• 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.

Glare in Zeiss SF and other flat field binoculars (1 Viewer)

V

Vespobuteo

Well-known member
I can't recall any direct comparison on how well Zeiss SF handles glare vs Zeiss HT/FL and Swaro SV. Is the SF weaker in glare compared to HT for example?

Does a flat field and/or increased edge sharpness automatically result in higher sensitivity to glare?
 
Vespobuteo said:
I can't recall any direct comparison on how well Zeiss SF handles glare vs Zeiss HT/FL and Swaro SV. Is the SF weaker in glare compared to HT for example?

Does a flat field and/or increased edge sharpness automatically result in higher sensitivity to glare?
Click to expand...

The SF is very good in that respect. Better than the Swaros. I think the HT is better still, but there isn't much in it, as far as I can see.

An interesting question will be how good the new Leica Noctivid is when it comes to glare. Leica has always been pretty good in that respect, and from what I've heard they put some effort into getting the glare sorted out in the Noctivid as well.

Hermann
 
Allbinos complains about ''reflections behind the eye-piece aperture'' in the SF, something that hasn't been mentioned elsewhere and I can't say I understand what they [Allbinos] are referring to.
 
Glare or flare, perhaps the distinction is not always clear but what I am interested in is performance in difficult light conditions, low sun and the sun close to the FOV.

Torview:
Greatest binoculars seem to give a sort of mixed impression.
Tobias writes:

"Against a low sun, the SF suffers badly from flare though, just as all other tested 8x42s. Here there is much to improve still for all models and makers and again, with the Nikon EDG being the most advanced design."

"The SF has a superb flare resistance, beating the Swarovision, and maybe even surpassing the already spectacular HT. Well done!"

http://www.greatestbinoculars.com/allpages/reviews/zeiss/zeissvictorysf8x42/zeissvictorysf8x42.html

"Flare suppression is good, especially for peripheral crescent flares and "flashes", but veiling glare does occur. "

http://www.greatestbinoculars.com/allpages/reviews/shootouts/shootoutpremier8x42s/8x42shootout.html

Hermann:
After more than a year with the 8.5x42 SV I know glare can be an issue in some situations. My theory is that it's related to the extreme edge sharpness and/or field flatteners. Baffling might be suffering from this design. My 7x42 FL is clearly better in handling glare.

From the info we have on the Noctivid design I suspect that it will be better than the SV:s when it comes to handling glare.
The high weight is a bit of a turnoff for me though.
 
Last edited:
james holdsworth said:
Allbinos complains about ''reflections behind the eye-piece aperture'' in the SF, something that hasn't been mentioned elsewhere and I can't say I understand what they [Allbinos] are referring to.
Click to expand...



I looked at the pictures Allbinos made of these reflections and they look somewhat like very small "false pupils" which are often seen in photographs they take through the eye pieces of the binoculars they are testing.

These are outside the cone of vision and big ones can be seen by people using the binoculars if they hold the binocular away from their eyes. They are very prominent in my Victory 7x42 FL. I can also see them in my Swarovski 7x42 SLC B. I do not see any in my Leica 7x42 Trinovid BN or 8x42 Ultravid BL.

Allbinos always criticizes them in their reviews.

Bob
 
Last edited:
ceasar said:
I looked at the pictures Allbinos made of these reflections and they look somewhat like very small "false pupils" which are often seen in photographs they take through the eye pieces of the binoculars they are testing.

These are outside the cone of vision and big ones can be seen by people using the binoculars if they hold the binocular away from their eyes. They are very prominent in my Victory 7x42 FL. I can also see them in my Swarovski 7x42 SLC B. I do not see any in my Leica 7x42 Trinovid BN or 8x42 Ultravid BL.

Allbinos always criticizes them in their reviews.

Bob
Click to expand...

Yes Bob, I can see the ones at 7 o'clock in the left eyepiece and at 5 o'clock in the right hand side. As you say they are outside the EP and I haven't encountered them in normal viewing.

