-
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.
My thoughts on the Zeiss 10X42SF (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SuperDuty
- Start date
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
I'm thinking that I'll keep the 10X50SV, will try to give my thoughts this evening. Bet you're all waiting with bated breath on this information. 3Please forgive the old pillows, thats the old couch I sleep on so I can afford binoculars.:-O
:eek!:, Inquiring Minds want to know! :t:
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Hi Ted
I felt I just had to see the SF in order to know if I was missing out on the best 10X available. Turns out, for me anyway, I already have them. The SF is a very nice binocular to be sure, they feel extremely light with great balance allowing me to be slightly less shaky than with the 10X50. Although not quite as sharp as the SV, the extra stability was a positive. They are bright with a somewhat clinical, neutral if you will, color balance. The SV on the other hand has a much more saturated, colorful image, I greatly preferred the brilliance of the SV. Looking at the trunk of a large oak tree 400 yards away, the SF showed it to be gray with decent rendering of the fine texture of the bark, the SV revealed even more of the texture of the bark including green tones that were lost to the SF. I felt that the SV image was more delicately detailed and pristine, more organic looking. In the area of CA correction there is no doubt that the SF is superior to the SV and probably the equal of the Kowa Genesis, but as has been said before, the SV is no slouch either. The much talked about ease of view of the SV was hinted at by the SF but for me not equaled. I saw the full FOV with the SF, but the edge of the field on the SV was sharper which I am beginning to think may be part of the reason for the SVs wide open feel in the image. I didn't think to check the SF for RB, but it didn't jump out at me, nor did the extra FOV seem to get my attention. I know the SF is wider but the SV feels more open. The focus knob on the SF is very smooth, but I lucked out with a good one on the SV so no real difference there. Much better though than on the 10X42 SV I had.
The SF is a good binocular, but for my taste, especially factoring in intrinsic value, legendary warranty, robust build quality, and above all else that beautiful, organic, colorful, absurdly easy view, the SV wins by a big margin for me. All of these thoughts IMO. |=)|
I felt I just had to see the SF in order to know if I was missing out on the best 10X available. Turns out, for me anyway, I already have them. The SF is a very nice binocular to be sure, they feel extremely light with great balance allowing me to be slightly less shaky than with the 10X50. Although not quite as sharp as the SV, the extra stability was a positive. They are bright with a somewhat clinical, neutral if you will, color balance. The SV on the other hand has a much more saturated, colorful image, I greatly preferred the brilliance of the SV. Looking at the trunk of a large oak tree 400 yards away, the SF showed it to be gray with decent rendering of the fine texture of the bark, the SV revealed even more of the texture of the bark including green tones that were lost to the SF. I felt that the SV image was more delicately detailed and pristine, more organic looking. In the area of CA correction there is no doubt that the SF is superior to the SV and probably the equal of the Kowa Genesis, but as has been said before, the SV is no slouch either. The much talked about ease of view of the SV was hinted at by the SF but for me not equaled. I saw the full FOV with the SF, but the edge of the field on the SV was sharper which I am beginning to think may be part of the reason for the SVs wide open feel in the image. I didn't think to check the SF for RB, but it didn't jump out at me, nor did the extra FOV seem to get my attention. I know the SF is wider but the SV feels more open. The focus knob on the SF is very smooth, but I lucked out with a good one on the SV so no real difference there. Much better though than on the 10X42 SV I had.
The SF is a good binocular, but for my taste, especially factoring in intrinsic value, legendary warranty, robust build quality, and above all else that beautiful, organic, colorful, absurdly easy view, the SV wins by a big margin for me. All of these thoughts IMO. |=)|
Rathaus
Well-known member
Great feedback, but the bins aren't quite equal in spec. Do you feel that the spec difference is accounting for much here?
As an aside, can you remember any bino having a more relaxing immersive view than that 10x50 SV? Just wondering. I haven't used one yet. I'd be fascinated to see how it locks horns with the old fujinon fmtrxs 10x50.
Cheers
Rathaus
As an aside, can you remember any bino having a more relaxing immersive view than that 10x50 SV? Just wondering. I haven't used one yet. I'd be fascinated to see how it locks horns with the old fujinon fmtrxs 10x50.
Cheers
Rathaus
Last edited:
SuperDuty
Well-known member
The 50mm I'm sure helps, but my opinion would have been virtually the same if I were doing the comparison with the 10X42 SV. The view to me is the very definition of relaxing and immersive, but I haven't seen a Fuji 10X50.
Hermann
Well-known member
Right, there's quite a difference in weight. That *does* make a difference in the field. And a larger exit pupil always makes a difference in ease of view, there's in my mind no doubt about it. None whatsoever.
That aside, I also feel you definitely need some time to get used to a pair of binoculars. I personally wouldn't really want to judge the differences between binoculars without having used them for some time in different situations in the field.
Hermann
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
apparently it takes a 50mm bin to beat the 10x42 SF!
:t:
:t:
Inquisitor
Well-known member
I know it is not what you want flat field wise, I am just wondering "out loud" about how a HT would have done on that oak tree. Have you used one?
I am shopping for a super good 10x to be obtained sometime between Christmas and the return of warm weather.
I am shopping for a super good 10x to be obtained sometime between Christmas and the return of warm weather.
SuperDuty
Well-known member
SuperDuty
Well-known member
I would say it's personal preference, to me the 10X42 SV is also preferable, you might see it different.
SuperDuty
Well-known member
The difference in weight is very noticeable. I've compared binoculars that were both so close that it was almost impossible for me to decide, that's not the case here, the view is very different between the two and the choice for me is clear. The air was good and the sun was in and out a lot, I was able to check about every optical parameter that was important to me, I also looked at pigeons, several different colors of chickens, and a big red Doberman. :-O I may look a little more with them this weekend, but I feel like they should go back soon while they are still indistinguishable from brand new. If they were $500 I wouldn't be quit as nervous carrying them around.
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Inquiring Minds Need To Know
Robert,
Thanks for your interesting initial assessment and findings! Maybe if you have more trial period time with the 10x42SF \ 10x50SV comparison, might you be able to add differences in:
Stereopsis (3D effects)
FOV In-focus DOF
Very low light (deep dusk-first light) transmission capabilities
A comparison between the 10x50SV and a 10x50SF (if\when available) would certainly even up differences you see, but for now, have to glass with what's available! :t:
BTW, when you do return it, consider converting those funds to a "new bed"! 3
Stay thirsty my friend, B
Ted
Robert,
Thanks for your interesting initial assessment and findings! Maybe if you have more trial period time with the 10x42SF \ 10x50SV comparison, might you be able to add differences in:
Stereopsis (3D effects)
FOV In-focus DOF
Very low light (deep dusk-first light) transmission capabilities
A comparison between the 10x50SV and a 10x50SF (if\when available) would certainly even up differences you see, but for now, have to glass with what's available! :t:
BTW, when you do return it, consider converting those funds to a "new bed"! 3
Stay thirsty my friend, B
Ted
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Hi Ted
The SF is a fine binocular with a first class image, the light weight and balance are definitely a big plus also. Would a 10X50 SF be superior to the 10X50 SV, I don't know, if you like total neutrality of color in your binoculars, then it might already be superior. I had them out again today for a little while and could see absolutely zero rolling ball in side to side panning, but I am obviously not RB sensitive to any degree. I see the full FOV of the SF while looking straight ahead, but when looking to the edge there is some black out that occurs. With the SV my eyes can wander to the edge with no hint of black out. Is it the bigger exit pupil of the SV, not enough eye relief on the SF, I don't know. That easy view of the 10x42 and 10X50SV is not duplicated by the SF, would it be in a 10X50 SF, I can't say. The CA control of the SF is impressive, and that's saying something coming from me, it's probably as good as I've seen. On the three other questions, I would say advantage SV, but I'll check maybe Sunday to see if I can tell much of a difference. My room is to small for a bed of any size, so the old broke down couch will have to stay, that and I'm stubborn as a mule about changing anything. 3
As with anything optical it is all about personal preference, and many will prefer the SF, you must try them for yourself, especially at this price level.
The SF is a fine binocular with a first class image, the light weight and balance are definitely a big plus also. Would a 10X50 SF be superior to the 10X50 SV, I don't know, if you like total neutrality of color in your binoculars, then it might already be superior. I had them out again today for a little while and could see absolutely zero rolling ball in side to side panning, but I am obviously not RB sensitive to any degree. I see the full FOV of the SF while looking straight ahead, but when looking to the edge there is some black out that occurs. With the SV my eyes can wander to the edge with no hint of black out. Is it the bigger exit pupil of the SV, not enough eye relief on the SF, I don't know. That easy view of the 10x42 and 10X50SV is not duplicated by the SF, would it be in a 10X50 SF, I can't say. The CA control of the SF is impressive, and that's saying something coming from me, it's probably as good as I've seen. On the three other questions, I would say advantage SV, but I'll check maybe Sunday to see if I can tell much of a difference. My room is to small for a bed of any size, so the old broke down couch will have to stay, that and I'm stubborn as a mule about changing anything. 3
As with anything optical it is all about personal preference, and many will prefer the SF, you must try them for yourself, especially at this price level.
Robert,
Thanks for your interesting initial assessment and findings! Maybe if you have more trial period time with the 10x42SF \ 10x50SV comparison, might you be able to add differences in:
Stereopsis (3D effects)
FOV In-focus DOF
Very low light (deep dusk-first light) transmission capabilities
A comparison between the 10x50SV and a 10x50SF (if\when available) would certainly even up differences you see, but for now, have to glass with what's available! :t:
BTW, when you do return it, consider converting those funds to a "new bed"! 3
Stay thirsty my friend, B
Ted
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
:t::t::t:
SUPPRESSOR
Well-known member
What the hell is an organic view, when its out!!!!
suppressor.
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Organic View...You know...Natural!
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Natural is what I was going for, but probably not the best descriptive. The SF is pretty much neutral in color, the SV a little on the Technicolor side of things, so maybe the SF is more natural in color. The SV just looks more dynamic, more dimensional, more alive to me. If I had the SF they would probably not get that much use, the SV on the other hand is always calling out to me.
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Your opinion of the colour balance of both bins seems to be the exact opposite of some of the expert reviews on here lately. And, this is not to say that I don't believe what you write but to illustrate how different people see different things. I think binocular preference is mostly a hard-wired, brain - eye thing that either we like [something] or we don't.
