate.

The 10 actually has good / excellent edge performance at certain positions. If you imagine the edge of the FOV as a clock, then the edge from 8 to 4 is very good. The area at the lower edge of the FOV [4 to 8] has astigmatism that is pronounced when viewing objects past about 400 metres. Less than this and I can still clearly read roadsigns, license plates etc.

The thing about this lower edge astigmatism [if that's what it is] is that I can focus out almost all of it, which I thought was not possible.

Anyway, consider this dead horse fully beaten.....
 
The thing about this lower edge astigmatism [if that's what it is] is that I can focus out almost all of it, which I thought was not possible.
Click to expand...

I've not been able to do that on the Victory 8x40 or the FL 7x42 or 10x42. IIRC my previous playing about with this I think these bins all have a flat field and all the edge effects are in astigmatism. I'll take another look tomorrow to make sure I'm not making this up!
 
Nessus said:
My own personal gut feeling is that it's the different coatings giving the richer color and not a stop down but I'm just guessing.
Click to expand...

Henry is probably correct in general principle, but in this particularly instance, I agree with you. In comparing the light curves of the 10x SE vs. 10x FL, it appears to be the bias of coatings that gives the Nikon its "richer" color saturation.

This is from, uh um.., allbinos, but it is not their data but Nikons:

Nikon, as one of just few manufacturers, publishes honestly its instrument’s transmission curve, which, for the blue light (420 nm) amounts to about 70%, then increases very sharply and reaches its maximum at the level significantly above 90% for a wide spectrum from around 550 to 680 nm; for the red light it decreases to about 87%.

Compare that to the 8x56 FL light transmission curve, also courtesy of our Polish friends. :)

http://www.allbinos.com/upload2/24609_zeiss_victory_tr.jpg

The two curves start off the same, with the FL at about 70% in the blue part of the spectrum. The curves are also similar but slightly shifted in the middle range, where the FL reaches its peak transmission from 500 nm to about 640 nm. A little "cooler" than Nikon. But here's where they part company.

In the red spectrum of about 650 nm, the FL falls off precipitously while the Nikon has only 3% less transmission in the red vs. the middle range (87% vs. 90%).

Okay, so case closed, right? Boy, wouldn't it be nice to win a debate with Henry, particularly a technical one, for once? :)

The "fudge factor" is that the aforementioned light curve for the Nikon above is from the HG not SE. However, in comparing the the 10x42 SE (with updated coatings) and the 10x42 HG, I see a similarity in color saturation, particularly in vibrant reds and yellows, with the HGs edging out the SE in overall color saturation.

Here's the speculator in me now saying that I suspect the pattern of the light curve of the 10x42 SE is similar to the HG except with higher transmission at the peak of 96-97%.

Brock
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

E
Age of Used Zeiss Victory SF 10 x 42
Replies
4
Views
649
z-ben
Z
G
In praise of the Zeiss SFL 10x40
Replies
2
Views
998
gweller
G
J
Brief reviews about Zeiss victory SFL 8/10 x40
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Declan Joseph Deasy
D
P
8x42 FL comparisons
Replies
6
Views
1K
Patudo
P
G
Inherited Zeiss binoculars
Replies
4
Views
993
Geometer
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top