Zeiss HT - 2 years on (1 Viewer)

Hermann · Mar 23, 2015

Well, it's about two years since the HT came onto the market in some numbers, and after reading parts of that old monster thread again I began wondering how people who got the 8x42 HT or the 10x42 HT at the time now feel about their bins. Maybe now, after the heated discussions about the SF died down somewhat, is a good time to have a look at the HT again.

Are you still happy with the HT? Any problems to report, for instance with the focuser? What about reliability? Any obvious (or not so obvious) optical differences between the 8x42 and the 10x42, except of course the different magnifications? Anyone here who uses the HTs with the 3x12 booster for IDing birds on a regular basis? And so on.

What I'd rather not see in this thread is yet another discussion of the virtues of field flatteners though. I really do believe that topic has been beaten to death by now, after something like five years of (more or less) continuous discussions here on BF. Those who got the HT knew all along it didn't have field flatteners.

Hermann

james holdsworth · Mar 24, 2015

Hi Hermann,

I have put an estimated 1500 field hours on my HT in two years [using them almost every day for fieldwork and general birding], so I can speak to durability - everything is as new, focus still silky and body still unmarked. The eyecups, that I 1st thought too loose, now feel elegant in their function compared to the rather stiff and sticky FL cups.

Optically, they still impress mightily each and every time I use them. I just had them out this evening, doing Bald Eagle surveys into heavy dusk and they were suberb as ever. In fact, I still have yet to use any optic that has more ''pop'' or ''wow'' to the view - a combination of transparency, brightness, great colour balance and contrast. I see no need to ''upgrade'' to the SF's or anything else, and may just stick with them as my primary binocular for years to come.

eddy the eagle · Mar 24, 2015

I use my 10x42 HT´s daily.They have been excelent since I bought them without any failings whatsoever.I am usualy the first out in the morning and last home at night using them to spot Eurasion eagle owls in near total darkness.Everyone who picks them goes WOW they are bright.I cannot fault them and they will probably outlast me so they can be passed on to the grandchildren when I´m gone.....Eddy

PHA · Mar 24, 2015

Hi!

I sold my FL to buy an HT (end in a very goog deal, indeed...!) some 1 1/2 years ago. Both 10x42. I am VERY PLEASED with the change! Optically, I must say, the differences are not big. But the HT IS BETTER. Has a slightly bigger so-called "sweet spot" and is slightly brighter. Anyway for me, the big difference is in the design of the body: Much better position of the focus wheel. PERFECT for me! And the diopter sistem is a way MUCH, MUCH better in the HT. I have just returned from a Red Deer hunting week. In the Andes. VERY tought, indeed...And the HT worked as expected. AUSTANDING!!!

Best Regards

PHA

joe101 · Mar 24, 2015

I think everybody here knows my story so there is no need for me to harp on it. Optically it is great. Build wise I seem to be in the minority.

Troubador · Mar 24, 2015

My HTs have been laid on in saltwater-soaked seaweed and oozing black peat, have been out for hours in pouring Scottish rain and have been baked in the sun of Southern France. Throughout they have given terrific views and the focuser allows the most exquisite of fine focus adjustments.

Compared with FL the handling is so much better for extended periods of viewing and the view is similar but with added vibrancy and a tiny bit more revealing in shadows.

HT can hold it's head up high in the company of SF. It has it's own personality and capabilities.

Lee

lmans66 · Mar 24, 2015

I have had my HT's since June of 13 ...Can't complain about anything since they are used, abused, dropped once in a while.... in the rain, sun etc... Focus still as sharp as when I first got, focus wheel has no play in it, eye cups are fine etc etc.... I too am still amazed every time I look into these bins. There is nothing I would do differently other than provide a better 'case' for.

They really shine in the shadows and as you look up in the trees at harsh light etc.

When the SF's came out....I thought, hmmmmm..... perhaps. But no....... the HT's are a solid bino with the fit and feel easily the best I have felt or seen. These are lifers. jim

Robert Wallace · Mar 24, 2015

This thread interests me because I am thinking of retiring my Zeiss 10x40 Dialyts after 29 years service (part time).
My thoughts are that the Nikon EDGs 10x42s are better than the Swarovski and Zeiss FLs. So I think the choice might be between the Nikon EDG, the Leica Ultravids HD+ and the HT.
At the Rutland Birdfair I compared the SFs with the HTs and didn't think they were £600 better.
Its the 10x42 that interests me.
I look forward to reading your comments.

