• 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.

Victory pocket models updated! (3 Viewers)

Continuation of post #58.
In summary: Excellent 8x25 for bird and nature watching.
Image in low light: Very good, as expected in a better model line of Zeiss.
Eye relief: This was not mentioned as what it means in use is seen under "Ease of view", and I do not quite know how to analyze it further.
Personally: This is to be carried in a front pocket of regular pants, as I do with pocket binoculars. It is just a little bit too heavy for this but I compromise for its optical quality. But the way its sits there and its outline are a bit awkward. This is solved by opening it out, when the outline is of a flat box. But then it has to be folded back in at every use. I will be trying this, but am not too hopeful. I may have to go for the little Leica Ultravid 8x20, which I was about to when this model appeared. For a wider and/or brighter view I will then use a 42.
 
We took a Victory 8x25 out to a local lake this afternoon for a more realistic test. Ring-necked ducks, the occasional mallard, and Canada geese. Beautiful easy views, no problems from bright sun reflecting on the water. Surprisingly pleasant to use, considering the tiny size.

It's silly not to provide a compact bag/pouch to hold the bino folded up, given that's the point of the asymmetric hinge (the supplied case holds it open flat). But I have a neoprene thing that fit pretty well, and it carries easily in a jacket pocket or on the belt. A bit much for shirt or pants pocket, I agree.
 
Veiling glare: More than in the pocket Leica Ultravids, where it is very slight.

I don't know about veiling glare, but I can definitely see more lens flare in the Ultravids.

Sharpness: Very good.

Yes, to about 60% of the edge. This is mostly due to field curvature.

- Vs Ultravid pockets. No direct comparison with the Uv. 8x20 was done, but on comparing with the Uv. 10x25 I feel that the Zeiss will be seen by me to be not quite equal in making out detail when that is done, due to Leica's contrast.

I tried reading book spines from about 4m away, close to minimum focus, at night, and find them easier to read with the Zeiss even though I am finding the Leicas easier to hand-hold. This may be due to the brighter aperture. I also suspect the Zeiss has slightly higher magnification that the nominal 8x.

Sweet spot: Image is sharp nearly to the edge.

Not really, there is significant field curvature and limited DOF at close focus.

Color rendering: A little "cool".

I am not seeing any significant difference.

Chromatic aberration. I am sensitive to color fringing in that it can be "provoked" easily and here that occurs less than 1/2 way from the center of view. In actual use it was never obtrusive or even noticeable.

I'm not noticing any on either binoculars

Ease of view (quick relaxed observation on putting up to the eyes): Very good. better than the Uv. 10x25 (with smaller exit pupil).

Definitely advantage to the Zeiss, much less finicky about eye placement than the Ultravids. I am not that fond of the single asymmetric hinge, it is quite bulky. however.

Field of view: The FOV of the Hawke, stated to be 6.8 deg., feels only a little less wide than of the Zeiss, stated to be 7.4 deg., so this to me is not striking.

I tried binoscoping with my Sony RX100IV at the widest focal length, pressed directly against the collapsed eye cups. There is a significant difference between the Zeiss (first) and the Leica (second).

Ergonomics: For my medium/small hands and the way I hold the body, with left index finger on focus knob, grip and balance of body, and focusing action, are very good.

I actually found the Leica easier to hand-hold, and the focusing knob is better, if a little stiffer. I have relatively small hands, though, some with larger hands may find the Leica too small to hold comfortably.

Barrels are thicker than of the 25mm pocket Uv. The strap lugs are located such that when the body is folded for ~60mm inter-pupil distance and placed flat on a plane surface it rests on these. This Zeiss can go into a front pocket of regular pants (mine anyway, fairly standard I think!) with that IPD held but the outline is more visible than of the Uv. 10x25, due to the bulkier barrels and the hinges lying less flat.

The Zeiss won't fit comfortably in my dress slacks, whereas the Leica will. The hinge is quite bulky and because it is not parallel to the barrels' plane it's harder to find cases that fit it properly. The Leica hard leather case for the Ultravid is outstanding, the Zeiss cordura one not so.

I don't really consider the Zeiss to be pocket binoculars, jacket pocket at best.

Finish: Not traditional Zeiss! On inspection, flawed, and armor seems flimsy. But in use the instrument feels robust enough.

I didn't find any flaws. My Ultravids are leather-armored, so they are not directly comparable. The leather definitely feels nicer to the touch than rubber. The Zeiss strap is comfortable but too bulky, I replaced it with the hollow-shoelace-style strap with quick-detach from my old Trinovid 8x20 BC, which is superior to either the Zeiss or Ultravid's. The strap eyelets on the Zeiss are very tight, tighter than on the Ultravids, which limits the aftermarket options (I had to use a paper clip to thread the Trinovid strap cords into the eyelets).

Continuation of post #58.
In summary: Excellent 8x25 for bird and nature watching.
Image in low light: Very good, as expected in a better model line of Zeiss.
Eye relief: This was not mentioned as what it means in use is seen under "Ease of view", and I do not quite know how to analyze it further.

Not sure how I can separate the exit pupil's effect from eye relief, but as an eyeglasses wearer, the Zeiss is definitely easier to use.

Personally: This is to be carried in a front pocket of regular pants, as I do with pocket binoculars. It is just a little bit too heavy for this but I compromise for its optical quality. But the way its sits there and its outline are a bit awkward. This is solved by opening it out, when the outline is of a flat box. But then it has to be folded back in at every use. I will be trying this, but am not too hopeful. I may have to go for the little Leica Ultravid 8x20, which I was about to when this model appeared. For a wider and/or brighter view I will then use a 42.

Once again I don't think they are in the same class. The Ultravids are pocketable, the Zeiss are not. I carry mine in a backpack (my EDC is a Monovid in my jacket pocket, or a Nikon 5x15 HG monocular). The Zeiss compares well with my Ultravid 8x32 HD. Not as bright, certainly, but much smaller for the same image in any but very dim light. The new Swarovski 8x30 CL is a contender as well, but I haven't tried it.
 

Attachments

  • DSC00249.jpg
    DSC00249.jpg
    891.8 KB · Views: 310
  • DSC00250.jpg
    DSC00250.jpg
    807.4 KB · Views: 286
Last edited:
I PMd Fazalmajid for his assessment on some aspects of this Zeiss 8x25 vs the Leica Uv. 8x20, beyond the information already there in his posts in this thread and in the User Reviews section of a retailer's website, which I found very useful. I suggested that he reply either here or back by PM. Thank you Fazalmajid for the lengthy and patient response.

We diverge mostly on two aspects. Comparing for glare, under which I would include flare, was done side by side by me only with the Uv. 10x25. With the Uv. 8x20 it was memory, a bad practice I know, and assumption.

On the sharpness of the image across the field I am at fault again I am sure. My assessment was mostly on comparison with the Hawke Sapphire 8x25, which also has a wide (thought less) field of view, and the image in the Zeiss, unlike in that much smaller instrument, is easily and usefully viewable nearly to the edges in most bird watching situations. This will needs be tested better when I take part in a waterbird survey in 2-3 months (when also the "pincushioning" should be useful for easier panning).

I still incline to the Uv. 8x20! But I wonder and will wait to see whether Leica will soon improve the two (8x and 10x) pocket Uvs, just to compete with the two new Zeisses. That should be possible if at all only with new glass and coatings, in line with the bigger Ultravids, which have gone from "Uv." to "Uv. HD" to "Uv. HD Plus" while the pockets have remained, in name at least, just "Uv."
 
Last edited:
Take my observations with a grain of salt. Indoors at night is very different from normal birdwatching conditions, as is close focus vs. normal range (unless you are mostly into hummingbirds as I am).

FWIW, the Swarovski 60510 field case for pocket binoculars fits the Victory Pocket 8x25, if a bit snugly, and it's half the size of the Zeiss case.
 
Curious to know how the Zeiss 8x25 compares with the Swaro CL 8x25.

I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.

I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other and although it is easy to fix, I have to send it to Swarovski for a fix.

Already had to do that twice because I find it extremely annoying having one hinge looser than the other.

That's why I'm keen to replace it with a single hinge compact.
 
Curious to know how the Zeiss 8x25 compares with the Swaro CL 8x25.

I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.

I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other and although it is easy to fix, I have to send it to Swarovski for a fix.

Already had to do that twice because I find it extremely annoying having one hinge looser than the other.

That's why I'm keen to replace it with a single hinge compact.

I had a Leica double hinge pocket bino for years and never managed to find a way to use it comfortably. Just the effort of moving the focus wheel meant I changed the IPD as I was looking throught them. AAAAGGGGHH. Swapping to a Victory Compact with the offeset single hinge was a terrific change for the better.

Lee
 
Last week I had the occasion to test the new Zeiss victory 8x25 as well during a rainy afternoon
To be honest , the view is very sharp,and contrasty;
On the other hand , wonen switching to the new swaro CL 8x 30 I suddenly realiseerde how much more eye comfort the bigger diameter gives you!
Smaller bins with diameter < 30 are ok for an easy carry solution but certainly not as a birding glass
 
Last week I had the occasion to test the new Zeiss victory 8x25 as well during a rainy afternoon
To be honest , the view is very sharp,and contrasty;
On the other hand , wonen switching to the new swaro CL 8x 30 I suddenly realiseerde how much more eye comfort the bigger diameter gives you!
Smaller bins with diameter < 30 are ok for an easy carry solution but certainly not as a birding glass

Yes, absolutely. My Victory Compacts are never taken out for serious nature observation, but it is nice to have binos on my work station at home or in the car driving through the country.

Lee
 
I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.
I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other...

I thought about the Swarovski 8x25 a number of times, but never got one as I find double hinges too fiddly. I instantly liked the Zeiss design, and expect you would too. Very comfortable to use, and still folds reasonably compactly. Half the weight of my usual 32mm bino, and less obvious when that matters. The focus wheel is rather slow, but there may be a mechanical reason for that.

Examine yours carefully, as QC may not be what one would expect from Zeiss. The one I received had obvious blemishes in the coating on one ocular, and I had to exchange it.
 
Curious to know how the Zeiss 8x25 compares with the Swaro CL 8x25.

I own the latter and although 100% happy with the optics, I'm terribly disappointed with the built quality.

I hate the double hinge design and on the slightest knock you end up with one barrel looser than the other and although it is easy to fix, I have to send it to Swarovski for a fix.

Already had to do that twice because I find it extremely annoying having one hinge looser than the other.

That's why I'm keen to replace it with a single hinge compact.


Hi Numbatino,

Welcome to Bird Forum!:hi:

Did you try holding your Swarovski 8x25CL Pocket with the looser hinge completely extended while adjusting the tighter hinge to get your correct inter pupillary distance?

Brace it in the crook at the base of your thumb and forefinger so it won't move. Holding it in that manner makes it work like the single offset hinge on the Zeiss.

Bob

PS: That is how I hold mine. You only have to fool around with one hinge. And they still fold up very compactly unlike the Zeiss.
 
Last edited:
I just took a look to the new victory 10x25 and i went to the store with my Leica Ultravid 10x25 and swarovski 8X25.

The zeiss has a very easy view compared with the Leica almost similar than the SV 8X25.

The contrast is a little bit lower than in the leicas but is brighter not by much but easy to notice.

Equally sharper, but the Leicas and swaros have bigger sweet spot.

The swarovski is the most transparent cristal clear of them, with better color separation and the Leica comes second.

Once again i see the green cast on the Zeiss not very pronounced as the first units of SF but still, personally i don't like it but in some placed with a lot of green and trees maybe the view looks better, here in Spain with mostly brown landscape everywhere the view thru Zeiss looks muted and ugly during the cloudy days.

Is a good binocular but not great, a evolution from previous model but not raise the bar to a new level on the compact sector.

Good day !!!!
 
I agree the Zeiss image seems a bit less vivid. (Is some of that "lower contrast" the familiar impression due to greater brightness?) The wider field of view strikes me as its really outstanding feature. But no, you just don't get perfection at this price point. Or good quality control, apparently. My enthusiasm is abating.
 
This is the result of a personal preference (quirk maybe) but set down FWIW. I like my main binocular to be very small, to carry unnoticed in a pants pocket, and light.

The Victory Pocket 8x25 is now the only binocular I use, and will probably remain so except for one more in 15x or 12x for higher x and for dim light. The text below I posted a year back (in another thread) and my needs remain the same.

"I have now had binoculars in 6,7,8,10,12,16x and 24,25,30,32,40,42,43,50,56,70 mm, which I have given away or sold. But for years my only optics for bird watching, conservation and ornithology, day and night, in varied habitats, was a small 8x25 Nikon. It was very rarely felt to be inadequate."

That period ended 7-8 years ago. Then I discovered fine optics! BirdForum was one source. Today that Nikon is not quite good enough for me. But it seems that I have found the replacement.

The Zeiss quietly excels in every way. The veiling glare I write of above is only noticed in a "side by side" comparison vs "alpha"-class optics with bigger objective lenses.

On just one occasion it seemed to perform a bit short. I viewed a Slender-billed Gull through it in bright sunlight and the bird's very subtle/delicate pink hue was only just conveyed. "Side by side" a Barr-&-Stroud Savannah ED 10x56 and an Eagle Optics 10x42 (with companions) showed this more strongly. Which color rendering is more true is yet uncertain. I could not see this color with the unaided eye at that range.
 
.....
.....
.....

The Zeiss quietly excels in every way. .....
.....
.....

I pretty much feel the same way about my Victory 8x25 (and I know that not everybody will agree).

I cannot say it is for me the best pocket binocular available, since I do not know every current model on the market, but I do own a few myself, and over time, I have compared the Victory side by side to the following pocket binos

- Leica Trinovid 8x20 BCA
- Leica Ultravid 8x20 BR
- Swarovski Habicht 8x20 Pocket
- Zeiss Victory 8x20
- Kowa Genesis 8x22 Prominar
- Zeiss Terra ED 8x25
- Swarovski CL Pocket 8x25
- Nikon Sportstar 8x25
- Meopta MeoSport 8x25
- Kowa BD 8x25

and like the Victory 8x25 more than any of them. I admit that a big positive factor for me, beside the optics, is the easy handling of the Victory with the single hinge.

Again, this is a personal opinion, no more.

Canip
 
I recently compared the Zeiss Victory Pocket 8x25 to the Swarovski 8x25 CL-P. I kept the Swarovski. IMO the Swarovski was quite a bit higher in quality than the Zeiss. The Zeiss really don't look like an $800.00 binocular. I thought the Swarovski was more comfortable with the double hinge design and I agree with Globetrotter in that optically the Swarovski was more transparent and had better contrast than the Zeiss. For me the eye cups were too short on the Zeiss also.
 
Last edited:
They claim fluorite lens elements, not coatings. That should make for less CA and sharper views. I haven’t tried the previous generation but they are outstanding for compact binos.

I reread the brochures, and what they actually claim is fluoride glass, not fluorite as in pure calcium fluorite crystals.
 
I reread the brochures, and what they actually claim is fluoride glass, not fluorite as in pure calcium fluorite crystals.

I don't think any brand has put fluorite crystal lenses in binos yet although Kowa has put bino-sized fluorite lens in their new travel scope TS550 series. I guess if anyone will do this it will be Kowa but there are no signs of this yet and maybe the lower magnifications of binos would not justify it.

Lee
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top