Review: Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 (6 Viewers)

[Troubador]

What I’d like to see is the Z 8x25 bumped up to 30 with 20% more weight and ... price.

Same fov, focus mechanics, just a teeny bit more light.

Edmund

Still a folding bino or conventional? Either way it would be a step up in size, and although this is just my guess and could be wrong, I suspect a 20% increase in lens diameter would lead to a more than 20% increase in weight when the prisms, optical tubes and rubber armour are taken into account.

But you would get an easier eye placement too.

Lee

 

[[email protected]]

Still a folding bino or conventional? Either way it would be a step up in size, and although this is just my guess and could be wrong, I suspect a 20% increase in lens diameter would lead to a more than 20% increase in weight when the prisms, optical tubes and rubber armour are taken into account.

But you would get an easier eye placement too.

Lee

Maybe more. The Swarovski 8x25 CL-P weigh's 12.2 oz. and the Swarovski 8x30 CL weigh's 17.3 oz. That is 30% heavier. You have to remember the whole binocular get's bigger. The lenses and the body. An 8x30 binocular is generally going to be quite a bit bigger and heavier than an 8x25. Even a Nikon HG 8x30 which is a smaller lighter binocular is 16 oz. You move up to an 8x30 from an 8x25 and it is a whole different class of binocular. IMO an 8x30 is a whole lot easier to use with easier eye placement and it is a lot brighter in low light than any 8x25 but you pay a price in weight and size for sure. There is a reason that only 1% of birder's say an 8x25 and only 4% say an 8x30 is their favorite format. For birding, an 8x32, 8x42 or 10x42 is the sweet spot for size and the three sizes to have to cover all your birding need's. 8x25's and 8x30's are fine for a nice small compact binocular to carry when you don't want to take out your bigger binocular but I wouldn't use one for my primary birding binocular.

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

 

[wdc]

There is a reason that only 1% of birder's say an 8x25 and only 4% say an 8x30 is their favorite format. For birding, an 8x32, 8x42 or 10x42 is the sweet spot for size and the three sizes to have to cover all your birding need's. 8x25's and 8x30's are for "weight weenie's" who's main priority is size and weight and they are willing to sacrifice optical performance to get it.

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

I'm not quite sure the reason, but the general tone of this post reminds me of biased ad copy hawking some sort of phony nutritional breakfast cereal, invoking unscientific data and shame!

-Bill

 

[MandoBear]

I'm not quite sure the reason, but the general tone of this post reminds me of biased ad copy hawking some sort of phony nutritional breakfast cereal, invoking unscientific data and shame!

-Bill

If it had been advertising copy one might hope the advertiser wouldn't have committed such egregious apostrophe crimes...

 

[SeldomPerched]

Hello SeldomPerched,

my point is that the optical innovations between the individual Leica models are too small or only marginal!
Of course there are always discussions about it and everyone has their own assessment, but I don't think that much has happened at Leica since the Trinovid BA / BN in the optical field.
Yes, there are always minor improvements, but in my opinion the big hit was never made.

I also find the color rendering of the Leica's very nice, but what always bothers me is the almost notorious chromatic aberration that I found annoying in all Leica models, but I'm also very sensitive on this point.
The Nikon EDG are binoculars that are very similar to Leica's in terms of color rendering, but here chromatic aberration is much better minimized.

However, it is important to note that I am originally from astronomy. Therefore, of course, I prefer binoculars with a field that is as flat as possible, even if I observe during the day, there may also be a reason that I can not do so much with the Leica's!

Ultimately, it is most important that the user of a pair of binoculars is ultimately satisfied, whether it is Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski or any other brand therefore remains secondary, everyone has different visual priorities and that's a good thing!
I therefore wish you continued fun with your Leica.

Andreas

Thank you, Andreas, and the points you make all taken. Luckily for me I don't seem to notice chromatic aberration very much unless making a high magnfication enlargement of a photographic picture on the computer (or printing it). However your point about the Nikon EDG is familiar to me: I got the 7x42 EDG last summer and though as said I don't consciously notice CA what I do notice is how calm and restful the view is, with a slightly less than full on flat field effect which appeals to me. All the same I get a bit more of a buzz out of the Leica 7x42 view.

At the moment the current summerlike weather while furloughed from work has combined with SLC 10X42s to give me some very pleasant viewing in my garden and from my window where my presence does not disturb the various birds and other animals.

By the way, if you have a moment spare, would you mind telling me which EDG you have? The 7x42 sometimes got slightly talked down for a duller image, whereas the 8x42 is generally talked up more. So I don't want to compare mine in the field with another version for fear of finding this to be true, but just reading about it won't have the same negative effect!

All the best,

Tom

 

[[email protected]]

I have had all the EDG's. I would rank them 10x42 first, 8x32 2nd, 8x42 3rd, 10x32 4th and the 7x42 last. The 7x42 EDG IMO does have a duller image and a smaller AFOV compared to the rest of the EDG's and is my least favorite. The 10x42 EDG is about as perfect as a binocular get's. I have the 10x42 , 8x42 and the 8x32 EDG now. When the Zeiss SF 8x32 comes out I am going to compare it to my 8x32 EDG and whichever one I like better I will keep. I don't need two alpha 8x32's. I don't think the 8x32 SF will be necessarily better because the SF 10x42 IMO is not better than the EDG 10x42 but time will tell. The 8x32 SF will have the advantage of the bigger FOV like the 10x42 SF but the 8x32 EDG could still be better at glare, have sharper edges and doesn't have the orange crescent around the bottom of the FOV that I saw in the 10x42 SF and the EDG will most assuredly have a smoother focuser and possibly be higher quality than the new SF unless Zeiss does a major redesign of the focuser and increases their QC. I will write a short review of the two when Zeiss releases the SF 8x32.

https://www.allbinos.com/allbinos_ranking-binoculars_ranking-10x42.html

 

[Torview]

Dennis, like you I`v owned or tried pretty much everything, not sure what your complaint is with the SF focus action, admittedly the first generation grey models were variable but the black bodied models have been unsurpassed in my personal experience.

I was informed by Cley Spy that Zeiss used engineers at Mercedes to make the action work as it now does.

I`v no doubt individual preferences may make the SF more or less appealing, but I don`t feel the focus action can reasonably be criticised.

 

[Conndomat]

By the way, if you have a moment spare, would you mind telling me which EDG you have? The 7x42 sometimes got slightly talked down for a duller image, whereas the 8x42 is generally talked up more. So I don't want to compare mine in the field with another version for fear of finding this to be true, but just reading about it won't have the same negative effect!

Hi Tom,

I have the 8x32 and 7x42 EDG!

I share your assessment of the 7x42, the view is very calm and relaxing!
It's true that 7x42 has a slightly smaller AFOV, similar to the Leica 7x42, but the Nikon doesn't bother me at all because the overall picture is just excellent.
In this context it is difficult for me to say whether the 8x32 or the 7x42 is the better glass, I like both very much!

I cannot contribute to the other EDGs because I do not know these glasses.

Andreas

 

[jgraider]

Seems like just a short year or so ago Dennis was on here talking about how "dark" the EDG's binos were. Maybe his eyeballs have changed over the last year or so.

 

[[email protected]]

I didn't criticise it. I think the Zeiss SF has a very good focuser being much better than the Swarovski's but IMO the EDG is a tad better. The EDG has the best smoothest focuser of any binocular I have ever used. it is so intuitive. It becomes seamless when you use it.

 

[[email protected]]

Seems like just a short year or so ago Dennis was on here talking about how "dark" the EDG's binos were. Maybe his eyeballs have changed over the last year or so.

I think I had the EDG 7x42 when was I was saying they were dark and of the series it is the dullest IMO but as Andreas says it is very calm and relaxing being 7x. The EDG 7x42 just doesn't seem to have the punch of the other EDG's partly due to the smaller AFOV. The light transmission of the EDG's is probably one of their weaker point's compared to other alpha's. That is one thing I will be looking at when I compare the EDG 8x32 to the SF 8x32 also. The SF will probably have better transmission. Zeiss usually do.

 

[Sebzwo]

I'm confused reading this. Shouldn't the 7x be the brightest and the most wide angle of the family? And if Nikon does some alpha series I'd trust them that they would have worked it out properly? So it must be a pretty nice binocular in any case.

 

[wdc]

I'm confused reading this. Shouldn't the 7x be the brightest and the most wide angle of the family? And if Nikon does some alpha series I'd trust them that they would have worked it out properly? So it must be a pretty nice binocular in any case.

Of course the EDG is a good binocular. It was even when Dennis didn't like it.

Your questions are dealing with optics, whereas Dennis is dealing with biased, subjective impressions, as, truthfully, most of us are. He read a review years ago on another website about the 'dark' EDG, and spent several years parroting those assertions on this forum, if only to needle and ridicule owners of said product. However that 'other' website has since re-canted those earlier observations, and now Dennis has to reconcile his former opinions with a new reality: Perhaps the EDG isn't 'dark' after all. Perhaps it never was!

Dennis now refers people to reviews that praise and rank his current purchases highly.

 

[[email protected]]

I'm confused reading this. Shouldn't the 7x be the brightest and the most wide angle of the family? And if Nikon does some alpha series I'd trust them that they would have worked it out properly? So it must be a pretty nice binocular in any case.

The EDG 7x42 is an excellent binocular but it is my personal least favorite of the EDG series. Don't confuse wide angle with AFOV. AFOV is the magnification multiplied by the actual FOV in degree's in simplest terms. The EDG has the smallest AFOV of the EDG series. The AFOV has a lot to do what gives a binocular the WOW factor when you look through it. Most would think the EDG 7x42 would be brighter than the EDG 10x42 in low light because it has a bigger exit pupil but seeing in low light is aided by magnification also. You can actually see more detail in low light with a 10x42 than you can with a 7x42 because of the Twilight Factor. The Twilight Factor is the square root of the product of the diameter of the objective lens and the magnifying power of the binocular. The higher the better and the more detail you will see in low light. The new Zeiss SF 8x32 will have a huge AFOV so it should be a real WOW binocular coupled with Zeiss's trademark high transmission it should be impressive.

 

[Conndomat]

Hi,

Yes, again and again this Twilight Factor...

I compared the EDG 7x42 with several glasses, a 10x42 couldn't get to the Nikon 7x42 at dusk!
the Zeiss 8x42 is also a bit darker, although it has a bit more transmission!

An AP. of 6mm. should be an AP. of 4.2mm. are almost always superior, even with significantly poorer transmission.
Your twillight factor doesn't help either.

Andreas

P.S." The AFOV has a lot to do what gives a binocular the WOW factor when you look through it."

Then where is the wow factor in the hawks???

 

[[email protected]]

Hi,

Yes, again and again this Twilight Factor...

I compared the EDG 7x42 with several glasses, a 10x42 couldn't get to the Nikon 7x42 at dusk!
the Zeiss 8x42 is also a bit darker, although it has a bit more transmission!

An AP. of 6mm. should be an AP. of 4.2mm. are almost always superior, even with significantly poorer transmission.
Your twillight factor doesn't help either.

Andreas

P.S." The AFOV has a lot to do what gives a binocular the WOW factor when you look through it."

Then where is the wow factor in the hawks???

Nope! Remember, Twilight Factor is not a measure of brightness. You will see more detail in low light with the EDG 10x42 than you will with the EDG 7x42.

 

[Conndomat]

Would you then consider why an 8x56 is the classic hunting glass?
With the glass you can still see it is long dark in 10x42!
Have you ever had your eyes checked for pupil size when they are no longer over 4mm. opens that would explain why you prefer the 10x42 format.
Ultimately, when the light is off, your twilight factor is of no use to you.

Andreas

 

[[email protected]]

Actually you would see more detail with a 10x56 than you would an 8x56 especially if you are older and your pupils are only opening up to 5mm or so because the 10x56 has a Twilight Factor of 24 and the 8x56 is 21. The magnification helps in low light when trying to discern detail.

 

[Conndomat]

especially if you are older and your pupils are only opening up to 5mm or so

I never contradicted this point !!!

If your pupils are still up to about 7 mm. open, the 8x56 will be superior!
Therefore, the Nikon EDG 7x42 is ultimately superior to the Zeiss SF 8x42 from a certain point in the dark, in the daytime the SF is superior because of the slightly higher transmission.
The differences in the dark are very small, but noticeable.

Andreas

 

[[email protected]]

I never contradicted this point !!!

If your pupils are still up to about 7 mm. open, the 8x56 will be superior!
Therefore, the Nikon EDG 7x42 is ultimately superior to the Zeiss SF 8x42 from a certain point in the dark, in the daytime the SF is superior because of the slightly higher transmission.
The differences in the dark are very small, but noticeable.

Andreas

No. Even if your pupils open up to 7mm the 10x56 will show more detail than the 8x56 and the 8x42 will show more detail then the 7x42 in low light. The 7x42 and the 8x56 may appear brighter but you will see more detail with the higher magnification binoculars. In low light look at a brick wall or something with detail with a 7x42 and then an 8x42 . You will be able to see much more detail with the 8x42. That is the reason hunter's like a 10x42 over an 8x42. They can identify a trophy easier with the 10x42 in low light.