Optical comparison of Habicht 10x40 and HT (or FL) 10x42 (1 Viewer)

[hopster]

I have narrowed it down to the HT or Habicht as my upcoming 10x purchase, with good second hand examples of both on offer. Unfortunately I cannot compare them side-by-side in the shop and, even if I could, I'm sure I would learn more out and about in nature afterwards.

I understand that the focuser will be nicer on the HT and the eye positioning somewhat easier (I wear glasses but always take them off to use bins except in particular circumstances like e.g. walking around a city with the VP 8x25 sometimes). What I am interested to ask here from those who have owned or spent significant time with both is a comparison of the optical performance. I have seen them compared in various different threads but it's not always easy to go back and find them, so I thought gathering together the distilled knowledge of the group in one place would be nice if anyone wants to participate. The qualities I would like to know about are inevitably at least partly subjective, but when a significant proportion of people agree on it that is evidence of something even if it can't be measured with the usual optical tests. I say that as a lifelong engineer, scientist and mathematician. For example:

• transparency or immediacy i.e. the feeling that you are in the same space as the object being watched as opposed to it being a 'synthetic projection'
• 3D (cue flame war, but some binoculars do give more of this and not just because of wider objective spacing IMO. prisms? field curvature?)
• colour balance (so far it seems to me that Habicht is completely neutral and HT might be losing just a little bit of red by comparison)
• size of sweet spot (I am not too bothered about edge-to-edge sharpness and the different compromises that can come with this, especially if the other image qualities in the centre are improved as a result, but I would like at least 75% of the centre to be sharp and easily usable and hopefully more)
• contrast in (1) bright daylight and (2) twilight
• brightness (both seem excellent to me with Habicht maybe a touch ahead)
• sharpness (both seem very good in the centre with the HT the best I have yet seen in any x42)
• glare control (from the front, I almost always use winged rubber eyecups with my bins as it gives improved handling and IQ almost for nothing in my experience)
• CA seems basically absent in both which is important for me
• other?

Other recommendations that don't use S-P prisms are also welcome (e.g. Vortex UHD but it's heavy, Alpen Teton Abbe but nobody seems to know anything about it here, other?) although I have been around the block a few times and done a lot of testing already to get to this stage. I know the SF does not quite do it for me on IQ (contrast, colour saturation & balance) which is a shame as in all other ways it is fantastic, Swaros are generally too flat-field and maybe a bit glary except SLC/Kahles S which has a very nice image but a rather mediocre focuser and can hardly be focused to infinity with my prescription (nor can the NL) which rules them out straight away, unfortunately. Also considering the Noctivid (haven't looked through a 10x yet but CA will most likely upset me) and the Opticron Aurora which may not have quite the transparency/3D/brightness of my shortlist albeit with a wider field/bigger sweet spot and other qualities nicely covered for me.

 

[norway]

Quick note: the Vortex UHD doesn't have that much extra weight compared to many other high-end roof-prism 10x42s — 913 g vs. 850-ish for EL, NL, and Noctivid — but it is a fair bit bulkier. Conversely, the HT and Habicht are both on the light-ish side for their class.

As you say, the optical qualities involve a subjective element, so go with your gut.

 

[hopster]

Quick note: the Vortex UHD doesn't have that much extra weight compared to many other high-end roof-prism 10x42s — 913 g vs. 850-ish for EL, NL, and Noctivid — but it is a fair bit bulkier. Conversely, the HT and Habicht are both on the light-ish side for their class.

As you say, the optical qualities involve a subjective element, so go with your gut.

I should have said, lighter weight is also good! As you say, my shortlist and the Aurora also have this benefit but it's not an optical quality of course.

 

[William Lewis]

I've had both habichts and FL's. For a general purpose birding glass that you can use with glasses, change focus easily and quickly and have a better corrected field choose the FL. If I wore glasses other than sunglasses id go for the FL. You could get the habicht only for your prescription to change and need the extra eye relief of the FL/HT.

Your quite conscious of your binocular with the habicht, the eye lenses tend to steam up more readily as they're closer to your eyes/face, the focuser is a conscious effort to move which means you can't have your hands near the objectives and reach out to give it a small adjustment as needed and the difference in 3d effect is only apparent at closer ranges.

There's a difference in brightness but not much at all, the slightly different colour cast is only apparent back to back.

They're both robust optics, the habicht maybe more so but that will only be an issue if you drop them, the fl's have easier eye cups to use - you'll need to ga version of the habichts and order separate objective covers (free) to have matching ones with the habicht and the eye piece guard doesn't fit at wider ipd's on the habicht so in wet weather I have to adjust the ipd every time I want to use the eye piece cover.

Having said all that I've just ordered another habicht but NOT as my main glass.

Will

 

[hopster]

I've had both habichts and FL's. For a general purpose birding glass that you can use with glasses, change focus easily and quickly and have a better corrected field choose the FL. If I wore glasses other than sunglasses id go for the FL. You could get the habicht only for your prescription to change and need the extra eye relief of the FL/HT.

Your quite conscious of your binocular with the habicht, the eye lenses tend to steam up more readily as they're closer to your eyes/face, the focuser is a conscious effort to move which means you can't have your hands near the objectives and reach out to give it a small adjustment as needed and the difference in 3d effect is only apparent at closer ranges.

There's a difference in brightness but not much at all, the slightly different colour cast is only apparent back to back.

They're both robust optics, the habicht maybe more so but that will only be an issue if you drop them, the fl's have easier eye cups to use - you'll need to ga version of the habichts and order separate objective covers (free) to have matching ones with the habicht and the eye piece guard doesn't fit at wider ipd's on the habicht so in wet weather I have to adjust the ipd every time I want to use the eye piece cover.

Having said all that I've just ordered another habicht but NOT as my main glass.

Will

Thanks Will, yes it would be for long distance slow moving stuff like on shore, estuaries and lakes and across fields where I want more pull but hopefully the targets are more static and so less focusing is required. Unless the brightness, contrast or other aspects of the image quality is better than the FL or HT I don't think it would be justified though because of the handing factors. I'm planning to update my ancient roof 8x42 for the closer range and more active observation.

 

[Paultricounty]

I have narrowed it down to the HT or Habicht as my upcoming 10x purchase, with good second hand examples of both on offer. Unfortunately I cannot compare them side-by-side in the shop and, even if I could, I'm sure I would learn more out and about in nature afterwards.

I understand that the focuser will be nicer on the HT and the eye positioning somewhat easier (I wear glasses but always take them off to use bins except in particular circumstances like e.g. walking around a city with the VP 8x25 sometimes). What I am interested to ask here from those who have owned or spent significant time with both is a comparison of the optical performance. I have seen them compared in various different threads but it's not always easy to go back and find them, so I thought gathering together the distilled knowledge of the group in one place would be nice if anyone wants to participate. The qualities I would like to know about are inevitably at least partly subjective, but when a significant proportion of people agree on it that is evidence of something even if it can't be measured with the usual optical tests. I say that as a lifelong engineer, scientist and mathematician. For example:

• transparency or immediacy i.e. the feeling that you are in the same space as the object being watched as opposed to it being a 'synthetic projection'
• 3D (cue flame war, but some binoculars do give more of this and not just because of wider objective spacing IMO. prisms? field curvature?)
• colour balance (so far it seems to me that Habicht is completely neutral and HT might be losing just a little bit of red by comparison)
• size of sweet spot (I am not too bothered about edge-to-edge sharpness and the different compromises that can come with this, especially if the other image qualities in the centre are improved as a result, but I would like at least 75% of the centre to be sharp and easily usable and hopefully more)
• contrast in (1) bright daylight and (2) twilight
• brightness (both seem excellent to me with Habicht maybe a touch ahead)
• sharpness (both seem very good in the centre with the HT the best I have yet seen in any x42)
• glare control (from the front, I almost always use winged rubber eyecups with my bins as it gives improved handling and IQ almost for nothing in my experience)
• CA seems basically absent in both which is important for me
• other?

Other recommendations that don't use S-P prisms are also welcome (e.g. Vortex UHD but it's heavy, Alpen Teton Abbe but nobody seems to know anything about it here, other?) although I have been around the block a few times and done a lot of testing already to get to this stage. I know the SF does not quite do it for me on IQ (contrast, colour saturation & balance) which is a shame as in all other ways it is fantastic, Swaros are generally too flat-field and maybe a bit glary except SLC/Kahles S which has a very nice image but a rather mediocre focuser and can hardly be focused to infinity with my prescription (nor can the NL) which rules them out straight away, unfortunately. Also considering the Noctivid (haven't looked through a 10x yet but CA will most likely upset me) and the Opticron Aurora which may not have quite the transparency/3D/brightness of my shortlist albeit with a wider field/bigger sweet spot and other qualities nicely covered for me.

Wow , a lot of most likely there 😉. I for one think your reading way to much into this. You obviously are looking for the perfect binoculars to check every box, dot every I, and cross every T. I’ll also say I don’t get the fascination or what you are perceiving with the the differences from AK and SP. I think what you might be seeing in the difference between the two differing prism types is less the prism type and more the binoculars optics themselves. But of course it’s all about what we like as individuals, real or perceived, no disrespect intended.

Now with all that gobbledygook said, I think based on your posts and understanding perfectly the quest to find the OCD killer binocular , if I am reading you correctly neither one , Habicht or HT will satisfy. The only way to solve this conundrum and never look back, is you need them both. Because both together will check the most boxes and dot the most I’s. iiiiiiii TTTT 😉✌🏼🙏🏼.

So it’s the HT to satisfy the AK needs and with a good focuser, and the Habicht for that incredible sharp , bright and high light transmission and of course the porro 3D effect, that will be missing in the roof. It’s the only way, there can never be just one. 👊🏻.

Paul

 

[hopster]

Wow , a lot of most likely there 😉. I for one think your reading way to much into this. You obviously are looking for the perfect binoculars to check every box, dot every I, and cross every T. I’ll also say I don’t get the fascination or what you are perceiving with the the differences from AK and SP. I think what you might be seeing in the difference between the two differing prism types is less the prism type and more the binoculars optics themselves. But of course it’s all about what we like as individuals, real or perceived, no disrespect intended.

Now with all that gobbledygook said, I think based on your posts and understanding perfectly the quest to find the OCD killer binocular , if I am reading you correctly neither one , Habicht or HT will satisfy. The only way to solve this conundrum and never look back, is you need them both. Because both together will check the most boxes and dot the most I’s. iiiiiiii TTTT 😉✌🏼🙏🏼.

So it’s the HT to satisfy the AK needs and with a good focuser, and the Habicht for that incredible sharp , bright and high light transmission and of course the porro 3D effect, that will be missing in the roof. It’s the only way, there can’t never be just one. 👊🏻.

Paul

Can't afford both unfortunately Paul! Need some budget left for my 8x42.

I'm known for being a careful purchaser, but also for keeping the nice things I buy for a long time and looking after them rather than flipping. Hence the up-front work!

 

[Patudo]

the eye lenses tend to steam up more readily as they're closer to your eyes/face,

This is a legit concern with the Habichts (or any short eye relief porro really). It's less of a problem at this time of the year, but can be a real issue in winter, and indeed early mornings whenever the temperature is below about 10-11 degrees. If you need one binocular for all seasons I would make sure you have no issues with the Habicht under all the conditions you intend to use it before purchasing it.

 

[William Lewis]

This is a legit concern with the Habichts (or any short eye relief porro really). It's less of a problem at this time of the year, but can be a real issue in winter, and indeed early mornings whenever the temperature is below about 10-11 degrees. If you need one binocular for all seasons I would make sure you have no issues with the Habicht under all the conditions you intend to use it before purchasing it.

Less of an issue with the 7 as you can back off a bit (I used to do this in winter) due to the greater eye relief - less stability though.

 

[hopster]

This is a legit concern with the Habichts (or any short eye relief porro really). It's less of a problem at this time of the year, but can be a real issue in winter, and indeed early mornings whenever the temperature is below about 10-11 degrees. If you need one binocular for all seasons I would make sure you have no issues with the Habicht under all the conditions you intend to use it before purchasing it.

Hmmm, that's useful to know about as they are just as likely to be used in cold and humid climates. Are rubber eye cups likely to help by keeping your eyes away from the glass somewhat?

 

[William Lewis]

Nope, mine were the ga's.

Hmmm, that's useful to know about as they are just as likely to be used in cold and humid climates. Are rubber eye cups likely to help by keeping your eyes away from the glass somewhat?

 

[norway]

Wow , a lot of most likely there 😉. I for one think your reading way to much into this. You obviously are looking for the perfect binoculars to check every box, dot every I, and cross every T. I’ll also say I don’t get the fascination or what you are perceiving with the the differences from AK and SP. I think what you might be seeing in the difference between the two differing prism types is less the prism type and more the binoculars optics themselves. But of course it’s all about what we like as individuals, real or perceived, no disrespect intended.

Now with all that gobbledygook said, I think based on your posts and understanding perfectly the quest to find the OCD killer binocular , if I am reading you correctly neither one , Habicht or HT will satisfy. The only way to solve this conundrum and never look back, is you need them both. Because both together will check the most boxes and dot the most I’s. iiiiiiii TTTT 😉✌🏼🙏🏼.

So it’s the HT to satisfy the AK needs and with a good focuser, and the Habicht for that incredible sharp , bright and high light transmission and of course the porro 3D effect, that will be missing in the roof. It’s the only way, there can’t never be just one. 👊🏻.

Paul

For sure. Plus the subjective elements of optics can become gear fetishization, similar to hi-fi cultists going on about make-believe stuff like "pacing" from their magic beans speaker wires.

 

[[email protected]]

Three things make the Habicht 10x40 different or special from your 10x42 FL or HT. The 3D stereoscopic image of a porro, the high transmission of a porro and the transparency of a porro.

The 3D image is immediately obvious when you use a porro like the Habicht 10x40 compared to the flat field of a roof like your 10x42FL or HT, and it makes the view more real. because there is more dimensionality to the view. The roof prism is pie plate flat in comparison.

Porros have less glass and their prism is more efficient and has TIR (Total Internal Reflection) meaning there is very little light loss through a porro compared to a roof so in general they transmit more light than a roof prism, especially the Habicht 10x40 which at almost 96% transmission is the highest transmitting binocular made. Porros are BRIGHT and the Habicht 10x40 is REALLY BRIGHT for its aperture.

Also, because of the simpler optical pathway a porro has with its simpler more efficient prism the view is more transparent because light is not going through as much glass as in a roof prism like a Swarovski NL that might have 20 glass elements per optical tube. A roof prisms view is more processed and a a porros view is simpler and purer. You can see it and you can almost feel it.

It is much simpler to make a porro prism perfect than it is a roof prism, so porros are in general a much better value than a roof. A porro that costs a $1000 like the Habicht 10x40 competes with roofs costing twice as much and beats them in many ways.

 

[Canip]

I for one think you are reading way to much into this.

👍👍 (also from me no disrespect intended)

 

[Conndomat]

Moin,

Gijs measured the transmission of the Habicht and the HT, Habicht by day 96%, Zeiss HT by day 95.2% transmission!

Please people, can you look for another topic if the Habicht is now so much brighter than the HT, de facto no pig sees it...sorry but this is about splitting hairs.

Andreas

 

[Paultricounty]

Can't afford both unfortunately Paul! Need some budget left for my 8x42.

I'm known for being a careful purchaser, but also for keeping the nice things I buy for a long time and looking after them rather than flipping. Hence the up-front work!

I understand, been there, done that. But it sounds to me if you buy the HT , there will lingering second guessing if you should’ve bought the Habicht’s. And the same in reverse 😜

 

[Paultricounty]

This is a legit concern with the Habichts (or any short eye relief porro really). It's less of a problem at this time of the year, but can be a real issue in winter, and indeed early mornings whenever the temperature is below about 10-11 degrees. If you need one binocular for all seasons I would make sure you have no issues with the Habicht under all the conditions you intend to use it before purchasing it.

10 to 11°? Who is going out and birding in 10 to 11°, never mind , who’s even going out in 10 to 11°. 😵‍💫😧

 

[Scott98]

10 to 11°? Who is going out and birding in 10 to 11°, never mind , who’s even going out in 10 to 11°. 😵‍💫😧

I think he's talkin' Celsius not Fahrenheit there . This situation of having both Habicht and HT's available for purchase used is rare and I would take advantage of it by purchasing both. Compare them and sell the one you don't like for little to no loss.

Doing the research "up front" before buying sounds good, but in practice it doesn't work. Even comparing them at the bino-store a couple times can only go so far. When they're close in quality, I need to use them for a few months for one to start to emerge as a favorite. I've had my EDG 7x42 and 8x42 SF for 6 months now and I"m still not sure which one I'd chose for a keeper if I had to.

 

[Paultricounty]

I think he's talkin' Celsius not Fahrenheit there .

Ooops , my bad. In that case it’s quite mild 😅.

This situation of having both Habicht and HT's available for purchase used is rare and I would take advantage of it by purchasing both. Compare them and sell the one you don't like for little to no loss.

Tried that , I usually wind up keeping both & in some occasions all three 😲.

Doing the research "up front" before buying sounds good, but in practice it doesn't work. Even comparing them at the bino-store a couple times can only go so far. When they're close in quality, I need to use them for a few months for one to start to emerge as a favorite.

I totally agree , at the very least a few weeks. Otherwise it’s just the first impression.

I've had my EDG 7x42 and 8x42 SF for 6 months now and I"m still not sure which one I'd chose for a keeper if I had to.

Same here but with different binos. The EDG 7 and SF 8 would be a very difficult decision. They both are excellent all around Binoculars and either one would serve for a lifetime of enjoyment, but both of those have such different characteristics.

 

[PHA]

Hi hopster,

I have had, at the same time, all 10x42/40, the FL and Habicht (actual iteration), and HT and Habicht. Now, I have the Habicht alone....
In another post you participate, I wrote that, comparing the two samples I had, like the FL instead the HT because the unacceptable the milky veiling glare of the HT. A pity because, in my opinion, the HT is superior in all other ways specially its great ergonomics, focusing wheel and diopter adjustment design.
I must say these Zeiss (to me the FL but perhaps the HT to others) and the Habicht are different instruments. I like both.
The difference in brightness or light transmission is not significant to even mention it.
The control of the CA was superb in both Zeiss and is almost as good in the Habicht.
The central "sharpness" are great in Zeiss and Habicht. In my samples, the FL, a superb one!!!, had an unmatched sharpness or resolution!!! In all the Habicht I have had, various ages, the central resolution was also great!!
Now, the Zeiss have noticeable better short distance focusing and eye releif (not an issue for me because I don´t use eyeglasses).
I miss that FL and, if I find a good deal occacion on one, I will buy it.
In 2019, when I bought this late Habicht in Europe, I did compare some top roof ones: Zeiss SF, Swarovski EL, Ultravid HD+ and the Noctivid, all 10x42. The Leicas, both the UVHD+ and Noctivid really impressed me! I had forgotten that superb "rich" Leica view!!!! Along with a top lightweight 8x20/25, one of the Leicas will be my next, and last binocular I will buy.

Good luck!

PHA