Lee
 
Vespobuteo said:
I can't recall any direct comparison on how well Zeiss SF handles glare vs Zeiss HT/FL and Swaro SV. Is the SF weaker in glare compared to HT for example?

Does a flat field and/or increased edge sharpness automatically result in higher sensitivity to glare?
Click to expand...

VB
During our many 'otter hunts' around the coasts of the Scottish islands we are often observing over brightly illuminated sea, especially in the autumn, with low sun. I haven't noticed any issue with glare in the SF compared with HT but I haven't compared them side-by-side in the same conditions. If the SF was significantly different and reduced my ability to observe and enjoy otters I wouldn't use them.

Lee
 
Troubador said:
VB
During our many 'otter hunts' around the coasts of the Scottish islands we are often observing over brightly illuminated sea, especially in the autumn, with low sun. I haven't noticed any issue with glare in the SF compared with HT but I haven't compared them side-by-side in the same conditions. If the SF was significantly different and reduced my ability to observe and enjoy otters I wouldn't use them.

Lee
Click to expand...

Nice to hear that they passed the ultimate "otter-test".
:t:
 
Troubador said:
VB
During our many 'otter hunts' around the coasts of the Scottish islands we are often observing over brightly illuminated sea, especially in the autumn, with low sun. I haven't noticed any issue with glare in the SF compared with HT but I haven't compared them side-by-side in the same conditions. If the SF was significantly different and reduced my ability to observe and enjoy otters I wouldn't use them.

Lee
Click to expand...

I did a side by side review of a number of 8x42 glasses in early 2015 (there, the EDG was top in terms of straylight suppression), and I just re-checked side by side the HT and the SF (grey version) over a water surface brightly illuminated by the sun (including direct sunlight on the objective lenses) - sorry, I did not have any otters to add to the spectacle ;)

My findings, for what it's worth: a few reflections become visible in both glasses, but not really too bad. The SF shows in my eyes a bit less glare (sort of a light veil covering part or all of the image) than the HT when direct sunlight shines onto the front lenses, but in both binos this does not become a big problem that seriously affects observation.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    144.3 KB · Views: 123
Canip said:
I did a side by side review of a number of 8x42 glasses in early 2015 (there, the EDG was top in terms of straylight suppression), and I just re-checked side by side the HT and the SF (grey version) over a water surface brightly illuminated by the sun (including direct sunlight on the objective lenses) - sorry, I did not have any otters to add to the spectacle ;)

My findings, for what it's worth: a few reflections become visible in both glasses, but not really too bad. The SF shows in my eyes a bit less glare (sort of a light veil covering part or all of the image) than the HT when direct sunlight shines onto the front lenses, but in both binos this does not become a big problem that seriously affects observation.
Click to expand...

Thanks for verifying this Canip. Personally I always expect some glare in challenging conditions like this and as usual the question as to how much is too much is a personal one.

Lee
 
Canip said:
I did a side by side review of a number of 8x42 glasses in early 2015 (there, the EDG was top in terms of straylight suppression), and I just re-checked side by side the HT and the SF (grey version) over a water surface brightly illuminated by the sun (including direct sunlight on the objective lenses) - sorry, I did not have any otters to add to the spectacle ;)

My findings, for what it's worth: a few reflections become visible in both glasses, but not really too bad. The SF shows in my eyes a bit less glare (sort of a light veil covering part or all of the image) than the HT when direct sunlight shines onto the front lenses, but in both binos this does not become a big problem that seriously affects observation.
Click to expand...

Ok, thanks, seems like the SF:s can be counted on in all light conditions.
Pretty important for me when it comes to bins.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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

J
Brief reviews about Zeiss victory SFL 8/10 x40
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Declan Joseph Deasy
D
D
A Zeiss Conquest HD on steroids.
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
12K
ArchStanton
A
O
Zeiss Victory HT 8x42 vs. Victory SF 8x42
Replies
4
Views
544
Scott98
S
P
8x42 FL comparisons
Replies
6
Views
1K
Patudo
P
D
Zeiss SFL 8x40 This Year's Best New Birding Binocular!
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
AlphaFan
A

Users who are viewing this thread

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