Tonight I thought I would compare some of my binoculars. My targets, a white box with dark blue writing and an envelope with a metering stamp in red ink and a shipping label with black all caps type. I set all these targets about 16 feet away so that the binocular with the longest close focus could go through the point of focus at the near end of the range.
Binoculars:
Leica 10x32 BA
Nikon 10x42 SE
Swarovski 10x42 EL
Swarovski 8.5x42 EL
Zeiss 10x42 FL T*
Sharpness and contrast in the middle 15% or 20% of the field, the winner was the Zeiss 10x42 FL. The two Swarovskis and Leica were a close second. It was really hard for me to see a difference even though I usually prefer the crisp image of the 8.5x EL. The Nikon 10x42SE was a close third.
Sharpness near the edge of the field, the clear winner was the Nikon SE, the 10x EL second, the 8.5x EL a close third and then the Leica.
Brightness, the Zeiss 10x42 FL is the winner. I'm really surprised the lower power 8.5x EL did not give quite as bright a field. The 10x EL was third and the Leica 10x32 last.
I just bought the Zeiss FL. Until now my favorite briding binocular is the Swarovski 8.5x EL.
I've been looking for a 10x42 binocular with enough eye relief so that I can see virtually all of the field of view while wearing my eye glasses. The Nikon SE meets this requirement but I just don't hold the porro prism Nikon as well. I think it is that my hands are a little farther apart.
The Swarovski 10x42 EL I thought I would like but I prefer the 8.5x EL. The new Zeiss FL meets my need for eye relief.
I guess I should have included my Leica 8x42 BN but while it is a fine binocular I use my 8.5 EL much more.
When I was at the binocular shop buying my Zeiss FL I also was looking at a Leica 10x42 Ultravid. It was a difficult choice. At the shop it was hard for me to see a real difference in image quality between the Zeiss and Leica. The Leica felt better in my hand. The little bumps on the under side were helpful in getting a good grip while
holding and focusing with one hand. I picked the Zeiss because it would let me focus at infinity without my glasses on (one of the very few binoculars that let me do that). The Zeiss was a little sharper at the edge of the field. This is nice when I use the binocular for amateur astronomy. The Zeiss also would focus closer than the Leica. But, if I could only have the Leica Ultravid I would still think I had a great binocular. I'm tempted to get one anyway.
In another post someone mentioned ruggedness of the Zeiss. It doesn't look as rugged as the Swarovski EL or the older Leica BAs and BNs. My impression was that the Leica Ultravid also *looked* more rugged. The Zeiss FL may take a hell of a beating and keep working just fine. But they don't have as rugged a look. I've very careful with my binoculars and will likely never put their ruggedness to a test.
My next binocular will likely be an 8x32. The Swarovski is very nice. I think I'll wait until I can try a 32mm Ultravid and Zeiss FL.
I purchased the Zeiss 10x42 FL at Out Of This World in Mendocino, California. They have an excellent selection of binoculars and very good prices. Too bad they are about 4 hours away by car.
My favorite astronomical binoculars, my Nikon 12x50SE, 12x50 Leica BN and Canon 15x50 IS.
Rich
Binoculars:
Leica 10x32 BA
Nikon 10x42 SE
Swarovski 10x42 EL
Swarovski 8.5x42 EL
Zeiss 10x42 FL T*
Sharpness and contrast in the middle 15% or 20% of the field, the winner was the Zeiss 10x42 FL. The two Swarovskis and Leica were a close second. It was really hard for me to see a difference even though I usually prefer the crisp image of the 8.5x EL. The Nikon 10x42SE was a close third.
Sharpness near the edge of the field, the clear winner was the Nikon SE, the 10x EL second, the 8.5x EL a close third and then the Leica.
Brightness, the Zeiss 10x42 FL is the winner. I'm really surprised the lower power 8.5x EL did not give quite as bright a field. The 10x EL was third and the Leica 10x32 last.
I just bought the Zeiss FL. Until now my favorite briding binocular is the Swarovski 8.5x EL.
I've been looking for a 10x42 binocular with enough eye relief so that I can see virtually all of the field of view while wearing my eye glasses. The Nikon SE meets this requirement but I just don't hold the porro prism Nikon as well. I think it is that my hands are a little farther apart.
The Swarovski 10x42 EL I thought I would like but I prefer the 8.5x EL. The new Zeiss FL meets my need for eye relief.
I guess I should have included my Leica 8x42 BN but while it is a fine binocular I use my 8.5 EL much more.
When I was at the binocular shop buying my Zeiss FL I also was looking at a Leica 10x42 Ultravid. It was a difficult choice. At the shop it was hard for me to see a real difference in image quality between the Zeiss and Leica. The Leica felt better in my hand. The little bumps on the under side were helpful in getting a good grip while
holding and focusing with one hand. I picked the Zeiss because it would let me focus at infinity without my glasses on (one of the very few binoculars that let me do that). The Zeiss was a little sharper at the edge of the field. This is nice when I use the binocular for amateur astronomy. The Zeiss also would focus closer than the Leica. But, if I could only have the Leica Ultravid I would still think I had a great binocular. I'm tempted to get one anyway.
In another post someone mentioned ruggedness of the Zeiss. It doesn't look as rugged as the Swarovski EL or the older Leica BAs and BNs. My impression was that the Leica Ultravid also *looked* more rugged. The Zeiss FL may take a hell of a beating and keep working just fine. But they don't have as rugged a look. I've very careful with my binoculars and will likely never put their ruggedness to a test.
My next binocular will likely be an 8x32. The Swarovski is very nice. I think I'll wait until I can try a 32mm Ultravid and Zeiss FL.
I purchased the Zeiss 10x42 FL at Out Of This World in Mendocino, California. They have an excellent selection of binoculars and very good prices. Too bad they are about 4 hours away by car.
My favorite astronomical binoculars, my Nikon 12x50SE, 12x50 Leica BN and Canon 15x50 IS.
Rich
