-
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.
SF Review - Scope Views, Roger Vine (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NDhunter
- Start date
PeterPS
Well-Known Member
I agree with Lee, the reviewer got a lemon (beaten-to-death review unit?). I have handled several examples of the SF, both in 10x42 and 8x42, and here is my experience:
"armour is thin and the strap lugs are plastic [magnesium actually], the eye cups quite flimsy"
Armor is thin but tactile and pleasant to touch. The eyecups are made of plastic but they work quite well and do the job.
"More seriously, the armour on the test pair was loose in places, making scrunching noises when pressed."
I have never experienced that
"there is all that dust in the left barrel."
There are a few dust particles, but that's true for most bins.
"loose eye cups"
Nope
"the uneven finish on the bridge"
What?
"the loose and wobbly diopter knob"
IMO SF's knob is one of the best: easy to adjust, lockable, and visible all the time.
"armour is thin and the strap lugs are plastic [magnesium actually], the eye cups quite flimsy"
Armor is thin but tactile and pleasant to touch. The eyecups are made of plastic but they work quite well and do the job.
"More seriously, the armour on the test pair was loose in places, making scrunching noises when pressed."
I have never experienced that
"there is all that dust in the left barrel."
There are a few dust particles, but that's true for most bins.
"loose eye cups"
Nope
"the uneven finish on the bridge"
What?
"the loose and wobbly diopter knob"
IMO SF's knob is one of the best: easy to adjust, lockable, and visible all the time.
Last edited:
dwever
Well-known member
Nope, the reviewer says he bought them anonymously and new in the Summary section of his review. Given another BFer's concurrence on this thread and similar other posts, hard to see this as isolated, but perhaps isolated to this extreme.
I've also handled numerous SF's, mostly at Woods and Water in Tuscaloosa (being from Gainesville [Florida?], you've heard of Tuscaloosa right?:eek!
and it would generally be hard for me to say if some of those issues existed unless specifically looking for them.Well said sir.
Last edited:
Steve C
Well-known member
There were reports of QC issues when the first SF's were released. These issues sounded a lot like what are described in the review from the OP. Other user posts sounded a lot like what Chuck describes with his SF.
This poses a couple of questions. The first is if the review model, which was purchased anonymously (according to the review) was an early release SF that had been in the box on the shelf for awhile? If memory serves it seems the SF Chuck got was from the time period they were first available. The next and biggest question is whether or not Zeiss has taken any pains to correct these issues?
Things like the internal debris from the photos in the review are certainly not to be expected nor appreciated...either by the consumer or Zeiss. Loose diopter dials should never have seen release into the wild either. However because one sample has a loose dial, that shoul dnot be taken to mean the SF in general has the issue.
I'm not getting into the loose armor too far other than to say all binoculars tend to have some armor looseness and user perceptions can vary a lot. Just how far was the squinching of armor being carried out to get noises?
When prices reach these levels, things need to be better sorted out before the binocular is boxed and shipped. Most of the user described issues should be discoverable within a time span of a few minute examination, again, before it is boxed and shipped.
This poses a couple of questions. The first is if the review model, which was purchased anonymously (according to the review) was an early release SF that had been in the box on the shelf for awhile? If memory serves it seems the SF Chuck got was from the time period they were first available. The next and biggest question is whether or not Zeiss has taken any pains to correct these issues?
Things like the internal debris from the photos in the review are certainly not to be expected nor appreciated...either by the consumer or Zeiss. Loose diopter dials should never have seen release into the wild either. However because one sample has a loose dial, that shoul dnot be taken to mean the SF in general has the issue.
I'm not getting into the loose armor too far other than to say all binoculars tend to have some armor looseness and user perceptions can vary a lot. Just how far was the squinching of armor being carried out to get noises?
When prices reach these levels, things need to be better sorted out before the binocular is boxed and shipped. Most of the user described issues should be discoverable within a time span of a few minute examination, again, before it is boxed and shipped.
