I didn't notice the pronounced 3D effect when I tried the Zeiss 10x42 HT. I wonder if it is just in the 8x42 HT. Could be. A roof rivaling a porro for 3D. That is a new revelation in my eyes. After trying them both I am like Lee in that I don't really think the HT is competing at the same level as the SF because there is a significant price difference between the two. The SF to my eyes is a superior binocular. I believe the marketing is like the Swarovski SLC and the Swarovski SV with the HT being the SLC equivalent and the SF being the SV equivalent. To most people the SV is superior to the SLC and is considered Swarovski's top binocular and I feel the Zeiss SF is Zeiss's top binocular also with the HT a rung down the food chain from it. The SF definitely has a more expensive complex eyepiece for example and like the SV better ergonomics than the HT and it is lighter at least in feel and has a much larger FOV..
Yes ,a lot of people like the SLC but it is not Swaro's "Top Gun" the SV is. The SLC is for people that are bothered by RB and don't like flat fields and sharp to the edge optics.
Don't look through an SF then. You will probably trade your HT in. The SF offers more than that. It feels much lighter in the hand than the HT, it has better ergonomics, and of course the bigger FOV which is sharp to the edge. I think if you got used to an SF your HT would feel tunnel-like in comparison. Just my observation when I compared them.
" although of course not matching a porro prism" Thank you for that! I didn't notice a huge 3D image in the Zeiss 10x42 HT but maybe the 8x42 HT is different. I would think the objective spacing would be the same on both the 8x and 10x HT. My point is when I compared the 10x42 SF to the 10x42 HT the SF BLEW me away and the HT was like Eeegh aaah it's alright. Hence the thread why buy an HT? 3D image to me is not a big deal. I sold my Nikon 8x32 SE's because I like the roof image of my SV's better. I still did not see a big difference in 3D image between the SF and the HT. If I was going to buy a Zeiss I guarantee it would have an SF on it. After I tried the SF I said no wonder Lee likes these this is a great binocular. Honestly after all the criticism of the SF I would say if you can afford one buy it. You will not be disappointed.
No, I would dump my 8x32 SV and buy the 8x42 SF. I like the 10x50 SV more than the 8x32 SV. I like the easy view of a 5mm EP. I have not seen any bargains yet on the SF's though. They remain sky high.
Cabella's and Sportman's Warehouse. Cabella's in Thornton has the Zeiss 10x42 SF and Sportman's Warehouse in Thornton has the Zeiss 10x42 HT. The SF is not in the glass case at Cabella's. I think they keep it in a special locked vault or something. Online they showed stock on one and I asked the clerk where it was and it took him 15 minutes to find it under the center shelf. He was looking among all these green Swarovski boxes when lo and behold I saw this expensive looking blue and white box stashed among the green boxes. He pulled out this huge expensive looking box that just smelled German and said here it is. Upon opening it it revealed a very nice expensive looking case and there were the Zeiss SF's. All kidding aside they are very impressive binoculars. I hate to say this but Lee is right the Zeiss SF's are very nice but when is the price going to come down? I checked stock at all three Cabella's on the SF and now they are out of stock so some lucky birder bought them.