Hermann · Mar 24, 2015

After reveiving a private email questioning my intentions of initiating this thread, a few words on why I posted it:

1. I feel the threads that develop immediately after a new binocular has been announced aren't really very useful at all since there's just too much speculation based on nothing but hot air. Any relevant postings on the performance of the binocular are lost in the noise.

2. After two years any real weaknesses in the construction and/or performance of a binocular should have become apparent. Any evaluation of a binocular after prolonged use is much more interesting than the "first impressions" posted after a five minute (or even a two hour) trial. That doesn't mean those first impressions aren't of any value, only that an evaluation based on many hours in the field has got to be much more sound, especially when it comes to the mechanical quality of a binocular.

3. I also believe the very real qualities of the HT have become sort of lost in the noise generated by the announcement of the SF. After the SF was announced many people immediately concluded that it (and not the HT) were *the* binoculars to look at, despite the rather obvious advantages of a more traditional roof with AK-prisms rather than the potentially much more troublesome SP-prisms.

Hermann

Pileatus · Mar 24, 2015

Hermann said:
After reveiving a private email questioning my intentions of initiating this thread, a few words on why I posted it:

1. I feel the threads that develop immediately after a new binocular has been announced aren't really very useful at all since there's just too much speculation based on nothing but hot air. Any relevant postings on the performance of the binocular are lost in the noise.

2. After two years any real weaknesses in the construction and/or performance of a binocular should have become apparent. Any evaluation of a binocular after prolonged use is much more interesting than the "first impressions" posted after a five minute (or even a two hour) trial. That doesn't mean those first impressions aren't of any value, only that an evaluation based on many hours in the field has got to be much more sound, especially when it comes to the mechanical quality of a binocular.

3. I also believe the very real qualities of the HT have become sort of lost in the noise generated by the announcement of the SF. After the SF was announced many people immediately concluded that it (and not the HT) were *the* binoculars to look at, despite the rather obvious advantages of a more traditional roof with AK-prisms rather than the potentially much more troublesome SP-prisms.

Hermann

:t:

Kammerdiner · Mar 24, 2015

Troubador said:
My HTs have been laid on in saltwater-soaked seaweed and oozing black peat, have been out for hours in pouring Scottish rain and have been baked in the sun of Southern France. Throughout they have given terrific views and the focuser allows the most exquisite of fine focus adjustments.

...
Lee

I swear this was the first thing that came to mind when I read that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2YvYiWtovM

Troubador · Mar 24, 2015

Hermann said:
I also believe the very real qualities of the HT have become sort of lost in the noise generated by the announcement of the SF. After the SF was announced many people immediately concluded that it (and not the HT) were *the* binoculars to look at, despite the rather obvious advantages of a more traditional roof with AK-prisms rather than the potentially much more troublesome SP-prisms.

Hermann

Hermann

I think you are right Hermann.
IMHO SF has not made HT obsolete at all. They are different bins and have different appeals.

Lee

Troubador · Mar 24, 2015

Kammerdiner said:
I swear this was the first thing that came to mind when I read that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2YvYiWtovM

Mark

Will you stop posting wise-ass remarks on here and get on with coupling those Coke bottles together. It can't be that difficult for Pete's sake. :-O

And don't forget to put the old Z logo on the end of the hinge as well as the blue shield on one tube.

And I want nicely adjusting eyecups please.

And kindly rinse the bottles out with clean water before you send them, I can't abide the smell of stale, flat Coke.

Thank you.

Lee

Kammerdiner · Mar 25, 2015

Troubador said:
Mark

Will you stop posting wise-ass remarks on here and get on with coupling those Coke bottles together. It can't be that difficult for Pete's sake. :-O

And don't forget to put the old Z logo on the end of the hinge as well as the blue shield on one tube.

And I want nicely adjusting eyecups please.

And kindly rinse the bottles out with clean water before you send them, I can't abide the smell of stale, flat Coke.

Thank you.

Lee

Hinge? You want a hinge? I'll have to get back to you on that. :-C

And I'm having some trouble with 12-axis collimation, but the genius of my design is that there's NO WAY anyone can tell if they aren't collimated anyway. Why hasn't anyone thought of this?!?

The eyecups will be made of 100 layers of bicycle inner tubes. Sorry, Oetzi, I stole the idea from you because I couldn't find any patent infringements.

Anyway, sorry to intrude in this thread. Like Hermann said, long-term views from actual users matter most. And it sounds to me like the HT is a long-term winner. :t:

Mark

oetzi · Mar 25, 2015

A great thread.
Solid, longtime personal experience condensed.

Elmer Fudd · Mar 25, 2015

oetzi said:
A great thread.
Solid, longtime personal experience condensed.

A great thread in every way!

Because of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2YvYiWtovM

I found this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wveW9Tw2JKE

which led to this:

http://www.lyricsmania.com/dont_lets_be_beastly_to_the_germans_lyrics_noel_coward.html

I am always interested in stuff like that.

Hard to believe that all these people gathered in this forum wouldn't have talked about glass, plastic and steel in this fine manner about 75 years ago.

oetzi · Mar 25, 2015

So good, it has to be read in a leisurely pace.

Lyrics to Don't Let's Be Beastly To The Germans

Don't let's be beastly to the Germans,
Now our victory is ultimately won.
Let us treat them very kindly,
As we would a valued friend.
We might them out some bishops,
As a form of lease and lend.

Let's be sweet to them
And day by day repeat to them
That sterilization simply isn't done.
Let's sweetly sympathize again,
And help the scum to rise again,
But don't let's be beastly to the Hun.

We must be kind
And with an open mind,
We must endeavour to find a way
To let the Germans know
That now the war is over,
They are not the ones who have to pay.

We must be sweet
And tactful and discreet,
And now they've suffered defeat,
We mustn't let
Them feel upset,
Or ever get the feeling
That we're cross with them or hate them.
Our future policy must be to reinstate them.

Don't let's be beastuly to the Germans,
For they're civilized,
When all is said and done.
Though they gave us science, culture, art, and music, to excess,
They also gave us two world wars and Dr. Rudolph Hess.

Let's be meek to them
And turn the other cheek to them,
And try to arouse their latent sense of fun.
Let's give them full air parity,
And treat the rats with charity,
But don't let's be beastly to the Hun!

Don't let's be beastly to the Germans.
You can't deprive a gangster of his gun!
Though they've been a little naughty
To the Czechs and Poles and Dutch,
I can't believe those countries
Really minded very much.

Let's be free with them
And share the BBC with them.
We mustn't prevent them basking in the sun!
Let's soften their defeat again,
And build their bloody fleet again,
But don't let's be beastly to the Hun!

Sagittarius · Mar 29, 2015

Except for better balance and field of view, I can't see the SF being that much better than the HT. (if at all)
The SF doesn't have HT glass and Abbe Konig prisms and therefore cannot quite equal the HT in low light situations.

I'm still thrilled with my HT, after 2 years. :t:
Odd how Zeiss, who for years extolled the virtues of Abbe Konig prisms as superior to the competition's Schmidt Pechan, now touts a binocular of their own design, using those same inferior prisms, as the best on the planet ! |:||

Elmer Fudd · Mar 30, 2015

Sagittarius said:
Except for better balance and field of view, I can't see the SF being that much better than the HT. (if at all)
The SF doesn't have HT glass and Abbe Konig prisms and therefore cannot quite equal the HT in low light situations.

I'm still thrilled with my HT, after 2 years. :t:
Odd how Zeiss, who for years extolled the virtues of Abbe Konig prisms as superior to the competition's Schmidt Pechan, now touts a binocular of their own design, using those same inferior prisms, as the best on the planet ! |:||

What HT bins do you exactly have?

Sagittarius · Mar 30, 2015

10x42, Elmer.

Zeiss HT - 2 years on (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Consulting Biologist

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

Out Birding....

Well-known member

Well-known member

"Experientia Docet”

Well-known member

Moderator

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread