• 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.

Here are the new Victorys: Victory HT (2 Viewers)

...The focuser is placed much lower than any other binocular I have handled. Awkward, and so which finger do you use? I made a post about this on the Zeiss thread,"Advice needed, Victory HT or SF", #95. ...

I find that focus knob placement refreshing. It brings back pleasant memories of the original B&L Elite, and of the Bushnell Banner roof, both with focus knobs in front of the hinge. I prefer to hold bins with one hand in front of the other. The long slim barrel of these bins provides plenty of room for a wrap-around grip by the forward placed focus hand, and having the knob in that position eliminates hand interference with hat brims and rain hoods.

--AP
 
Sandy

I am a huge fan of my HT and consider it the best pair of bins I have ever had.

Having tried SF I can say that HT can hold its head up alongside it and which you think is best for you is down to personal preference for different features.

The field of view of SF 8x42 is way bigger than my HT and the closer focus distance is closer. If these features are important to you then you owe it to yourself to try out SF.

Handling is a big part of SF's character but in my view it is also one of HT's strong points and in fact I think it is as important as its optical strengths.

In the meantime enjoy your HT.

Lee

Lee

I agree that the handling is very good on the HT, although a lot of people wouldn't agree with us! I think the positioning of the focus is perfect and can easily be operated while using gloves.

I think the one thing that sets the HT apart from the other bins that I tried is its performance under low light conditions, I was watching a water rail deep in a reed bed a few days ago and even though it was a really grey miserable day, I could still pick out amazing detail.

As the SF has a completely different optical setup, with different prisms etc. I wonder if it will be as good as the HT in challenging low light conditions. The quoted light transmission is lower than the HT's, but it will undoubtably still be very good.

Sandy
 
Lee

I agree that the handling is very good on the HT, although a lot of people wouldn't agree with us! I think the positioning of the focus is perfect and can easily be operated while using gloves.

I think the one thing that sets the HT apart from the other bins that I tried is its performance under low light conditions, I was watching a water rail deep in a reed bed a few days ago and even though it was a really grey miserable day, I could still pick out amazing detail.

As the SF has a completely different optical setup, with different prisms etc. I wonder if it will be as good as the HT in challenging low light conditions. The quoted light transmission is lower than the HT's, but it will undoubtably still be very good.

Sandy


Don't see how the SF can match the low light performance of an HT with Abbe-Konig prisms.
It should be close but not quite there.
I would love to own an SF for the FOV and balance but would probably prefer the light gathering ability of an HT in the last flicker of light at the end of the day.
Would like to hear from someone who has compared the two under those conditions.

My first choice in a next binocular is still an HT 15x54, if they have the good sense to build it, followed by an SF in 12x50.
I predict, Zeiss will build both in the future because they don't want Swarovski having those options all to themselves. (At lease, not the 12x50 option) |=)|
 
Hello Lee and Sandy,

I agree about the easy handling of the HT. It is near perfect for me !! I pick up the binocular with my hands around the barrels and my index finger rest naturally on the focus wheel !
The optics are GREAT, and the low light performance is trully amazing!

Best Regards

PHA
 
Ron (post 1101)
On this forum Porro's have almost a cult status, but I agree that it is cheaper to make an excellent quality Porro binocular for a lower price than an excellent roof binocular.
Since there is a lot of discussion abut HT glass and light transmissions of different binoculars I want to present some of our measured data on different porro's. I will give only the transmissions at 550 nm, the transmissions at 500 nm are generally 1-4% lower depending on the porro model. I have also listed the year of production (as far as I could find) to give an overview of the historical developments:
Leitz Binodal 6x21 (1908): 51%
Leitz Binot 6x30 (1915): 54,5%
Leitz Binux 8x30 (1927): 54%
Leitz Mardocit 12x60 (1948): 72%
Leitz Camparit 10x40 (1950): 73%
Leica-Kern 8x30 (2000): 68% N.B. Transmission lower due to heat filter
Hartmann Compact 8x30 WW (1985): 70,5%
Hartmann Bernina 7x50 (1975): 77%
Kern Pizar 8x30 (1995?): 83%
Zeiss RLN 68200 (1943-1945): 73% N.B. The outstanding technology for this binocular is most likely identical to that used for U-boat glasses.
Nedinsco Nedelta 7x50 (1955): 75% (this binocular is based on the RLN Zeiss)
Bleeker 6x30 (1955): 79%
Beck Zenith 8x30 (1970): 66%
Beck Luchs 7x50 (1975): 70,5%
Beck Tordalk 22x80 (1985?): 76,5%
Hensoldt Diagon 7x50 (1955): 67%
Swarovski Habicht 6x30 (1949): 45%
Swarovski Habicht 6x30 (1963): 83,5%
Swarovski Habicht SL 10x40 (1985?): 90,3%
Swarovski Doppelteleskop 30x75 (1990): 88%
Nikon Monarch 8,5x56 (2000?): 79,3%
Nikon Tropical 7x50 (?): 87%
Nikon 10x70 (?): 82%
Nikon 7x35 nr 780xxx (?): 86,9%
Nikon 8x30 FOV 8,3 deg, nr 414xxx (?): 77,9%
Nikon 8x30 FOV 8,5 deg. nr. 537xxx (?): 74%
Nikon 8x30 EII nr. 808xxx (?): 74%
Nikon 8x32 SE nr 550xxx (?): 88,3%
Fujnon 10x50 FMTR-SX (2010?): 84,8%
Swarovski Habicht 8x30 WW (2010): 95%

N.B. The Swarovski roofs 8x30 CL and 8x32 SV both have light transmissions of 93% .
I add that I do not believe the transmission value of 95% of the Fujinon 10x50 or 98% for the Nobilem 8x56 until I have measured it myself. Up to now that is not the case.
My conclusion is that hasty remarks with regard to high light transmissions of porros are limited to only a few examples and until now it is only Swarovski that has the highest scores.
Gijs


Gijs, although more than three years old your contribution to the forum is younger than ever!

In addition to the above stated transmission rates I'd like to know something more about the light transmission of the Carl Zeiss Jena binos with and without the so called multi coating.

Im especially interested in the transmission performance of the Binoctem/Dekarem of the pre-MC era in comparance of the performance of those produced with the new coating technology starting around serial number 4.8 Million.
Sometimes these binos were called Jenoptem no matter if they were of 7x or 10x magnification.
 
Elmer Fudd, post 1925,
I will look in my notes to see whether I can answer your question, that may take one or two days, but do not become desparate I will be back.
Gijs
 
Emer Fudd, post 1927,
I have found some of our data, but the production year of the binoculars was not attached, nevertheless I will give them here (transmission values at 5550 nm):
Canon porro 7x50 (probably from the 1980's): 78%
Carl Zeiss Jena DDR Octarem 7x50 porro (idem): 86%
Carl Zeiss Jena Binoctem 7x50 porro (idem): 75%
Tento (Russ.) 7x50 porro (idem): 78%
I hope this will answer your question to some extent.
In about six weeks time we will repeat a series of such measurements, if that gives new information I wil come back.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Emer Fudd, post 1927,
I have found some of our data, but the production year of the binoculars was not attached, nevertheless I will give them here (transmission values at 5550 nm):
Canon porro 7x50 (probably from the 1980's): 78%
Carl Zeiss Jena DDR Octarem 7x50 porro (idem): 86%
Carl Zeiss Jena Binoctem 7x50 porro (idem): 75%
Tento (Russ.) 7x50 porro (idem): 78%
I hope this will answer your question to some extent.
In about six weeks time we will repeat a series of such measurements, if that gives new information I wil come back.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Gijs, thank you very much.

I asked because I am interested in an old Hensoldt 7x50 (of course not Hans Hensoldt) with central focussing wheel. The difference in light transmission to the Zeiss Jena isn't that huge. I wonder if the Hensoldt, probably from the 50s, will have some advantages from the mechanical point of view.

It will definately a little bit mor scarce than the CZJ 7x50 Jenoptem/Binoctar.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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