NDhunter
Experienced observer
James:
I think you need some help. I have told you more than once.
Don't feed the troll.
Jerry
-
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.
New Zeiss Victory SF !!!!!! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Chosun Juan
- Start date
James:
I think you need some help. I have told you more than once.
Don't feed the troll.
Jerry
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Jerry,
it's this entire board that is guilty of giving him a platform in narcissism.....I don't want anyone on ignore but then again I don't need to read this junk either.
Here are some random comments from the web about SF as a contrast with Dennis's selection:
Not only is the SF's field of view extraordinarily wide, but it's also sharp edge to edge.
Colour reproduction and contrast are also excellent.
The SF is really faster in focus: easy focusing on flying birds
-The balance and grip is excellent
Sharpness across the field of view- the 8x42 is outstanding
For me the SF is the perfect binocular
Got mine a few days ago I can say that the Victory SF 10x42 binoculars are exceptional.
- Optics are stunning
- The usability and focusing are fantastic
- very light
because of the balance and weight distribution of the SF it "feels"lighter and that is immediately obvious when you take an SF in your hands.
I was surprised by how light in weight the pair were, and well balanced they are, despite the length of the barrels
I consider the Victory SF 10x42 spectacular bins and I have never used anything better
However everything about the bino is flawless, Fast focus is a real delight to get on birds FAST! Flat field across the view Colors simply real
We have gotten no SF's returned from any customer for any reason
At this moment we received 6 SF's which are sold to very satisfied customers.
This last quote is from Jan and it tells us that:
Not 1
Not 2
Not 3
Not 4
Not 5
But 6 persons visited his store, tried out the SFs (unlike you Dennis) and wanted one and bought one.
Lee
Not only is the SF's field of view extraordinarily wide, but it's also sharp edge to edge.
Colour reproduction and contrast are also excellent.
The SF is really faster in focus: easy focusing on flying birds
-The balance and grip is excellent
Sharpness across the field of view- the 8x42 is outstanding
For me the SF is the perfect binocular
Got mine a few days ago I can say that the Victory SF 10x42 binoculars are exceptional.
- Optics are stunning
- The usability and focusing are fantastic
- very light
because of the balance and weight distribution of the SF it "feels"lighter and that is immediately obvious when you take an SF in your hands.
I was surprised by how light in weight the pair were, and well balanced they are, despite the length of the barrels
I consider the Victory SF 10x42 spectacular bins and I have never used anything better
However everything about the bino is flawless, Fast focus is a real delight to get on birds FAST! Flat field across the view Colors simply real
We have gotten no SF's returned from any customer for any reason
At this moment we received 6 SF's which are sold to very satisfied customers.
This last quote is from Jan and it tells us that:
Not 1
Not 2
Not 3
Not 4
Not 5
But 6 persons visited his store, tried out the SFs (unlike you Dennis) and wanted one and bought one.
Lee
Just to add to Lee's comments, in back to back comparisons with Swarovski 10x42 SVs in field conditions the 10x42 SF has a noticeably wider field of view e.g. with the SFs I could see a crow and a particular post together. Using the Swaros I could only see one of these at a time and had to turn my head to see the other. Not the most scientific of comparison but a very noticeable difference in day-to-day conditions.
Andy
Field of view isn't the be all and end all of bins to everybody but since we want to see as much as possible through our bins, getting a big FOV is a big bonus.
Lee
bh46118
Well-known member
Hi Andy
I also have the EL 10X42 SV and enjoy the vivid color representation quit a lot. Is it the more neutral colors of the SF that have you preferring it to the SV ?
Thanks Bruce
I also have the EL 10X42 SV and enjoy the vivid color representation quit a lot. Is it the more neutral colors of the SF that have you preferring it to the SV ?
Thanks Bruce
HI Brock
What look like grooves on the SF barrels actually aren't grooves but a step down in the thickness of the armour. This lower level of armour is also present at the top of the barrels (at the strap lugs) and also at the bottom of the barrels next to the objectives.
Take a look at the HT and you will see similar features so it's actually an integrated family appearance, and not at all a feature unique to SF, although integrating the third bridge into the design necessitated some detail changes. It is also mirrored by the Conquest HDs although achieved in slightly different ways.