Last edited:
Yeah I agree for the most part. Seriously....pulled the SF out of the box and was like...ahhhhh...oh oh. Creaking armoring is kinda like a dash on your car that rattles.. Car still drives fine but it sure isn't confidence inspiring. I'm trying to think how many binoculars I have actually PURCHASED...from $49.00 to about $2,800 and only one has creaked out of the box and only one has armoring that stains....
My HT hasn't missed a beat. Perfectly from the first moment and every minute since. I wouldn't hesitate for one second on recommending an HT....especially if one has the rolling ball issue...
I don't know the manufacturing date of my SF. Is there a way to tell what date any SF is made to see if issues are with early or late manufacturing dates?
At any rate....due to the creaking and MAINLY staining armoring, Zeiss should have received my SF to hopefully correct these issues. It was returned 03/08...
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Build Quality Just Fine
I'm not sure what is going on with the referenced review, but in my experience, the build quality of the Zeiss SF has been just fine. My brother, two friends and I have the SF 10X42 and none of us have had any of these problems. I have also seen several 10X42 SF units in the store and several more at shows, all again without any of these problems.
The barrels are clean, the diopter knob is nice and tight along with the armor and as I have mentioned in previous posts, the composite eye cups have advantages over metal. The Zeiss eye cup only has one intermediate position (with a very positive lock) which may give it a marketing disadvantage, but not much of a real use disadvantage. The edges of the eye cups are more comfortable against the face than the eye cup edges of the Swaro ELs that I have.
Every so often someone will post that they looked at an SF and they did not think it was as robust as say a Swaro. In all due respect, I do not know where that is coming from. I suspect it is because the SF has a much lighter feel because of the excellent balance. There are only a few members that have the knowledge to pass judgment on the build quality of a high end binocular, and only after they had a chance to disassemble it for inspection. I have EDG, Zeiss SF, and Swaro EL models and they appear just fine in build quality to me. There is no way I could pass judgment that one is of better quality than the other based on casual inspection because I (along with most members) do not have that kind of knowledge.
Time will tell if a binocular has a particular issue but the SF has been out about a year and a half and I have not noticed any trends being reported. All brands, including Swaro, Zeiss and Leica, have an occasional post reporting an isolated issue. There is nothing about any of the current high end brands that cause me concern.
I use the SF just about every day without problems. My concerns about quality issues are zero. I also feel confident if there should be an issue with it (or with the ELs), Zeiss (or Swaro) will take care of it.
I'm not sure what is going on with the referenced review, but in my experience, the build quality of the Zeiss SF has been just fine. My brother, two friends and I have the SF 10X42 and none of us have had any of these problems. I have also seen several 10X42 SF units in the store and several more at shows, all again without any of these problems.
The barrels are clean, the diopter knob is nice and tight along with the armor and as I have mentioned in previous posts, the composite eye cups have advantages over metal. The Zeiss eye cup only has one intermediate position (with a very positive lock) which may give it a marketing disadvantage, but not much of a real use disadvantage. The edges of the eye cups are more comfortable against the face than the eye cup edges of the Swaro ELs that I have.
Every so often someone will post that they looked at an SF and they did not think it was as robust as say a Swaro. In all due respect, I do not know where that is coming from. I suspect it is because the SF has a much lighter feel because of the excellent balance. There are only a few members that have the knowledge to pass judgment on the build quality of a high end binocular, and only after they had a chance to disassemble it for inspection. I have EDG, Zeiss SF, and Swaro EL models and they appear just fine in build quality to me. There is no way I could pass judgment that one is of better quality than the other based on casual inspection because I (along with most members) do not have that kind of knowledge.
Time will tell if a binocular has a particular issue but the SF has been out about a year and a half and I have not noticed any trends being reported. All brands, including Swaro, Zeiss and Leica, have an occasional post reporting an isolated issue. There is nothing about any of the current high end brands that cause me concern.
I use the SF just about every day without problems. My concerns about quality issues are zero. I also feel confident if there should be an issue with it (or with the ELs), Zeiss (or Swaro) will take care of it.
Last edited:
I bought a pair of SF 8x42 last month and feel very happy with them. I've never owned Swaros, just tried them out in several retailers and realise optically they're different in colour cast but just as good. All the comments about build quality don't seem to apply to the unit I bought though I suppose it's early days. What I would say is that the SFs are a delight to hold and a dream to focus, important to me as I 've been used to holding very heavy Trinovids. I like the overall look of them but realise this is personal taste to a degree. Optically, I can't imagine an image I'd be much happier with. I'm posting here as I feel that in contrast to other posters on this thread I'm very much a layman in my knowledge but one who really loves this product. I would recommend them to anyone. Immersive FOV too!
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Like Jerry, I also have the Nikon EDG-II and the Zeiss SF, both in a 10X42. The EDG was my all time favorite until getting the Zeiss SF. I now prefer the SF over the EDG without hesitation.
Two of the more obvious advantages of the SF are the wider field of view and the better balance. Both of these improvements are quite noticeable. I also think the SF has a more neutral color balance. (The Nikon shows a little red/pink color balance.) The SF view has more life (better contrast?) and detail stands out better. The view of the Nikon is excellent but the SF is just that much more excellent!
The mechanics are a little nicer on the SF. For some reason, the eye cups on the Nikon tend to turn in although they do not seem that loose. (Must be gremlins!) Also the hinge is on the loose side and it may be getting more so over time (as reported by others). These are only minor issues.
The Nikon EDG is excellent, but I do not see any improvement over the SF you already have. The Nikon does have a slightly nicer focus mechanism but there is nothing wrong with the focus mechanism on my SF.
The Nikon EDG-II feels just fine in the hand. It does not feel like a lump at all. Take a look at a photo and notice the curves of the barrels. They fit the palm of the hand real well. The Nikon has a nice hold but it is more front heavy than the SF. I prefer the SF balance over the EDG and the EDG over the Swaro EL 10X50 that I have.
My big concern about the EDG is if Nikon plans to continue in the high end market. They have disappeared from the birding scene. One of the high end reps told me last fall that he does not even consider Nikon a competitor any more. I have doubts as to what kind of service support will be available for the EDG over the long term.
There are two generations of the EDG. The first gen has a dual hinge design and the second has a single hinge. The general consensus is that they are the same optically, but the EDG-II is superior mechanically. If you do get an EDG, go for the EDG-II.
The primary reasons for buying an EDG over a Zeiss SF would be if it is available for a much lower price or if a shorter binocular is required. Just looking at the optical quality and the over all package, for me, the Zeiss SF is the much better choice.
It will be interesting to see what Jerry has to say.
dwever
Well-known member
On ANY High-End Product Forum
1. A high end product is reviewed with an/some issue(s); or a member reports a product problem.
2. The issue(s) resonates on some level(s) with the experience of one or more other owners.
3. At or before the issue(s) appear to be trending on some level, a comment is inevitably made how unacceptable such QC is that it ever got out the door. Other members say "here here" and drink to that!
4. One or more members, an owner most of the time, comes vociferously to the product's defense. They have not seen the issue in their own sample and most often any other sample for that matter. Their defense may include some general derision to previous posters.
Hey, everyone's experience is different and everone's telling the truth. It's a vast retail market out there with untold factors to account for varying individual experience to include QC. How much of this would go away if we couldn't order on-line and we were just buying stuff across the glass cabinet we personally inspected? I just ordered some 7x42's today from Joel at CamerLand and I hope very very much to keep them!
I know at one time slop in the focusing wheel was reportedly an issue for some Leica Alphas and I was bit by that once jumping on some demo stock. I know my Zeiss Marine's are tanks and quite possibly bomb proof. Glad some are getting the SF's with zero issues. I know at the moment, taking everything in balance, for me I would be very cautious and would instead move towards the HT's. Peace.
1. A high end product is reviewed with an/some issue(s); or a member reports a product problem.
2. The issue(s) resonates on some level(s) with the experience of one or more other owners.
3. At or before the issue(s) appear to be trending on some level, a comment is inevitably made how unacceptable such QC is that it ever got out the door. Other members say "here here" and drink to that!
4. One or more members, an owner most of the time, comes vociferously to the product's defense. They have not seen the issue in their own sample and most often any other sample for that matter. Their defense may include some general derision to previous posters.
Hey, everyone's experience is different and everone's telling the truth. It's a vast retail market out there with untold factors to account for varying individual experience to include QC. How much of this would go away if we couldn't order on-line and we were just buying stuff across the glass cabinet we personally inspected? I just ordered some 7x42's today from Joel at CamerLand and I hope very very much to keep them!
I know at one time slop in the focusing wheel was reportedly an issue for some Leica Alphas and I was bit by that once jumping on some demo stock. I know my Zeiss Marine's are tanks and quite possibly bomb proof
. Glad some are getting the SF's with zero issues. I know at the moment, taking everything in balance, for me I would be very cautious and would instead move towards the HT's. Peace.
Last edited:
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Bruce:
I will tag on to your post, as I agree with much of your thoughts about
the Nikon EDG and the Zeiss SF. The SF is brighter than the EDG, and also the SV.
I rate the quality of build about equal with all of these, the SF eyecups are
plastic, but that is how Zeiss has been making them for many years with success.
The wider FOV, balance, handling and ergos. also prefer the SF. I rate the optics of all of these binoculars very nice, and I have no nits to pick with any of them. The focuser of the EDG and the SF are superb, my first SV, was
not so smooth.
As far as the armor being loose, that is a question I had when I first got
mine. The armor on the SF is designed to be a bit loose, not cemented and is ribbed underneath to allow some give in case of a fall, to prevent damage.
It is a non-issue to me.
I received this from Gary a Zeiss tech. who posts on here. Many retailers
and others at Zeiss are not even aware of this feature, I asked Zeiss in the
US and they did not know a thing about it.
This is an area where Zeiss could train their help better. Too bad if someone
returned one if this was the reason.
I don't like to play favorites, and right now I am in my office watching 2 northern flickers having fun pecking in my lawn.
I am using a Leica.
Jerry
I agree with Steve. Especially at the price level of the Zeiss SF every binocular should be individually inspected for defects. It is surprising to me that these quality control problems were not detected before the binoculars got out on the market especially the first ones produced. You know people are going to be looking closely at the initial production run. Obviously most Zeiss SF binoculars were fine but there have been some reviews and several members where they said they had quality problems.
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
So, are you worried about the focus on your SV crapping out? After all, we have had lots of reports of this problem, dating back to their introduction. It's been 6 years and yet we keep getting reports of dodgy SV focusers - what's up with that?
It's not that I would give a pass to the SF quality issues - I have commented here previously that it is unacceptable for such a costly device - but perspective and objectivity are needed.
Thanks for your viewpoint Chill6x6. I really laughed at your comment::-O
"Seriously....pulled the SF out of the box and was like...ahhhhh...oh oh. Creaking armoring is kinda like a dash on your car that rattles.. Car still drives fine but it sure isn't confidence inspiring. I'm trying to think how many binoculars I have actually PURCHASED...from $49.00 to about $2,800 and only one has creaked out of the box and only one has armoring that stains...."
I laughed at the humorous way you related your problems but I am truly sorry though you had trouble with your new SF's.:-C It is disappointing to spend that much money and not get what you expected. That is why QA is so important. I am sure Zeiss will correct your problems.
"Seriously....pulled the SF out of the box and was like...ahhhhh...oh oh. Creaking armoring is kinda like a dash on your car that rattles.. Car still drives fine but it sure isn't confidence inspiring. I'm trying to think how many binoculars I have actually PURCHASED...from $49.00 to about $2,800 and only one has creaked out of the box and only one has armoring that stains...."
I laughed at the humorous way you related your problems but I am truly sorry though you had trouble with your new SF's.:-C It is disappointing to spend that much money and not get what you expected. That is why QA is so important. I am sure Zeiss will correct your problems.
Last edited:
Dennis,
How about identifying the post where the quotes you highlighted in black came from so we can read them in their original context. OK?
Bob
Last edited:
The Swaro focusers have been dodgy in the past. That is true. They use a grease less system so they work in cold temperatures and a spring tension system I am told that sometimes causes them to be easier in one direction and have stiction. My 10x50 SV had a little stiction in both directions that wasn't too bad but it bothered me. I sent it in to Swarovski and in about a month they returned it free of charge. Honestly, Swarovski has the best customer service I have ever experienced from any company in my life. They have sent me countless eye cups, lens covers and cases free of charge. I am not sure what they did to the focus but it is perfect now. No stiction and the same tension in both directions. It makes me wonder why they don't do it in the first place because the focus can be corrected. I have heard the newer Fieldpro models have smooth focusers so perhaps they have solved the problem. Time will tell. I am not saying Swarovski's are perfect but I have had many for years and the focus is the only issue I have had but I have also had many Zeiss binoculars including the older FL's of many sizes and their compact Victories and I have never had a problem with them either. To me having QA problems like this is not the Zeiss I have known. That is why this talk of loose armour and staining is strange. None of my FL's or any other Zeiss I had had these kind of problems. They have always been a superb binocular. I even had the Zeiss 8x56 FL for awhile and it had awesome optics but I just couldn't carry the weight. Not one problem with it.
Last edited:
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Our opinions are subjective, the same as always. The 10X42SF was only just OK for me, the 8.5 SV is WELL ahead of it overall in my opinion. The only other glass I feel the need to see now would be the latest 8 or 10 power FL of some configuration to see if I also find the CA levels to be miniscule. Bottom line, if you want to find the best binocular for your eyes, be prepared to spend a lot of time and money trying most of the Alphas side by side without time constraints. Not an easy task.
Last edited:
PeterPS
Well-Known Member
Bruce:
Thanks for your detailed comments. You are exactly right:
*If you shop around you can get an EDG for a lower price than SF's
(not my main reason, though)
*The EDG is shorter and fits more easily in a small backpack, and indeed I want an EDG for travel.
However my primary reason is the fact that the EDG might have better glare control. The SF is often said to have excellent glare resistance. I find that to be only partly true. Maybe I am more sensitive to glare than other people? Maybe sensitivity to glare, like to CA, is an individual thing?
Peter
Den
Please stop highlighting text in bold.
This is the internet equivalent of shouting in peoples' faces.
It isn't polite.
If you want to give added emphasis to some words or phrases you could put them in italics.
Lee
The-Wanderer
Well-known member
"This June, I was lucky enough to get invited to an advance showing of the new Zeiss Victory SF binocular at Zeiss's production facility in Wexler, Germany. This is their new premium binocular, designed especially with birders in mind. What an eye-opening experience!
I got to watch highly skilled craftsmen meticulously creating the binoculars, one by one. They assembled the parts*with infinite attention, checking and re-checking at each step to make sure the quality was impeccable, making sure the experience of using the binocular would be completely satisfying."
Source: Diane Porter http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/zeiss/zeiss_victory_sf.html
Does anyone know if Roger Vine returned the bin and, if he did, what the response was?
His product would probably be regarded as unfit for the intended purpose in the UK, i don' t know the equivalent term in the US - delinquent?
I got to watch highly skilled craftsmen meticulously creating the binoculars, one by one. They assembled the parts*with infinite attention, checking and re-checking at each step to make sure the quality was impeccable, making sure the experience of using the binocular would be completely satisfying."
Source: Diane Porter http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/zeiss/zeiss_victory_sf.html
Does anyone know if Roger Vine returned the bin and, if he did, what the response was?
His product would probably be regarded as unfit for the intended purpose in the UK, i don' t know the equivalent term in the US - delinquent?
