Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Friday 13th October 2017, 07:26   #51
Gzoladz74
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Dublin
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Well done Dublin man. Please let us know what you think of them when you have had time to try them out.

Lee
Will do - mine will be an end user comment though, lacking all the technicalities ussually displayed in the forum by the experts (which are great contributions and I enjoy reading).

It actually reminds me when I got my Victory SF 8x42 a few years back. I was looking to upgrade and went to the shop ready to buy another model from a different brand, which cost less than half the price of the Zeiss (again, after months of research and testing).

So I tried that brand/model one last time and compared it vs the Swarovision (which I had already tested) and the Zeiss Victory (which for some reason I hadn't) and was blown away primarily by the "immersive" field of view. It made it feel as if I was perching on the branch next to the bird I was watching...so back to the drawing board, additional research, additional test at different times of the day and went for the Victory at the end. Right decission.

The pocket should arrive today, just in time for the weekend.
Gzoladz74 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 13th October 2017, 23:01   #52
Gzoladz74
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Dublin
Posts: 68
Just arrived...some initial impressions...
-They literally are baby Victory...same strap and case as the sf but smaller.
-Strap light and comfortable.
-The case's size is what I expected it to be. I red somewhere that some found it too big, but I thought it would be this size. Not to put in your pocket though.
-I only tested them briefly at night, they are a little bit brighter than the 8x20, but not a lot. Field of view is noticeable wider.
-Main size difference vs the 8x20 is its lenght.
-I wish the eye relief was a little longer. My eyelashes as a bit long so they get to touch the front lens, what is a bit annoying. This was worst with the 8x20 and doesn't happen with the sf 8x42. Personally this is something to watch.
-Eye placement is easier than with the 8x20, but I need to test it further.
-I will test it further tomorrow with particular attention to glare control as the difference between the 8x20 and the 8x42 is huge in this regard.
Gzoladz74 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th October 2017, 13:34   #53
Gzoladz74
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Dublin
Posts: 68
Brief update after this morning... Optic performance is outstanding, no need to elaborate much here. Glare control is excellent, probably at the level of the sf 8x42. It feels very light and comfortable in the hand, my finger rests naturally on the focus knob, which had the right resistance.

I am still getting used to the eyelashes thing I mentioned before as I like resting the binocs against my face, but I need to use them for more hours and time will tell.

Any q feel free to ask.
Gzoladz74 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th October 2017, 14:29   #54
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzoladz74 View Post
Brief update after this morning... Optic performance is outstanding, no need to elaborate much here. Glare control is excellent, probably at the level of the sf 8x42. It feels very light and comfortable in the hand, my finger rests naturally on the focus knob, which had the right resistance.

I am still getting used to the eyelashes thing I mentioned before as I like resting the binocs against my face, but I need to use them for more hours and time will tell.

Any q feel free to ask.
Check the user instructions to find out if the eyecups remove for cleaning. If they do you could put a 1.0 or 1.5mm thick rubber o-ring underneath the eyecup to give you a bit more clearance for your eyelashes. Before doing this, unscrew them by this amount and make sure you can still see the full field of view. The other solution is to dab an electric razor against the tips of your lashes and just 'shave' off a tiny amount.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 15th October 2017, 08:39   #55
Gzoladz74
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Dublin
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Check the user instructions to find out if the eyecups remove for cleaning. If they do you could put a 1.0 or 1.5mm thick rubber o-ring underneath the eyecup to give you a bit more clearance for your eyelashes. Before doing this, unscrew them by this amount and make sure you can still see the full field of view. The other solution is to dab an electric razor against the tips of your lashes and just 'shave' off a tiny amount.

Lee
Thanks, good idea, just checked and unfortunately they are not removable like the sf's. I need to spend hours with them before doing anything as sometimes you naturally find the best way to use them.

Another option...many years ago I got a pair of winged eyecups from Ace Optiocs. They are a bit expensive but I find them fantastic and I have used them in every binocular every since. I have now ordered a "compact" pair from them as I can easily gain 1 or 2mm with them with the addition benefit of blocking light coming from the side (that is exactly what I do with the "standard size" binocs, so it should work with the compacts.
Gzoladz74 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 15th October 2017, 09:42   #56
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzoladz74 View Post
Thanks, good idea, just checked and unfortunately they are not removable like the sf's. I need to spend hours with them before doing anything as sometimes you naturally find the best way to use them.

Another option...many years ago I got a pair of winged eyecups from Ace Optiocs. They are a bit expensive but I find them fantastic and I have used them in every binocular every since. I have now ordered a "compact" pair from them as I can easily gain 1 or 2mm with them with the addition benefit of blocking light coming from the side (that is exactly what I do with the "standard size" binocs, so it should work with the compacts.
Neat solution for anyone who does not wear spectacles. Good luck.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 20th October 2017, 18:43   #57
Gzoladz74
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Dublin
Posts: 68
A few hours using it and getting used to, combined with the winged eyecups is making a difference... They feel much more comfortable every time. The fov is just amazing.
Gzoladz74 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th November 2017, 05:12   #58
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 237
Iinitial reflections on the new Zeiss Victory Pocket 8x25.
I have used it in the field only for a few hours, and am not sure when I can do so again.
My visual acuity is ~20/15. Myopic. Astigmatic, ~-1.0. The following tests were each with and without glasses.
Veiling glare: More than in the pocket Leica Ultravids, where it is very slight.
Backlit glare: Well controlled, but more than in the pocket Uvs.
Glare is stated first because it affects other optical parameters (below) when it is present, and also to me the difference between the image when there is veiling glare, for example when the subject is within foliage lit from above or a side, vs when there is none, when the subject is lit evenly or from the front, is a bit nagging; glare when backlit though does not nag me in this way, because it is "naturally" expected.
Sharpness: Very good.
- Vs Swarovski Habicht 8x30. A friend with acuity ~20/12 finds the Zeiss not as sharp. I cannot, or did not, see this difference.
- Vs Ultravid pockets. No direct comparison with the Uv. 8x20 was done, but on comparing with the Uv. 10x25 I feel that the Zeiss will be seen by me to be not quite equal in making out detail when that is done, due to Leica's contrast.
Sweet spot: Image is sharp nearly to the edge.
Color rendering: A little "cool".
Chromatic aberration. I am sensitive to color fringing in that it can be "provoked" easily and here that occurs less than 1/2 way from the center of view. In actual use it was never obtrusive or even noticeable.
Ease of view (quick relaxed observation on putting up to the eyes): Very good. Better than the Hawke Sapphire 8x25 (with smaller eyepiece diameter), which was my last pocket 8x, better than the Uv. 10x25 (with smaller exit pupil). [Edited after further testing to change Hawke comparison from "much" better.] (This too depends on the user.)
Field of view: The FOV of the Hawke, stated to be 6.8 deg., feels only a little less wide than of the Zeiss, stated to be 7.4 deg., so this to me is not striking.
Ergonomics: For my medium/small hands and the way I hold the body, with left index finger on focus knob, grip and balance of body, and focusing action, are very good. Barrels are thicker than of the 25mm pocket Uv. The strap lugs are located such that when the body is folded for ~60mm inter-pupil distance and placed flat on a plane surface it rests on these. This Zeiss can go into a front pocket of regular pants (mine anyway, fairly standard I think!) with that IPD held but the outline is more visible than of the Uv. 10x25, due to the bulkier barrels and the hinges lying less flat.
Finish: Not traditional Zeiss! On inspection, flawed, and armor seems flimsy. But in use the instrument feels robust enough.

Last edited by adhoc : Friday 17th November 2017 at 03:42.
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 18th November 2017, 00:36   #59
tenex
Registered User
 
tenex's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 70
I just got to try the new Victory 8x25 and was really blown away. It has roughly the same exit pupil as my old(ish) Trinovid 10x32, is significantly brighter, has lovely contrast and color, similar sharpness across the field, and weighs less than half as much! Smooth, easy focusing, nice armor (doesn't feel cheap to me; I think the slight ridge at the seams is intentional), love the asymmetric hinge. Cons: I still prefer 10x (which I could have if I wanted to sacrifice EP, which I don't) and the eye relief is crazy high here, too much for the eyecups which I can barely rest against my brow. An increasingly common problem, but I think I could make it work.

I might have to get one. Can anyone recommend a very simple belt pouch (neoprene or nylon) that fits these models snugly when folded closed?

