• 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.

Alula review of Zeiss FL (1 Viewer)

B

Ben O

Well-known member
A number of people have mentioned this publication and that they have recently reviewed the FL binocular. Can anyone who has seen this review reveal the gist of the review and its conclusion? I expect there is a copyright issue so I don't expect word for word.

I am seriously considering the 8x42 FL and I am pretty much convinced from the numerous comments on birdforum that these are the ones to buy but I'd just like to hear about this review from Finland. I have looked through a pair of the 7x42FL and was astounded by the view compared to my current 8x42 BN's but just want that extra bit of magnification.

Thanks in advance,
Ben
 
Ben O said:
I am seriously considering the 8x42 FL and I am pretty much convinced from the numerous comments on birdforum that these are the ones to buy...(snip)

Thanks in advance,
Ben
Click to expand...

You're a brave man! Anyone coming in from the outside and reading these threads might justifiably conclude that the FL is the worst piece of overpriced, underachieving junk to have hit the shelves in years. (Not my opinion, I hasten to add!)
 
Curtis Croulet said:
You're a brave man! Anyone coming in from the outside and reading these threads might justifiably conclude that the FL is the worst piece of overpriced, underachieving junk to have hit the shelves in years. (Not my opinion, I hasten to add!)
Click to expand...

I didn't find that case. I have read everything I could on the FLs and with just one exception, everyone is full of praise for the FL. I will admit the unhappy chappy is very active so it does distort things but I go by the consensus of opinion rather than listening to a lone voice.
I'm glad you are enjoying your FLs :bounce:
Ben
 
Curtis Croulet said:
You're a brave man! Anyone coming in from the outside and reading these threads might justifiably conclude that the FL is the worst piece of overpriced, underachieving junk to have hit the shelves in years. (Not my opinion, I hasten to add!)
Click to expand...

No Curtis... I really don't think that anyone would conclude that at all... but if they carefully read your posts they might conclude you are OVERLY defensive about your expensive new purchase. It seems to me that you UNABLE to accept the possibility that these FL's have any faults whatsoever.

Isnt it just possible that someone actually believes that the FL's are not perfect????

Don
 
Donzo98 said:
Isnt it just possible that someone actually believes that the FL's are not perfect????Don
Click to expand...

Don,

Count me in among those who have doubts. I've had my hopes up that the FL will be truly great, as I already consider the Nikon SE and the Leica Ultravid to be. And as I have said elsewhere in this forum, I look forward to comparing the FL to those binoculars. However, the possible quality control issue that has surfaced with Henry's in-store test of the FL, together with repeated mention of a relatively narrow "sweet spot" in some people's FLs, has shaken my confidence.

Don't get me wrong. I have had serious issues with both Leica and Nikon--defective equipment with the former and horrible customer service with the latter--so I don't play favorites. But it seems to me that a company like Zeiss, issuing a product that is expected to change the way binoculars are made, would ensure that its initial offering of the product would be assembled and adjusted perfectly.
 
Amazing that so few of the people with 'issues' against the FL haven't actually looked through one? Similarly curious that just two people who see a 'problem' have had such a huge impact on the threads against all those who have seen no problem AFTER using the bino.... another odd fact, probably of no relevance, is that of the geographical location of those with a concern.
Ben asked for any info on the Alula review... can we try to keep this thread on topic without the 'usual suspects' muddying the waters?
 
Ben

I don't have the Alula review to hand so can't give you the full ins and outs. If you want more info then feel free to PM me and I'll give you a summary on individual points. The reviewer is Kimmo Absetz who is a member of the forum.

The conclusion was that the 8x42FL was in their view the best bin available. There was however a caveat to that and that was they didn't think serious birders with already good bins (And reading other Alula reviews I would take this to be stuff like the Swaro EL 8.5x42, Nikon HG 8x42 and 8x32, Trinovid 8x32) would consider upgrading. There hasn't been a review of the Ultravid 8x42 but some comments are made in the review of 10x bins.

If you haven't already check out the alula website its recently had a lot of past reviews added.

Hope that helps.
 
Ben O said:
A number of people have mentioned this publication and that they have recently reviewed the FL binocular. Can anyone who has seen this review reveal the gist of the review and its conclusion? I expect there is a copyright issue so I don't expect word for word.

I am seriously considering the 8x42 FL and I am pretty much convinced from the numerous comments on birdforum that these are the ones to buy but I'd just like to hear about this review from Finland. I have looked through a pair of the 7x42FL and was astounded by the view compared to my current 8x42 BN's but just want that extra bit of magnification.

Thanks in advance,
Ben
Click to expand...

Hi Ben,

Sorry, I didn't see the review you mention.

I hope you can look through the 8x42 FL and 8x42 Ultravid.

I recently compared the 10x42 FL and 10x42 Ultravid at a store in northern California. The FL could focus a little closer and it had a little better resolution at the extreme edge of the field. Not that this matters in birding. Standing outside the store, two of us (bino nuts) were handing the FL and Ultravid back and forth to each other for nearly half an hour. The image through both was so close that we could not honestly say which was better. Maybe under different conditions we could see a difference. This was in the mid afternoon with a sunny, cloudless sky. We were looking at houses about 1/2 mile away across a small ocean bay and at old wooden water towers a few blocks away. Oh, and a good looking woman walking across the street. Yet another form of bird watching. ;)

I found the Leica 10x42 Ultravid more comfortable to hold. The only reason I bought the Zeiss FL was it had a long enough focusing run past infinity so that I could use them without my eye glasses (something I likely won't do most of the time). I didn't try the Ultravid for focusing pase infinity and I should have and not assumed they were like my Leica BNs in focuser travel. The Zeiss also focused a little closer.

I could be very happy with either the Zeiss 10x42 FL or the Leica 10x42 Ultravid. I'm seriously temped to buy a 10x42 Ultravid because I'm a Leica fan and I liked the way they felt. Althouth, it would likely be smarter to use my money on one of the new light weight (Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss) 8x32s and not another 10x42.

Hope this helps.

Good luck,
Rich
 
Last edited:
Rich N said:
Hi Althouth, it would likely be smarter to use my money on one of the new light weight (Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss) 8x32s and not another 10x42.
Click to expand...

Rich I'd add in the new HGL 8x32 as well. Likely to be a lot cheaper.
 
Rich N said:
Hi Pete,

Ok, I'll add the HGL to my list of 32s to look through. Is that a Nikon?

Thanks,
Rich
Click to expand...

yup its a Nikon - not sure what the HGL will be called over there. Its the new lightweight version of the Venturer LX
 
pduxon said:
Ben
I don't have the Alula review to hand so can't give you the full ins and outs. If you want more info then feel free to PM me and I'll give you a summary on individual points. The reviewer is Kimmo Absetz who is a member of the forum.

The conclusion was that the 8x42FL was in their view the best bin available. There was however a caveat to that and that was they didn't think serious birders with already good bins (And reading other Alula reviews I would take this to be stuff like the Swaro EL 8.5x42, Nikon HG 8x42 and 8x32, Trinovid 8x32) would consider upgrading. There hasn't been a review of the Ultravid 8x42 but some comments are made in the review of 10x bins.

.
Click to expand...
Pete, thanks for that. I was also wondering about the review. More out of curiosity than anything else. I think that's a fair point though, about considering upgrading, or not, as the case may be.

I get the feeling these bins have been better received in Europe than the States ;) As you know, I'm a happy chappy with my FL's :gh:
 
helenol said:
I get the feeling these bins have been better received in Europe than the States ;) As you know, I'm a happy chappy with my FL's :gh:
Click to expand...

Hi Helen,

Give us a little time and we will likely come along. We are a little slow over here. ;) I almost bought a Leica.

Rich
 
Last edited:
helenol said:
LOL ! I'm sure you will Rich. ;)
Click to expand...

Hi Helen,

A more serious answer, the number of retail stores selling Zeiss binoculars in the San Francisco Bay Area have been shrinking. IMHO, Zeiss is having a big problem in my area holding on to their retail outlets.

There were three retail stores selling Zeiss binoculars in the south S.F. Bay Area only a few years ago. The first to drop Zeiss was a telescope / binocular store. Within the last year, two gun/sporting goods stores have dropped Zeiss binoculars (and kept Swarovski). To my great surprise a store that is in the boonies (well, a very nice resort town on the California coast about 3.5 hours north of San Francisco) had Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, Nikon and other brands of binoculars. I was in bino-holic heaven.

I can find almost anything in the S. F. Bay Area. The idea that Zeiss is having a hard time keeping retail outlets is amazing. It's not as if there aren't people here without a good amount of disposable income. There are also quite a few active birders in this area. Maybe Zeiss needs to change something about they way the market their binoculars on the west coast of the U.S.?

Rich
 
Last edited:
pduxon said:
Ben

I don't have the Alula review to hand so can't give you the full ins and outs. If you want more info then feel free to PM me and I'll give you a summary on individual points. The reviewer is Kimmo Absetz who is a member of the forum.

The conclusion was that the 8x42FL was in their view the best bin available. There was however a caveat to that and that was they didn't think serious birders with already good bins (And reading other Alula reviews I would take this to be stuff like the Swaro EL 8.5x42, Nikon HG 8x42 and 8x32, Trinovid 8x32) would consider upgrading. .
Click to expand...
Thats very reassuring to me, I'm not barking mad and blind... the review concludes exactly the same as my one, even to the point of saying that owners of high-end binos won't necessarily be rushing out to upgrade as the differences aren't huge (pretty obvious really, you can't get huge leaps in optical quality these days).
I expect Kimmo just waits for me to review something and works from that ;)
 
Rich N said:
The idea that Zeiss is having a hard time keeping retail outlets is amazing.
Click to expand...

Rich,

I have visited several shops in the Bay Area. There is a Wild Bird Center in Walnut Creek that had a very good selection of binoculars, including Zeiss, in the recent past. I was able to compare several Zeiss and Swarovski models there. I'm sure you have found that shop.

At the risk of sounding like the dreaded anti-Zeiss, let me suggest that you ask the proprietor of the Wild Bird Center in San Carlos why she no longer carries Zeiss. Let's put it this way: after many years selling optics, she is happy to carry two companies whose customer service she considers exceptional--Swarovski and Swift. One of the only shops in New Mexico that carries high-end binoculars used to handle Zeiss, but almost never does anymore. I asked one of the staff about it, and he said that they "never hear from the sales rep."

I am pleased to see your comments on FL vs. Ultravid. The Ultravid has had far less coverage in the forum than the FL. I hope Ben O. will try them both before making his purchase.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 20 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

Ian Shepherd
Zeiss 10x32 T FL
Replies
6
Views
1K
PeterPS
PeterPS
Saxatilis
Zeiss Victory 7x42 FL internal check after 15 years of use?
Replies
15
Views
1K
Rg548
R
O
Zeiss Victory HT 8x42 vs. Victory SF 8x42
Replies
4
Views
508
Scott98
S
B
Zeiss SFL versus Zeiss Victory FL contrast and color reproduction.
2 3
Replies
45
Views
10K
Trinovid
T
mgp13
Zeiss SFL 8x40 review from Australia
Replies
7
Views
3K
GrampaTom
G

Users who are viewing this thread

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