Zeiss 10x42 FL review.
Hello all,
I already own a Zeiss Dialyt 8x56 BGA T* binocular and use them for nightsky observation.
I'm now after a smaller pair for more general use and a beginning in birdwatching. I've decided on a pair of 10x to make them sufficiently different from the 8x I already have and think the 42mm objective would suit me better than the 32mm to maintain some semblance of twilight ability I absolutely love in the 7mm exit pupils of my existing Dialyt.
I was able to review the following pairs of binos at a local retailer.
1. Zeiss 10x42 FL - $2199 AUD
2. Leica 10x42 Ultravid - $2499 AUD
3. Leica 8-12x42 Duovid - $2259
4. Swarovski 8.5x42 EL - $2399 AUD
5. Nikon 10x42 HG (High Grade) $2199 AUD
Here was my impressions.
The Zeiss FL was clearly the brightest of the lot, followed by the Nikon, Leica Ultravid, Swarovski, Leica Duovid (in 12x mode) in that order. The Zeiss was also the winner for contrast. It had a neutral colour compared to the Swarovski and Leica which had yellowish casts. The Nikon was close to neutral but was also very slighty yellow.
Sharpness was good across the board. The only one that had any issues here was the Leica that seemed to require convergence effort on my part to see clearly (diopter adjustments were all set to zero).
The only other big disappointment was the Nikon when panned. A slowish movement revealed a wave like distortion of straight lines which I think was due to field flattening. I noticed this effect with the Nikon and checked it in the others which did not show the same effect. Very disconcerting and it disqualified the Nikon from further consideration. The display model Nikon also had white/aged rubber which one sees if one scuffs rubber - I've seen it on other things but it's not a great look.
I had expected the Swarovski to be much better than what I observed, for the money. Its image was nothing special, had a colour cast and its field of view was really no better in practical terms than the FL. Its feel and handling were inferior to the rubberised models in my hands.
Overall the Zeiss FL was the bino that won me over. I was able to get a price of $2100 AUD which is probably higher than USD prices but I'm concerned about warranty so want to buy locally. The discount was for the display model which appeared to have perfect glass etc.
Is there any other thing I should be looking out for, features I'm missing by commiting to the Zeiss FL? I'm on the verge of getting them.
Looking forward to any advice.
Regards.
Hello all,
I already own a Zeiss Dialyt 8x56 BGA T* binocular and use them for nightsky observation.
I'm now after a smaller pair for more general use and a beginning in birdwatching. I've decided on a pair of 10x to make them sufficiently different from the 8x I already have and think the 42mm objective would suit me better than the 32mm to maintain some semblance of twilight ability I absolutely love in the 7mm exit pupils of my existing Dialyt.
I was able to review the following pairs of binos at a local retailer.
1. Zeiss 10x42 FL - $2199 AUD
2. Leica 10x42 Ultravid - $2499 AUD
3. Leica 8-12x42 Duovid - $2259
4. Swarovski 8.5x42 EL - $2399 AUD
5. Nikon 10x42 HG (High Grade) $2199 AUD
Here was my impressions.
The Zeiss FL was clearly the brightest of the lot, followed by the Nikon, Leica Ultravid, Swarovski, Leica Duovid (in 12x mode) in that order. The Zeiss was also the winner for contrast. It had a neutral colour compared to the Swarovski and Leica which had yellowish casts. The Nikon was close to neutral but was also very slighty yellow.
Sharpness was good across the board. The only one that had any issues here was the Leica that seemed to require convergence effort on my part to see clearly (diopter adjustments were all set to zero).
The only other big disappointment was the Nikon when panned. A slowish movement revealed a wave like distortion of straight lines which I think was due to field flattening. I noticed this effect with the Nikon and checked it in the others which did not show the same effect. Very disconcerting and it disqualified the Nikon from further consideration. The display model Nikon also had white/aged rubber which one sees if one scuffs rubber - I've seen it on other things but it's not a great look.
I had expected the Swarovski to be much better than what I observed, for the money. Its image was nothing special, had a colour cast and its field of view was really no better in practical terms than the FL. Its feel and handling were inferior to the rubberised models in my hands.
Overall the Zeiss FL was the bino that won me over. I was able to get a price of $2100 AUD which is probably higher than USD prices but I'm concerned about warranty so want to buy locally. The discount was for the display model which appeared to have perfect glass etc.
Is there any other thing I should be looking out for, features I'm missing by commiting to the Zeiss FL? I'm on the verge of getting them.
Looking forward to any advice.
Regards.
Last edited: