• 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.

Zeiss 8x56t fl (1 Viewer)

P

pdgritz

Member
Hi everyone. I have been shopping for a new pair of binoculars. I had settled on one of two models both Swarovski’s 10x56 and 10 x50. Well I stumbled upon a as new pair of Zeiss 8x56 and now wondering if these are worth considering. I have a nice compact pair of 8x30 and a older pair of Leitz 8x40 and were looking for a long range pair of glasses and stargazing. Looking for options on the Zeiss they are 10 years old or buy new Swarovski with Warranty.
Thanks
 
Optical quality aside, going from two 8x binoculars to another 8x binocular, how does that help with your long range viewing?
 
the Zeiss is a very very very fine glass, but it's heavy and ergonomically I found the tubes to be a bit too big to hold well.

I would consider the 10x56 (or better: a 15x56 if that would exist) for viewing from a fixed position like at sea or from a viewpoint, preferably from a monopod or tripod. I would not consider it for holding a long time / walking around,... If you want to walk, I would consider the Swaro 10x50.
 
pdgritz said:
Hi everyone. I have been shopping for a new pair of binoculars. I had settled on one of two models both Swarovski’s 10x56 and 10 x50. Well I stumbled upon a as new pair of Zeiss 8x56 and now wondering if these are worth considering. I have a nice compact pair of 8x30 and a older pair of Leitz 8x40 and were looking for a long range pair of glasses and stargazing. Looking for options on the Zeiss they are 10 years old or buy new Swarovski with Warranty.
Thanks
Click to expand...
If you handle the weight and size of the Zeiss 8x56 FL's and you want the best view I would get them over the other two. A harness can help to handle the weight. I have found as Henry Link has found that a good 8x56 will give you the best view of any binocular. I have 12 binoculars including an 8x32 and 8x42 EDG and an 8x32 and a 8x42 Zeiss FL and my Zeiss Conquest HD 8x56 has the best, clearest, most glare free and aberration free view of any of them. The Conquest HD 8x56 is very close in performance to the 8x56 FL with even a little less distortion but not quite as big of FOV. The 10x56's or 10x50's will not give you the view an 8x56 will. I had a Swarovski 8x56 SLC also and it is very good but it is not quite as sharp on-axis as the big Zeiss 8x56 FL or Zeiss Conquest HD 8x56. It is all about the having the huge exit pupil so you never see the aberrations as they pass your eyes. Here is Henry's excellent review on the Zeiss 8x56 FL and also an excellent comparison of the 8x56 SLC and 8x56 FL in Cloudy Night's by Erik Baker where he say's the Zeiss FL has a sharper on-axis view with less aberrations and the Swarovski SLC is better off-axis.

"I consider the great strengths of the 8x56 FL in daylight to be an unusually transparent, low aberration center field image and a very relaxed view, uncritical of eye placement. It beats any smaller binocular I've tried in those areas, so I would want the same from the Swaro."

"On axis, the Zeiss FL's are very sharp. Side by side observing the first quarter Moon, the Zeiss showed a bit more detail and 3-D in the center of the field. Slightly more, but there. The SLC's still showed a magnificent image though. And through the 3x booster, all the SLC's and FL's showed sharp and almost color-free stars."

"On axis, the Zeiss are my favorites, off axis the Swaro SLC's"

https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=81438&highlight=zeiss+8x56+the+best+8x42
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/446051-swarovski-slc-56-wb-vs-zeiss-victory-fl-56/
 
Last edited:
Speaking as someone who has settled into a happy long term relationship with the 8x56 FL I continue to find it optically unequaled by any other binocular at the most basic binocular task, which I see as providing the best possible image across the center 20º of the AFOV. Every time I return to it from some other binocular I feel a sense of relief and delight. The only binocular potentially equal or better I see around now is the Swarovski 8x56 SLC, which I haven't tried. I expect the SLC has better off-axis performance and more natural color, but I don't know whether it will have the same low aberration center field magic that is so addictive in the 8x56 FL. Smitten as I am I never recommend the FL to others because it's a beast to carry around and besides, outside of optical geekdom, the absolute best center field image quality is sadly not strictly required.

Edit: Dennis posted as I was writing.
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys for the input. I was set on getting 10x and still leaning that way.
I have heard the fl’s are a cut above the Swarovski’s and that’s what enticed me to consider them. But I already have eights. My walk around pair are Habicht 8x30. I want to bring the view across the canyon closer without pulling out the scope.
 
I have a Habicht 8x30 as well. It has the kind of image that looks just fine unless you compare it to something much better. In fact, it's actually one of the binoculars I'm relieved to get away from when I go back to the big FL.

Henry
 
pdgritz said:
Hi everyone. I have been shopping for a new pair of binoculars. I had settled on one of two models both Swarovski’s 10x56 and 10 x50. Well I stumbled upon a as new pair of Zeiss 8x56 and now wondering if these are worth considering. I have a nice compact pair of 8x30 and a older pair of Leitz 8x40 and were looking for a long range pair of glasses and stargazing. Looking for options on the Zeiss they are 10 years old or buy new Swarovski with Warranty.
Thanks
Click to expand...


I have experience with the FL 10X56, Swarovski SLC 10X56 and the EL 10X50, they are all different. Since you are looking at something for stargazing the SLC 10X56 or the EL 10X50 will provide the best views especially off axis, stars will not be deformed approaching the field stop. The SLC with the larger aperture will provide you with better vision of deep sky objects than the 10X50 under a dark sky, light polluted skies are a different story.
The FL 10X56 provides the best on axis views in a 10X out of the three IMO, especially during the day. I actually prefer the overall view of the FLs during the day. (Just my 2cts, so this is subjective).
The EL 10X50 out of the three is the best compromise for size and weight and is a very good all around glass. It is the one with the pure flat field. It is also the most expensive.
If you can find a FL 8X56 or a FL 10X56 in good condition, I would say get it. They are not made anymore, will be cheaper in price than the the Swarovski models, and they are still serviced by Zeiss.

The 8X56 FL is a different beast than the 10X56, I do agree with Henry regarding the on axis views, and nothing like throwing your eyes into that large exit pupil.

Andy W.
 
dries1 said:
I have experience with the FL 10X56, Swarovski SLC 10X56 and the EL 10X50, they are all different. Since you are looking at something for stargazing the SLC 10X56 or the EL 10X50 will provide the best views especially off axis, stars will not be deformed approaching the field stop. The SLC with the larger aperture will provide you with better vision of deep sky objects than the 10X50 under a dark sky, light polluted skies are a different story.
The FL 10X56 provides the best on axis views in a 10X out of the three IMO, especially during the day. I actually prefer the overall view of the FLs during the day. (Just my 2cts, so this is subjective).
The EL 10X50 out of the three is the best compromise for size and weight and is a very good all around glass. It is the one with the pure flat field. It is also the most expensive.
Click to expand...

I personally like the SLC and the Zeiss better than the EL 10x50. Another excellent binocular in that range is the Leica Ultravid 10x50 HD+. That may well be the best of the Ultravid models. Even the older versions, starting with the Trinovid 10x50 BA, are very good indeed.

Hermann
 
I really appreciate all the help and suggestions. This is a big purchase for me, so I want to make the best choice possible. I tend to hold onto things like my Leitz binoculars. Those binoculars have been everywhere with me just an old friend I keep around .
 
Hermann said:
I personally like the SLC and the Zeiss better than the EL 10x50. Another excellent binocular in that range is the Leica Ultravid 10x50 HD+. That may well be the best of the Ultravid models. Even the older versions, starting with the Trinovid 10x50 BA, are very good indeed.

Hermann
Click to expand...

Hermann,

The OP stated his choices between Zeiss/Swaro so I did not bring up Leica. I totally agree that the 10X50 UV HD+ may be the best of the UV models, in my opinion there is no ergonomic equal in 10X50, and the reason I rarely use a 10X42 format; it is my most used 10X50 glass. After 25 years since its manufacture the BA 10X50 still blows away some of today's premium offerings, that one I bring out for the special occasions.

Andy W.
 
I’m open to Leica. I thought Leica eye relief would be too short.Thinking about the long-term the SLC’s will give me the most eye relieve. I’m 61 and wear glasses but take them off to use the binoculars and spotting scope.
 
If you go to the Scopeviews website the Author Roger Vine has reviewed a few of the ones you are interested in (he wears glasses also). Allbinos also has some useful information regarding eye relief. Based on your previous post, it will likely help if you could look at them at the same time in person since eye relief is an important feature and often not accurate in the stat sheets.

Andy W.
 
pdgritz said:
I’m 61 and wear glasses but take them off to use the binoculars and spotting scope.
Click to expand...
In daytime observations, less is seen, but in nocturnal observations, astigmatism is more visible. When using binoculars to observe the stars, it is generally preferable, if possible, to keep corrective glasses.

I only have "half a degree" of astigmatism, but when I use reading glasses that have this correction, I see better in any case.
 
pdgritz said:
Hi everyone. I have been shopping for a new pair of binoculars. I had settled on one of two models both Swarovski’s 10x56 and 10 x50. Well I stumbled upon a as new pair of Zeiss 8x56 and now wondering if these are worth considering. I have a nice compact pair of 8x30 and a older pair of Leitz 8x40 and were looking for a long range pair of glasses and stargazing. Looking for options on the Zeiss they are 10 years old or buy new Swarovski with Warranty.
Thanks
Click to expand...

Hello,

My opinion....

Since you have TWO 8X binoculars all ready, I'd probably just go for the 10X56 Swarovski. I have the Swarovski 10X56 SLC(10X56 FL as well)and it's going to be hard to beat. When iooking at the stars most of your FOV will be in focus with the SLC, more so than the FL. Both are excellent binoculars but I'd probably lean toward the 10X56 SLC.

To add...

I wear glasses as well...the SLC 10X56 has plenty of ER for me as does the FL 10X56 so I can't imagine the FL 8X56 not having enough ER as well. The Leica 10X50 on the other hand does NOT have enough ER for me.
 
Last edited:
pdgritz said:
Hi everyone. I have been shopping for a new pair of binoculars. I had settled on one of two models both Swarovski’s 10x56 and 10 x50. Well I stumbled upon a as new pair of Zeiss 8x56 and now wondering if these are worth considering. I have a nice compact pair of 8x30 and a older pair of Leitz 8x40 and were looking for a long range pair of glasses and stargazing. Looking for options on the Zeiss they are 10 years old or buy new Swarovski with Warranty.
Thanks
Click to expand...
I purchased the 10X50 Swarovision for stargazing but found it works fine for birding, though I did change to a bandolier strap to manage the weight. The 10X56 will have a larger exit pupil but it's quite a bit heavier and I'm not sure I'd tolerate that much weight during a day of birding.

The 10X50 SV is deadly uniform across the FOV for stargazing; I have no experience with the 10X56 SLC. My experience tells me that handheld stargazing is a waste of time with the 10X50. There's a BIG difference between seeing something (dancing stars) and enjoying something. When mounted, the 10X50 SV is phenomenal.
 

Attachments

  • DSC01171.JPG
    DSC01171.JPG
    173.7 KB · Views: 140
Pileatus, if you keep drinking out of your counter weight container you will eventually be looking at the zenith.

Andy W.
 
First I want to thank everyone again who has responded. I think I’m going to go with the SLC 10x56 it has the prisms, eye relief and ergonomics. The other consideration is as my eye’s mature I will be able to grow-in to the eye relief.
 
The more I use my 8x56 FL the more appreciate the view. I think the tack sharp center of field is worth the trade off. I may prefer it to my SV 10x 50. Zeiss knew what they were doing when they designed the FL series.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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

E
Age of Used Zeiss Victory SF 10 x 42
Replies
4
Views
614
z-ben
Z
G
In praise of the Zeiss SFL 10x40
Replies
2
Views
922
gweller
G
A
Zeiss Victory 10x42 T* FL Rubber Armouring
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
PYRTLE
PYRTLE
D
A Zeiss Conquest HD on steroids.
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
12K
ArchStanton
A
Swissboy
Zeiss 8x32 Conquest HD vs FL comparison?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Andy Gan
A

Users who are viewing this thread

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