-
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.
Review of Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 on Binomania (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter binomania
- Start date
idaho john
Well-known member
and...
Pier: thanks for the review...
John
Pier: thanks for the review...
John
Sandy Leng
Well-known member
Piergiovanni,
Thanks for a very good review. The translation is fine.
Very good photos as well.
Sandy.
brocknroller
porromaniac
Piergiovanni,
Thanks for that review. I was never uninterested in the original 8x30 Conquest due to its narrowish FOV, unappealing looks, and lackluster performance (depending on whose review you read).
But after reading your review of the 8x32 HD, I was impressed and want to try one of these myself. The Price is Right. Even Bob Barker would buy one of these.
(a double entendre for those who follow Astromart's bin ads).
I would prefer the 8x32's 8* FOV to the 8x42's 7.2* but usually there are trade offs in terms of more aberrations and distortions in the wider field midsized model, but from your review, they seem to be minimal.
One comment that surprised me is when you wrote that the 8x32 Conquest HD has a fast focuser yet also good depth of field.
One of the reasons why I never expect to buy an 8x32 format roof (except if I find a amazing deal on an 8x32 EL) is that every one I've tried has had shallow depth perception, giving a rather 2-D rather than 3-D view. And a fast focuser makes this shallow depth perception worse. So I was surprised about this sentence in your review:
"The rotor has been very fast and fluid, and thanks to the great depth of field, and good field of view provided is a real pleasure to have fun chasing the fastest avi-fauna."
Not sure how Zeiss managed to overcome the usual pitfall of shallow depth perception of other midsized roofs. I checked the specs, and it is slightly longer than the 8x32 FL but only by 2/10 of an inch, which is insignificant. So it's not due to the longer FL, as I think it is with the 8x32 EL. The 8x32 Ultravid looks like a compact bin next to the EL.
Not sure I'd like the fast focuser even if the depth perception is good, because I tend to overshoot my targets with fast focusers, and they may play havoc with my focus accommodation, and I have to keep tweaking the diopter at different distances. I'm not sure since there might be a problem with the diopter and the focuser not turning in synch with Zeiss bins as Holger mentioned with his 8x32 FL.
The other interesting thing I noted was the similarity of the color reflected off the objectives with the old 8x30B/GA T*P Classic and 7x42 ClassiC. The ClassiC's coating was a bit darker, and my 8x50 Octarem's objectives were a bit more orangey.
Not sure what that represents. A boost in the yellow-green? Or just the reflected color of the compounds used in the AR coatings? Whatever it is, the reflected color off Zeiss objectives been fairly consistent for two decades.
Brock de Fazio
Thanks for that review. I was never uninterested in the original 8x30 Conquest due to its narrowish FOV, unappealing looks, and lackluster performance (depending on whose review you read).
But after reading your review of the 8x32 HD, I was impressed and want to try one of these myself. The Price is Right. Even Bob Barker would buy one of these.
(a double entendre for those who follow Astromart's bin ads). I would prefer the 8x32's 8* FOV to the 8x42's 7.2* but usually there are trade offs in terms of more aberrations and distortions in the wider field midsized model, but from your review, they seem to be minimal.
One comment that surprised me is when you wrote that the 8x32 Conquest HD has a fast focuser yet also good depth of field.
One of the reasons why I never expect to buy an 8x32 format roof (except if I find a amazing deal on an 8x32 EL) is that every one I've tried has had shallow depth perception, giving a rather 2-D rather than 3-D view. And a fast focuser makes this shallow depth perception worse. So I was surprised about this sentence in your review:
"The rotor has been very fast and fluid, and thanks to the great depth of field, and good field of view provided is a real pleasure to have fun chasing the fastest avi-fauna."
Not sure how Zeiss managed to overcome the usual pitfall of shallow depth perception of other midsized roofs. I checked the specs, and it is slightly longer than the 8x32 FL but only by 2/10 of an inch, which is insignificant. So it's not due to the longer FL, as I think it is with the 8x32 EL. The 8x32 Ultravid looks like a compact bin next to the EL.
Not sure I'd like the fast focuser even if the depth perception is good, because I tend to overshoot my targets with fast focusers, and they may play havoc with my focus accommodation, and I have to keep tweaking the diopter at different distances. I'm not sure since there might be a problem with the diopter and the focuser not turning in synch with Zeiss bins as Holger mentioned with his 8x32 FL.
The other interesting thing I noted was the similarity of the color reflected off the objectives with the old 8x30B/GA T*P Classic and 7x42 ClassiC. The ClassiC's coating was a bit darker, and my 8x50 Octarem's objectives were a bit more orangey.
Not sure what that represents. A boost in the yellow-green? Or just the reflected color of the compounds used in the AR coatings? Whatever it is, the reflected color off Zeiss objectives been fairly consistent for two decades.
Brock de Fazio
Mark9473
Well-known member
Brock, I could be wrong but I don't think you're talking about the same thing. I believe that Piergiovanni is talking about "depth of focus" which basically depends only on magnification and, as Glenn LeDrew pointed out on CN some time ago, on the eye pupil size. Isn't what you mention more about "3D" perception? Would like to hear your thoughts on this.
marinemaster
Well-known member
The lady holding the binoculars on the first page is cute
Nice review, looking forward to try them. I noticed they have the external diopter which I like. Reliable.
Nice review, looking forward to try them. I noticed they have the external diopter which I like. Reliable.
Last edited:
binomania
Well-known member
Hi to all.yes!i talk about the depht of focus ..not the 3d perception. A porro prism like, nikon Se is better, in the 3d perception,but the depht of focus depend only for the binoculars enlargements.
Probably google translate generates some mistakes.i am sorry for this..
