My New Zeiss (1 Viewer)

Torview · Apr 27, 2012

In an earlier thread about the cost of new Alphas, I wrote I was in the happy position of buying pretty much any new binocular I liked this year, there was no real upper price restriction.

I went to try the new Conquest HD today, no use to me, the eye relief was no good, the only way I could see the full field was to place the eye cups on my eyebrows !

Had yet another look through the old Conquest 8x40. after nearly 12 months of trying just about everything this is the one model I kept coming back to like an old friend, I liked the handling, loved the view it always suited "me", but. there was always a new model to consider just to be sure, the new Zeiss, the new Leica..............

What I was looking for was the one binocular to be my companion for the next decade or so, looking at all those birds familiar and hopefully new, it did`nt have to be the "best", just the one I liked the best.

Well I stopped looking and stumped up today, the reason ?, a never to be repeated price, brand spanking new from South West Optics £499.

To say I`m happy is an understatement.

James Bean · May 2, 2012

I take it the £499 you paid was for the Conquest 8x40? That's very good, since the price has been around £750, and the cheapest I've seen in recent times was £585, but that was from USA so extra costs would also arise, probably taking total expenditure over £700.
I've just bought a Conquest 8x30 on eBay from someone who's acquired a 40mm Zeiss as a replacement. Quite a coincidence, wouldn't you say? I wonder...
Let me know how you get on with your 8x40, as I renew my acquaintance with an 8x30!

denco@comcast.n · May 2, 2012

Torview said:
In an earlier thread about the cost of new Alphas, I wrote I was in the happy position of buying pretty much any new binocular I liked this year, there was no real upper price restriction.

I went to try the new Conquest HD today, no use to me, the eye relief was no good, the only way I could see the full field was to place the eye cups on my eyebrows !

Had yet another look through the old Conquest 8x40. after nearly 12 months of trying just about everything this is the one model I kept coming back to like an old friend, I liked the handling, loved the view it always suited "me", but. there was always a new model to consider just to be sure, the new Zeiss, the new Leica..............

What I was looking for was the one binocular to be my companion for the next decade or so, looking at all those birds familiar and hopefully new, it did`nt have to be the "best", just the one I liked the best.

Well I stopped looking and stumped up today, the reason ?, a never to be repeated price, brand spanking new from South West Optics £499.

To say I`m happy is an understatement.

I am surprised you didn't like the Zeiss FL. It is quite a bit better than the Conquest and they can be had pretty cheaply now. Sometimes a binocular works for you though.

Torview · May 2, 2012

James.

Hope you enjoy getting reacquainted with the 8x30, I think the Conquest line is undervalued in general, maybe owners of the Victory feel a more affordable Zeiss reduces the overall pedigree, I don`t know.

Dennis.

I agree the FL is a better optic than some Conquests, but I`m not convinced of such with the 8 & 10x40`s, I think its correct that only these 2 use the Abbe Koenig prisms like the FL. IMHO the gap isnt that great.

That extra £800 means I can get a classic porro, Habicht maybe !

temmie · May 3, 2012

In my humble opinion:
The Conquest is a heavy-focussing, tunnel-vision, less ergonomical, plastic-feel, somewhat dim binocular (at least, in comparison with

The Victory is a smooth-focussing, wide-vision, ergonomical, solid-feel, super-bright binocular.

The Conquest is still better than many out there, but the Victory is just better and I like it a lot more. If I would ever want a Conquest, it would be the new ones.

Torview · May 3, 2012

temmie said:
In my humble opinion:
The Conquest is a heavy-focussing, tunnel-vision, less ergonomical, plastic-feel, somewhat dim binocular (at least, in comparison with
The Victory is a smooth-focussing, wide-vision, ergonomical, solid-feel, super-bright binocular.

The Conquest is still better than many out there, but the Victory is just better and I like it a lot more. If I would ever want a Conquest, it would be the new ones.

Well Albino`s measured the 10x40 at 93+% transmission ! if that`s "dim" then the 94/95% measured for the Victory must be disappointing also.

Ergonomically they`re practically identical IMO.

The new Conquest is a huge disappointment in its almost useless eye relief on the 8X.

Different strokes I guess.

temmie · May 3, 2012

Comparing transmission between different configurations is tricky. The Conquest and Victory are maybe very comparable in transmission, but the the Conquest is 10x40 and that's dimmer than the most similar configuration for the Victory, which is 10x42.

I have tried the new Conquest with glasses and did not find any problem with eye relief (and I found the old Conquest to be poor on eye relief).
Ergonomically the tubes on the conquests are slimmer and they almost feel a little too light for me.
I have had many many side comparisons between the two and how much fun the conquest would be to have as a second pair, I would almost never take them out having the victory as a first choice.

