Here are the new Victorys: Victory HT (4 Viewers)

[eddy the eagle]

Hi Lee and everyone else my 10x40´s arrived tonight and it was dark and continuous rain so very little trial I did look outside with them and found I could see certain small things and features on buildings that I could not see with the naked eye.The focus is extra smoothe and precise and the near focus I measured in the house at under 6 feet.The ergos are just right for .me and I can get all fingers on the barrels and they feel well balanced.Further evaluation will be made as and when and I will report back. Eddy

 

[james holdsworth]

Lee,

Thanks for checking on that, but you needn't have almost unscrewed your eyeballs. Moving your eyes toward the edges, however, is a good test for "image blackouts."

All you need to do to test edge performance, at least for birding purposes, is locate a bird or a small object and slowly move it toward the outside edge of the binoculars, noting at which point the image blurs and then try to refocus the image at that point, move it bit farther out and refocus. The idea is to identify how large the sweet spot is and what's going on beyond that point, field curvature or astigmatism.

Allbinos didn't like the astigmatism in the 10x42 model, Arek thought the 8x32 was much better in this regard, so a bigger sweet spot is a welcomed change for those bothered by "edge effects".

PS - sorry for the sidetracking Troub, looking forward to the rest of your review!

Troub - sorry for the sidetrack, looking forward to the rest of your review!

I wouldn't be as "doom and gloom" as James, though he is right to some extent, edge performance is something that birders are finally noticing. This wasn't always the case and is still not the case for many birders.

I found that once I tried bins with good edges - Nikon WF, SE, EII, LX, and EDG, and Swaro EL and SLCneu - it's hard to go "backa".

<B>

Actually Brock, if you reread the Allbinos review for the 10x42FL, you will not find any comments on astigmatism. In fact, in the ''pro'' column was listed ''•sharp image in almost all the field'' and corrected field was est. at 88%.

This is why I wonder why people go on and on about the edge of the 10FL. Either take Allbinos data as correct or try them yourself and give us an opinion.

 

[brocknroller]

Actually Brock, if you reread the Allbinos review for the 10x42FL, you will not find any comments on astigmatism. In fact, in the ''pro'' column was listed ''•sharp image in almost all the field'' and corrected field was est. at 88%.

This is why I wonder why people go on and on about the edge of the 10FL. Either take Allbinos data as correct or try them yourself and give us an opinion.

You're correct, Arek gave it "almost perfect" in the astigmatism category, but what he meant by that is that stars are a pinpoints in the sweet spot, it is not a comment about the edge.

What he didn't like abut the 10x42 was the high level of distortion (pincushion), which he measured as the first curved line appearing 37% +- 8% from center (that's a wide margin of error, I wonder how he determines that). He measured 56% from center for the 8x32 model. That's what I was thinking about, the difference in distortion rather than astigmatism between those two models. My bad.

As far as the FL's astigmatism at the edges, you are not going to start denying the astigmatism at the edges of the FLs, are you? If so, you can go back and dig out the dozens of comments about this from reviewers and users. Steve Ingraham also had several threads on zbirding explaining the designers "philosophy" for allowing astigmatism at the edges to optimize the sharpness at the center. This has been thoroughly discussed on BF and elsewhere.

Just read Frank D's review of the 7x42 model.

"The Zeiss suffer from noticeable astigmatism around the outer edge of the image…I would say, conservatively, the outer 25%."

http://www.opticstalk.com/zen-ray-7x36-ed-zeiss-7x42-fl-and-nikon-7x35-e-co_topic18841.html

<B>

 

[Star Farmer]

Hi Joe

....by the light of the street lights over there I can see details of the windows and doors. With the FLs these details are barely discernable.
...

Sounds like they are at least 30% brighter than FL's!

 

[james holdsworth]

You're correct, Arek gave it "almost perfect" in the astigmatism category, but what he meant by that is that stars are a pinpoints in the sweet spot, it is not a comment about the edge.

What he didn't like abut the 10x42 was the high level of distortion (pincushion), which he measured as the first curved line appearing 37% +- 8% from center (that's a wide margin of error, I wonder how he determines that). He measured 56% from center for the 8x32 model. That's what I was thinking about, the difference in distortion rather than astigmatism between those two models. My bad.

As far as the FL's astigmatism at the edges, you are not going to start denying the astigmatism at the edges of the FLs, are you? If so, you can go back and dig out the dozens of comments about this from reviewers and users. Steve Ingraham also had several threads on zbirding explaining the designers "philosophy" for allowing astigmatism at the edges to optimize the sharpness at the center. This has been thoroughly discussed on BF and elsewhere.

Just read Frank D's review of the 7x42 model.

"The Zeiss suffer from noticeable astigmatism around the outer edge of the image…I would say, conservatively, the outer 25%."

http://www.opticstalk.com/zen-ray-7x36-ed-zeiss-7x42-fl-and-nikon-7x35-e-co_topic18841.html

<B>

I'm talking about the 10x42, so I would have to say you do not believe Allbinos when they say ''sharp image in almost all the field'' and corrected field was est. at 88%.

Try a pair [of 10's] and get back to us.

 

[ronh]

"Sounds like they are at least 30% brighter than FL's!"

