Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42 or Vanguard Endeavor ED2 10x42 or.... (1 Viewer)

Hi.

I'm in the process of trying to find me a new binocular. My Hawke Frontier ED 8x42 has done it well but now i will go to a 10x binocular.

I've read a lot of reviews and looked through a lot of binoculars and so far come to the conclusion it's between the Conquest HD and Vanguard ED2.

I have tried the Conquest and think they are amazing for my use and eyes. I need long eye relief because i'm a glass wearer and have tried some with short eye relief with bad result.

I have only read about the Vanguard ED2 but have tried Vanguard ED. They had to short eye relief and because I'm very sensitive to CA I saw to much of CA in it. I also had lots of glare in it. Tried my Hawke at the same objects and no glare.

I've tried Meopta Meostar HD 10x42 but with an eye relief of 15 mm i didn't get the full sight. I also got CA in them, but nice and sharp they were.

I then tried Kite Ibis 10x42 but didn't like the narrow DOF, had a hard time getting sharp image because I had to go back and forth some time to get focus.

Kamakura to much CA.

Opticron to much CA.

Swarovski and Leica to expensive.

I can furthermore tell that I can get the Vanguard for €535 and the Conquest for €735 so I don't think the price matters if Conquest is the best option.

Vanguard Endeavor has got a lot of good reviews both in BF and other places but I have recently read a review regarding the new Bushnell Legend M series where the reviewer states its better than the Vanguard. I can get the Bushnell for €615 so its in the middle of the two others.

But maybe I first should try the Vanguard so that I know they fit me because we all mostly have different experience with the same binoculars.

Thanks

Tommy

Tommy:

I have the Conquest HD 10x42, and really like it, and as you mentioned it is very nice.
I have other alpha glass to compare with, and these are a great value and I recommend.

I have not tried the Vanguard line, but I don't think they have others that compare in this
price range.

I would get the Conquest, and not look back.

Jerry

That's a very good price for the Conquest and you might take advantage of it. The only drawback of my 8x42 is the 5o degrees AFOV and the 10x42 has more.

http://www.birdforum.net/reviews/showproduct.php/product/446/cat/9
Here is the link to Typo's in-depth look at the Vanguard 8x42 EDII which you may have seen.
The EDII is a considerably improved instrument to the ED original, and i would suggest trying one before your enviable decision!
Paddy

Also
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=286260&page=2
Post #45 - direct comparison between ED 8.5x45 and EDII 8x42

Allbinos has a recent review of the Vanguard 8x42 ED II. Overall it is pretty good for its price.

http://www.allbinos.com/278-binoculars_review-Vanguard_Endeavor_ED_II_8x42_review.html

Hello Tommy,

I'm rather more familliar with the 8x42 models than the 10x42s but it looks like the Conquest HD 10x42 has 18mm ER like the 8x42. The regular Endeavour ED10x42 has 16.5mm but the EDII 10x has 18.5mm like the 8x. With my glasses I'usually content with around 16mm. I don't think I needed to adjust the Conquest, but on the Vanguard I need to twist out the eyecups about 2.5mm. The fields of view are only 1m @1000m different. The Conquest has the more neutral colour balance and I know many will feel the view appears brighter, but as you will probably have read the Vanguard has the flatter field and sharper edges. Certainly the EDII I have has a higher effective resolution than most Conquests I've tried though I prefer the Zeiss ergonomically.

The question of CA is a bit more complicated. Imperfect eye positioning will aggrevate any CA. I found that the control was very good on the Vanguard when set up correctly and the longitudinal CA is probably the best I've seen but you can still see fringing if your eye strays off centre. So was is that you saw CA mostly when the ER was inadequate?

I'm not sure what you mean when you say Kamakura has too much CA. Did you mean the brand? Kamakura Koki makes most of the Kites, many Opticrons and other makes and probabaly the important bits of the Conquest HD. I personally wasn't keen on the Ibis ED thought the 7x42 wasn't bad, but I do like the new Bonelli 2.0. I think overall I prefer it to the Conquest HD even though it doesn't have ED glass and there is more CA than some. It does the rest very nicely. Local prices seem to vary and I haven't checked how they might compare in Denmark.

I briefly tried the Bushnell L and M 8x42s last month. They are both a lot better than the old Legend HD. I personally thought the L represented better value. The M was better, but at the time I wasn't convinced it stood out from the crowd.

David

Hi.

Thank you for all your suggestiens they are very helpfull.

Being i've only tried the Conquest I will also try the Endeavor ED2 before I will decide.

NDhunter and kkokolis, think your are rigth, the Conquest is a very fine binocular for the price I can get it for.

Paddy7, i've, as you have expected, read the reviews and other small reviews of the Endeavor here at BF, thats one of the reason I'm interested in that binocular. Think you get a lot for the money, maybe not alpha, but near enough.

typo, I need the long ER, can't use any at 15-17 no mather how i put the binocular. My Hawke has an ER at 18 mm and those i have had to remove the eye cups and put some not as thick eye cups from another binocular to get the full view. I have another binocular for my car, Nikon Sporter EX 8x42 with an ER at 19,7 mm, those I have to twist the eye cups about 1 mm to get no black outs.

I know its not all the binoculars fault if I get CA, my eyes and my glasses also has something to say. CA was visible in all the binoculars i've tried minus the Conquest. But the Conquest was also the one with the longest ER of them i tried.

I tried the Kamakura at a Birdshow at Falsterbo, Sweden and i didn't like them and they had much CA. I was also told that Kamakura was involved in Kite, Opticron and Conquest, but the only one I liked was the Conquest. Youre right about the Bonelli 2.0, they were excellent and bright and they had CA and they are nearly as good as the Conquest. But those I have to pay €250 more than Conquest.

The difference between Bushnell L and M are M are with dielectric coating and price is €100 lower for the L. Have to try both to know if dielectric is worth the extra.

I will be on a trip to London next week and will try to find a shop with the Vanguard to try them out.

Hi again, a little update.
I went out and tried the Vanguard and liked both the feeling and IQ. As the price in the shop was nearly €160 more expensive than online I decided to buy online at another shop and got them last week. My first impression was WOW they were excellent (tried them at first in my garden at sundown and in low light). In the weekend I tried them more and against my Hawke and suddenly it was not as WOW anymore. There were more CA in the Vanguard and I just couldn’t get them as sharp as the Hawke. I have tried to adjust IPD and eye cups with no visual difference. The contrast in the Hawke were also better, maybe is has to do with the Hawke is 8x and the Vanguard is 10x I don’t know. But I have decided to buy another pair online to see if it is sample variation or if the Vanguard just doesn’t fit me. I have read in the reviews that the 8x should be better than the 10x regarding IQ but it is a 10x I need. I’ve also looked at the Conquest again but now the difference in price is way higher (Got the Vanguard at €375 and the Conquest are now €844 so they are too expensive now). I have also looked at Hawke Sapphire and Frontier ED but they have to short eye relief when wearing glasses.
Do any of you think I will get anything from trying a second pair or should I look elsewhere?

I have three pairs of bins, Bausch and Lomb Elites, 10x42 20 years old, Optolyth Alpin 12x50 25years old. Nikon CF111 7x20 also about 20 years old and my latest pair, Bushnel Elites 8x42. ED.

They are all within a bugs whisker of each other. In fact apart from low light performance, I can't tell the difference, they are all superb. You can see some CA in all of them some degree, but you have to go looking for it and even then it's only at the edge. I'm told some people are more susceptible to CA than others. Looks like I'm not one of those.

Ron

I haven't seen the Ed2, but bought my mom the ed. Decent for the price of $250, but I haven't spent a lot of time with them. Now that she has had the, awhile my concern is durability. The eye ups were loose after about 2 years of use. I tried getting my mom to send them in to test the warranty, but she hasn't yet. I probably would have put more thought into the warranty and future value if I were to do it again.

The conquest HD are built like tanks, good image reviews, and zeiss will hold value.

The meoptas are great for me, I guess everyone's eyes are different.

Vortex is another good option with the viper HD or razors.

vanguard Endeavor ED2

I had the ED 1, which I got rid of. It handled very nicely, but was only average, optically.

I also got the ED2, which, while optically better, was not up to the quality of the Conquests. Good in its own right, but not really comparable with the Conquests, although it does have very good edge definition.