Review of 8x25 Victory Pocket (1 Viewer)

[mbb]

summary op third party or DIY accessories

As I agree with many that the supplied accessories are a major pity for these binoculars and because there is a lot of info spread across 300posts, I've tried to summarize the suggested options, creditting also who mentioned it and in which post number (no idea how to change these numbers into direct links to the posts) This should make it easier finding back the additional info/links/pictures or asking for more info:

Rainguards/ocular covers:

• Opticron compact rainguard 34mm (potentially trimming off the ununsed strap guides), "fits fine when the bin is unfolded (but not when folded)" (Alexis Powell #41+#146, wdc #83+#85(incl. link & picture), ailevin #154, mwhogue #153, jremmons #207, mwhongue #289)
• Vortex Rainguard Small: " The oculars of the Zeiss 8x25 are 34 mm, the rainguard fits 35 tot 38 mm. The fit is loose, but the rainguard stays put in normal use (while walking, etc.) and comes of in an instant. The material is nice softish rubber, not hard plastic." (14Goudvink #145+#150)
• modified Vortex rainguards (mwhogue #153)
• ocular caps from the Nikon 8x25 SportStar IV (Alexis Powell #41, with picture)

=> which fit both unfolded and fully folded?


Objective covers:

• Vortex compact objective covers (mwhongue #289)

=>...any other? or anyone tried these?: https://www.benl.ebay.be/itm/Binocu...602247?hash=item1cae509a47:g:pYkAAOSwEeFU-u7b


Smaller bag:
(-for size measurements folded/open, see: John Frink #109)
-case for the Nikon 8x25 SportStar IV (Alexis Powell #17+#41+#208, with pictures)
-Swarovski field bag: "fits like a glove"/"a good if snug fit" (Fazalmajid #46+#123+#151)

• LowePro Dashpoint 20 compact camera case: "Fits like a glove, even with a RYO harness wrapped round it." (paddy7 #121+#129)
• Ape Case AC150: "Its a padded case that provides ample room, but is rather simple. Wish it had and extra pocket or two." (Bill Atwood #152)
• Vortex case for Vortex 10x28 binocular: "a perfect fit for the Zeiss including either a strap or an RYO harness, Opticron rainguard, and Vortex objective covers installed" (mwhogue #153)
• "I've ordered Maven bags and hard cases for both. An Amazon basics compact camera case also works quite well for the folded 8x25." (ailevin #195)
• Leupold Go Afield, size 'small' (Kevin Conville #236)
• Gem Kangaroo Grandad (cottonbase #285 with link and pictures, mwhongue #289)

=> not always clear if they fit tightly or not when folded with/without strap.
=> I would love to find a small(!) hard case that fits well, with (room for) a little padding, actually like the original one, but fitting well when folded(!). That'd be for stuffing it safely in e.g. a tighty packed cycling bag while bike-camping). But at least some that fits well/compact with the binoculars folded and well sealed (e.g. zippers) would do.


Eyecups, wider and/or winged (to limit black-out issues for non-glass wearers (or using the 'MOLCET' technique) and side light)

• Field Optics Compact Eyeshield/cups (/Ace Optics) (ailevin #215-#238, cfranchi #239, Gzoladz74 #52+#54(with link)+#158+#245)
• BoliOptics microscope eyepiece eyeshield or eye-guards, foldable, 30mm mounting size, from Amazon.com (pechelman #37, with picture and link)
• or just with your thumbs... (Kevin Conville #236, with picture)

=> are these compatible with some of the mentioned rainguards/ocular covers?


Neck strap

• Trinovid strap or DIY equivalent (using tubular shoelace material + YKKK LB-LS quick-release buclkes wit nylon loops (fazalmajid #22+#27+#151, 14Goudvink #145)
• Optech binostrap: "works very well, is more compact, comfortable, less fiddly than the included strap and you can get 1.5 mm attachment cords on Optech as opposed to the 1 mm cord on the Zeiss strap" (mwhogue #158)
• RYO harness + 1.75mm Dyneema cord loops (ailevin #57)
• Optech loops or zip ties (paddy7 #159)
• Op Tech compact Op Strap (mwhogue https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=378540 #7)
• Op/Tech Mini QD Loops (1.5mm) [Op/Tech Item Nr. 1301082] (John Frink https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=362900 #1)
• DIY with nylon cord and leather (Kevin Conville #236, with pictures)
• DIY with polyester cord, metal ring etc. (cgeiser #223, with pictures)
• DIY harness (ailevin #154)
• DIY "from a length of soft 1.5 cm wide flattened tubular nylon webbing, with a length of thin black synthetic shoelace on each end (to slip through the ultra small lugs, then knot at the end to keep it from slipping back through)" (Alexis Powell #17)

=> I have to admit I don't really have a big problem with the original strap (waiting for its Zeiss replacement now). It could be more simple, with less hard parts potentially potentially touching the lenses if stuffed in a bag, but that's mainly due to the tiny strap wholes of the binoculars, and I want to add ocular covers anyway. But I really like the DIY nyloncord+leather that Kevin has made.

I hope this'll help others who are searching.

 

[Alexis Powell]

Nice summary, thanks! I think many suitable soft cases exist, depending on taste, but we'll have to work on identifying more appropriate hard cases. They are tougher to find, if one is avoiding lot of empty space, because of the irregular shape of this bin when folded.

--AP

PS - For neckstrap, I also described a do-it-yourself solution in post 17 which is shown in my photos in post 41.

 

[[email protected]]

"I have to hold the bins away from my eyes a bit even with the cups fully out - I wish the cups could go a bit further out."

That is the trouble I had with the Zeiss Victory 8x25. The Swarovski CL-P 8x25 eye cups come out a bit farther so I don't have to hold the bins away from my face. Also, even though the Zeiss Victory 8x25 had a bigger FOV then the Swaro the Swaro's edges were sharper which I preferred. I sold my Zeiss and kept the Swaro. Actually, if you want to carry a little bigger binocular the Nikon HG 8x30 is better than either the Zeiss or the Swarovski compact because it has a much bigger FOV and it is better in low light. I had one of those too but I sold it because my SV 8x32 is so much better than the Nikon HG and not much bigger. I guess the bigger the better. Depends on how much you want to carry.

 

[eronald]

Edmund,

You "hate every every second looking through" the Victory Pocket 8x25?

As we would say here in Texas: "Mais non! Pas possible! Certainement pas! Allons enfants de la patrie avec le Victory Pocket! Vive la France!"

Mike

Every second makes me cry. I try to keep the glances short, whereas I’ll gladly spend a long time staring through my 7x42 Ultravid HD.

There is a reason why people buy and carry larger glasses,- in the daytime.

Edmund

 

[[email protected]]

Every second makes me cry. I try to keep the glances short, whereas I’ll gladly spend a long time staring through my 7x42 Ultravid HD.

There is a reason why people buy and carry larger glasses,- in the daytime.

Edmund

Edmund. I understand what you are saying. The compacts are nice for when you want a binocular that is easy to carry but there is no comparison between any 8x25 to an 8x42, 7x42, 10x50, 12x50 or even an 8x32 when it comes to an easy relaxing, bright view. The bigger aperture and exit pupil just makes a huge difference. That is why the 8x32 and 8x42 formats are the most popular for birding. It is not just brightness either it is comfort. A 7x42 binocular is a comfortable binocular to use for long periods. You put a 7x42 up to your eyes and BANG the full FOV is there without any blackouts and you don't have to mess around moving your eyes around to find the perfect spot so you won't get blackouts like you do with an 8x25. The exit pupil is twice the size of an 8x25.

 

[mbb]

Nice summary, thanks! I think many suitable soft cases exist, depending on taste, but we'll have to work on identifying more appropriate hard cases. They are tougher to find, if one is avoiding lot of empty space, because of the irregular shape of this bin when folded.

--AP

PS - For neckstrap, I also described a do-it-yourself solution in post 17 which is shown in my photos in post 41.

oh, you're right, I've missed your DIY strap. Sorry! I just wanted to add it to my list now, but apparently I cannot edit my previous post. It's probably only possible within a short time-lapse after the original posting. In this case that's a pity, as I could have tried to update that list as new ideas are gathered.

Regarding the hard case, I also think it won't be easy to find. But maybe putting the strap next to the 'bump' of the folded hinge could make a rather squarish compact hard case work.

Regarding the ocular covers, I was wondering if we couldn't find/use something similar to those of the Leica Ultravid 8x20: instead of of them being made in one piece, hanging to the strap on one side, having two individual cap hanging each on one side of the strap. This would at least solve the 'problem' of being compatible with the non-centered hinge. Anyone has any idea if such a set of individual, fitting covers can be found somewhere?

 

[14Goudvink]

Regarding the ocular covers, I was wondering if we couldn't find/use something similar to those of the Leica Ultravid 8x20: instead of of them being made in one piece, hanging to the strap on one side, having two individual cap hanging each on one side of the strap. This would at least solve the 'problem' of being compatible with the non-centered hinge. Anyone has any idea if such a set of individual, fitting covers can be found somewhere?

The Vortex rainguard is very flexible and also fits with the bins folded.

To get a Leica Ultravid like solution, you can cut off the bridge between the left and right ocular guard with a sharp knife.

Another suggestion for a bag: I use a neoprene Sea to Summit Padded Pouch size M. A perfect fit for the Zeiss with the Vortex rainguard and a Leica Trinovid 8x20 strap. The only drawback is that it has no belt loop.


George

 

[mbb]

Thank you for the info!
I'll have to look for some reseller in the EU, selling those Vortex rainguards. (I mainly find some in the US or Canada, which would result in shipping costs probably as 'high' as the price of the rainguards )
Regarding the bag: I guess the original Zeiss neckstrap would also fit (instead of the Leica one)(?). It seems simple and nice.

 

[eronald]

I think one purpose of discussions here is to allow people to get tools which suit them.

In this context some potential purchasers may become confused by good reviews of the Pocket 8x25, and they deserve a broader explanation:

The 8x25 are exceptionally sharp and useful for their price. They are «*alphas*», no doubt about it, and bring unmatched lightness (309g!), superb build quality and good ergonomics to the table, in addition to optics that are as sharp as those of any other MUCH larger binocular.

However they are still x25 instruments and simply do not have the brightness or the comfort of a larger «*alpha*» glass. People who wish to use them for prolonged observation may in some cases find them unacceptably tiring, and they cannot look into the night for terrestrial use.

Edmund

PS It might be useful to suggest the next step up to a sharp and yet very compact 8x30 or 8x32. I’m not sure the Ultravid is in the same sharpness class as the Pocket.

Edmund. I understand what you are saying. The compacts are nice for when you want a binocular that is easy to carry but there is no comparison between any 8x25 to an 8x42, 7x42, 10x50, 12x50 or even an 8x32 when it comes to an easy relaxing, bright view. The bigger aperture and exit pupil just makes a huge difference. That is why the 8x32 and 8x42 formats are the most popular for birding. It is not just brightness either it is comfort. A 7x42 binocular is a comfortable binocular to use for long periods. You put a 7x42 up to your eyes and BANG the full FOV is there without any blackouts and you don't have to mess around moving your eyes around to find the perfect spot so you won't get blackouts like you do with an 8x25. The exit pupil is twice the size of an 8x25.

 

[paddy7]

Like the FL 8x32?

More seriously, i speculated elsewhere on the forum as to whether the Zeiss upgrading of the 32mm format maybe more scaling up the the Pocket, rather than scaling down the SF. I was expecting torrents of hilarity, but didn't get it. Perhaps this time....?

 

[14Goudvink]

Thank you for the info!
I'll have to look for some reseller in the EU, selling those Vortex rainguards. (I mainly find some in the US or Canada, which would result in shipping costs probably as 'high' as the price of the rainguards )
Regarding the bag: I guess the original Zeiss neckstrap would also fit (instead of the Leica one)(?). It seems simple and nice.

Here is one reseller in the Netherlands:
https://www.cameranu.nl/nl/p1108945/vortex-rainguard-small

I wrap the (very thin) Leica strap around the hinge before I fold the bins to put them in the bag. I don't think the bins with the original Zeiss strap would fit in the Sea to Summit bag.

George

 

[mbb]

objective covers

Opticron compact rain guard and vortex compact objective covers. Very intelligent, well made and handy design.

Mike

I'm curious about the objective covers you refer to:
Do the vortex compact objective covers fit well? (not too loose?)
Do they pose a problem for folding the binoculars closed?
Is it these, for the "Viper 28mm HD"?: https://www.cameranu.nl/nl/p1109455/vortex-lensdop-set-of-2-28mm-viper-hd

(It is the interior/lens diameter that is referenced of course, and barrel thicknesses can differ, but 28mm makes me wonder if they wouldn't be too large for a good fit, or maybe did I not find the correct, compact ones.)

 

[mbb]

Here is one reseller in the Netherlands:
https://www.cameranu.nl/nl/p1108945/vortex-rainguard-small

I wrap the (very thin) Leica strap around the hinge before I fold the bins to put them in the bag. I don't think the bins with the original Zeiss strap would fit in the Sea to Summit bag.

George

Thank you again!

 

[[email protected]]

I think one purpose of discussions here is to allow people to get tools which suit them.

In this context some potential purchasers may become confused by good reviews of the Pocket 8x25, and they deserve a broader explanation:

The 8x25 are exceptionally sharp and useful for their price. They are «*alphas*», no doubt about it, and bring unmatched lightness (309g!), superb build quality and good ergonomics to the table, in addition to optics that are as sharp as those of any other MUCH larger binocular.

However they are still x25 instruments and simply do not have the brightness or the comfort of a larger «*alpha*» glass. People who wish to use them for prolonged observation may in some cases find them unacceptably tiring, and they cannot look into the night for terrestrial use.

Edmund

PS It might be useful to suggest the next step up to a sharp and yet very compact 8x30 or 8x32. I’m not sure the Ultravid is in the same sharpness class as the Pocket.

I agree. IMO there is no comparison between the Zeiss Victory 8x25 and Nikon Monarch HG 8x30. The bigger Nikon is no doubt a better all around birding binocular being more comfortable to use and better in low light with it's bigger aperture and bigger exit pupil. Also, there is no comparison between the Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 and the Swarovski SV 8x32 for the same reason. With binoculars of equal quality the bigger aperture will always win. I have had all three of them and I kept the SV. You have to decide if the smaller size is worth the decrease in performance especially in low light and viewing comfort.

 

[Alexis Powell]

I too prefer bigger bins to smaller ones for their easier and usually higher quality view. For that reason, even though I own a variety of configurations and have been a long-time enthusiastic user of compact and pocket binoculars (e.g. B&L 7x26 Custom, Zeiss 8x20 Victory Compact, Leica 8x20 Ultravid BL), and mid-sized bins (e.g. Leica 8x32 Ultra BA, Zeiss 8x32 FL, Swarovski 8x32 EL) my regular birding bins have always been full sized (e.g. Nikon 8x40 Classic Eagle, Zeiss 7x42 BGATP, Swarovski 8.5x42 EL SV). I generally agree that 8x42 are nicer than 8x32 which are nicer than 8x25 which are nicer than 8x20 to look through. Such has been true of the very many bins (of comparable high quality) with which I have had past experience, that is, up until the Zeiss 8x25 Victory Pocket was released. For me, it is one of the great binoculars of all time because for me it performs well beyond its size to the extent that I prefer it over (for example) the Zeiss 8x32 FL. The view through the 8x25 Victory is more restful than the 8x32 FL because eye placement is more forgiving and because the view lacks the strong off-axis astigmatism of the FL. Moreover, the handling characteristics of the 8x25 Victory are outstanding. I trust it for almost any critical birding application.

--AP

 

[mwhogue]

I'm curious about the objective covers you refer to:
Do the vortex compact objective covers fit well? (not too loose?)
Do they pose a problem for folding the binoculars closed?
Is it these, for the "Viper 28mm HD"?: https://www.cameranu.nl/nl/p1109455/vortex-lensdop-set-of-2-28mm-viper-hd

(It is the interior/lens diameter that is referenced of course, and barrel thicknesses can differ, but 28mm makes me wonder if they wouldn't be too large for a good fit, or maybe did I not find the correct, compact ones.)

mbb,

Yes, those are the Vortex objective covers I am using on my Victory Pocket. They do fit too loose to stay on unless you modify them. To modify you can cut the split lug off a Vortex compact rain guard then cut the two pieces of the lug in half where they bend. Then you can glue one of the pieces vertically on the inside rim of each objective cover. This is easier to do than it sounds and works quite well. You can also glue the remaining two pieces of the lug inside the Vortex rain guard so that it has a tighter fit and will better stay on the Pocket. However I prefer to use the Opticron rain guard on the Pocket because it fits perfectly without any modification except I do carefully cut off all the attachment points except the one I use to reduce the bulk for better fit in the case. None of these accessories interferes with fully folding the Pocket closed or fitting in any suitable case I have tried including the Vortex and the GEM either fully adjusted for my IP distance or fully folded.

If Opticron sells their 25mm objective covers as accessories, they will fit the Pocket as well with a bit of stretching.

Hope this helps.

Mike

 

[[email protected]]

"I generally agree that 8x42 are nicer than 8x32 which are nicer than 8x25 which are nicer than 8x20 to look through."

I agree but I think there are diminishing returns when you get past an 8x32. My 12x50 SV is probably a little better optically than my 8x32 SV but I think the 8x32 format is the sweet spot for birding when you consider performance, weight and size. That is why 8x32 is the most popular birding format. The 8x25 format works pretty good for most birding applications until the sun starts going down or light is low like under a jungle canopy then it starts becoming too dim, whereas, the 8x32 will stiil perform satisfactorily. That extra 1mm of exit pupil makes a big difference. I sill have a Swarovski CL-P 8x25 for it's compactness and light weight but I don't use it as my full time birding glass. Bot the Zeiss and Swarovski 8x25's are good compacts. The Zeiss has a little larger FOV but it has more distortion at the edges and the Swarovski's eye cups match it's eye relief closer than the Zeiss. It depends upon which you prefer.

 

[Alexis Powell]

"I generally agree that 8x42 are nicer than 8x32 which are nicer than 8x25 which are nicer than 8x20 to look through."

I agree but I think there are diminishing returns when you get past an 8x32. My 12x50 SV is probably a little better optically than my 8x32 SV but I think the 8x32 format is the sweet spot for birding when you consider performance, weight and size. That is why 8x32 is the most popular birding format. The 8x25 format works pretty good for most birding applications until the sun starts going down or light is low like under a jungle canopy then it starts becoming too dim, whereas, the 8x32 will stiil perform satisfactorily. That extra 1mm of exit pupil makes a big difference. I sill have a Swarovski CL-P 8x25 for it's compactness and light weight but I don't use it as my full time birding glass. Bot the Zeiss and Swarovski 8x25's are good compacts. The Zeiss has a little larger FOV but it has more distortion at the edges and the Swarovski's eye cups match it's eye relief closer than the Zeiss. It depends upon which you prefer.

The differences between our assessments are hilariously incongruous. Or maybe not. I am both more positive about small binoculars and about big binoculars than are you. You like 8x32 as a compromise, whereas I find it to be an unappealing in-all-ways-suboptimally tepid and uninspiring middle ground in the trade-off between pack size and viewing/handling comfort. What I find special about the Zeiss 8x25 Victory Pocket is that it seems to preserve more of the latter relative to the former than any other binocular that I've experienced. I used to say the same about the Leica 8x32 BA/BN/Ultravid, but now those I rank as runner-up because I like the viewing comfort of the considerably smaller Zeiss just as much as that lineage of extraordinarily capable Leica bins.

--AP

 

[jremmons]

For me, it is one of the great binoculars of all time because for me it performs well beyond its size to the extent that I prefer it over (for example) the Zeiss 8x32 FL. The view through the 8x25 Victory is more restful than the 8x32 FL because eye placement is more forgiving and because the view lacks the strong off-axis astigmatism of the FL. Moreover, the handling characteristics of the 8x25 Victory are outstanding. I trust it for almost any critical birding application.

--AP

On these points, I completely agree.
I have used it for all varieties of birding, including deep woods point counts, grassland point counts, waterfowl surveys, to birding excursions, to just casual bird observation when hiking. I trust it completely for any professional endeavor where weight and compactness are a benefit.
To me they feel much more like an 8x32 in the body of an 8x25. They have the easiest eye placement of any bin I've used, comparable to the 8x32 SV (which had glare no matter where I stuck it to my eyes).
I've tried other alpha level pockets and none have compared.

Justin

 

[[email protected]]

In the binocular poll below 51% of birders prefer the 8x32 and .93% prefer the 8x25 format. That really should tell you something. There is no way any 8x25 will perform like an 8x32 for all around birding and the popular opinion agrees. The majority rules. Any 8x25 is going to be way more finicky and will not perform as well in low light as an 8x32 and that includes the Zeiss Victory 8x25 or Swarovski 8x25 CL-P. It is a matter of physics. You can only do so much with coatings and glass. 3mm of exit pupil is 3mm of exit pupil be it Zeiss or Swarovski or Leica. It is not possible for an 8x25 to have the easy eye placement of an 8x32 or 8x42. The only smaller binocular I have seen with easier eye placement is the Swarovski 8x30 CL and it has a special design called an " optical box" and it was still not as comfortable or have as easy eye placement as my 8x32 SV. The extra 1mm of exit pupil on an 8x32 is going to give you more room to move your eyes around without getting blackouts and when the light starts getting low it is going to be brighter.

https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=376666&page=5