Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42 or 8x32? (1 Viewer)

Hello all.

I have a Zeiss Terra ED 8x42 which I like a lot. For higher magnifications I use two Canons 18x50 UD and 12x36. For lighter binoculars I use two Pentax, a Papilio 6.5x21 and a vintage ZCF type 8x30.

After a thread here I decided to buy a more portable Zeiss binocular, a Terra ED 8x32 OR a Conquest HD 8x32. We have trouble here sending money abroad (capital controls), so I have to buy from Greece and presumably new since few people are birders here (we have a lot of astronomers though) to find a used Zeiss.

So I was ready to go for the Conquest 8x32 and have 850 euros in cash as they cost new. Now, by coincidence, a fellow sells his new Conquest 8x42 for 850. He used them for one week (I know the guy) and he bought them from a Cyprus store where they said to him that they imported them for a Russian buyer who tested them for a while and he had blackouts, so he exchanged them for a Victory HT. If that's true they are almost new and at the price of the smaller model.

I would like a better 8x42 than the Terras of course. Then what are my concerns?

Well, I wanted something more portable. The 8x42 are heavier than the Terras. If I buy this I will still be wanting a 8x32. Maybe I could buy a Terra or a Conquest later, according to budget, to fill that need (for travel and hikes).

I don't need two 8x42s and the Terras would have to go, but I won't find easily a buyer here, since we don't have a birding forum.

I wanted some more apparent field of view (I have many 100, 82 and 72 degrees eyepieces for astronomy and I am spoiled, but for binoculars 68 would be my nirvana). The Conquests 8x32 have 64 degrees (fair), the Terras 8x32 56 degrees (barely acceptable) and the Conquests 8x42 59. %9 is not what I dreamed of. But how is it in real use, is it restricting? Still, it will be an upgrade from what I have, but a marginal one.

Then it's the weight and dimensions. You can't tell me how it feels, it is subjective, but I find the Terras perfect and 100 grams more with the same strap could be more tiring. Of course I expect them to be more robust.

Finally, although they cost double the money + I know I can't expect "double" performance. Reviews are good, yes. You that used them, could you post your subjective experiene of the Conquest 8x42 vs the Terra 8x42 and Conquest 8x32? In what way they are better than the Terras and which Conquest is the best in day performance, the 32s or 42s?

Thank you for all your input.

Given your preferences just get an 8x32 and be done with.

There are so many posts here comparing the Terras and the Conquests to anything and everything, the forum search should give you more information than you can read in an evening. Just use the forum search.

In short: IMO the Terra is a low-priced, somewhat mediocre binocular. Reasonable value for money though. The Conquest if a medium-priced binocular that's reasonably close to the alphas.

You decide what you want. I'd get the Conquest no question.

Hermann

Thanks. I'm getting the Conquest, I just wanted some help on the 8x42 vs 8x32. I guess my post was confusing, sorry. Let's simplify it.

1. I have the Terra 8x42 and decided to get the Conquest 8x32, to have both apertures at the moment.
2. A Conquest 8x42 emerged. If I get it I will be having two 8x42 and no 8x32.
3. So, I wonder, should I stick to the plan for a Conquest 8x32 or grab the 8x42? Are they equal (the Conquests)?

The question about the Terra (which I already have and know well) is for getting a hint about what to expect.

Sorry if my dilemma is dull but it is impossible to test binoculars here. Good binoculars are rare at the hands of users, they all come from abroad (and have restrictions for sending money abroad, via Paypal or bank transfer) and if we don't like them it is difficult to send them back or find another buyer. Most people are happy with 20-50 euros "binoculars", they (rightly?) think that those prices are insane given the circumstances here.

Boy, I have a feeling that Balcan countries' conditions are alien to most of BF users and perhaps it is hopeless to try to explain them. |=(|

kkokkolis said:

Thanks. I'm getting the Conquest, I just wanted some help on the 8x42 vs 8x32. I guess my post was confusing, sorry. Let's simplify it.

1. I have the Terra 8x42 and decided to get the Conquest 8x32, to have both apertures at the moment.
2. A Conquest 8x42 emerged. If I get it I will be having two 8x42 and no 8x32.
3. So, I wonder, should I stick to the plan for a Conquest 8x32 or grab the 8x42? Are they equal (the Conquests)?

The question about the Terra (which I already have and know well) is for getting a hint about what to expect.

Sorry if my dilemma is dull but it is impossible to test binoculars here. Good binoculars are rare at the hands of users, they all come from abroad (and have restrictions for sending money abroad, via Paypal or bank transfer) and if we don't like them it is difficult to send them back or find another buyer. Most people are happy with 20-50 euros "binoculars", they (rightly?) think that those prices are insane given the circumstances here.

Boy, I have a feeling that Balcan countries' conditions are alien to most of BF users and perhaps it is hopeless to try to explain them. |=(|

Click to expand...

Not dull, but one of those questions only you can answer. Kind of like asking, will I like chocolate ice cream. Nobody knows but you, and you wont until after you try it.

If it were me, I would jump at the Conquest also.

The 8x32 HD is great - get it. Only ''lack'' is stray light control, in some situations. Otherwise, near alpha.

Hi,

since you are looking for a wide angle glass, I'd certainly dismiss the 8x42 HD - it just doesn't fit the bill and will give only a marginal update over the ED 8x42 in terms of FOV although it is hopefully a better glass.

The 8x32 HD fits the bill better with 64 degrees and is probably also a step up in optical and mechanical quality over the Terra ED.

If you're really into wide-angle why not get your nirvana of 69 degrees of apparent FOV and then some and wait until you can get a Nikon 8x30 E II from abroad again... 70.4 degrees AFOV and a beautiful 3D image. Not waterproof or armored though and eye relief might be marginal if you wear glasses. It's a bit larger than the roof models but actually a bit lighter than the 8x32 HD.

Joachim

You are right with the Nikon, but I use to carry the Terra with me and it barely fits my small monosling with all the other stuff I EDC (a Pentax Papilio is included, yes, I carried two binoculars throughout my vacations). That's why I thought about a Roof 8x32.
My Canon 18x50 has 68 degrees which is perfect for me. Conquest 10x32 has 68 degrees also, but no IS.
According to specifications the Conquest 8x32 isn't just (a bit) cheaper, smaller and lighter than the Conquest 8x42. It also has 5 more degrees AFOV and it focuses more than half a meter closer (but I have the Papilio, so not much worry about that).
Eventually, I see myself buying both Conquests. If so, which I buy first is merely circumstantial.

Having Conquests 8x42 and 10x32 is sensible? The later will be a day glass. This way the two will differentiate themselves and I'll be able to choose noot only by aperture but by magnification also. The Canon 12x36 has also a 3mm exit pupil and I catch myself pushing the IS button a 30% of the time I use it, so I might manage a 10x.

8x32 was just reviewed by optyczne.pl see: http://translate.google.com/transla...p?test=lornetki&test_l=298&edit-text=&act=url

kkokkolis said:

Having Conquests 8x42 and 10x32 is sensible?

Click to expand...

KK
If by sensible you mean 'logical' then no. A 10x32 will only give you a 3.2mm exit pupil which some people find rather small and not always easy to line up the eye with, especially wearing spectacles.

But a 10x42 will give you a 4.2mm exit pupil and an 8x32 a 4 mm one and they are so similar you will get used to them easily and have a brighter result in dull conditions.

But hey if an 8x42 and 10x32 is your personal idea of heaven then go for it.

Good luck with your choice.

Lee

kestrel1 said:

8x32 was just reviewed by optyczne.pl see: http://translate.google.com/transla...p?test=lornetki&test_l=298&edit-text=&act=url

Click to expand...

I have no idea how they perform their vignetting tests. When I look through the HD straight on and centred, both exit pupils are perfectly round. If I skew the bin a bit to one side, I get the effect they illustrate.

Even looking through the exit pupil magnified, I still see a perfectly round exit pupil, with no vignetting at all and no parts of the internal components intruding onto the image.

Here is a pic. of the right exit pupil of my 8x32 HD....

Oofda! As my Midwest relatives would say. I think you get a pupil like that when you are utterly desperate to collimate something that doesn't want to be collimated. They trounced the Zen 8x43 for something far less severe.

Their test sample is probably just a very bad sample. At least I hope so.

Mark

Troubador said:

KK
If by sensible you mean 'logical' then no. A 10x32 will only give you a 3.2mm exit pupil which some people find rather small and not always easy to line up the eye with, especially wearing spectacles.

But a 10x42 will give you a 4.2mm exit pupil and an 8x32 a 4 mm one and they are so similar you will get used to them easily and have a brighter result in dull conditions.

But hey if an 8x42 and 10x32 is your personal idea of heaven then go for it.

Good luck with your choice.

Lee

Click to expand...

I don't have to answer that question now. I asked about 10x32 a while ago and ended with a Canon 12x36. This (portable but not as portable and robust as roofs are) Canon 18x50 and Pentax 6.5x21, all three have more or less 3mm exit pupil and I have no problem, I observe most celestial objects at 2mm and planets at 1mm (in perfect conditions down to 0.5mm). I have no problem aligning my eyes and rarely get blackouts or kidney beaning with anything less than 20mm eye relief, no matter if I wear glasses or not, most of my eyepieces (Naglers T4, Deloi, Radians, Hyperions) have 18-20mm of eye relief.

This Conquest exit pupil in the review site is a puzzle, I only saw such a pupil in a 20 euros Bresser and I made it myself (failed colimation experiment).

Kammerdiner said:

Oofda! As my Midwest relatives would say. I think you get a pupil like that when you are utterly desperate to collimate something that doesn't want to be collimated. They trounced the Zen 8x43 for something far less severe.

Their test sample is probably just a very bad sample. At least I hope so.

Mark

Click to expand...

I think Mark has it exactly right. This is what happens when too much eccentricity has been applied to the optics of one side in order the bring the two sides into collimation. I've never understood why Allbinos calls this kind of alignment defect "vignetting" and then goes on to score it as if every specimen of the same binocular will have the same problem.

Henry

Why can't the effect be caused by taking the photo slightly off-centre? That's exactly what I get when I do the same.....

It can be caused by that, but their photo looks like it's aligned well enough to me. In the smaller brighter versions of the exit pupil photos that show the binocular interior you can see that the prism aperture is well centered within the circle made by the eyepiece.

There is certain to be a large amount of coma in that right side.

I dunno, it only takes the slightest off-centering [too small to judge in any photo] to produce a truncated exit pupil. I have long suspected that 'most' of the same conditions reported from Allbinos are from poorly centred photos.

I paid for a pair of Zeiss Conquest 8x42 HD and I should have them by the weekend.
I'll have the opportunity to test them with the Terra ED (I haven't seen a single comparison, I found riflescope comparisons though). Not very elaborate but mainly quality, ergonomics, subjective experience of the optics and resolution USAF 1951.
It is difficult to sell locally the Terra after the comparison, so I hope I might exchange it for another binocular. I was already offered a Vixen Ultima 9x63 which is mostly astronomical, so I won't ask here. I could use it for birding from my balcony though, although 48 degrees AFOV makes me feel claustrophobia. Anyway.
Thanks for your input everybody. My next dilemma is already solved, a Conquest 8x32 (or 10x32), unless the financial situation pushes me to the easier task of a Terra 8x32 (or 10x32).

Congratulations to your new bins - I hope you like them.

PS: We look forward to your comparision!

Joachim

If you don't like the CHDs, you can sell them to me for $14 a month over the next 5.75 years @ 0% financing.

If you get a good sample 8x32 TED, I think you'll find they will compliment your HDs nicely w/out having to spend $700 more on an 8x32 HD.

Brock