Now, now. We must let the lucky HT boys have their well bought fun, and gloat for a while. After about a month of "your binocular sucks eggs" we can bear down a bit.

Seriously, as an FL fan, I am green with envy. Uh yellow, blue, red, whatever...
Ron

 

[xu42]

HT's coming to China! Next week, first shipment 6 pairs of HT will arrive; 3 8X42s and 3 10X42s.

 

[joe101]

Darn it the the Singapore retailers are getting the HTs next week .
How shit do I feel

 

[Troubador]

Just snatched 10 minutes between other jobs looking across the valley with both FL and HT. The difference is remarkable even allowing for newbinocularitis.

The view is of an estate of private houses, some with red roof-tiles some with grey. It has been raining so road and roofs are wet with the sunlight reflecting off these wet areas.

Through the HTs the wet parts glisten and sparkle, the red roofs are redder (!) and the green grass lawns are greener and in short there is a greater range of contrast.

I can't believe I'm writing this but by comparison the FL is lifeless and dull.

These observations were made by swapping back and forth at very short intervals between the FL and the HT so that changes in illumination are seen through both bins.

On this evidence I have to reappraise my earlier summary and say that the HTs are like FLs with the optics turned up to 13 (not 11) and with the ergonomics turned up to 15.

Lee

 

[Star Farmer]

"I can't believe I'm writing this but by comparison the FL is lifeless and dull."

I believe.

I did extensive comparison between the 7x40 EDF and 10x42 and 8x32 FLs. Completely different animals for sure, but the EDF shows much more vivid contrast in bright light, with tremendous depth of view. The EDF does have a significant yellow tint.

 

[pompadour]

Lee, actually you said 12, not 11. (You have achieved Dennis-like celebrity status with people remembering your every utterance.)

... Just returned from the Bird Fair ... The HTs are like FLs but turned up to 12 on the optics and up to 15 on the ergonomics. ... Lee

 

[Star Farmer]

HT's coming to China! Next week, first shipment 6 pairs of HT will arrive; 3 8X42s and 3 10X42s.

Very curious how these will be distributed. Probably need both money and connections.

 

[Troubador]

Lee, actually you said 12, not 11. (You have achieved Dennis-like celebrity status with people remembering your every utterance.)

Dang, my own words come back to haunt me.........

Pompadour, I clearly had a 'senior' moment. Hopefully, lucidity will return eventually and I can send the nurse home....

Lee

 

[eddy the eagle]

Hi everyone 1st time out with the HT´s this afternoon very gloomy with light rain showers.I was watching marsh harriers over an estuary and I compared the HT´s with my newly purchased Zeiss Diascope with the 20x75 eyepiece.Looking across the river at some building approx 1km distant I could determine features with the HT´s that I could only just determine with the scope on20x.The brightness I would put at 20%+ more than the scope and the definition and contrast I put at 10% better.I later moved to where there were chimneys and pylons and did some edge tests against the straight lines of the chimney.I would say that the sweet spot is 85%+and it only goes slightly out of focus in the last10% and then is refocusable.There is distortion at the edge against the straight edge of the chimney where the top half curves slightly.There is no phasing at the edges of the pylons and they remain sharp and well defined.The contrast is sharp and well defined and in my opinion the colours are true to life.I later went to the woods as it was getting dark and it was very shady under the canopy,but I was able to identify a Sardinian warbler from approx 150 metres with ease.In conclusion and bear in mind that these are my first Alpha bins I would say that with the ergos to my liking and everything quoted above I feel that it has been a good puchase and I am very pleased with the performance.The diopter adjustment is quite stiff but not unduly so and it stays put which is the main thing.The focussing is super smooth and very comfortable to operate and surprisingly for a 10x the depth of field is virtually 50 metres to infinity without much focusing.Finally does anyone want to by an obsolete Zeiss Diascope ....only joking.Well thats my two penneth for what its worth Enjoy your birding as I know I will Regards Eddy PS i´M NOT ON THE ZEISS PAYROL.

 

[ticl2184]

Hi Eddy

Thanks for the mini review of the HT's. I know you said it was a gloomy day, but did you find any internal reflections or ghosting of the image ?

Cheers Tim

 

[james holdsworth]

*Sigh*.........sounds like I might just have to upgrade.......I was hoping for a bit less enthusiasm......;]

Anyway, we want to hear more!

 

[joe101]

*Sigh*.........sounds like I might just have to upgrade.......I was hoping for a bit less enthusiasm......;]

There is no Hope ! The poison has done irreparable damage and has taken root in your thoughts .

 

[eddy the eagle]

Hi Tim,not sufficient brightness in the sky today when there is I will test for glare etc and let you know. Eddy.

 

[NDhunter]

*Sigh*.........sounds like I might just have to upgrade.......I was hoping for a bit less enthusiasm......;]

Anyway, we want to hear more!

James:

These do sound like a very nice new binocular. I remember you posted
about getting that Nightowl. I would sure like to hear how you like the
big 10x56. I had one, and they do offer a nice view.

I guess we are talking about something new, and something with a
classic view.

Jerry

 

[AZ8]

I'm jealous!! lol

Hope they show up here soon!