-
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.
Roger Vine’s review of the Zeiss Conquest 8x56 HD (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter John A Roberts
- Start date
"
Conndomat
United States of Europe
If you really value low edge aberrations, the SLC is the better binocular for you.
Andreas
dries1
Member
No need to go to Rokslide, they are only into the new production glass. I have never seen any discussion of the Zeiss FL there. If you can get the FL 10X56 at a fair price go for it, I find the FL to be a stellar 10X56. I believe you actually have a better chance getting a good sample from Germany than anywhere else.
It's mainly CA that annoys me - I don't mind non-flat field if the sweet spot is large enough.
Thanks
Conndomat
United States of Europe
Zeiss Victory FL 10 x 56 Fernglas neuwertig OVP | eBay
Das Fernglas Zeiss Victory FL 10 x 56 befindet sich in einem neuwertigen Zustand. Die Linsen sind frei von irgendwelchen Beeinträchtigungen. Das Fernglas wurde im April 2019 durch die Fa. Zeiss überprüft, die Gummierung (hatte sich produktionsbedingt leicht gelöst) und die Schiebemuscheln...
www.ebay.de
Zeiss Victory 10x56 T FL Fernglas
Hallo, Sie können hier ein sehr gut erhaltenes Zeiss Victory 10x56 T FL erwerben. Bis auf eine...,Zeiss Victory 10x56 T FL Fernglas in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern - Schönwalde (Vorpommern)
www.ebay-kleinanzeigen.de
Andreas
The big difference is the CA. The FL has superb CA control, but the Conquest not so much.
Conndomat
United States of Europe
Good point! Swarovski's are ALWAYS better at low edge aberrations. That is their trademark.
I don't have any issues with the barely perceptible CA in the 15x56 SLC - I wonder whether 10x56 FL is significantly better or the 10x56 SLC worse. The Conquest's beyond the 8x30 seemed poor, and I know the 10x54HT was only okay - Is the FL that much better?That speaks in turn for the FL...
Andreas
My 10x40 Habicht is okay, but not stunning in that respect (admittedly it is a Porro). My SLC 7x50 is are pretty good.
Conndomat
United States of Europe
Yes the FL is better than the HT and slightly better than the SLC.
If you don't have any problems with the SLC 15x56, the 10x56 SLC should also work well, the 15 actually has a bit more CA, which is normal considering the magnification.
The FL are probably still among the absolute top binoculars as far as CA is concerned, the HT 10x54 was more noticeable here, overall the edge areas were more affected imo, I would never swap the FL 56 for an HT 54, the HT has more edge aberrations overall.
Andreas
I have the FL and SLC both in 10x56. In that configuration both handle CA quite well, with the FL maybe edging out the SLC. Andy and Andreas (especially post #58) pretty much nailed it on overall performance. There is no loser between them, but they are very different both physically and optically. Personally, I find the glare-crushing ability of the FLs second to none and thoroughly enjoy using them to view waterfowl and waders on bright, sunny days.
Last edited:
tenex
reality-based
I thought what I said about the one still wrapped up was fairly obvious, referencing this photo. Roger quickly put a spare on the bin in order not to mess with the one it came with. Sorry now to have mentioned it just to poke fun at SSIƎZ, not worth the trouble. I wonder whether he follows our dissections.
Attachments
Last edited:
Conndomat
United States of Europe
I use the 10x56 freehand during the day and on a tripod in the sky at night!
I only use the 8x56 freehand, not at night for the stars.
Andreas
I tried a 12x50 Leica a few months back and was very impressed at the stability, but if you think of how easy a heavy barreled revolver is to keep steady it makes absolute sense.
If a 12x50 is stable due to weight at the objective end, then going down in magnification and adding even more frontal weight, it’s only going to be beneficial in terms of stability.
I apologise for not reading your post carefully enough.
My only excuse is we were in the throes of preparations for a trip up north to meet an old friend. We have today cruising around unfamiliar beautiful country and we meet our old pal tomorrow for lunch.
I am sure Zeiss do not mind the odd bit of fun being poked in their direction.
tenex
reality-based
I meant Roger of course, not Zeiss. You must really be enjoying your trip! Do share a photo if you have one.
We have been exploring a part of northern England and southern Scotland that we have never visited before and it is very beautiful. It doesn't have the wild ruggedness of the west but the sheer lack of urban development and the mix of lowland grazing (sheep) and higher level rough grazing (also sheep) with small hamlets and farmsteads makes for a landscape easy on the eye. Unfortunately the narrow roads with no stopping places make photography impossible so despite us having our DSLRs with us we haven't taken any pics.
Today we are going to meet an old friend we haven't seen for many years.
I mostly use the 10x56 for astronomy, I tried them on a tripod once, the stability was nice, but it hurts my neck to look upward. You need a specialized parallelogram mount which are bulky. I prefer handheld for 10x, it's easier to brace my elbows against something. And easier to look upwards.
It's the same with birding - not worth bringing the tripod and setting it up unless it's a long session at a fixed location and you probably want higher power or a scope in that situation. The color correction in the 10x56 and EDG are the best of any binoculars I own. It seems near-perfect. The only thing I would change is eliminating the thumb grooves. The current Zeiss focusers are better too but the SLC one is OK for me.
I feel like 10x is a better match for 56mm than 8x. As you get older the smaller exit pupil is going to work better. I had a pair of 8x56 in my 20's, but 30 years later 7mm exit pupils don't work so well for me anymore. Plus the extra magnification unlocks the power of the big lenses more. 15x is probably ideal but you need to mount them, and you lose the big DOF of the 8x and 10x. And the FOV becomes narrow and harder to work with.
