• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

$1K binoculars experiences - Conquest HD, Monarch HG, Tract Toric, GPO Passion HD, Trinovid HD (1 Viewer)

Could indeed be a Conquest in a better body. One of the owners and head of the US division was a top exec for Zeiss before founding GPO. I’m sure he’s using the same manufacturer and making them a little nicer.
 
Upland said:
Could indeed be a Conquest in a better body. One of the owners and head of the US division was a top exec for Zeiss before founding GPO. I’m sure he’s using the same manufacturer and making them a little nicer.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing at first, but there are two indicators that might dispel that hypothesis. One, when I was looking to replace my conquest 10x42 because I didn’t like the eyecups and not necessarily being a brand loyalist, it was more about the optics than the name. I had both binoculars for two weeks, every day side-by-side and although they were very close optically, I felt that the GPO seemed a little warmer and little easier on the eye. I wouldn’t bet the farm on it but I did have the opportunity to compare to someone else’s conquest 1042, so I don’t think it was variation.

Secondly, supposedly conquest is made in Germany and GPO HD is made in Japan.

To me these GPO’s are thousand dollar optics in a $2000 body.

Paul
 
A2GG said:
Here's a long thread from last year about this topic.
www.birdforum.net

Where are made the Conquest HD

Hello, Do you know where are made the Conquest HD? Just curious... Thanks PHA
www.birdforum.net www.birdforum.net
Click to expand...
I actually enjoyed reading that annoying thread. Nothing substantially proves anything in that thread, mostly all here say. If you read some of the attachments from Zeiss, the conclusion I take away is MIG. I specifically asked three representatives over the last year, everyone indicated MIG.

I really don’t wanna get caught up in this thread again , even though it’s so captivating😏. Where do they get the raw materials, where are they making , grinding and polishing the glass, coatings, where is it being assembled and so on and so on. If we get that deep into it, nothing is made anywhere specifically. If the raw materials are coming from china and Zeiss is making all the parts and it’s being assembled in Japan and Zeiss says it’s made in Germany, that’s good enough for me. 😉
 
Paultricounty said:
interesting takes on the GPO. I can’t say I have any opinion on the 8 x 42 GPO, but I have a good deal of experience between the MHG 8x42, 10x42 and the GPO 10x42. My opinion on the GPO is that its a conquest in an Alpha body. The image, color rendition, sharpness and fast focus is very much like the Zeiss conquest, (not surprise there considering the owners of GPO). Build quality is superior than the MHG and the eyecups while some complain there a little hard, others a have no issues. The eyecups are probably the best in the business as far as quality of the mechanism, solid detents, smooth operation, feels expensive.

In the 10’s it’s brighter and sharper than the MHG, but I can see how some might like the Nikon better for its warmer image quality, just like some like it better than the conquest. CA is about the same in both , give or take. These $1000 bins are all in about the same category optically some better at one thing and others do something else better. Build quality on the GPO are a step up from that price point.
Click to expand...
GPO with an Alpha body ? But not an Alpha ingineering... (i.e. photo)
I don't find the GPO warmer and sharper than Nikon MHG (in the 10x). Edge to edge, the MHG are, in my impression, sharper.
 

Attachments

  • 5.1.jpg
    5.1.jpg
    3.5 MB · Views: 88
  • 5.3.jpg
    5.3.jpg
    5.2 MB · Views: 85
DadraFromFrance said:
GPO with an Alpha body ? But not an Alpha ingineering... (i.e. photo)
I don't find the GPO warmer and sharper than Nikon MHG (in the 10x). Edge to edge, the MHG are, in my impression, sharper.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what your showing us the in the circles. My reference to warmer was between the GPO in comparison to the Zeiss conquest , which are very similar. If one likes Conquest there going to like GPO.

The MHG are definitely warmer (Nikon warm) than than GPO, thus part of the reason I believe is why the GPO is a little sharper than MHG, at least in my two copies with multiple users on different days.

Again I’m not knocking the MHG at all, I love the 842 I have. I got rid of my 1042 MHG and conquest for the GPO. You mentioned engineering , to me that’s part of build quality , ergonomics can be another story. Like issues with every binocular, some have said they don’t like the reach for the focuser on GPO, I have no problem, I just adjust my hold. Just the fit and finish of how the rubber is inlaid into magnesium body as opposed to the kind of fake leather of the MHG, to me it’s nice but doesn’t feel high end. The Diopter is in the right alpha position. Theres also more plastic on MHG. I usually, not all the time, like to base my opinions after having multiple users play with the optics. It’s my kind of way to make sure I’m not being bias on something that I might like or dislike. That’s the way I roll.

Paul
 
Paultricounty said:
I actually enjoyed reading that annoying thread. Nothing substantially proves anything in that thread, mostly all here say. If you read some of the attachments from Zeiss, the conclusion I take away is MIG. I specifically asked three representatives over the last year, everyone indicated MIG.

I really don’t wanna get caught up in this thread again , even though it’s so captivating😏. Where do they get the raw materials, where are they making , grinding and polishing the glass, coatings, where is it being assembled and so on and so on. If we get that deep into it, nothing is made anywhere specifically. If the raw materials are coming from china and Zeiss is making all the parts and it’s being assembled in Japan and Zeiss says it’s made in Germany, that’s good enough for me. 😉
Click to expand...

It is irrelevant what you believe. What matters is the truth. At least you're open minded about the possibility.
 
Ted Y. said:
On pictures of Zeiss Conquest 8x32 one can see "Made in Germany".
I asked a known vendor and: "ZEISS 8x32 Conquest HD Binoculars are made in Germany."
Click to expand...
I know, I’ve read a lot of them. Are we (me) supposed to ignore MIG label on the bins and confirmed by three different representatives at Zeiss (in US, if that matters) over a period of a year or so? It seems like should dismiss that because a few people on BF say otherwise. I’m not from Missouri, but show me.

Oh btw, I don’t need pictures to show me MIG on the bins, I’ve had three of these in my hands in the last 6-8 months, they all say MIG.
 
Paultricounty said:
I know, I’ve read a lot of them. Are we (me) supposed to ignore MIG label on the bins and confirmed by three different representatives at Zeiss (in US, if that matters) over a period of a year or so? It seems like should dismiss that because a few people on BF say otherwise. I’m not from Missouri, but show me.

Oh btw, I don’t need pictures to show me MIG on the bins, I’ve had three of these in my hands in the last 6-8 months, they all say MIG.
Click to expand...

MIG ?
A russian MIG ? 😈 (Im out)

5c00327b8eb7e800bf0c24d3
 
pbjosh said:
I agree experiences are personal. I used a Conquest HD from roughly 2013-2019 as my primary bin for 1000+ days of birding and working in the tropics. I abused it heavily and it was really robust and reliable. I have used the Monarch HG quite a bit in 42mm and own it in 30mm. I agree the Conquest is superior in CA control, and that it is perhaps a touch sharper in the center. However, unless the Conquest has changed (could well have quietly gotten updated coatings in the last 10 years), I found the contrast and colors more pleasing in the MHG, as well as the light weight, FOV, and ergonomics.

In the end, both are great bins. I prefer either to the Trinovid by a fair margin. I've not seen the GPO or the Tract, but have seen the Opticron BGA VHD which several people have postulated to be a sister binocular to the Tract. I thought it was excellent for the price, if not quite at the level of the Conquest or Monarch HG.
Click to expand...
yep, the Opticron DBA VHD+ is excellent for $700USD, I find it ever so slightly behind my MHG, inferior only in FOV. My conquest bests my MHG, but only by a little.
 
DrewskiMT said:
yep, the Opticron DBA VHD+ is excellent for $700USD, I find it ever so slightly behind my MHG, inferior only in FOV. My conquest bests my MHG, but only by a little.
Click to expand...

My ownership and usage is all 8x. Things could be different among these bins in 10x. Also, I found the MHG 8x30 to be stellar.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 2 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

C
which 10x42 : Nikon HG / GPO Passion HD / Maven B1.2 / Vortex Razor HD ?
2 3
Replies
43
Views
4K
Ratal
Ratal
D
Is Nikon Monarch HG 10x42 the best choise for me?
2
Replies
21
Views
4K
Paultricounty
P
N
Zeiss CHD 8x32 vs Nikon MHG 8x42
Replies
17
Views
2K
Andy Gan
A
A
How many lens elements do sub-alphas bins have? less than alphas?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Maljunulo
M
R
Looking to decide on a new binocular
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
tenex
tenex

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top