aquilaaudax
Member
Already chosen - the Zeiss SFL 10x40. Should have it tomorrow.
Yes it was a bit first world as problems go!
-
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.
Desperately seeking advice: MHG vs Conquest vs SFL (10x) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter aquilaaudax
- Start date
Yes it was a bit first world as problems go!
Too late, I guess. I was going to tell you to avoid the SFL. It looks like they are having armour problems similar to the Swarovski's. It could be the manufacturers are being forced to use biodegradable materials for the armour that doesn't last very long. Picture from Aquaplas's post.
www.birdforum.net
Zeiss SFL 8x40 Rubber Coating becomes Bubbled
My instruction is that if they are going to be replaced that some one tests out the replacement that it should be equal too or better than the one being replaced. I usually have three criteria I ask to be checked. ... and do you think they actually do this? ...
www.birdforum.net
Last edited:
Oh I see now. Cool. Please do let us know how you like them. It is pretty amazing when you step up into that next tier of binoculars.
I went through something very similar a few years ago. I also had M7s (mine are 8s) that I had used every day for a few years. In the course of about two months I bought and returned pairs of Conquests, SLCs, and ELs. I finally settled on a pair of UVs in 7x42, which are still my favorite pair of binoculars now. I hope you are ultimately as pleased with your choice as I have been.
pbjosh
missing the neotropics
I think you'll be happy. I've been playing with them lately to see if I want a pair. They strike me as excellent if you don't have unrealistic expectations. FOV is good but not excellent (ala the Conquest). Control of CA is very good on axis but suffers a bit off axis, I can't remember how the Conquest was in comparison, it's been too long but I recall it being similar. The Monarch is certainly worse in this regard in my experience. Sharpness, color, contrast, stray light control are excellent. The focuser on the sample I've been playing with is excellent. The size and weight are excellent. They're not alphas, they're still a clear step behind the SF. But they are a very clear step up, for me, from the Conquest in terms of focuser, contrast, color, stray light control / viewing under challenging conditions, and just all around how enjoyable they are to use and how good they are as a birding tool. They are a clear step up for me, as well, from the MHG, basically the same binocular but better in near every way (perhaps a bit less flat of a field / more noticeably rolls off at the edges but doesn't bother). If you don't need the light weight and compact form, a used EL will be a better binocular at the same price (though not better in every way, particularly not stray light). However, if you want that compact format and light weight, I don't know if you actually can do better than the SFL.
To be clear, my perspective is not based upon critical evaluations of star tests or some composition of numbers assigned to various measurements, but rather using the bins to actually bird, particularly in poor light / challenging conditions. Lately that means trying to get detail on fall migrants in the canopy or flying over against harsh blown out grey skies. It really performs there, as well as the EL at least, even if the edges are softer and it will lose out in a technical / allbinos type showdown.
aquilaaudax
Member
That's pretty disappointing. Spending this much, you should be able to expect a durable build that lasts you years. Unfortunate for the user of the pictured binos, but here's hoping it's just a defective pair. If it happens to mine, they'll be going back to Zeiss (remains to be seen how easy that'll be in Australia).
aquilaaudax
Member
What attracted me to the SFLs is that they sounded like a more premium, slightly better performing MHG. I love the lightweight feel (and size) of the M7s, basically the same as the MHGs, while still being 40/42mm. What I had read about stray light control was very attractive too. I wish they matched the MHG's FOV, but it's pretty marginal anyway.
My friend also just got a pair. He was using Trinovid 10x42 and switched to SFL 8x40 and has been blown away by the SFLs.
I don't think I'm expecting too much. I'm not hoping for perfect CA control (to be honest, I don't think I'm very sensitive to it anyway, I barely even see it in my M7s) or perfect edge sharpness. I think if there's a noticeable difference to my M7s - especially in sharpness, contrast and glare - that makes me feel I'm using a better birding tool that was worth the step up in $$$ too, I'll be happy.
He says it is caused by hand sweat because he never allows his binocular to lay in the sun or in the car. The bubbling occurred exactly where he grips the binoculars. Now that is really worrisome because there would be no way to avoid it. You HAVE to hold your binoculars someway.
Chances are when you have an armour issue like this it is because of the material the armour is made of, and it will be common to all the new SFL's. I would avoid all the new SFL's if I were you. I know I won't be buying any.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Nonsense, Ive Seen and used five of these already , some have been used quite a bit in some rough conditions in Florida. I don’t know where you’re getting your information from, but if you got a source let us know. My guess it’s a defect, maybe in a few or one lot. I guess we’re certainly going to see and we’re gonna hear a lot about it if it does start to happen to more people.
Similar threads
- Locked
