BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
The Nature Expo at the Tucson, AZ Audubon Society Bird and Wildlife Festival opened today and one of the vendors was Zeiss USA, represented by Rich M. and Steve Ingraham. It was the first time I met both of these gentleman and they were very easy to talk with and were patient with my many questions. I really enjoyed the time spent meeting with them.
My primary priority was to handle and look through the new Zeiss SF binocular. They had one 10X42 and two 8X42 units for demo. These were “pre-production” units and I believe the only SF models in the US.. They should be very close to what will be in general production. If there are any optical changes, they would be very minor (but most likely this is it). The operation of the eye cups may have some small changes from the models I used today.
Environment: The Expo is at a hotel near downtown Tucson with the vendors in a hotel conference room with no windows and not the best lighting. The hotel borders the I-10 Freeway access road so outside viewing does not have the riparian look of the Bird Fair. It is mainly concrete, asphalt and cement freeway retaining walls but there is some grass, trees, bushes and other assorted buildings. It is good enough to get a general idea how the binocular will do out in the field. As typical of the desert southwest, the sky was a beautiful bright blue with some broken clouds.
Is it Any Good: In a word, Yes! Rich was trusting enough to let me take one of the SF units outside for testing and for no particular reason, I spent most of my time with the 10X42. I did a second and shorter outdoor test with the 8X42. I spent at least 20 minutes outside with the 10X before feeling guilty about hogging the only unit and then spent about 5 or so minutes with the 8X. Both are very impressive.
There were three things that really stood out to me on first view.
- One: The colors seemed very true and vivid. I really could not detect any color bias. Keep in mind this was not the best outdoor environment and I did not have another binocular to compare with, so under different circumstances, I might pick up something different. But for today, the colors seemed very natural and impressive. A couple of Swaro owning friends thought the same. What is strange is that another member, Tim, commented just the opposite in a different post. I do not know why we reached different conclusions, Maybe it has something to do with the bright blue sky of AZ to what I suspect is more gray in England, or maybe it had something to due with the colors of our target items. It will be interesting to see what the light transmission charts ultimately show.
-Two: The CA control was excellent. I kept viewing various targets in high contrast conditions and there was just no CA of any significance. I am one of those that generally does not notice CA, but I can see it if I look for it. If I were at home, looking at my usual CA target, it may have been noticeable, but it sure wasn’t today at the hotel. It is possible that the SF has the best CA control of any binocular I have used.
- Three: Sharpness to the edge is excellent. I own several Nikon EDG products but I did not have any with me for a side by side comparison. However, I suspect the Zeiss would show slightly less drop off near the edge and going by memory, I think it may beat the Swaro SV.
Sharpness: I can just give a general opinion since I somehow cut my right eye a couple of weeks ago while on an extended camping trip and it became infected. It is mostly healed now but it is not quite there yet. I noticed I was not able to get quite the same sharpness in the right eye when adjusting the diopter of various binoculars today. However, I do feel confident in saying that the SF is as sharp as any other binocular I own and will I leave it to Typo/David and Lee to comment on how sharp they really are.
Brightness and Contrast: Under the blue skies of today, even a Coke bottle would look bright. I did spend a little time looking into the dark areas of the trees and bushes and the SF did a great job of pulling out the detail. Contrast also seemed excellent but I did not have another binocular to use for comparison.
Glare Handling: I did some viewing of treetops in near alignment with the sun and did not have any glare issues or the overall haze I will sometimes see under those viewing conditions with other brands.
FOV: I did not immediately notice the wide FOV as mentioned in a couple of the other posts discussing the SF. That may be because I have been using a wide field Nikon EII 10X and a 8X quite a bit this last month. However, I did not get that tunnel feeling that I sometimes get when going from the EII to another binocular. The wide FOV and the sharp edges deliver and excellent view.
Handling: The binoculars actually looked a little bit smaller than what I was expecting and they also felt lighter than expected. The weight is just a little bit more to the rear than other brands and so that gave them a lighter feel when viewing. I can see that being a nice feature when bringing them up to the face many times over several hours of viewing. The hold was steady and I had no problem is getting quick alignment with my eyes. They were easy to point and pick up the subject. I did compare the feel to the Zeiss HT in the conference room and I liked the feel of the SF much more.
SF - Smart Focus: I got the impression that term came from the marketing department to convey the idea that a lot of thought went into the design and placement of the focus mechanism. There is nothing unconventional in the mechanics of the mechanism. It is about getting the size, shape, location, etc just right for most. I did ultimately notice that I was at times using my index finger to focus, then sometimes my middle finger, and sometime both at the same time. It all depended on how my hands were positioned at the time. It all came very naturally and I was not even aware at first that I was using different fingers. Normally I find it very awkward to use the middle finger for focusing. Overall, I found the SF very easy and comfortable to use.
Focus Wheel Travel: The initial plan was to observe the amount of rotation of the focus wheel when going from max close focus to infinity, but that did not work out. First, I did not have another binocular to compare the close focus distance so if the Zeiss was closer, it would have more travel and give a mis-leading impression. Second, there was no single unique mark on the wheel to measure the rotation travel. What is important to me is if I can go from a relatively close subject to infinity in one swipe. I focused on a car hood emblem about 15 feet away (which is about the closest distance I normally view birds) then refocused on some palm trees about a half mile away. I was able to do this with one left to right swipe of the finger and still has some travel left before that section of the wheel would rotate below my reach. I do not see any focus travel issues for my intended use.
Focus Mechanism: The Nikon EDG is the gold standard for me and assuming it scores a 10, I would give the Zeiss SF at least an 8.5 and maybe a 9. There was no free play, tension was very close in both directions and slightly on the light side, There was a very, very small amount of roughness in the feel, but nothing to hinder quickly obtaining a sharp focus. It does not quite have that ball bearing precision feel of a Nikon but functionally, there are no complaints.
Diopter Adjustment: Zeiss did a great job on this. It is similar to the HT, but improved. It has the small diopter wheel behind the focus wheel like the HT but for the SF, the user must first unlock it by pulling it rearward in order to adjust the diopter. Since it has lock/unlock positions, Zeiss was able to reduce the tension considerably on the diopter wheel as compared to the HT and it is much easier to rotate the wheel without moving the binocular. It is very easy to adjust the diopter.
Eye Cups: I view without wearing my glasses so I have the eye cups extended. When fully extended, the length was fine and I did not have blackout issues. The eye cups were comfortable against the face. The only issue was the notching when less than fully extended. It was difficult to feel and I was never sure of the spacing. I do hope this is something Zeiss changes from the pre-production units, but in reality, it was not a problem for me because I fully extend the eye cups. Sorry, but I totally forgot to check for eye relief with my eye glasses on. Hopefully some of our Bird Fair attending members will comment on that.
Pin Cushioning: The SF does exhibit some pin cushioning when viewing horizontal lines but it is very mild. What was somewhat surprising is that is started fairly close to the center. Considering my viewing environment was concrete walls and buildings, it was a worse case scenario. The pin cushioning is mild and I do not expect any issues in the field.
Rolling Ball: I am able to detect rolling ball in binoculars so I panned various items with the 10X42 and the results were about the same as any other conventional binocular. There were no rolling ball issues with it for me. However, I did detect it to some degree with the 8X42. The view was rolling off the last 5 to 10% of the edges when panning a line of bushes against a wall. I did not pan that same spot with the 10X so I cannot say for sure if I would have seen rolling ball, but I doubt it. I suspect the 8X may have a little more tendency to exhibit rolling ball, but what I saw was slight and it would not stop me from buying one. It is nothing as extreme as what I see in a Swaro 8.5X42 SV.
SF vs HT: I did have an 8X42 HT for about a week but my brother wanted it so now I borrow it on occasion. Zeiss had some HT models at the show so I did do a quick comparison. For my preferences, the SF is the better choice. I know that is a strong statement considering the HT is one of the best. For me, the SF has a better feel, a much better focus mechanism and a superior diopter adjustment. I also prefer the overall view of the SF over the HT with the flat field and to some extent, the wider FOV. The HT has a little better light transmission, but it is not that much and it is not something I need. The overall package of the SF is the better fit for my uses.
Zeiss USA: Both Rich and Steve were very interested in what people thought of the SF and were trying to get as much input as they could before the general release. I left the show with the feeling that Rich would do his very best to address any problems I might have with a Zeiss product. There are not very many other binocular vendors the give me that same level of confidence.
Summation: There is very little not like about this binocular (other than the cost). It is difficult for me to completely judge a binocular when using it only one time, but the SF left and excellent impression. I want to see one a few more times and find out what others discover. However, I suspect that this may be the finest binocular I have ever used. I am seriously (gulp!) considering acquiring an SF if my initial impressions hold. If you can get use out of the SF, are able to notice the qualities it offers, appreciate all that goes in to a top of line binocular, and can spare the money, then definitely check out the SF.
My primary priority was to handle and look through the new Zeiss SF binocular. They had one 10X42 and two 8X42 units for demo. These were “pre-production” units and I believe the only SF models in the US.. They should be very close to what will be in general production. If there are any optical changes, they would be very minor (but most likely this is it). The operation of the eye cups may have some small changes from the models I used today.
Environment: The Expo is at a hotel near downtown Tucson with the vendors in a hotel conference room with no windows and not the best lighting. The hotel borders the I-10 Freeway access road so outside viewing does not have the riparian look of the Bird Fair. It is mainly concrete, asphalt and cement freeway retaining walls but there is some grass, trees, bushes and other assorted buildings. It is good enough to get a general idea how the binocular will do out in the field. As typical of the desert southwest, the sky was a beautiful bright blue with some broken clouds.
Is it Any Good: In a word, Yes! Rich was trusting enough to let me take one of the SF units outside for testing and for no particular reason, I spent most of my time with the 10X42. I did a second and shorter outdoor test with the 8X42. I spent at least 20 minutes outside with the 10X before feeling guilty about hogging the only unit and then spent about 5 or so minutes with the 8X. Both are very impressive.
There were three things that really stood out to me on first view.
- One: The colors seemed very true and vivid. I really could not detect any color bias. Keep in mind this was not the best outdoor environment and I did not have another binocular to compare with, so under different circumstances, I might pick up something different. But for today, the colors seemed very natural and impressive. A couple of Swaro owning friends thought the same. What is strange is that another member, Tim, commented just the opposite in a different post. I do not know why we reached different conclusions, Maybe it has something to do with the bright blue sky of AZ to what I suspect is more gray in England, or maybe it had something to due with the colors of our target items. It will be interesting to see what the light transmission charts ultimately show.
-Two: The CA control was excellent. I kept viewing various targets in high contrast conditions and there was just no CA of any significance. I am one of those that generally does not notice CA, but I can see it if I look for it. If I were at home, looking at my usual CA target, it may have been noticeable, but it sure wasn’t today at the hotel. It is possible that the SF has the best CA control of any binocular I have used.
- Three: Sharpness to the edge is excellent. I own several Nikon EDG products but I did not have any with me for a side by side comparison. However, I suspect the Zeiss would show slightly less drop off near the edge and going by memory, I think it may beat the Swaro SV.
Sharpness: I can just give a general opinion since I somehow cut my right eye a couple of weeks ago while on an extended camping trip and it became infected. It is mostly healed now but it is not quite there yet. I noticed I was not able to get quite the same sharpness in the right eye when adjusting the diopter of various binoculars today. However, I do feel confident in saying that the SF is as sharp as any other binocular I own and will I leave it to Typo/David and Lee to comment on how sharp they really are.
Brightness and Contrast: Under the blue skies of today, even a Coke bottle would look bright. I did spend a little time looking into the dark areas of the trees and bushes and the SF did a great job of pulling out the detail. Contrast also seemed excellent but I did not have another binocular to use for comparison.
Glare Handling: I did some viewing of treetops in near alignment with the sun and did not have any glare issues or the overall haze I will sometimes see under those viewing conditions with other brands.
FOV: I did not immediately notice the wide FOV as mentioned in a couple of the other posts discussing the SF. That may be because I have been using a wide field Nikon EII 10X and a 8X quite a bit this last month. However, I did not get that tunnel feeling that I sometimes get when going from the EII to another binocular. The wide FOV and the sharp edges deliver and excellent view.
Handling: The binoculars actually looked a little bit smaller than what I was expecting and they also felt lighter than expected. The weight is just a little bit more to the rear than other brands and so that gave them a lighter feel when viewing. I can see that being a nice feature when bringing them up to the face many times over several hours of viewing. The hold was steady and I had no problem is getting quick alignment with my eyes. They were easy to point and pick up the subject. I did compare the feel to the Zeiss HT in the conference room and I liked the feel of the SF much more.
SF - Smart Focus: I got the impression that term came from the marketing department to convey the idea that a lot of thought went into the design and placement of the focus mechanism. There is nothing unconventional in the mechanics of the mechanism. It is about getting the size, shape, location, etc just right for most. I did ultimately notice that I was at times using my index finger to focus, then sometimes my middle finger, and sometime both at the same time. It all depended on how my hands were positioned at the time. It all came very naturally and I was not even aware at first that I was using different fingers. Normally I find it very awkward to use the middle finger for focusing. Overall, I found the SF very easy and comfortable to use.
Focus Wheel Travel: The initial plan was to observe the amount of rotation of the focus wheel when going from max close focus to infinity, but that did not work out. First, I did not have another binocular to compare the close focus distance so if the Zeiss was closer, it would have more travel and give a mis-leading impression. Second, there was no single unique mark on the wheel to measure the rotation travel. What is important to me is if I can go from a relatively close subject to infinity in one swipe. I focused on a car hood emblem about 15 feet away (which is about the closest distance I normally view birds) then refocused on some palm trees about a half mile away. I was able to do this with one left to right swipe of the finger and still has some travel left before that section of the wheel would rotate below my reach. I do not see any focus travel issues for my intended use.
Focus Mechanism: The Nikon EDG is the gold standard for me and assuming it scores a 10, I would give the Zeiss SF at least an 8.5 and maybe a 9. There was no free play, tension was very close in both directions and slightly on the light side, There was a very, very small amount of roughness in the feel, but nothing to hinder quickly obtaining a sharp focus. It does not quite have that ball bearing precision feel of a Nikon but functionally, there are no complaints.
Diopter Adjustment: Zeiss did a great job on this. It is similar to the HT, but improved. It has the small diopter wheel behind the focus wheel like the HT but for the SF, the user must first unlock it by pulling it rearward in order to adjust the diopter. Since it has lock/unlock positions, Zeiss was able to reduce the tension considerably on the diopter wheel as compared to the HT and it is much easier to rotate the wheel without moving the binocular. It is very easy to adjust the diopter.
Eye Cups: I view without wearing my glasses so I have the eye cups extended. When fully extended, the length was fine and I did not have blackout issues. The eye cups were comfortable against the face. The only issue was the notching when less than fully extended. It was difficult to feel and I was never sure of the spacing. I do hope this is something Zeiss changes from the pre-production units, but in reality, it was not a problem for me because I fully extend the eye cups. Sorry, but I totally forgot to check for eye relief with my eye glasses on. Hopefully some of our Bird Fair attending members will comment on that.
Pin Cushioning: The SF does exhibit some pin cushioning when viewing horizontal lines but it is very mild. What was somewhat surprising is that is started fairly close to the center. Considering my viewing environment was concrete walls and buildings, it was a worse case scenario. The pin cushioning is mild and I do not expect any issues in the field.
Rolling Ball: I am able to detect rolling ball in binoculars so I panned various items with the 10X42 and the results were about the same as any other conventional binocular. There were no rolling ball issues with it for me. However, I did detect it to some degree with the 8X42. The view was rolling off the last 5 to 10% of the edges when panning a line of bushes against a wall. I did not pan that same spot with the 10X so I cannot say for sure if I would have seen rolling ball, but I doubt it. I suspect the 8X may have a little more tendency to exhibit rolling ball, but what I saw was slight and it would not stop me from buying one. It is nothing as extreme as what I see in a Swaro 8.5X42 SV.
SF vs HT: I did have an 8X42 HT for about a week but my brother wanted it so now I borrow it on occasion. Zeiss had some HT models at the show so I did do a quick comparison. For my preferences, the SF is the better choice. I know that is a strong statement considering the HT is one of the best. For me, the SF has a better feel, a much better focus mechanism and a superior diopter adjustment. I also prefer the overall view of the SF over the HT with the flat field and to some extent, the wider FOV. The HT has a little better light transmission, but it is not that much and it is not something I need. The overall package of the SF is the better fit for my uses.
Zeiss USA: Both Rich and Steve were very interested in what people thought of the SF and were trying to get as much input as they could before the general release. I left the show with the feeling that Rich would do his very best to address any problems I might have with a Zeiss product. There are not very many other binocular vendors the give me that same level of confidence.
Summation: There is very little not like about this binocular (other than the cost). It is difficult for me to completely judge a binocular when using it only one time, but the SF left and excellent impression. I want to see one a few more times and find out what others discover. However, I suspect that this may be the finest binocular I have ever used. I am seriously (gulp!) considering acquiring an SF if my initial impressions hold. If you can get use out of the SF, are able to notice the qualities it offers, appreciate all that goes in to a top of line binocular, and can spare the money, then definitely check out the SF.
Last edited:
