• 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 Conquest HD and Victory FL (1 Viewer)

It would be good if we could get back to the original topic....Since it matters very little to me if the SV is better than the HT
 
Seems recently (from what I read in BF) at least two other makers have got there, Kowa and Swarovski, but in the first case the Genesis (with 33 mm obj.) enhancing sharpness, and in the second the SV flat field and contrast, deliberately at the expense of brightness. Yet the Zeiss Victory, wonderfuly, even now, is notably lighter and smaller. (CJ, I was taking time off from BF but you taunted me back in another current Zeiss thread.)

Ok, skirting back to the topic (eventually) ......

Pomp, have you been puffin' muffins again?! :hippy:

I'm having trouble digesting your post due to your lack of comprehension of my simple post! *smacks head / roll eyes smilie* ;)

Let me spell it out in Engrish ......

The x32 Zeiss Victory FL has a light transmission of 95% (as claimed by them), or 94.6% (as measured by Allbino's http://www.allbinos.com/191-binoculars_review-Carl_Zeiss_Victory_8x32_T*_FL.html ). This is astounding for a Schmidt-Pechan roof prism system binocular. In fact it's the highest one I recall ever seeing. The Optics Mavens doggedly dodge commenting on the achievement, and how it doesn't garner more digestion from the Binoholics here, I'll never know ...... |8.|

It bears repeating again - no other roof prism bin comes within cooee of the little x32, not the Kowa Genesis (with 33 mm obj. @91.1% http://www.allbinos.com/182-binoculars_review-Kowa_Genesis_8x33.html ) and not the Swarovski SV (at a similar level). So how the dickens did Zeiss do it ?? :h?: :brains:

Now 95% vs 90% in a 32mm bin IS going to make a difference to most people ...... only the OP can decide if it's a £500 difference though, for no matter what helpful first hand reports one gets, they are all 2nd hand compared to your own eyes ......


Chosun :gh:
 
Of course I reserve the right to ammend, change, or completely recant this position when I finally get the two side by side, and under a variety of lighting, and environmental conditions! :cat:

Chosun :gh:

Guys, calm down.

The lady has made it absolutely clear that she will make her own judgement when she has tried the two bins at the same time.

Can't say fairer than that surely?

TroubaLee
 
CJ, now that you "spell it out in English", I comprehend - but only that you're going by the AllBinos transmission figures. I have myself been astonished for a long time (this with an S-P prism while for all their other models at the time they had worked on the A-K).

I think, i.e. guess, that now Kowa and Swaro. can achieve that brightness if they choose to, but instead give priority to those parameters I mention, in which those two models are better than the Zeiss acc. to most reports. The final 18:19 is pretty close anyway.

The brightness of the Z. Victory FL 8x32 (among its other qualities) received high praise here in BF by many for a long time when it was first produced. As for explaining it maybe the "mavens" share our wonder but cannot do that. And Zeiss will not oblige!

As for Z. Conquest HD vs Z. Victory FL, the original subject of the thread, which you address at the beginning and the end of your post, I was not thinking about it there. Apologies, to all, about "skirting ... the topic".
 
Last edited:
Ah yes pomp - I see now what you're saying about the design decisions of the Kowa Genesis, and SV to go with flat field (extra elements) at the expense of some brightness. I don't agree though, as I still don't think that without those extra elements (they're not worth ~4%), that those two would reach the level of the Zeiss Victory FL x32's. So still some quite unexplained alchemy going on there. :cat:

Anywho, for the OP who is not susceptible to CA, thus taking one of the FL's strongpoints out, as Eitan said, then that extra ~5% brightness of the FL over the HD, and the p**fteenth extra Fov (0.1*) comes at quite a high price, unless other factors like colour rendition, field characteristics, focusing, fit, weight and handling, etc, come into the equation. Maybe that brightness is worth it though, if it lights up the shadows, or usefully extends the low-light viewing time, etc ......

The only way to know for sure is to try them both side by side in a variety of typical conditions and see.


Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:
Chosun Juan is a LADY? I had no idea!

It's so easy to assume that all of the obsessive types in enthusiast forums like this are men, unless there is some obvious moniker which reveals that extra X chromosome (I'm looking at you, Annabeth).
 
Guys, calm down.

The lady has made it absolutely clear that she will make her own judgement when she has tried the two bins at the same time.

Can't say fairer than that surely?

TroubaLee

I didn't think it that big of a deal, and didn't think it warranted the hysterical response.

BUT, its a muggs game to try to 'predict' how something will look, so why don't we all just wait until we actually see something as all this prognostication leads nowhere.

It's like trying to guess how a piece of stereo equipment will sound to your ear, based on a cell phone recording.
 
... brightness ... I still don't think that without those extra elements (they're not worth ~4%), that those two would reach the level of the Zeiss Victory FL x32's.
CJ, am responding to that, though I've got a bit paranoid about going off topic, because this may possibly be relevant in some degree to the Z. Conquest HD also (at a slightly different level of refinement with the pricing constraint) - I was thinking of other factors, too, of course: coatings, glass types, "spectrum tuning", possibly lens curvatures, and the optlcal system overall.

... why don't we all just wait until we actually see something ... It's like trying to guess how a piece of stereo equipment will sound to your ear, based on a cell phone recording.

James, the second idea is surely a bit extreme here! The first idea is no doubt sensible policy in N. America, but some of us elsewhere will have to "just wait" until eternity! Comments such as those by CJ are meant to evoke response, both ways, by those fortunate to have already looked thorugh whatever bin/s in question, and alternative models, finally to try and balance those impressions, before making a choice, when one has no easy access to them. One can ask a flat question, or make a comment like CJ does, obviously tentative. I have myslef done both in BF, and been guided to several purchases. In the process I have called the Leica view "Bollywood", obvious overstatement!

(I'm looking at you, Annabeth)
Eitan, I wish you better luck than <this, 6:46>.
 
Last edited:
CJ, am responding to that, though I've got a bit paranoid about going off topic, because this may possibly be relevant in some degree to the Z. Conquest HD also (at a slightly different level of refinement with the pricing constraint) - I was thinking of other factors, too, of course: coatings, glass types, "spectrum tuning", possibly lens curvatures, and the optlcal system overall.....

Pomp, that's all fine and dandy, and no doubt Swaro has a fine colour balance, and excellent atmospheric crud cutting ability due to, I suspect, its spectral tuning, and use of quasi-HT-like glass to maximise blue transmission ...... however - the point about the Zeiss Victory FL's brightness (95% transmission) still stands. It's head and shoulders above the rest of roofdom, and just to bring things back on topic, could be the extra 5% brightness straw that justifies breaking the OP's bank account camel's back .... :t:

As for 'the' comment, well that was just a bit of a throwaway line ..... a momentary lapse in conscious awareness that BF is the place where humour comes to die! 8-P (especially, it can seem, for those over 'precious' new parents!!) 3:)


Chosun :gh:
 
Yeah, the "spanked your kid" line was pretty funny! 3:) :'D :D8-P o:D :king: B :) :cat:


Chosun :gh:

Just trying to let you know what the actual colour representation is for the HT. I have compared them extensively with everything I have and find that colour palette is very close to my 7x42BGAT/P.

I know, I know, probably not vaild -- as I own both, have used both and have done a side-by-side - so pretty useless.............;)
 
I tried 8x42 fl an hd went for the fl. The view just seemed better, for want of any technical terms, really. Being a two minute drive from an optics shop I have resisted the urge to go look at a HT lest I feel compelled to spend what little money I have!

Will
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top