• 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.

Zeiss SF - 10x is the new 8.5x (1 Viewer)

V

Vespobuteo

Well-known member
Never did I believe that I would prefer a 10x binocular before a lower mag ditto…

But after trying the 10x42 SF more extensively,
it seems to me that the view is as easy and feels (almost) as stable as with the 8.5x42 SV. The 10x42 SV feels rather restricted and narrow to me in comparison. The 10x50 SV is clearly better in that aspect, and the view is very relaxed.

Many have raved about the wide field of the 8x SF, (including my self),
but what is your thoughts on the Zeiss 10x42 SF?
I think that it contains as much progress and unique qualities in the 10x segment as the 8x SF does.
 
I had a Dialyt 10x40 for 17 years until 2003 and thought I would never want to use a 10x again.

The SF 10x really is so easy to handle and hold, as you say, nearly as steady as an 8.5x. I never thought I would be able to hold a 10x as steady as this.

Lee
 
Vespobuteo said:
Never did I believe that I would prefer a 10x binocular before a lower mag ditto…

But after trying the 10x42 SF more extensively,
it seems to me that the view is as easy and feels (almost) as stable as with the 8.5x42 SV. The 10x42 SV feels rather restricted and narrow to me in comparison. The 10x50 SV is clearly better in that aspect, and the view is very relaxed.

Many have raved about the wide field of the 8x SF, (including my self),
but what is your thoughts on the Zeiss 10x42 SF?
I think that it contains as much progress and unique qualities in the 10x segment as the 8x SF does.
Click to expand...

Did you try 10*50 SV. What is your views on that.

sanjay
 
Vespobuteo said:
Never did I believe that I would prefer a 10x binocular before a lower mag ditto…

But after trying the 10x42 SF more extensively,
it seems to me that the view is as easy and feels (almost) as stable as with the 8.5x42 SV. The 10x42 SV feels rather restricted and narrow to me in comparison. The 10x50 SV is clearly better in that aspect, and the view is very relaxed.

Many have raved about the wide field of the 8x SF, (including my self),
but what is your thoughts on the Zeiss 10x42 SF?
I think that it contains as much progress and unique qualities in the 10x segment as the 8x SF does.
Click to expand...

I'm a big FOV maniac, so for me the 8x was a natural choice! :t: I have no doubt that the 10x is excellent though, and perhaps slightly better in some respects (slightly bigger AFOV and better glare resistance?). I do know though, that I'd want a stabilised bin if I ever went for a 10x. I tried the 10x50 EL SV and didn't like the ergonomics and shake.

HN
 
Vespobuteo said:
But after trying the 10x42 SF more extensively,
it seems to me that the view is as easy and feels (almost) as stable as with the 8.5x42 SV.
Click to expand...

I have tried as well 8 and 10x SF and 8,5 and 10x SV. Then I noticed that SF models definitely are more comfortable to hold and feel more light weight.
Therefore I think the comparison between 10x SF and 8,5x SV isn't really fair.
Maybe the good weight balance of SFs among some people makes them to be considered as comfortable to hold at 10x while Svarovisions are not.
 
james holdsworth said:
I hear it stains fairly easily.....
Click to expand...

This over-attention to minor problems [such as stains, rust, and specks] is a bit of an epidemic here, with a very few posters that push the ''anti-stain, anti-rust, anti-speck" agenda, to the point where an outside observer is [very falsely] led to believe they are dealing with a huge stain or rust or speck problem. I think this sort of over-the-top repetition [because some people just love to express themselves, even if for the 1000th time on the same subject of stains, rust, or specks] does a real disservice to this forum and the binoculars discussed here.

James (taking the "plank" out of his own eye) ;)
 
brocknroller said:
This over-attention to minor problems [such as stains, rust, and specks] is a bit of an epidemic here, with a very few posters that push the ''anti-stain, anti-rust, anti-speck" agenda, to the point where an outside observer is [very falsely] led to believe they are dealing with a huge stain or rust or speck problem. I think this sort of over-the-top repetition [because some people just love to express themselves, even if for the 1000th time on the same subject of stains, rust, or specks] does a real disservice to this forum and the binoculars discussed here.

James (taking the "plank" out of his own eye) ;)
Click to expand...

sarcasm much, Brock? I suspect you would be the only one to not get it......
 
Sanjay Naithani said:
Did you try 10*50 SV. What is your views on that.

sanjay
Click to expand...

I like the 10x50 SV very much, the large exit pupil and big AFOV gives a very relaxed view that drags you into the scene, good eye relief, very good contrast, edge to edge sharpness, clarity and pop, the CA level was under control and it did not bother me, but it's not CA-free, but non of the alpha binos* are. CA can be seen off-axis and if provoked.

The 10x50mm swaro is almost as compact as a 42mm, feels nice and solid to hold, but it's a bit heavy as a walk-around bino for me, the thumb indents I could be without, but might be nice for some.
Build quality is very good as expected. The focuser on the unit tested worked without problems.

If you don't mind the weight (1000 grams) or think 115m of FOV is narrow, I don't see how you could be disappointed with the optics in the 10x50 SV.

The only quirk is that the 10x42 SF is optically in the same league, but with better ergonomics, lighter weight and slightly better FOV and AFOV.

Personally I really would like to have BOTH of these binos…
So darn good are they!

*Kowa Genesis 44mm is said to have very low CA. I haven't tried them though.
 
Last edited:
HighNorth said:
I'm a big FOV maniac, so for me the 8x was a natural choice! :t: I have no doubt that the 10x is excellent though, and perhaps slightly better in some respects (slightly bigger AFOV and better glare resistance?). I do know though, that I'd want a stabilised bin if I ever went for a 10x. I tried the 10x50 EL SV and didn't like the ergonomics and shake.

HN
Click to expand...

I like big FOV to, but my thought is that a 10x might be a better complement to my 7x42 FL (and potentially a 8x32/30 of some kind), specially on occasions birding without a scope, the 10x can be nice, and you could always bring a monopod or even better a small tripod,
stability is extremely important, but stabilized binos don't appeal to me,

the 8x42 is the best all-around binocular, no doubt,
 
Swedpat said:
I have tried as well 8 and 10x SF and 8,5 and 10x SV. Then I noticed that SF models definitely are more comfortable to hold and feel more light weight.
Therefore I think the comparison between 10x SF and 8,5x SV isn't really fair.
Maybe the good weight balance of SFs among some people makes them to be considered as comfortable to hold at 10x while Svarovisions are not.
Click to expand...

yep, that's the whole point,
fair or not, many preferred the 8.5x swaro just because of that extra 0.5x mag and the open bridge, compared to other makes,
I think that was a brilliant idea from Swaro,
almost as smart as the zeiss SF-concept,
o:)
 
AndyRB said:
I've been using mine on a day-to-day basis since December and no stains yet. I wonder what conditions are resulting in stains?
Click to expand...

oil, grease, cigar smoking and some rusty hinges,
HN really knows how to stress test binoculars,
maybe Swaro or Zeiss will hire him for testing their next binocular series.
;)
 
Vespobuteo said:
If you don't mind the weight (1000 grams) or think 115m of FOV is narrow, I don't see how you could be disappointed with the optics in the 10x50 SV.
Click to expand...

The weight is the killer as far as I'm concerned. It's alright for couple of hours or so, but not for birding all day, especially if you also carry a scope+tripod.

Hermann
 
Never could gel with ten power, too shallow depth of focus for me, don`t like high power on a scope either, always been a fan of a good wide angle twenty power.
 
Vespobuteo said:
yep, that's the whole point,
fair or not, many preferred the 8.5x swaro just because of that extra 0.5x mag and the open bridge, compared to other makes,
I think that was a brilliant idea from Swaro,
almost as smart as the zeiss SF-concept,
o:)
Click to expand...

Actually it was a brilliant idea from Dr Gerold Dobler who is also the man behind the SF.

Lee
 
Vespobuteo said:
yep, that's the whole point,
fair or not, many preferred the 8.5x swaro just because of that extra 0.5x mag and the open bridge, compared to other makes,
I think that was a brilliant idea from Swaro,
almost as smart as the zeiss SF-concept,
o:)
Click to expand...
The 8.5X magnification is right in the middle of the popular 7X/10X models ((7+10)/2).
IMO, Zeiss should have followed suit.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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

T
Zeiss SF 8x30 vs SFL 8x40
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
tian1227
T
mgp13
Zeiss SFL 8x40 review from Australia
Replies
7
Views
3K
GrampaTom
G
SuperDuty
CA control in the SF and NL Pure
Replies
3
Views
1K
dries1
dries1
dorubird
Zeiss SF 10x42 dissection
2 3
Replies
51
Views
11K
PHA
P
J
My First Experience Purchasing Birding Binoculars. Part 2 first anniversary
Replies
2
Views
654
Scott98
S

Users who are viewing this thread

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