James Bean · May 3, 2012

Different strokes indeed. I had a Zeiss 8x30 Conquest, liked it, but sold it in one of my less lucid moments. My replacement 8x30 Conquest arrived this morning, so I'm happy again. I accept it's not quite as outstanding as the Victory, but it's more than good enough for me. As nice as new, this one cost £275 on eBay and I'm delighted with it. What would a used Zeiss FL cost in mint condition? It doesn't bear thinking about...
Well, I did think about it, checked on eBay, and there's a used 8x32 FL for... £800!
Is an FL 3x better than a Conquest? I don't think so!

Torview · May 3, 2012

I don`t use glasses and the only way I could see the full field on the HD was to balance the edge of the eye cups on my eyebrows, I see the full field comfortably on the ABK.

I accept your opinion to be as valid as any others, I can`t however agree the ABK Conquest is "somewhat dim", whatever other shortfalls it has.

John Russell · May 5, 2012

Torview said:
I don`t use glasses and the only way I could see the full field on the HD was to balance the edge of the eye cups on my eyebrows, I see the full field comfortably on the ABK.

Do you mean you were getting blackouts? That happens when your eyes are closer to the eyepiece than the exit pupil or where there is spherical aberration of the exit pupil.

If the bin was designed with eye relief for glasses wearers there has to be a position where you can see the full FOV without glasses.

John

Torview · May 5, 2012

John Russell said:
Do you mean you were getting blackouts? That happens when your eyes are closer to the eyepiece than the exit pupil or where there is spherical aberration of the exit pupil.

If the bin was designed with eye relief for glasses wearers there has to be a position where you can see the full FOV without glasses.

John

Yes, blackouts, even with the cups twisted all the way out it was`nt sufficiently far enough, for me, the 10X was better but not comfortable.

I`v never had this problem in a modern roof, very disappointing.

ibramr · May 8, 2012

I had the pleasure of trying the Zeiss Conquest HD for the first time on Saturday during a gathering in Ohio Birds Festival. One clear feature of this model was that the placing of the eyes was excessively critical to avoid blackouts. But once learnt, and in excellent viewing conditions, it compared reasonably well with the FL in terms clarity, color and brightness. The FL, however, was much more "forgiving", and considerably more comfortable to use for extended period of time. I am sure that this model will fill the needs of many, but in my opinion, the price premium of the FL is certainly worth it. Enjoy in good health.

denco@comcast.n · May 8, 2012

I feel the same. The FL is a much better binocular. I had the Conquest 8x30 and always considered it about equal to a Nikon Monarch but maybe the HD is better. I had blackouts also with the Conquest. Sold it in about a month.

absolut_beethoven · May 9, 2012

ibramr said:
I had the pleasure of trying the Zeiss Conquest HD for the first time on Saturday during a gathering in Ohio Birds Festival. One clear feature of this model was that the placing of the eyes was excessively critical to avoid blackouts. But once learnt, and in excellent viewing conditions, it compared reasonably well with the FL in terms clarity, color and brightness. The FL, however, was much more "forgiving", and considerably more comfortable to use for extended period of time. I am sure that this model will fill the needs of many, but in my opinion, the price premium of the FL is certainly worth it. Enjoy in good health.

I don't wear eyeglasses except for driving, so I'm surprised that you found eye placement critical, because I didn't. But as I noted in my review of them their prisms are not as generously over sized as the Nikon Edg, so one will obviously have less leeway.

For most people it means playing around with IPD and placement of the eye cups into your sockets, or resting up against your eyebrows - whatever works for you and still feels comfortable.

perseid28 · May 13, 2012

temmie said:
Comparing transmission between different configurations is tricky. The Conquest and Victory are maybe very comparable in transmission, but the the Conquest is 10x40 and that's dimmer than the most similar configuration for the Victory, which is 10x42.

In broad daylight when our pupils are only dilated to a couple millimeters, any 10x binoculars of more than 20-25 millimeters (assuming the same transmission %) will appear identically bright. Even in the evening/night when our pupils are fully dilated, a 42 mm binocular would only be 11% brighter than the 40 mm, and that's actually still not noticeable (in astronomy, it would be equivalent to a 0.106-magnitude difference in star brightness).

I'm left to conclude that--assuming Allbino's transmission measurements are accurate--any difference in brightness of the 10x40 Conquest and 10x42 Victory is entirely imagined.

stereotruckdriver · May 13, 2012

perseid28 said:
In broad daylight when our pupils are only dilated to a couple millimeters, any 10x binoculars of more than 20-25 millimeters (assuming the same transmission %) will appear identically bright. Even in the evening/night when our pupils are fully dilated, a 42 mm binocular would only be 11% brighter than the 40 mm, and that's actually still not noticeable (in astronomy, it would be equivalent to a 0.106-magnitude difference in star brightness).

I'm left to conclude that--assuming Allbino's transmission measurements are accurate--any difference in brightness of the 10x40 Conquest and 10x42 Victory is entirely imagined.

I don't disagree on the theory, what i do disagree on is the fact that you state according to there measurements (imagined the difference in brightness?)Better coatings can make a large degree of percieved brightness though theory would dismiss this. I have seen this first hand with identical configurations? Don't ask me how? But, i would like to know more about how they come to these conclusion's on there transmission measurements? It's more curiosity on my part, Bryce...

Torview · May 13, 2012

Zeiss Fl...........Real front lens diameter Left: 42.15+/- 0.05mm
Right: 42.15+/- 0.05mm 8/8.0
Real magnification 9.7+/- 0.2x 3/3.0
Transmission 95.5+/- 3% 14.5/15.0
Chromatic aberration Very low in the centre. Almost perfect. 9.5/10.0
Astigmatism Properly corrected. 8.5/10.0
Distortion The distance of the first curved line from the field centre compared to the field of vision radius: 37% +- 8% 3.5/10.0
Coma Perfect. Minimal even at the very edge. 9.7/10.0
Blurring at the edge of the FOV The blur appears in the distance of 88% +- 4% from the field of view centre. 7.5/10.0

Zeiss Conquest ABK............Real front lens diameter Left: 40+/- 0.05mm
Right: 40+/- 0.05mm 8/8.0
Real magnification 9.81+/- 0.2x 3/3.0
Transmission 93+/- 3% 14/15.0
Chromatic aberration Medium in the centre and at the edge. 5.2/10.0
Astigmatism Low. 8.4/10.0
Distortion The distance of the first curved line from the field centre compared to the field of view radius : 25% +\- 4% 2/10.0
Coma Negligible. 9.2/10.0
Blurring at the edge of the FOV The blur occurs in the distance of 81% +\- 5% from the field of view centre. 6/10.0

This is taken from Allbino`s reviews, the Conquest drops points mainly on Distortion and C/A, but for me the C/A`S not that bad, certainly no worse than my Nikon Hg l.

perseid28 · May 13, 2012

stereotruckdriver said:
I don't disagree on the theory, what i do disagree on is the fact that you state according to there measurements (imagined the difference in brightness?)Better coatings can make a large degree of percieved brightness though theory would dismiss this. I have seen this first hand with identical configurations? Don't ask me how? But, i would like to know more about how they come to these conclusion's on there transmission measurements? It's more curiosity on my part, Bryce...

Better coatings *might* have some effect on perceived brightness, because multicoatings that are tuned to the index level of the glass are claimed to have less light scatter than ones which are not (and I assume the latest and greatest coatings have this feature). By carefully blackening the inside of the optical tube, the manufacturer can also reduce spurrious light from creeping into the image.

These are just some ideas that popped into my head for possible reasons for the Victory to seem noticeably brighter than the Conquest. I don't doubt your observations, and unfortunately I haven't had the opportunity to compare the two binoculars side by side. My point was that presumably Allbinos does a pretty accurate job of measuring the transmission of binoculars, so the perceived brightness difference of the two binoculars should be almost completely due to some unrelated factor (like image contrast).

stereotruckdriver · May 13, 2012

perseid28 said:
Better coatings *might* have some effect on perceived brightness, because multicoatings that are tuned to the index level of the glass are claimed to have less light scatter than ones which are not (and I assume the latest and greatest coatings have this feature). By carefully blackening the inside of the optical tube, the manufacturer can also reduce spurrious light from creeping into the image.

These are just some ideas that popped into my head for possible reasons for the Victory to seem noticeably brighter than the Conquest. I don't doubt your observations, and unfortunately I haven't had the opportunity to compare the two binoculars side by side. My point was that presumably Allbinos does a pretty accurate job of measuring the transmission of binoculars, so the perceived brightness difference of the two binoculars should be almost completely due to some unrelated factor (like image contrast).

:t:

Torview · May 28, 2012

Just returned from a weeks Birding in an unusually sunny and hot Wales including a day at Ynys-hir, so lots of time spent with the ABK.

My admiration for them grows stronger, very bright and I do mean BRIGHT, they really pull up detail in deeply shaded area`s of woodland.

Fov acceptable, just not expansive, Pin sharp centre starts to soften about 65% out, no good if you love a sharp edge.

Focus is workmanlike, it does the job, no more.

The view feels more Porro than Roof to me.

CA prominent in some lighting conditions, but for me only on peripheral objects never on the target so I can live with it.

Overall an absolute joy to own and use IMO. Deserves a larger fan base IMO.

My New Zeiss (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread