• 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.

New Zeiss 56mm Conquest HD's (1 Viewer)

The FoV specs given in the link are fine for the 10x56 but dismally narrow for the 8x56. The 8x56 has a field only a bit wider than in the narrow-field Leica 8x50. All the other specifications look fine for a binocular in this class. Of course, they are pretty heavy, but that is unavoidable with objectives this large.

If the figures Zeiss is giving are correct, they are using the "old measure" AFOV here, since the math adds up. 115 meters/km is very good for a 10x, but 125m/km nothing to write home about in an 8x.

Kimmo
 
kabsetz said:
The FoV specs given in the link are fine for the 10x56 but dismally narrow for the 8x56. The 8x56 has a field only a bit wider than in the narrow-field Leica 8x50. All the other specifications look fine for a binocular in this class. Of course, they are pretty heavy, but that is unavoidable with objectives this large.

If the figures Zeiss is giving are correct, they are using the "old measure" AFOV here, since the math adds up. 115 meters/km is very good for a 10x, but 125m/km nothing to write home about in an 8x.

Kimmo
Click to expand...

Kimmo

The FOV for the 8x is modest though an improvement over the previous model, but don't forget its price point and position in the triple level that Zeiss are building.

Those hoping for or expecting a 56mm HT may perhaps take encouragement from the modest Conquest HD as it leaves the field open for a HT 56 with a truly impressive FOV, although personally I would give priority to a 32mm with a breathtaking vista.

Lee
 
Last edited:
Just compared the FOV of 56 mm bins.

Conquest HD / old Conquest / Victory FL / SLC

8x56: 125 / 110 / 130 / 133 m
10x56: 115 / 105 / 110 / 110 m
15x56: 80 / - / - / 78 m
 
Hi Holger, why choose the Conquest HD over a Fujinon 10x50 or Docter Nobilem?

I guess the extra aperture is nice and perhaps less CA with HD glass. Any other aspects?

Andy J
 
Last edited:
Holger,

I got my 10x56 FL as a (perfect) demo from Euro-Optic for $1700, and have just about abandoned the rest of my collection. It was relatively cheap because it is green, which had just been discontinued. I guess the HD will be about $1300-$1400. I'm not sure about availability as the last stock of FLs runs out, but my experience suggests the end of the line could make for record low prices.

I tried a 42mm HD and while it was very good, it wasn't as good as an FL. My FL just knocks me out. If I must have an 5 extra m, I just it wiggle it around a little bit.

Just saying, keep your eyes peeled while you're waiting.

Ron
 
plyscope said:
Hi Holger, why choose the Conquest HD over a Fujinon 10x50 or Docter Nobilem?

I guess the extra aperture is nice and perhaps less CA with HD glass. Any other aspects?

Andy J
Click to expand...

Hi Andy,

You are right - the Fujinon in particular is outstanding and not easily topped in astro-use. The Nobilem is superior for general use (because it has center-focus, is somewhat less heavy and with less stray-light), but not as good on the sky (edge-sharpness). Whatever the new Conquest HD has to offer - it would have to prove its qualities against the Porro-competition.

I liked the 8x32 Conquest HD (apart from the focuser) because of its high contrast and its wide, reasonably well corrected field. Ron has got another good suggestion - a reduced Victory FL would do the job no doubt. And then there are still the new Swaro SLC.

But if in fact a new HT came with a field even wider than the Conquest's, well then ...

... let's see, anyway it is time to go big ;-)
 
Thank you Holger,

It is certainly very interesting to hear about these new binoculars being developed and released soon.

For more than a year now I have had the pleasure of owning a 10x50 Nobilem. I use it for astronomy mostly and am very happy with it. I chose it partly based on your review. I was concerned about the size of the eyecups on the Fujinon. I had issues with a Kunming BA8 10x50 because of the large eyecups being uncomfortable for prolonged use. I like the centre focus of the Nobilem. Although it is not essential it does make the binocular more versatile. I have no regrets about the Nobilem but of course it is always nice to dream of a better binocular. |=)|

Andy J.
 
There are several Swaro EL's on the middle table - so I guess Zeiss is inviting the comparison.

Not sure whether they are 42's or 56's though - they look long-bodied.
 
Sagittarius said:
The big Conquests look impressive.
Does anyone know if Zeiss will produce the HT's in the larger 56mm sizes ?
The Shot Show only mentions the Conquests, so far.
Click to expand...

They have not been announced as far as I know. But I'm quite sure myself that they'll make a range of 56mm HTs as well at some stage.

Hermann
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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.

Similar threads

John A Roberts
Roger Vine’s review of the Zeiss Conquest 8x56 HD
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
9K
dan31
D
D
A Zeiss Conquest HD on steroids.
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
12K
ArchStanton
A
Swissboy
Zeiss 8x32 Conquest HD vs FL comparison?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Andy Gan
A
W
Questions about Conquest HD 8x42 binoculars replacement longer eye-cups
Replies
12
Views
1K
wllmspd
W
S
Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42 nightmare
Replies
18
Views
4K
Swedpat
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top