ZEISS Victory SF Appreciation Thread (1 Viewer)

[mgp13]

These binoculars deserve an appreciation thread so here it is. I'll open the proceedings.

I own the 8x42. Despite the fact I've had to send them back for replacement due to a QC issue (lack of blackening causing an internal reflection), I still consider them the best binocular for birding bar none. They are that good that even if the verdict from ZEISS was every pair of them suffers from the same annoying issue, I'd still happily accept them as my primary birding binoculars. That is because the Victory SF with a defect is still better than any other binocular without defect.

I believe this is an objective fact.

No binocular handles better or disappears so completely during prolonged viewing of a stationary object. The ErgoBalance concept alone deserves huge praise, not just from me but from everyone. The field of view, though since bested by Swarovski's NL Pures, is so wide one forgets he is viewing through binoculars. The brightness is incredible - the Victory SF effortlessly penetrates the twilight and bright moonlight, giving me breathtaking views of absolutely everything. The view through these binoculars is absolutely gorgeous and combined with the ease of handling make this the best binocular ever manufactured.

I think I would like to marry my replacement pair of ZEISS Victory SF 8x42 when they arrive.

I love my ZEISS Victory SF 8x42. They are the world's best binoculars, and I own them. I don't have Victorys so I can go birding, I go birding so I can use my Victorys.

 

[Pinewood]

Hello Mgp13,

I have a 8x32SF which is thoroughly satisfactory and a pleasure to use. There are objective facts and there are subjective issues as we humans do differ slightly in needs and preferences, in colour rendition and in ergonomics, for examples. My SF replaced an 8x32FL, which had satisfied me for seventeen years but the SF is certainly superior in the ways you mention. My enthusiasm for the SF is tempered with the knowledge that bird watchers do benefit from choice.

Enjoy your replacement,
Arthur

 

[Ignatius]

...

I think I would like to marry my replacement pair of ZEISS Victory SF 8x42 when they arrive.

...

I was aware that things are somewhat different downunder, but ...

 

[Maljunulo]

"Better" is a subjective attribute.

 

[GrampaTom]

I believe this is an objective fact.

I get nervous when believe and fact are in the same sentence...

 

[Paultricounty]

These binoculars deserve an appreciation thread so here it is. I'll open the proceedings.

I own the 8x42. Despite the fact I've had to send them back for replacement due to a QC issue (lack of blackening causing an internal reflection), I still consider them the best binocular for birding bar none. They are that good that even if the verdict from ZEISS was every pair of them suffers from the same annoying issue, I'd still happily accept them as my primary birding binoculars. That is because the Victory SF with a defect is still better than any other binocular without defect.

I believe this is an objective fact.

No binocular handles better or disappears so completely during prolonged viewing of a stationary object. The ErgoBalance concept alone deserves huge praise, not just from me but from everyone. The field of view, though since bested by Swarovski's NL Pures, is so wide one forgets he is viewing through binoculars. The brightness is incredible - the Victory SF effortlessly penetrates the twilight and bright moonlight, giving me breathtaking views of absolutely everything. The view through these binoculars is absolutely gorgeous and combined with the ease of handling make this the best binocular ever manufactured.

I think I would like to marry my replacement pair of ZEISS Victory SF 8x42 when they arrive.

I love my ZEISS Victory SF 8x42. They are the world's best binoculars, and I own them. I don't have Victorys so I can go birding, I go birding so I can use my Victorys.

Ok I’m gonna bite. Have you had side by side comparisons with NL’s , EL’s, Nocttivids and Ultravids?

 

[Ted Y.]

I believe this is an objective fact.

When "believe", "objective" is not.

 

[Ted Y.]

Ok I’m gonna bite. Have you had side by side comparisons with NL’s , EL’s, Nocttivids and Ultravids?

I think the first post is an emotional one and it is OK.
I reckon is an emotional review .

Logic has little place when emotions are dominant, we are all human beings.
Can you use logic with supporters of a hockey/football team? Just saying.

Edit
"Can you use logic ..." when discussing about the adversary, of course.

 

[Maljunulo]

There are people walking around who state as a “fact” that the earth is flat.

And they believe it.

 

[Patudo]

A couple are even regular posters here.

 

[Ignatius]

There are people walking around who state as a “fact” that the earth is flat.

And they believe it.

And sadly this is becoming more common again. Expenditure on public, not private, education must be in vain.

 

[Scott98]

I"m with you on the 8x42 SF's! They're my favorite ones for all the reasons you mention, especially ergonomics. And the optics reveal their excellence for me when I'm doing astronomy. Shouldn't you wait until your get back from Zeiss to declare victory though

I didn't see any reflections in mine, hopefully your's will be perfect when they arrive.

 

[Conndomat]

I agree with the ergonomics, balance and the focuser (perhaps the EDG is a touch better here), Zeiss has done a really good job.
Visually I think the NL is a bit better, except for the scattered light suppression, but it's all a matter of taste.

Andreas

 

[Maljunulo]

And sadly this is becoming more common again. Expenditure on public, not private, education must be in vain.

If you’re born stupid, you will die stupid, no matter how much money is wasted on trying to educate you.

 

[MiddleRiver]

Tough crowd around here.... sheesh :-o

 

[mgp13]

There are people walking around who state as a “fact” that the earth is flat.

And they believe it.

In the words of Richard Stallman "well that's just a false belief."

 

[Ignatius]

In the words of Richard Stallman "well that's just a false belief."

Isn't he that do-gooder pedo apologist?

 

[Ted Y.]

my statistics:
1/4 of posts are in scope of the original post
3/4 of posts are out of scope
A lot of noise, do you agree?

 

[Paultricounty]

my statistics:
1/4 of posts are in scope of the original post
3/4 of posts are out of scope
A lot of noise, do you agree?

I’m feeling a guilty here Ted , I find myself in that 3/4ths more often than I care to admit 😲✌🏼. My apologies, I just did it again 🤣.

I like that scope word, was kind of a pun 😜.

🙏🏼
Paul

 

[tenex]

my statistics:
1/4 of posts are in scope of the original post
3/4 of posts are out of scope
A lot of noise, do you agree?

Yes, roughly... but what is the "scope" of an OP that just says "SFs are the world's best binoculars"? Not likely to be a productive discussion. I keep wondering exactly why SFs (esp. 42) don't wow me -- haptics/size is surely involved -- but it's hardly worth talking much less arguing about. I'd give the edge to NLs, but I didn't get those either, and started a thread about that which naturally was also somewhat muddled. In the end I do think one has to really like one's binocular but it doesn't matter which is "the best" by what criteria.