• 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.

Better than Zeiss Conquest HD? (1 Viewer)

PJPro said:
Looks like the DCF are discontinued.

If I have nervousness about Nikon, it's customer service.
Click to expand...

Nikon has had quite a mixed reputation for after sales and warranty issues in the UK, so when I checked out the Monarch HG a few months back I asked what the dealer thought of the current service. He said Nikon had some fairly rigid rules but he was quite happy with their support. On the other hand, he wouldn't touch a Leica.

I think you've probably realised now that the old Nikon HG was a high end alternative to the field flattened EDG, and totally different from the current Monarch HG.

David
 
One would think that Leica would have great service in Europe, but based on that dealer, seems not.

P.S. the Conquest is a nice name for a glass, but never did it for me.

A.W.
 
james holdsworth said:
At least in Canada, these would come in way over his price limit.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I over looked the budget part... BUT I did consider which binocular would be better than a Conquest HD with the least impact on the wallet. I came up SLC all day. The SLC is actually a bargain...it's an alpha in sheep's clothing.

PJPro said:
Swarovski SLC 8X42 = £1200 in UK
Click to expand...

The optics will be worth it my friend!

[email protected] said:
Old SLC or new HD SLC?
Click to expand...

Either....that old SLC HD is a good one! ;)
 
"The SLC is actually a bargain...it's an alpha in sheep's clothing."

I agree with that. Frankly, I don't understand the difference in price between the SLC's and the SV's. The SLC is a sleeper that will surprise you.
 
Last edited:
The Nikon HG 10x42 is the new Monarch or MHG everybody talks about and the Nikon HG 10x42 L DCF is the old Nikon HG L. The old model is actually ranked above the new one slightly. The old model had better build quality also if you can find one. Sometimes they are on Ebay for around $500 to $600. Not as big of FOV though as the new model if that's what gets you going.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-Prem...995836?hash=item3b0336d5fc:g:KJIAAOSwkV5aZCOJ
 
Last edited:
PJPro said:
What's the difference between the Nikon HG 8x42 and the Nikon HG 8x42 L DCF?
Click to expand...

There is a lot of confusion over Nikon's binocular designations.

There is no "Nikon HG 8x42." There is none to be found in the Allbinos listing of Nikon binoculars.

There is a Nikon Monarch HG 8x42. These Monarch HGs are the top of the line binoculars in Nikon's Monarch series.

HG is Nikon's abbreviation for "high grade" and is seen on the boxes that many Nikon binoculars come in. For instance, the box that my Nikon 8x32 LXL came in says HGL on it.

To confuse matters further the LXL designation was used only in North America and the HGL designation in Europe and the L in both of them means it is "light weight."

There was a Nikon HG 8x42 L DCF which is now discontinued. It was formerly Nikon's top of the line 8x42. it was replaced by the Nikon 8x42 EDG.

https://www.allbinos.com/91-Nikon_HG_8x42_L_DCF-binoculars_specifications.html

Bob
 
Last edited:
[email protected] said:
That is the old model SLC. The new SLC HD is an entirely different animal.
Click to expand...
I think the HD version has been discontinued and the newer version is the one with the suffix W B? The article I linked to shows an revision date of 18th Jan 2018.

http://www.optics4birding.com/swarovski-slc-hd-binoculars-review.aspx
The article above makes the following statement...

"The HD version of SLC binoculars have been discontinued. The new SLC binoculars have the same quality optics although the close focus is now 10.5ft. and they are slightly brighter. Find them here: new Swarovski SLC."

When you follow the link it takes you to the Swarovski SLC 8x42 W B Binoculars.

SOmewhat confused about which are the newer version. The HD or the WB? If it's the WB, then the Greatest Binocular review is for the current version.

I'm not sure why manufacturers don't approach these versions using a simple numbering system!
 
PJ,

I've looked at about 20 samples of the SLC, and would count about 14 or 15 as very good to excellent excellent and something like another 4 were good. All of those were better than the four samples of the Monarch HG I've tried for on-axis image quality. Unfortunatelys it's sadly true that pretty pretty all the models I've tried, there has been a rogue sample or two. Only you can decide if the difference in optical quality of the sample you choose to buy is worth the the asking price.

David
 
PJPro said:
I think the HD version has been discontinued and the newer version is the one with the suffix W B? The article I linked to shows an revision date of 18th Jan 2018.

http://www.optics4birding.com/swarovski-slc-hd-binoculars-review.aspx
The article above makes the following statement...

"The HD version of SLC binoculars have been discontinued. The new SLC binoculars have the same quality optics although the close focus is now 10.5ft. and they are slightly brighter. Find them here: new Swarovski SLC."

When you follow the link it takes you to the Swarovski SLC 8x42 W B Binoculars.

SOmewhat confused about which are the newer version. The HD or the WB? If it's the WB, then the Greatest Binocular review is for the current version.

