HT, Conquest HD, Terra (1 Viewer)

[Troubador]

I ended up exchanging my HD's after the eye cups actually broke on two different units. I was able to upgrade to the 8x42 HT's and I am a VERY happy binoboy. I don't care what anyone says about these but I have never used a finer binocular than the HT's. It's my opinion the HT's are at the top of the alpha class these days and Leica and Swaro are going to have their work cut out for them to come up with a binocular that can beat the HT's. The optics and ergos of the HT's are simply sublime and make them the best of the best.

All IMO, of course.

IMHO you are perfectly right !

Lee

 

[Petrus82]

In spite of the blackout issues I have with the Conquest HD 8x42, I ordered a pair from Eagle today. I'd looked at a pair locally again yesterday but this time we added the Field Optics winged eyeshields (in the standard size) and they made a significant improvement re: blackouts. Optically, these are simply amazing bins. I'm not sure I'll end up keeping them but I need to spend a few days with them at home.

FWIW, Zeiss is aware of the blackout issues, probably due to the length of the eyecups relative to the eye relief. Carol, in Zeiss CS told me they are working on a fix for these.

This is very interesting. I had the 8x42 and had terrible trouble with the blackouts. I exchanged email with Mark with Zeiss UK and he assured me that there was no problem with the eyecups. In the end, I swapped them for the 8x32, which don't have the same problem (eye relief is 15mm). In many ways, I prefer the 8x32. I feel they are the best of the Conquest HD range.

 

[Troubador]

This is very interesting. I had the 8x42 and had terrible trouble with the blackouts. I exchanged email with Mark with Zeiss UK and he assured me that there was no problem with the eyecups. In the end, I swapped them for the 8x32, which don't have the same problem (eye relief is 15mm). In many ways, I prefer the 8x32. I feel they are the best of the Conquest HD range.

Hi Petrus

I have looked through several HD 8x42s without blackout issues and at a dealer open day and at the Bird Fair have seen quite a lot of people try them out without problems. I suppose Zeiss have to wait until a certain number of folks report issues before they have to concede there is a problem and seek a fix.

BTW I think the HD 32s are terrific too.

Lee

 

[CSG]

There *is* a fix coming as I've reported here in another topic. The cups on the 8x42 are too short for too many people who don't wear glasses and to keep from blackouts those folks have to hold the bins farther out than is comfortable. There was/is another issue where the cups have separated which happened to me with two different examples. However, after replacing the cups (Zeiss sent me a pair) I didn't have another problem these past couple weeks. But the die was cast and it was already in the works to trade them in and move up to the HT version.

I actually hated to let them go as they are otherwise great bins. But the too short eye cups are the weak spot and once replaced with what's coming from Zeiss (by the end of the year, they hope) will be class beaters IMO.

I just ordered some Minox 8x33 HG's from CLNY (due Tuesday) but I should have (and still might) order the 8x32 HD's to compare. If the 8x32 HD's are as good as the 8x42's and don't have any issues with the eye cups, well, I think I'd better call Neil...

 

[eddy the eagle]

As you probably know I have the HT 10x42 abd the Conquest HD 8x32.Each of them is a very good bin and I am pleased with them both.I use the 8x32 in the woods and the like and the 10x42 everywhere else and the only trouble I have that after I have used the HT's for sometime and then change to the HD's I find that I am missing somethind.I can't put my finger on it but I call it lack of reach.The HT has the ability to see into the darkest corner and beyond,cut through the glare and I miss this when using the HD's but I appreciate the wider field. They are two different animals and I enjoy them both .Regards ...Eddy

 

[CSG]

Yeah, I think it would be hard to make a fair comparison between most 10x42's and 8x32's.

 

[John Dracon]

Yes, such comparison is hard to make. Even between 8x42s and 8x32s. Compared my FL 8x32 & SE 8x32 against my Leupold Cascade porro 8x42 in a low light situation several times. The results show that the extra 2 mm of exit pupil does make a real difference - more detail and color. Both the FL & SE are considered alphas. The Cascade?
John

 

[lmans66]

Conquest vs HT

I ended up exchanging my HD's after the eye cups actually broke on two different units. I was able to upgrade to the 8x42 HT's and I am a VERY happy binoboy. I don't care what anyone says about these but I have never used a finer binocular than the HT's. It's my opinion the HT's are at the top of the alpha class these days and Leica and Swaro are going to have their work cut out for them to come up with a binocular that can beat the HT's. The optics and ergos of the HT's are simply sublime and make them the best of the best.

All IMO, of course.

When I did my field test of the Conquests vs HT's.....(http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=258855).... This was one of the items I mentioned in regards to the Conquest.... In my postings I 'suggested' that while the optics appeared great on the Conquest, I was worried about the overall quality of this bino in the long run. All anyone has to do is look at the eyecups of the Conquest to know that Zeiss came out with a great pair of binos that do have that "wow factor" at a relatively low cost, but ......all of that is 'at what expense?"

If some of the outer features of the Conquest are 'cheaply manufactured' to save on cost, how much of the "INNER WORKINGS" of the Conquest are also manufactured to save on costs? Those are the ones I worry about. And I might add this is not relative to only Zeiss's mid to low range binos. There is no manufacturer (Swaro CL, Vortex, the beloved Nikon Monarch, Opticron etc) out there that produces $200-1000 pair of binos that does not cut corners to save on cost.

Now it is not that the Conquest is not a solid pair of binos, for indeed it has a good feel and great optics.... No, I love the Conquest and would easily pick up one as a second pair. The 10x (I never tried the 8x) still have blackout issues to contend with though. But if I am going to spend 'any money'....I want to only spend my money 'once'....regardless if that money is $1000 or $2000. So my decision to opt for the HT was a no brainer.

The Zeiss 10x HT = a higher cost....but clearly better ergonomics, clearly better light, clearly a sharp, crisp focus, clearly the focus wheel was designed to quickly bring into focus and clearly Zeiss cut no corners when manufacturing this product to save on their cost.

While I know that I paid over $2000 for the HT, I am not going to be trading them in for an upgrade later on, nor will I ever regret the purchase for I know I have a product that is difficult to beat. lmans

 

[CSG]

I really think the only *mistake* on the Conquest series is the eyecups. I believe they are quite solid otherwise.

The puzzling thing is how great the eyecups are on the Terras! Their optics are quite good at their price point and the mechanicals seem excellent as well. How the Conquest eyecups were approved is beyond me. Zeiss put great eyecups on their price leader MiC bins as well as the HT's (and FL's too). If they get the eyecups on the Conquest HD's upgraded, I doubt there would be any concerns with anything else. They are otherwise amazingly good bins.

In any event, Zeiss was unbelievably wonderful working with me on this issue with my Conquests after two strikes with the eyecups on two different 8x42 HD's (and kudos too to Eagle Optics for their help).

 

[james holdsworth]

I really think the only *mistake* on the Conquest series is the eyecups. I believe they are quite solid otherwise.

The puzzling thing is how great the eyecups are on the Terras! Their optics are quite good at their price point and the mechanicals seem excellent as well. How the Conquest eyecups were approved is beyond me. Zeiss put great eyecups on their price leader MiC bins as well as the HT's (and FL's too). If they get the eyecups on the Conquest HD's upgraded, I doubt there would be any concerns with anything else. They are otherwise amazingly good bins.

In any event, Zeiss was unbelievably wonderful working with me on this issue with my Conquests after two strikes with the eyecups on two different 8x42 HD's (and kudos too to Eagle Optics for their help).

My question would be - how in the heck did Zeiss not find the problem in field testing? It took me all of one minute to see that the ER in the Conquest just would never work for me - and I haven't had this problem on other bins.

So, how could they have missed it? Calling Mike Jensen..........