Jim,
Many thanks for your insightful comparisons. It seems like you're having a lot of fun. Holger's evaluations are always first class, of course, and he has much more experience with military optimized instruments. However, so far I have not been able to confirm a stray light problem with my Kestrel, particularly under daylight conditions. His specimen appears to be identical to mine, except for the liquid color of his oculars, which I would have expected to appear as dark green. Maybe it's the camera flash he used, or ... who knows? Overall, though, he says:
Altogether, [the Kestrel] does not reach the performance level of the Fujinon FMTR-SX and the Docter Nobilem, but it may be regarded as a legitimate, in optical performance and handling improved successor of the Zeiss Jenoptem/Dekarem, and it comes with a reasonable price-tag.
That's not too bad an endorsement, I gather, never having seen a Fujinon FMTR-SX, Docter Nobilem, or Zeiss Jenoptem/Dekarem, which apparently have less reasonable price tags. Renze de Vries knows a lot more than I do about Zeiss optics, so he may chime in. (Next week, he's on vacation.) Also, when Holger mentions 'performance level' he includes several things I don't give a lot of weight to.
What I have found is that the Swift FMC models (i.e., Type 4, HR/5) really do provide brighter images with possibly greater color contrast. The experience is, as you say, "deeper colours." So, for me, the Type 1c is not only larger and bulkier but also (forgive the expression) more 'washed out' than the 4b,c. I assume this is due to more internal light scatter, even under daylight conditions, which suppresses color contrast. The other reason for keeping my 1c on the pedestal, I admit, is just because it is the progenitor of the species. :t:
Regards,
Ed