I'm not sure why manufacturers don't approach these versions using a simple numbering system!
Click to expand...

This is the latest.

https://www.allbinos.com/303-binoculars_review-Swarovski_SLC_10x42_W_B.html

W = Wide angle (Apparent FOV > 60 degrees)
B = Twist up eyecups/usable with glasses ("Brillen" in german)
 
typo said:
PJ,

I've looked at about 20 samples of the SLC, and would count about 14 or 15 as very good to excellent excellent and something like another 4 were good. All of those were better than the four samples of the Monarch HG I've tried for on-axis image quality. Unfortunatelys it's sadly true that pretty pretty all the models I've tried, there has been a rogue sample or two. Only you can decide if the difference in optical quality of the sample you choose to buy is worth the the asking price.

David
Click to expand...

Wow! One would have hoped that QA on a top marque would have ensured better odds than that. Your numbers suggest 1 in 20 are less than good (5%) and 1 in 4 (25%) achieve good at best. Makes internet shopping decidedly risky! Are these probabilities applicable to all Swarovski binoculars or just the SLCs?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
PJPro said:
Wow! One would have hoped that QA on a top marque would have ensured better odds than that. Your numbers suggest 1 in 20 are less than good (5%) and 1 in 4 (25%) achieve good at best. Makes internet shopping decidedly risky!
Click to expand...

Since 2006 pretty much all those making fro £200 to £2000 models have relied on the same ISO standard for resolution which is evidently quite inadequate. I think awareness of the issue is growing, but in 2016 they actually relaxed the standard. There still a lot of samples out there that are not as good as the companies would like you to think. Only you can decide if they are good enough.

David
 
Last edited:
I believe that is the latest version but the author comments he thinks the sample was defective. "NOTE: Although this sample was from the Swarovski test pool - which mostly offers cherry picked glass as we would expect - I am a bit doubtful about this individual. Moreover, Kimmo Absetz remarked on birdforum that the 8x42 SLC is the glass with the least aberrations he knows..." I have had a lot of Swarovski binoculars and I have never had one defective optically. The big thing I notice about the 8x56 SLC is as Kimmo pointed out is the lack of aberrations especially on-axis. I have had several Conquest's HD and as Chuck said above the SLC is definitely better optically. The bigger 56mm Conquest HD is a very good binocular but Scopeviews preferred the SLC.


https://www.opticsreviewer.com/swarovski-slc-hd.html
http://scopeviews.co.uk/Swaro10x42SLCHD.htm
http://scopeviews.co.uk/Swaro10x56SLC.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1L1BJxMd68
 
Last edited:
PJPro said:
Thanks for the clarification.

Here's a comment from that review...

If the weight and dimensions aren’t your priority you might consider buying the cheaper Zeiss Conquest HD which additionally features a wider field of view.
Click to expand...

Some truth to that perhaps, 42mm SLC:s are a bit overpriced IMO.
But they are made in Austria and Swarovski also provides good service/support.

For the same price as an SLC you might find an Leica Ultravid HD (predecessor to the Plus model).
 
PJPro said:
Thanks for the clarification.

Here's a comment from that review...

If the weight and dimensions aren’t your priority you might consider buying the cheaper Zeiss Conquest HD which additionally features a wider field of view.
Click to expand...
The SLC is still ranked 5th place and the Conquest is 15th place. The Zeiss Conquest HD is a very good binocular even with the known eye cup issues but I preferred the view through the SLC.

https://www.allbinos.com/allbinos_ranking-binoculars_ranking-10x42.html
 
Last edited:
Vespobuteo said:
Some truth to that perhaps, 42mm SLC:s are a bit overpriced IMO.
But they are made in Austria and Swarovski also provides good service/support.

For the same price as an SLC you might find an Leica Ultravid HD (predecessor to the Plus model).
Click to expand...

I have not tried the SLC, but the Leica Ultravid HD is not any better
than the Conquest HD.

Jerry
 
NDhunter said:
I have not tried the SLC, but the Leica Ultravid HD is not any better
than the Conquest HD.

Jerry
Click to expand...

TS already owns smaller Leicas that he are happy with so something with the same color rendition (and make) might be suitable was my thought.

There are things to like and not like in both UVHD:s and Conquest HD:s.
What's better would be quite subjective.
 
Vespobuteo said:
TS already owns smaller Leicas that he are happy with so something with the same color rendition (and make) might be suitable was my thought.

There are things to like and not like in both UVHD:s and Conquest HD:s.
What's better would be quite subjective.
Click to expand...

Much of what is said on here, is very subjective. ;)

That is what makes the world go round.

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.

Similar threads

J
Which ~$1000 8x roof binoculars have the least chromatic aberration?
Replies
16
Views
1K
JayW
J
I
Analysis Paralysis- Please help me choose!
2 3
Replies
42
Views
2K
Patudo
P
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
H
8x32 NL Pures vs SF 8x32
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
Will K
Will K

Users who are viewing this thread

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