-
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.
SF Review - Scope Views, Roger Vine (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NDhunter
- Start date
Steve C
Well-known member
Here is the link for the Roger Vine Zeiss 10x42 SF review. He liked the Zeiss SF for their optics and functionality but wouldn't buy them because of quality issues. Here is also the link for Swarovski 10x50 SV review. It is among his favorite all around binoculars and surprisingly are among his favorite astronomy binoculars. Here is a quote from the review on the 10x50 SV's performance on the night sky. Also, the link for the review site.
"The view of the Great Nebula in Orion on a clear night was the best I’ve had through binoculars, period. I could make out the dark lane and sharply defined ‘arms’ as if through a telescope. With averted vision I could see variations in the nebulosity – something I’ve never seen with hand-held binoculars before."
http://scopeviews.co.uk/Zeiss10x42SF.htm
http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/Swaro10x50EL.htm
http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/BinoReviews.htm
Last edited:
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Steve:
Thanks for posting the link. I am not real good on the computer.
This reviewer has lots of solid reviews of optics I am familiar with, just look further at his other reviews.
I spend way too much time on optics, but you do find more every day !
Jerry
I think he's right too... That was my impression from the moment I pulled mine out of the box... Seriously...
Did you buy a pair of Zeiss SF's?
Thanks Jerry,
This is a very good site. Well written and thorough reviews from a perceptive and knowledgeable fellow. On the SF review, there is the minor slip of saying that the dioptre adjustment lacks a scale, while the scale is clearly visible in all the photos. True, when you pull the wheel out, no scale is revealed, but that is because it is printed on the top of the wheel with the index mark on the hinge.
Other than that, I largely agree with his findings when it comes to the 10x42 SF, and also on the 10x56 SLC & the 10x30 Canon. The other reviews I'll look at later.
Kimmo
This is a very good site. Well written and thorough reviews from a perceptive and knowledgeable fellow. On the SF review, there is the minor slip of saying that the dioptre adjustment lacks a scale, while the scale is clearly visible in all the photos. True, when you pull the wheel out, no scale is revealed, but that is because it is printed on the top of the wheel with the index mark on the hinge.
Other than that, I largely agree with his findings when it comes to the 10x42 SF, and also on the 10x56 SLC & the 10x30 Canon. The other reviews I'll look at later.
Kimmo
Steve
Here is how he summed up the view:
By any standards the view is excellent: superbly detailed and natural and aberration free.
(my italics).Shame his example had QA issues in other ways.
Lee
NDhunter
Experienced observer
I agree and it seems the early examples of the SF had some issues
reported on more than one review.
The newer production, and one I am using, I received in November, seems solid in every way with no issues at all.
The focuser is superb, and that is one thing I really appreciate.
Jerry
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
"Despite the lack of a blackened lens ring, the SFs control stray light exceptionally well. They produced no flare or ghosting or spikes, even on a streetlight or full Moon. Veiling flare, when viewing around a full Moon or bright lamp, was also very well controlled."
No spikes, as reported elsewhere.
No spikes, as reported elsewhere.
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Kimmo:
He is a good reviewer, another mistake he made about the Zeiss SF
is he said it has plastic strap lugs, and they are really magnesium.
Jerry
GLOBETROTTER
Well-known member
Also he says:
The colour balance overall seems slightly less vivid than Swarovski’s ELs and I also felt that the SFs lacked the absolutely crystalline clarity and supreme resolution of my ELs, but that could well be down to variation between samples.
The colour balance overall seems slightly less vivid than Swarovski’s ELs and I also felt that the SFs lacked the absolutely crystalline clarity and supreme resolution of my ELs, but that could well be down to variation between samples.
Yeah... Had 'em since January....8X42
Attachments
Yes he must have had an amazing and quite exceptionally good EL to come to that conclusion :-O
Lee
I know you have had quite a few alpha level binoculars. How do the SF's stack up? What do you like and dislike about them. I value your opinion. Thanks.
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
1st you spend weeks trying to find as many bad reviews as possible for the SF, then you try a pair and tell us how much you like them, now you are back to trying to find fault wherever it may be.
Seriously man, you have one of the finest bins in the world [your SV], why don't you go off and enjoy it and forget about the SF?
Seriously man, you have one of the finest bins in the world [your SV], why don't you go off and enjoy it and forget about the SF?
PeterPS
Well-Known Member
Hi Jerry:
Is it SF 10x42? I own an SF 10x , and was considering buying also an EDG 10x42---I cannot try the EDG before buying, and would appreciate a comparison of your EDG and SF---I believe the EDG was your favorite; why do you now prefer the SF? (the EDG has a number of potential mechanical issues; besides that it is sometimes referred to as a "lump of lead"---does it really feel heavy in the hand?).
Peter
dwever
Well-known member
Wow. A surprising and disappointing review from the perspective of build quality; and then to have Chill6X6 confirm it. At any rate the best image I've ever seen was from the Zeiss HT 8x42 as I said last week below.
You agree Chuck since you have SF, HT's, and UV's? How is the HT build quality?
As my eyes got progressively wider in the Roger Vine review:
"armour is thin and the strap lugs are plastic [magnesium actually], the eye cups quite flimsy"
"More seriously, the armour on the test pair was loose in places, making scrunching noises when pressed."
"there is all that dust in the left barrel."
"loose eye cups"
"the uneven finish on the bridge"
"the loose and wobbly diopter knob"
You agree Chuck since you have SF, HT's, and UV's? How is the HT build quality?
As my eyes got progressively wider in the Roger Vine review:
"armour is thin and the strap lugs are plastic [magnesium actually], the eye cups quite flimsy"
"More seriously, the armour on the test pair was loose in places, making scrunching noises when pressed."
"there is all that dust in the left barrel."
"loose eye cups"
"the uneven finish on the bridge"
"the loose and wobbly diopter knob"
Last edited:
