Introduction
I have owned and loved the Maven B2 9x45 for about a year and a half and it has been my first choice for birding most of that time, though when I travel by air I generally take something smaller. In June I bought a Zeiss Victory 8x25 and used it extensively over the summer. I was kind of stunned that the little 8x25 had the same wow factor as the much larger Maven 9x45 as long as I wasn't in a low light situation, and I was surprisingly happy with the ergonomics given the compact form factor.
I had been drawn to the Zeiss SF 8x42 for a couple years now having tried it out at shows and shops. I found I preferred the ergonomics of the Zeiss to the competing Swaro and Leica 8x42s, and all three provided marvelous views, though of course I only had quick looks. I never seriously considered upgrading because I was quite happy with my Maven B2. OTH my recent experience with the Zeiss 8x25 made me extremely curious to compare the full size Zeiss with my Maven B2. I was happy with the retailer who sold me the 8x25 and the combination of a good price and generous return policy pushed me over the edge. The Zeiss SF 8x42 arrived a few days ago, and I have been evaluating it trying to decide whether to keep it.
My motivation here is simple. I am trying to decide if I prefer the Zeiss SF to the Maven, and if I do whether I'm willing to pay this much for that preference. I state this in personal subjective terms because I make no pretense about objective evaluation of which is better. There are specifications to compare, and I do make some evaluations of performance and features that I expect others would agree with to some extent, but my personal experience using each binocular is just that, personal. What I will try to do is articulate how important a particular feature or performance factor is to me so that others can apply their own priorities. At the end of the day, no binocular is perfect and each binocular is kind of a blue plate special. The designers and manufacturers (and yes the marketers and sales and service people) make a series of decisions and then it is up to us as consumers to choose what suits us off the menu.
Initial Impressions
Let's start with comparing specs Zeiss vs, Maven:
Accessories. I prefer the Maven accessories. I have both a hard case and a double layer cloth bag. I use the cloth bag most all the time carrying the binoculars in a backpack, but the hard case is nice when carrying the binoculars more like luggage. It unzips flat and fits the binoculars nicely while they are set at my IPD with rain guard, objective caps, and RYO harness. The Zeiss hard case, like the case for the Victory 8x25 is disappointing. To fit in the case the binoculars have to be opened almost flat to a very wide IPD. My IPD is rather narrow at 57mm, so that is a show stopper right there. Also the case does not open up to fold flat. The neck straps for both are reasonable, but again Maven has the advantage with a strap that clips in and out for change over to a harness. OTH the straps are irrellevant to me since I always use RYO harness. The rain guards are both fine. The Zeiss has a better objective cover system with a one piece cover for both barrels with insets that push into each barrel. It also has a small tether with clip so the cover can be attached to the lower hinge. Maven has the traditions rubber objective cover for each barrel with a tether to a rubber ring that fits around the barrel. But the rubber ring is not tight enough and if you leave the covers on the binocular in use you will lose them. However, once again this is not an issue to me as I never bring the covers to either binocular along when I observe. They are only for storage and remain in the case when the binocular is in use.
Fit and finish. Out of the box, and ignoring the labels, you might guess that the Maven was the more expensive binocular. I prefer the feel of the armoring on the Maven to the rubber armor and plastic barrels of the Zeiss. The cross hatched metal focus knob on the Maven is nicer than the plastic knurled focus knob of the Zeiss. The eyecup operation is similar. The Zeiss has greater hinge resistance, and the Maven has greater focuser resistance, but both focus smoothly and precisely with no sponginess or backlash. The Maven focuser is a little bit faster, but both are reasonably fast. The center diopter adjustment of the Zeiss is much nicer than the traditional right eyepiece diopter adjust on the Maven. It may be that Zeiss was trying to reduce weight with the high impact polymers vs. metal and rubber. But except for the diopter adjustment, the Maven feels more like a precision instrument.
Handling. Both of these binoculars feel great in my hands. I am more used to the Maven, so it took a little experimenting to “get my grip” on the Zeiss. The balance points on the binoculars are pretty similar, just to the objective side of the focus knob, but the open frame design of the Zeiss makes it more natural to hold it well below the balance point with fingers wrapped around the barrel and forefinger very naturally falling on the focus knob. With the Maven because of the location of the bridge relative to the focus knob I tend to hold it a bit closer to the eyepiece end which creates a bit more weight cantilevered “below” my grip on the objective side. As in their advertising hype, the Zeiss does seem lighter in use than its weight spec. The two binoculars seem quite similar when carrying in the harness, but the Zeiss is lighter to hold. OTH, the Maven is also very well balanced and I have had no complaint about the weight. I prefer the tactile feel of the Maven armor and focus knob, but the Zeiss ergonomics are better because of balance, open frame, and focus knob location. Zeiss focus is clockwise to infinity, Maven is counter-clockwise. Maven focus speed is slightly faster, both have similar and nice close focus of around 5 feet. I have not yet had the Zeiss out in the field, but I have a deck with a view of shore birds so I have experimented with getting on birds in flight quickly and both are easy to get on target and in focus.
The view. While the difference in actual field of view is quite obvious, most of that is due to the difference in magnification. The Maven apparent field of view at 8x magnification would have an actual field of view of 438 ft vs. 444 ft for the Zeiss. In most circumstances I would prefer 8x and wider actual field of view. Also, the Zeiss field is flatter. The Maven shows more field curvature. Both show a little astigmatism at the extreme edge of field but no other obvious optical aberrations. I have never been bothered by slight field curvature of the Maven. I have some concern about rolling ball mostly because I've heard others complain about it. I can detect it under the right circumstances, but I've yet to decide whether it is a problem for me.
Both binoculars are extremely well baffled and perform very well in difficult lighting conditions without internal reflections or noticeable stray light problems. The color balance of the two binoculars is very similar to my eye. Comparing resolution is slightly apples and oranges because of the magnification difference, but having done all my comparisons hand held I would put them on a par for on-axis resolution. They are very similar in terms of snap to focus and wow factor for image quality, color rendition and putting you in the scene.
Both control chromatic aberration (CA) well on axis, but it is obvious that Zeiss controls lateral CA better when I scan off the center of the field. This leads me to believe that the Zeiss control of CA on axis is superior as well, I presume this is because of choice of glass in the objectives. I think this gives the Zeiss a slight contrast advantage on axis that in some ways compensates for the smaller image scale of 8x vs. 9x. However, I am talking about very small differences here. My only real data point was looking at a rocky outer channel wall about 1/4 mile out in the late afternoon with sunlight reflecting strongly off the ocean beyond. The birds and rocks were reduced to silhouettes in both binoculars, but the edge between black and bright light off the water was a little sharper in the Zeiss than the Maven. So I presume that in backlit conditions the Zeiss will perform better because of marginally less color fringing on-axis.
First Impression Summary
These are two very good binoculars, that is I like them both very much. Not surprisingly, so far I mostly prefer the 3x more expensive binocular. Yet, there wasn't a different wow factor between these like there was between the Maven B3 8x30 and the Zeiss 8x25. The margins here are smaller and there are potential deal breakers besides the cost. I've also learned that comparing at home and spending time in the field can tell different stories. But with these caveats, I would say the fit, finish and accessories of the Maven are certainly as good as and in some cases better than the Zeiss. As far as bulk and weight to transport or carry, they are very much on a par, but in use the ergonomics of the Zeiss are a bit better because of open hinge design and focuser location relative to balance point. I think I prefer the lower power and wider field of the Zeiss, but that is really a question for the field. I have had no complaint about the minor field curvature in the Maven and I don't have a strong preference for the flat field of the Zeiss. I remain concerned about rolling ball, again a question for the field. I am very impressed with the superior CA control of the Zeiss, but it will become a deciding factor only if I find it easier to see details in backlit conditions in the field.
Alan
I have owned and loved the Maven B2 9x45 for about a year and a half and it has been my first choice for birding most of that time, though when I travel by air I generally take something smaller. In June I bought a Zeiss Victory 8x25 and used it extensively over the summer. I was kind of stunned that the little 8x25 had the same wow factor as the much larger Maven 9x45 as long as I wasn't in a low light situation, and I was surprisingly happy with the ergonomics given the compact form factor.
I had been drawn to the Zeiss SF 8x42 for a couple years now having tried it out at shows and shops. I found I preferred the ergonomics of the Zeiss to the competing Swaro and Leica 8x42s, and all three provided marvelous views, though of course I only had quick looks. I never seriously considered upgrading because I was quite happy with my Maven B2. OTH my recent experience with the Zeiss 8x25 made me extremely curious to compare the full size Zeiss with my Maven B2. I was happy with the retailer who sold me the 8x25 and the combination of a good price and generous return policy pushed me over the edge. The Zeiss SF 8x42 arrived a few days ago, and I have been evaluating it trying to decide whether to keep it.
My motivation here is simple. I am trying to decide if I prefer the Zeiss SF to the Maven, and if I do whether I'm willing to pay this much for that preference. I state this in personal subjective terms because I make no pretense about objective evaluation of which is better. There are specifications to compare, and I do make some evaluations of performance and features that I expect others would agree with to some extent, but my personal experience using each binocular is just that, personal. What I will try to do is articulate how important a particular feature or performance factor is to me so that others can apply their own priorities. At the end of the day, no binocular is perfect and each binocular is kind of a blue plate special. The designers and manufacturers (and yes the marketers and sales and service people) make a series of decisions and then it is up to us as consumers to choose what suits us off the menu.
Initial Impressions
Let's start with comparing specs Zeiss vs, Maven:
- Magnification 8x vs. 9x,
- Aperture 42mm vs 45mm
- Exit pupil 5.25mm vs 5mm
- Eye relief 18mm vs. 17.3mm
- Weight 28 oz vs. 33 oz
- Height (length) 6.8” vs. 7.25”
- Apparent field of view 68 deg vs. 67 deg
- Actual field of view 444ft@1000yds vs. 389ft@1000yds
- List price $2649 vs. $1080.
Accessories. I prefer the Maven accessories. I have both a hard case and a double layer cloth bag. I use the cloth bag most all the time carrying the binoculars in a backpack, but the hard case is nice when carrying the binoculars more like luggage. It unzips flat and fits the binoculars nicely while they are set at my IPD with rain guard, objective caps, and RYO harness. The Zeiss hard case, like the case for the Victory 8x25 is disappointing. To fit in the case the binoculars have to be opened almost flat to a very wide IPD. My IPD is rather narrow at 57mm, so that is a show stopper right there. Also the case does not open up to fold flat. The neck straps for both are reasonable, but again Maven has the advantage with a strap that clips in and out for change over to a harness. OTH the straps are irrellevant to me since I always use RYO harness. The rain guards are both fine. The Zeiss has a better objective cover system with a one piece cover for both barrels with insets that push into each barrel. It also has a small tether with clip so the cover can be attached to the lower hinge. Maven has the traditions rubber objective cover for each barrel with a tether to a rubber ring that fits around the barrel. But the rubber ring is not tight enough and if you leave the covers on the binocular in use you will lose them. However, once again this is not an issue to me as I never bring the covers to either binocular along when I observe. They are only for storage and remain in the case when the binocular is in use.
Fit and finish. Out of the box, and ignoring the labels, you might guess that the Maven was the more expensive binocular. I prefer the feel of the armoring on the Maven to the rubber armor and plastic barrels of the Zeiss. The cross hatched metal focus knob on the Maven is nicer than the plastic knurled focus knob of the Zeiss. The eyecup operation is similar. The Zeiss has greater hinge resistance, and the Maven has greater focuser resistance, but both focus smoothly and precisely with no sponginess or backlash. The Maven focuser is a little bit faster, but both are reasonably fast. The center diopter adjustment of the Zeiss is much nicer than the traditional right eyepiece diopter adjust on the Maven. It may be that Zeiss was trying to reduce weight with the high impact polymers vs. metal and rubber. But except for the diopter adjustment, the Maven feels more like a precision instrument.
Handling. Both of these binoculars feel great in my hands. I am more used to the Maven, so it took a little experimenting to “get my grip” on the Zeiss. The balance points on the binoculars are pretty similar, just to the objective side of the focus knob, but the open frame design of the Zeiss makes it more natural to hold it well below the balance point with fingers wrapped around the barrel and forefinger very naturally falling on the focus knob. With the Maven because of the location of the bridge relative to the focus knob I tend to hold it a bit closer to the eyepiece end which creates a bit more weight cantilevered “below” my grip on the objective side. As in their advertising hype, the Zeiss does seem lighter in use than its weight spec. The two binoculars seem quite similar when carrying in the harness, but the Zeiss is lighter to hold. OTH, the Maven is also very well balanced and I have had no complaint about the weight. I prefer the tactile feel of the Maven armor and focus knob, but the Zeiss ergonomics are better because of balance, open frame, and focus knob location. Zeiss focus is clockwise to infinity, Maven is counter-clockwise. Maven focus speed is slightly faster, both have similar and nice close focus of around 5 feet. I have not yet had the Zeiss out in the field, but I have a deck with a view of shore birds so I have experimented with getting on birds in flight quickly and both are easy to get on target and in focus.
The view. While the difference in actual field of view is quite obvious, most of that is due to the difference in magnification. The Maven apparent field of view at 8x magnification would have an actual field of view of 438 ft vs. 444 ft for the Zeiss. In most circumstances I would prefer 8x and wider actual field of view. Also, the Zeiss field is flatter. The Maven shows more field curvature. Both show a little astigmatism at the extreme edge of field but no other obvious optical aberrations. I have never been bothered by slight field curvature of the Maven. I have some concern about rolling ball mostly because I've heard others complain about it. I can detect it under the right circumstances, but I've yet to decide whether it is a problem for me.
Both binoculars are extremely well baffled and perform very well in difficult lighting conditions without internal reflections or noticeable stray light problems. The color balance of the two binoculars is very similar to my eye. Comparing resolution is slightly apples and oranges because of the magnification difference, but having done all my comparisons hand held I would put them on a par for on-axis resolution. They are very similar in terms of snap to focus and wow factor for image quality, color rendition and putting you in the scene.
Both control chromatic aberration (CA) well on axis, but it is obvious that Zeiss controls lateral CA better when I scan off the center of the field. This leads me to believe that the Zeiss control of CA on axis is superior as well, I presume this is because of choice of glass in the objectives. I think this gives the Zeiss a slight contrast advantage on axis that in some ways compensates for the smaller image scale of 8x vs. 9x. However, I am talking about very small differences here. My only real data point was looking at a rocky outer channel wall about 1/4 mile out in the late afternoon with sunlight reflecting strongly off the ocean beyond. The birds and rocks were reduced to silhouettes in both binoculars, but the edge between black and bright light off the water was a little sharper in the Zeiss than the Maven. So I presume that in backlit conditions the Zeiss will perform better because of marginally less color fringing on-axis.
First Impression Summary
These are two very good binoculars, that is I like them both very much. Not surprisingly, so far I mostly prefer the 3x more expensive binocular. Yet, there wasn't a different wow factor between these like there was between the Maven B3 8x30 and the Zeiss 8x25. The margins here are smaller and there are potential deal breakers besides the cost. I've also learned that comparing at home and spending time in the field can tell different stories. But with these caveats, I would say the fit, finish and accessories of the Maven are certainly as good as and in some cases better than the Zeiss. As far as bulk and weight to transport or carry, they are very much on a par, but in use the ergonomics of the Zeiss are a bit better because of open hinge design and focuser location relative to balance point. I think I prefer the lower power and wider field of the Zeiss, but that is really a question for the field. I have had no complaint about the minor field curvature in the Maven and I don't have a strong preference for the flat field of the Zeiss. I remain concerned about rolling ball, again a question for the field. I am very impressed with the superior CA control of the Zeiss, but it will become a deciding factor only if I find it easier to see details in backlit conditions in the field.
Alan