Last edited by tenex : Saturday 18th November 2017 at 00:40.
tenex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 18th November 2017, 01:59   #60
PhilR.
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: TX
Posts: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenex View Post
I might have to get one. Can anyone recommend a very simple belt pouch (neoprene or nylon) that fits these models snugly when folded closed?
I use camera cases from Lowe with all of our compact binos. Works quite well.
PhilR. is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th November 2017, 04:39   #61
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 237
Continuation of post #58.
In summary: Excellent 8x25 for bird and nature watching.
Image in low light: Very good, as expected in a better model line of Zeiss.
Eye relief: This was not mentioned as what it means in use is seen under "Ease of view", and I do not quite know how to analyze it further.
Personally: This is to be carried in a front pocket of regular pants, as I do with pocket binoculars. It is just a little bit too heavy for this but I compromise for its optical quality. But the way its sits there and its outline are a bit awkward. This is solved by opening it out, when the outline is of a flat box. But then it has to be folded back in at every use. I will be trying this, but am not too hopeful. I may have to go for the little Leica Ultravid 8x20, which I was about to when this model appeared. For a wider and/or brighter view I will then use a 42.
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th November 2017, 06:41   #62
tenex
Registered User
 
tenex's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 70
We took a Victory 8x25 out to a local lake this afternoon for a more realistic test. Ring-necked ducks, the occasional mallard, and Canada geese. Beautiful easy views, no problems from bright sun reflecting on the water. Surprisingly pleasant to use, considering the tiny size.

It's silly not to provide a compact bag/pouch to hold the bino folded up, given that's the point of the asymmetric hinge (the supplied case holds it open flat). But I have a neoprene thing that fit pretty well, and it carries easily in a jacket pocket or on the belt. A bit much for shirt or pants pocket, I agree.
tenex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd November 2017, 08:23   #63
fazalmajid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
Veiling glare: More than in the pocket Leica Ultravids, where it is very slight.
I don't know about veiling glare, but I can definitely see more lens flare in the Ultravids.

Quote:
Sharpness: Very good.
Yes, to about 60% of the edge. This is mostly due to field curvature.

Quote:
- Vs Ultravid pockets. No direct comparison with the Uv. 8x20 was done, but on comparing with the Uv. 10x25 I feel that the Zeiss will be seen by me to be not quite equal in making out detail when that is done, due to Leica's contrast.
I tried reading book spines from about 4m away, close to minimum focus, at night, and find them easier to read with the Zeiss even though I am finding the Leicas easier to hand-hold. This may be due to the brighter aperture. I also suspect the Zeiss has slightly higher magnification that the nominal 8x.

Quote:
Sweet spot: Image is sharp nearly to the edge.
Not really, there is significant field curvature and limited DOF at close focus.

Quote:
Color rendering: A little "cool".
I am not seeing any significant difference.

Quote:
Chromatic aberration. I am sensitive to color fringing in that it can be "provoked" easily and here that occurs less than 1/2 way from the center of view. In actual use it was never obtrusive or even noticeable.
I'm not noticing any on either binoculars

Quote:
Ease of view (quick relaxed observation on putting up to the eyes): Very good. better than the Uv. 10x25 (with smaller exit pupil).
Definitely advantage to the Zeiss, much less finicky about eye placement than the Ultravids. I am not that fond of the single asymmetric hinge, it is quite bulky. however.

Quote:
Field of view: The FOV of the Hawke, stated to be 6.8 deg., feels only a little less wide than of the Zeiss, stated to be 7.4 deg., so this to me is not striking.
I tried binoscoping with my Sony RX100IV at the widest focal length, pressed directly against the collapsed eye cups. There is a significant difference between the Zeiss (first) and the Leica (second).

Quote:
Ergonomics: For my medium/small hands and the way I hold the body, with left index finger on focus knob, grip and balance of body, and focusing action, are very good.
I actually found the Leica easier to hand-hold, and the focusing knob is better, if a little stiffer. I have relatively small hands, though, some with larger hands may find the Leica too small to hold comfortably.

Quote:
Barrels are thicker than of the 25mm pocket Uv. The strap lugs are located such that when the body is folded for ~60mm inter-pupil distance and placed flat on a plane surface it rests on these. This Zeiss can go into a front pocket of regular pants (mine anyway, fairly standard I think!) with that IPD held but the outline is more visible than of the Uv. 10x25, due to the bulkier barrels and the hinges lying less flat.
The Zeiss won't fit comfortably in my dress slacks, whereas the Leica will. The hinge is quite bulky and because it is not parallel to the barrels' plane it's harder to find cases that fit it properly. The Leica hard leather case for the Ultravid is outstanding, the Zeiss cordura one not so.

I don't really consider the Zeiss to be pocket binoculars, jacket pocket at best.

Quote:
Finish: Not traditional Zeiss! On inspection, flawed, and armor seems flimsy. But in use the instrument feels robust enough.
I didn't find any flaws. My Ultravids are leather-armored, so they are not directly comparable. The leather definitely feels nicer to the touch than rubber. The Zeiss strap is comfortable but too bulky, I replaced it with the hollow-shoelace-style strap with quick-detach from my old Trinovid 8x20 BC, which is superior to either the Zeiss or Ultravid's. The strap eyelets on the Zeiss are very tight, tighter than on the Ultravids, which limits the aftermarket options (I had to use a paper clip to thread the Trinovid strap cords into the eyelets).

Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc View Post
Continuation of post #58.
In summary: Excellent 8x25 for bird and nature watching.
Image in low light: Very good, as expected in a better model line of Zeiss.
Eye relief: This was not mentioned as what it means in use is seen under "Ease of view", and I do not quite know how to analyze it further.
Not sure how I can separate the exit pupil's effect from eye relief, but as an eyeglasses wearer, the Zeiss is definitely easier to use.

Quote:
Personally: This is to be carried in a front pocket of regular pants, as I do with pocket binoculars. It is just a little bit too heavy for this but I compromise for its optical quality. But the way its sits there and its outline are a bit awkward. This is solved by opening it out, when the outline is of a flat box. But then it has to be folded back in at every use. I will be trying this, but am not too hopeful. I may have to go for the little Leica Ultravid 8x20, which I was about to when this model appeared. For a wider and/or brighter view I will then use a 42.
Once again I don't think they are in the same class. The Ultravids are pocketable, the Zeiss are not. I carry mine in a backpack (my EDC is a Monovid in my jacket pocket, or a Nikon 5x15 HG monocular). The Zeiss compares well with my Ultravid 8x32 HD. Not as bright, certainly, but much smaller for the same image in any but very dim light. The new Swarovski 8x30 CL is a contender as well, but I haven't tried it.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC00249.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	891.8 KB
ID:	647055  Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC00250.jpg
Views:	56
Size:	807.4 KB
ID:	647056  

Last edited by fazalmajid : Thursday 23rd November 2017 at 08:33.
fazalmajid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 23rd November 2017, 13:42   #64
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 237
I PMd Fazalmajid for his assessment on some aspects of this Zeiss 8x25 vs the Leica Uv. 8x20, beyond the information already there in his posts in this thread and in the User Reviews section of a retailer's website, which I found very useful. I suggested that he reply either here or back by PM. Thank you Fazalmajid for the lengthy and patient response.

We diverge mostly on two aspects. Comparing for glare, under which I would include flare, was done side by side by me only with the Uv. 10x25. With the Uv. 8x20 it was memory, a bad practice I know, and assumption.

On the sharpness of the image across the field I am at fault again I am sure. My assessment was mostly on comparison with the Hawke Sapphire 8x25, which also has a wide (thought less) field of view, and the image in the Zeiss, unlike in that much smaller instrument, is easily and usefully viewable nearly to the edges in most bird watching situations. This will needs be tested better when I take part in a waterbird survey in 2-3 months (when also the "pincushioning" should be useful for easier panning).

I still incline to the Uv. 8x20! But I wonder and will wait to see whether Leica will soon improve the two (8x and 10x) pocket Uvs, just to compete with the two new Zeisses. That should be possible if at all only with new glass and coatings, in line with the bigger Ultravids, which have gone from "Uv." to "Uv. HD" to "Uv. HD Plus" while the pockets have remained, in name at least, just "Uv."

Last edited by adhoc : Thursday 23rd November 2017 at 14:14. Reason: Forgot flare issue.
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 25th November 2017, 22:40   #65
fazalmajid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 136
Take my observations with a grain of salt. Indoors at night is very different from normal birdwatching conditions, as is close focus vs. normal range (unless you are mostly into hummingbirds as I am).

FWIW, the Swarovski 60510 field case for pocket binoculars fits the Victory Pocket 8x25, if a bit snugly, and it's half the size of the Zeiss case.
fazalmajid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 28th November 2017, 11:43   #66
numbatino
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Perth
Posts: 1
Curious to know how the Zeiss 8x25 compares with the Swaro CL 8x25.