Lee
Last edited:
HighNorth
Well-known member
The only thing I'm really worried about is whether I can see any rolling ball or not!:t:
l guess I will find out tomorrow; the postal truck still has about 300 miles left to drive! :smoke:
bh46118
Well-known member
All other thing being equal or better, anybody in their right mind would want more FOV.
My ideas have probably evolved a bit, but my priorities would probably be.
1- Rich color saturation and contrast coupled with high brightness and transmission, without wash out. - Not easy to achieve, and one of the things that separates the merely very good from the best.
2- Resolution of fine detail, by whatever means that is achieved. There seems to be a lot of debate on how much of that is real or perceived depending on who's eyes are doing the looking.
3- FOV- I'll take as much as I can get. I'm not unfamiliar with it after having the 6.5X32 Fury and Zen ED2.
4- Glare control, sharp edges, handling and ergonomics, appearance, mechanics-not to particular about it as long as they don't break.
My ideas have probably evolved a bit, but my priorities would probably be.
1- Rich color saturation and contrast coupled with high brightness and transmission, without wash out. - Not easy to achieve, and one of the things that separates the merely very good from the best.
2- Resolution of fine detail, by whatever means that is achieved. There seems to be a lot of debate on how much of that is real or perceived depending on who's eyes are doing the looking.
3- FOV- I'll take as much as I can get. I'm not unfamiliar with it after having the 6.5X32 Fury and Zen ED2.
4- Glare control, sharp edges, handling and ergonomics, appearance, mechanics-not to particular about it as long as they don't break.
HighNorth
Well-known member
I thought birdforum WAS on the Internet? :-O (Silly me; couldn't resist!) :king:
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
No USA Price Increase
It was reported toward the end of last year in one of the threads that there would be a price increase on the SF in the US this January. Ultimately, it is good to know that is not the case. I noticed a couple of sites did increase for a few days but quickly returned to the original advertised pricing. One of the sites first mentioning an upcoming increase removed that comment.
The Optics for Birding web site currently shows the following comment:
We recently announced that on January 1, 2015 Zeiss would have a $350 price increase on the Victory SF binoculars. Zeiss has rescinded that announcement. The price will remain as is until further notice.
http://www.optics4birding.com/zeiss-victory-sf-8x42-binoculars.html
That sounds like good news to me. To paraphrase Ben Franklin, in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes and price increases. So get'em now before the price goes up. Sorry Brock, but no three thousand dollar main stream alpha yet.
It was reported toward the end of last year in one of the threads that there would be a price increase on the SF in the US this January. Ultimately, it is good to know that is not the case. I noticed a couple of sites did increase for a few days but quickly returned to the original advertised pricing. One of the sites first mentioning an upcoming increase removed that comment.
The Optics for Birding web site currently shows the following comment:
We recently announced that on January 1, 2015 Zeiss would have a $350 price increase on the Victory SF binoculars. Zeiss has rescinded that announcement. The price will remain as is until further notice.
http://www.optics4birding.com/zeiss-victory-sf-8x42-binoculars.html
That sounds like good news to me. To paraphrase Ben Franklin, in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes and price increases. So get'em now before the price goes up. Sorry Brock, but no three thousand dollar main stream alpha yet.
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Thank God I'm just going out to look for Redpoll and Pine Siskin today, with my 8.5 SV.
Which rattles by the way, if I shake it. And it has for 4 years now. And it obviously makes no effin' difference whatsoever. My 8x32 SV does not rattle. And it obviously makes no effin' difference whatsoever. And my 8x20 Ultravid rattles, too. And it obviously makes no effin' difference, since 2009. None of the others rattle, and...well you get the drift.
And I don't use objective caps whatsoever, so it makes no effin' difference.
And I could go on, but it obviously makes no effin' difference... 8-P
I think I'll just wait on the SF. Obviously it's not the best thing since sliced bread. It's just another binocular. :smoke:
As for the cancelled price increase, I think Zeiss saw the writing on the wall. The alphas aren't THAT much better anymore.
Bonus funny true Pennsylvania story: I saw a diesel Pickup yesterday with a home made sticker on it: "REAL TRUCKS RADDLE." Couldn't spell rattle, and had the hood up at the grocery store. And it wasn't rattling any more.
Just two cents,
Mark
Which rattles by the way, if I shake it. And it has for 4 years now. And it obviously makes no effin' difference whatsoever. My 8x32 SV does not rattle. And it obviously makes no effin' difference whatsoever. And my 8x20 Ultravid rattles, too. And it obviously makes no effin' difference, since 2009. None of the others rattle, and...well you get the drift.
And I don't use objective caps whatsoever, so it makes no effin' difference.
And I could go on, but it obviously makes no effin' difference... 8-P
I think I'll just wait on the SF. Obviously it's not the best thing since sliced bread. It's just another binocular. :smoke:
As for the cancelled price increase, I think Zeiss saw the writing on the wall. The alphas aren't THAT much better anymore.
Bonus funny true Pennsylvania story: I saw a diesel Pickup yesterday with a home made sticker on it: "REAL TRUCKS RADDLE." Couldn't spell rattle, and had the hood up at the grocery store. And it wasn't rattling any more.
Just two cents,
Mark
Thank God I'm just going out to look for Redpoll and Pine Siskin today, with my 8.5 SV.
Which rattles by the way, if I shake it. And it has for 4 years now. And it obviously makes no effin' difference whatsoever. My 8x32 SV does not rattle. And it obviously makes no effin' difference whatsoever. And my 8x20 Ultravid rattles, too. And it obviously makes no effin' difference, since 2009. None of the others rattle, and...well you get the drift.
And I don't use objective caps whatsoever, so it makes no effin' difference.
And I could go on, but it obviously makes no effin' difference... 8-P
I think I'll just wait on the SF. Obviously it's not the best thing since sliced bread. It's just another binocular. :smoke:
As for the cancelled price increase, I think Zeiss saw the writing on the wall. The alphas aren't THAT much better anymore.
Bonus funny true Pennsylvania story: I saw a diesel Pickup yesterday with a home made sticker on it: "REAL TRUCKS RADDLE." Couldn't spell rattle, and had the hood up at the grocery store. And it wasn't rattling any more.
Just two cents,
Mark
A masterly intervention Mark. :king:
Welcome back.
Lee
bh46118
Well-known member
Very true, unless you have the right bloodline, the looks , or belong to one of the more "enlightened' clubs or groups of mutual back slappers. Then the whole damn world is all ears, regardless of whether or not what's being said amounts to a tinkerers damn. 3
HighNorth
Well-known member
Very true, unless you have the right bloodline, the looks , or belong to one of the more "enlightened' clubs or groups of mutual back slappers. Then the whole damn world is all ears, regardless of whether or not what's being said amounts to a tinkerers damn. 3
Fortunately bh, on Bird Forum, we all have the same bloodline, all have 'the looks' (apart from you when you wear your tin hat) and we all belong to the most delightful of back-slapping clubs. Or perhaps we all slap each other's back with clubs, or something............ what was the question? :-O
Lee
HighNorth
Well-known member
HN
You are getting over excited, try to calm down.
Relax! I'm only trying to rile Dennis a little!
But if I do receive ladies' underwear, I do hope they are the right size! :-O
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
No no no Brock, it's such a small detail it can't be a consideration of weight, but rather styling, as noted by Troubadour and others.
Post-script addendum after having been censored:
Wow, I can't believe that my entirely serious and tastefully/academically/medically worded mention of the possible anatomical inspiration for the styling of the open-hinged SV and SF designs was deleted by a moderator. Have a look at Holger's photo. I thought Europeans were supposed to be less prudish than Americans. And I'm angry because I thought my observation had a touch of real socio-political academic value. It was, in fact, on topic. This thread is about everything real and speculative to do with the SF design. If I understand correctly, it is OK to post polite but by some people's criteria off-topic comments in Ruffled Feathers. I've never had to go there before today.
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=3154836#post3154836
PPS: Well, apparently it isn't possible to make the comparison I wanted to make even in Ruffled Feathers because now that post has been edited/censored as well. I guess I'll just leave what remains of this post and that one and hope that Birdforum members can discern the missing content. Or maybe I'll try to find an even more tactful, less explicit, high-brow way of making my point in a post later in this thread.
Last edited:
