• 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.

Opinion on Zeiss Victory FL. (1 Viewer)

Actually, the FL models have a very flat field. Unfortunately, they also have off-axis astigmatism.

--AP

"The curved field has the advantage of very comfortable panning. That and the wide and deep view encourage you to keep these held up to your eyes longer than any binoculars I know."

http://scopeviews.co.uk/Zeiss7x42FL.htm

PeterPS said:
They definitely do, at least the 32mm models, which begs the question: do they have field flatteners, if not how do they achieve that?

"Flat field?

Like most Zeiss binoculars (the new SFs excepted), the field drops off at the edge more than in binos with field flatteners. The field is so wide that this isn’t a huge problem during the day and it does make for more comfortable panning."

http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/Zeiss8x32FL.htm
 
Last edited:
They definitely do, at least the 32mm models, which begs the question: do they have field flatteners, if not how do they achieve that?

No field flatteners in FLs (see cutaways below, 32mm on left, 42 on right).

Lee
 

Attachments

  • FL10x32.jpg
    FL10x32.jpg
    43.6 KB · Views: 188
  • FL10x42.jpg
    FL10x42.jpg
    78.2 KB · Views: 175
In the strictest meaning of the term, Alexis is right that the FLs have very little field curvature, but that doesn't make them sharp at the edge. It just means that the least astigmatic point of focus at the edge is close to the center field's point of focus.

Here's a link to some drawings that illustrate the various possible interactions between off-axis astigmatism and field curvature. The FLs and the HTs both conform to condition "b".

https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=1879542&postcount=5

I should add that field curvature has nothing to do with curved lines or "rolling ball". Curved lines near the edge are caused by rectilinear distortion and can be perfectly sharp. Field curvature causes defocus at the edge, but lines can be perfectly straight. Also, spherical aberration has nothing to do with curved lines or sharpness at the field edge. SA reduces sharpness in all parts of the field equally when rays from the outer part of the objective lens (not the FOV) fail to come to focus at the same point as rays from the inner part of the objective lens.
 
Last edited:
Henry, I'm not doubting you for one second, and I truly appreciate your ability to explain such matters (the diagrams were ever so helpful), but I have to ask, how do you know this stuff?
 
Last edited:
There are pros here who know much more than I do and there are books and some excellent optics sites on the internet. I just have the obsession of the avid hobbyist and a peculiar interest in constructing observational experiments.
 
Last edited:
It just means that the least astigmatic point of focus at the edge is close to the center field's point of focus.

I agree, it must be condition b in Henry's drawings; and if you are "lucky" the astigmatism of your eyes might compensate for the FL's astigmatism near the edge and then you see a nearly perfect flat field, which seems to be my case---Henry would you agree that's possible?
 
I agree, it must be condition b in Henry's drawings; and if you are "lucky" the astigmatism of your eyes might compensate for the FL's astigmatism near the edge and then you see a nearly perfect flat field, which seems to be my case---Henry would you agree that's possible?

Well, it doesn't quite work like that. The off-axis astigmatism in the binocular changes its "axis" around the edge like the hands on a clock face. If your eyesight astigmatism happened to be the right amount and have the right axis to cancel the binocular astigmatism at 3:00 and 9:00 then it would double the binocular astigmatism at 12:00 and 6:00.

If the binocular is defective with an on-axis astigmatism you could get lucky and have your eyesight astigmatism cancel it or you could get unlucky and have your eyesight astigmatism reinforce it.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Henry for the valuable information, I am really enjoying the 8X42 T FL glass, it is a bright one, and the only 8X42 I own with AK prisms vs the rest which have SP prisms. By the by, I had a chance at a 8X56 T FL but the seller removed them, perhaps he had a realization on how rare they are.

A.W.
 
In my book, the FL doesn't earn high points for colour reproduction. While it is virtually CA free, very bright and has a very good whiteness rendering, I have seen it erase weak hues of pink and peach, effectively whitewashing them. I also thought that brown birds like female Mallards looked dull and lifeless.
Still it was no easy decision to sell my 10x32, it certainly had unique qualities.
//L
I copy from a post I made a month ago (link here) in another thread in this sub-forum.

Looksharp65, now you have ruined my contentment!

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 Zeiss quietly excels in every way.
...
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.

PS. Now I am not sure even if it was "very subtle/delicate"!
 
Last edited:
My 8x42 Terra definitely shows pink / orange / buff etc. hues more strongly than my HT or an FL. That said, those hues depicted by the Terra definitely are less accurate than hues depicted by the HT / FL.
 
My 8x42 Terra definitely shows pink / orange / buff etc. hues more strongly than my HT or an FL. That said, those hues depicted by the Terra definitely are less accurate than hues depicted by the HT / FL.

James:

That is interesting, how does one go about comparing and testing
for color accuracy ?

I am just wondering, as I do not judge to that extent, as it is not important
to me. I have different abilities in color in each of my eyes. So, I suppose I
just average it all out. ;)

I do want to leave one thought on the Zeiss FL, they are a very good binocular
and they rank among the best of what is available on the market today.

Jerry
 
I copy from a post I made a month ago (link here) in another thread in this sub-forum.

Looksharp65, now you have ruined my contentment!



PS. Now I am not sure even if it was "very subtle/delicate"!

adhoc, so sorry to have ruined your Zeiss experience. However, my opinion regarding the colour is far from new. I recall posting a thread with photoshopped images to show how I perceived the difference between the FL and the Nikon HG 10x32.
Now, you could always escape to building expertise in the gulls and terns division, or simply try to tell yourself that what you cannot see, isn't there :-O

//L

In all honesty, the brightness of the FL means that there are other things seen through it that other binoculars possibly would not deliver.
You just can't have it all, and the flavour wasn't quite to my liking.

Edit: Found the thread
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2473447&postcount=12
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2473449&postcount=13
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2473452&postcount=14
 
Last edited:
Looksharp:

Which one is the Zeiss ?

Jerry

Sorry, I thought it was obvious, but then I realised I hadn't posted the context and that I posted the same set of pictures three times.
It's fixed and the FL is the left one. Remember this is my interpretation of what I see, and probably one much exaggerated. It's not actual photos through the binoculars.

//L

Edit: This is the thread: https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=2473447#post2473447
 
Last edited:
Thank you Looksharp65.

Isn't there a Catch 22 here: for "building expertise in the gulls and terns division" you have to first see them correctly!

But here your efforts to console receive due appreciation from me: "...the brightness of the FL means that there are other things seen through it that other binoculars possibly would not deliver.//You just can't have it all..." After "brightness" I would add: and other optical qualities (which I cannot identify however).

At last, it seems, I have the best instrument for my purposes which matches my preferences best.

Now that I have learnt of its one(?) deficiency, I will see whether/how I can adjust for that "on the fly".

The images created by you should be useful to many. I had already thought of trying the Nikon Premier/HG 8x20 to see if it is better ("pinker" and all) for me than the Zeiss 8x25, and that I would wait a few months to see if they replace that model or improve it further. Also I might see if Leica are going to replace the current Ultravid 8x20: I do not very much like the color rendition and contrived "calmness" in their images at present, and I hope that will be changed.
 
Last edited:
Fl

adhoc, so sorry to have ruined your Zeiss experience. However, my opinion regarding the colour is far from new. I recall posting a thread with photoshopped images to show how I perceived the difference between the FL and the Nikon HG 10x32.
Now, you could always escape to building expertise in the gulls and terns division, or simply try to tell yourself that what you cannot see, isn't there :-O

//L

In all honesty, the brightness of the FL means that there are other things seen through it that other binoculars possibly would not deliver.
You just can't have it all, and the flavour wasn't quite to my liking.

Edit: Found the thread
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2473447&postcount=12
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2473449&postcount=13
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2473452&postcount=14

Lars,

Great pics, I find the pics very similar to how I view through the 8X42 but not through the 8X32 FL, true to life.

A.W.
 
Thank you Looksharp65.

Isn't there a Catch 22 here: for "building expertise in the gulls and terns division" you have to first see them correctly!

But here your efforts to console receive due appreciation from me: "...the brightness of the FL means that there are other things seen through it that other binoculars possibly would not deliver.//You just can't have it all..." After "brightness" I would add: and other optical qualities (which I cannot identify however).

At last, it seems, I have the best instrument for my purposes which matches my preferences best.

Now that I have learnt of its one(?) deficiency, I will see whether/how I can adjust for that "on the fly".

The images created by you should be useful to many. I had already thought of trying the Nikon Premier/HG 8x20 to see if it is better ("pinker" and all) for me than the Zeiss 8x25, and that I would wait a few months to see if they replace that model or improve it further. Also I might see if Leica are going to replace the current Ultravid 8x20: I do not very much like the color rendition and contrived "calmness" in their images at present, and I hope that will be changed.

Thanks! Let us know what you decide upon! :t:

Lars,

Great pics, I find the pics very similar to how I view through the 8X42 but not through the 8X32 FL, true to life.

A.W.

Thanks! Interesting, are you saying that the 8x32 FL has a better colour reproduction than the 8x42 FL?

//L
 
Not necessarily color, but the whiteness over the image (like your pics) is noticeable in the 8X42, the 8X32 I do not see it and I believe is a better glass. Now this is a 8X42 I procured on the bay, so sample variation is also a possibility. By the way I have the HG/LX original Venturers in 8 & 10X32 which I still view with and they give me a different, more prevalent red/brown tones, so when comparing the two the whiteness is more noticeable.

A.W.
 
Is here a difference between the 8X42 and 10X42 model ? beyond the 2X+ and the difference in the exit pupil ?
Wachi.

I would take a look at the Allbinos site, and look at the rankings and reviews and how they rate them.

I don't think you could go wrong with either one, both are very good binoculars.

The Victory FL models excel at controlling chromatic aberration, and they
are also some of the brightest out there.

Jerry
 
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