I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.

I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other and although it is easy to fix, I have to send it to Swarovski for a fix.

Already had to do that twice because I find it extremely annoying having one hinge looser than the other.

That's why I'm keen to replace it with a single hinge compact.
numbatino is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 28th November 2017, 15:13   #67
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by numbatino View Post
Curious to know how the Zeiss 8x25 compares with the Swaro CL 8x25.

I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.

I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other and although it is easy to fix, I have to send it to Swarovski for a fix.

Already had to do that twice because I find it extremely annoying having one hinge looser than the other.

That's why I'm keen to replace it with a single hinge compact.
I had a Leica double hinge pocket bino for years and never managed to find a way to use it comfortably. Just the effort of moving the focus wheel meant I changed the IPD as I was looking throught them. AAAAGGGGHH. Swapping to a Victory Compact with the offeset single hinge was a terrific change for the better.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 28th November 2017, 16:14   #68
arran
Registered User
 
arran's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Belgium
Posts: 122
Last week I had the occasion to test the new Zeiss victory 8x25 as well during a rainy afternoon
To be honest , the view is very sharp,and contrasty;
On the other hand , wonen switching to the new swaro CL 8x 30 I suddenly realiseerde how much more eye comfort the bigger diameter gives you!
Smaller bins with diameter < 30 are ok for an easy carry solution but certainly not as a birding glass
arran is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 28th November 2017, 16:29   #69
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by arran View Post
Last week I had the occasion to test the new Zeiss victory 8x25 as well during a rainy afternoon
To be honest , the view is very sharp,and contrasty;
On the other hand , wonen switching to the new swaro CL 8x 30 I suddenly realiseerde how much more eye comfort the bigger diameter gives you!
Smaller bins with diameter < 30 are ok for an easy carry solution but certainly not as a birding glass
Yes, absolutely. My Victory Compacts are never taken out for serious nature observation, but it is nice to have binos on my work station at home or in the car driving through the country.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 29th November 2017, 00:34   #70
tenex
Registered User
 
tenex's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by numbatino View Post
I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.
I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other...
I thought about the Swarovski 8x25 a number of times, but never got one as I find double hinges too fiddly. I instantly liked the Zeiss design, and expect you would too. Very comfortable to use, and still folds reasonably compactly. Half the weight of my usual 32mm bino, and less obvious when that matters. The focus wheel is rather slow, but there may be a mechanical reason for that.

Examine yours carefully, as QC may not be what one would expect from Zeiss. The one I received had obvious blemishes in the coating on one ocular, and I had to exchange it.
tenex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 29th November 2017, 01:56   #71
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 10,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by numbatino View Post
Curious to know how the Zeiss 8x25 compares with the Swaro CL 8x25.

I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.

I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other and although it is easy to fix, I have to send it to Swarovski for a fix.

Already had to do that twice because I find it extremely annoying having one hinge looser than the other.

That's why I'm keen to replace it with a single hinge compact.

Hi Numbatino,

Welcome to Bird Forum!

Did you try holding your Swarovski 8x25CL Pocket with the looser hinge completely extended while adjusting the tighter hinge to get your correct inter pupillary distance?

Brace it in the crook at the base of your thumb and forefinger so it won't move. Holding it in that manner makes it work like the single offset hinge on the Zeiss.

Bob

PS: That is how I hold mine. You only have to fool around with one hinge. And they still fold up very compactly unlike the Zeiss.

Last edited by ceasar : Wednesday 29th November 2017 at 02:27. Reason: Add Post Script.
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pocket bino choice, Leica Ultravid 8x20 vs Swarovski CL Pocket 8x25 etc. nestara Binoculars 49 Monday 13th June 2016 11:25
Has Zeiss updated the T* coatings on the Victory FL line over the years? ZDHart Zeiss 14 Saturday 21st June 2014 16:56
Which pocket compact: Zeiss Victory 8x20 or Nikon LX L 8x21 Kevin Purcell Binoculars 37 Thursday 11th December 2008 05:43
Victory B 56mm models - any users solentbirder Zeiss 5 Friday 26th May 2006 20:15

{googleads}
£100 Cashback on Opticron DBA VHD Binoculars. Click to find out more.

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.25494289 seconds with 33 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 19:05.