• 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.

Review of 8x25 Victory Pocket (1 Viewer)

NDhunter said:
I have been watching the positive reviews on this model, and now your mention of the small sized eyecups, and so they may not work well for those without eyeglasses is disappointing...
Click to expand...

I was surprised and impressed myself by the new Pocket's optics and great FOV, but without eyeglasses I found them unpleasantly finicky for extended use, unable to brace comfortably. This may have to do as much with inadequate depth of the eyecups as their small diameter, but will still likely vary with anatomy. It could be worth trying them for yourself.
 
What manner of sorcery is this?

I haven't posted on this thread in a while, but I continue to be amazed by these little bins to an extent that I thought impossible in this era given the high overall functionality and quality view of so many of today's binocular offerings. How do these little bins work so well, and why haven't we seen a pocket roof this good before? In particular, an interrelated mix of easy eye placement, wide FOV that is delivered with high contrast right to the field stop, and superb glare resistance are INCREDIBLE in comparison to other pocket bins. How do they do it? No technological breakthroughs are apparent in casual inspection. I do think, at least when used w/glasses, that it may have something to do w/suppressing internal reflections from stray light entering the ocular end.

I still prefer full-sized bins (Swarovski 8.5x42 EL SV) for routine birding, ironically for their heft as much as anything else, but the Zeiss 8x25 Victory Pocket has rendered my Zeiss 8x32 FL and Leica 8x20 Ultravid BL almost obsolete. Its optical performance easily beats the Leica, it beats the 8x32 FL in ways that matter a lot to me (off-axis astigmatism), and it is easier to use than either.

On eyecups and use without glasses: I don't think these are any worse than the Terra (and certainly they are a much better bin in many other respects). That said, I've long thought that someone ought to manufacture or figure out how to make a DIY (3D printed?) slip-on large eyecup adapter for pocket roofs. The fit to the eyes is the main problem with little 8x20, 8x25, and 10x25 bins for users who don't wear glasses.

--AP
 
AP: I would agree, with these binoculars, I have no need for an 8x32 or similar small binocular; this 8x25 Victory functions much the same as any 8x32 I've used but with easier eye placement and lighter weight. Distortions and aberrations appear minimal to my eyes. Brightness , contrast, and apparent sharpness are all top of the line. If you stick these exact optics in an 8x42 frame, they'd be considered as much an alpha as any of the current models, in my opinion. I pick these up any time I head out the door for anything other than truly 'dedicated' birding where the low light capabilities of a 42mm may come more into play.
 
Hello,

I am currently choosing a pair of 8x25 binoculars to bring everywhere (I already have Sightron 8x32).

So I tested several pairs of binoculars, including Zeiss Victory Pocket and Swaro Pocket.

I'm always very careful about the size of the central net area (sweet spot ?), and was surprised by the Zeiss.
In the link below, there is a VERY VERY VERY APPROXIMATE comparison of border fuzzy areas.

Édit :
Left circle = Swaro field
Right circle = Zeiss field

In blue: beginning of the loss of sharpness, but still exploitable.
In red: zone not really exploitable, because too fuzzy for the smallest details.

http://res.cloudinary.com/eveos/image/upload/v1545235457/Sans_titrsrdgge_2_fbv3jv.jpg

The Swaro is clear on almost the whole field, except really the edge.
The Zeiss seems to lose more quickly in sharpness, but in a very progressive way. On the other hand, the really fuzzy area is much wider than on the Swaro binoculars.

THE PERCENTAGE ARE VERY VERY VERY APPROXIMATE : The blue zone concerns a very subtle loss of sharpness. I would try to work again soon.

What do you think ?
Can the owners of Zeiss Victory give their opinion on the size of the fuzzy area?

Thank you !! :)
 

Attachments

  • Sans_titrsrdgge_2_fbv3jv.jpg
    Sans_titrsrdgge_2_fbv3jv.jpg
    59.2 KB · Views: 124
Last edited:
Eveos: I do not see the distortion pattern that way. I just rechecked, and to my eyes blur begins near 70%, with 'excessive' blur beginning at around 90%. I am able to dart back and forth near to the edge of the field without much issue excepting that last 10%; even then, I can utilize this last 10%, but not with the same level of comfort as the rest of the field..
 
I did the test again : at about 5 or 6 meters, I tried to read a text that is almost in readability limit.

Zeiss : At about 60/65%, the words were no longer comprehensible.

Swaro : At about 67% the words were no longer comprehensible.

Sightron SII BS 8x32 : at around 40/45% the texts were no longer comprehensible (but in a very gradual way).

The Zeiss have a field of 130/1000 and Swaro 119/1000 ; considering this, finally the two binoculars must have a net spot of the same surface ...
(Zeiss wanted a bigger field, but sacrificing sharpness in border. Swaro privileged the overall sharpness, but for that reducing the field ...)

We also note that the Swaro does not present astigmatism, while the Zeiss a little more from about 70% (Probably due to the wider fields).

The test of writing requires a lot of patience and many tests. Nevertheless, the result will probably vary according to the observers ... (and maybe one of the bin is a bad sample !!!).
 
Last edited:
Eveos said:
...The Swaro is clear on almost the whole field, except really the edge.
The Zeiss seems to lose more quickly in sharpness, but in a very progressive way. On the other hand, the really fuzzy area is much wider than on the Swaro binoculars...
....What do you think ?
Can the owners of Zeiss Victory give their opinion on the size of the fuzzy area?...
Click to expand...

I don't have the Swarovski 8x25 for side-by-side comparison. My thoughts are that (1) the Swarovski has a FOV that is 357 ft across at 1000 yards versus the Zeiss being 390 ft across at 1000 yards, so even if your assessment is accurate, you should draw the Zeiss circle as larger, (2) the Zeiss does exhibit curvature of field, which is what I assume that you are detecting, but it has very little astigmatism, so the field away from the center can be brought to sharp focus but not at the same time as the center.

I find the field curvature of the Zeiss to be very modest. It is almost identical to that of the Leica 8x32 models. Although I much prefer a flat field, I find bins with this degree of curvature to be quite comfortable in use. What I _don't_ tolerate well is off-axis astigmatism and I am happy that the Zeiss 8x25 Victory Pocket has very little of that. By contrast, the Zeiss 8x25 Terra has a generous amount of astigmatism, just one of the reasons I do not find it at all competitive with the Victory.

--AP
 
I used these for about an hour yesterday to specifically look again at the edges. I can see what I assume is astigmatism at the very last 10% or so - I could never quite seem to get that section into focus (but at that point I also have difficulty using the binoculars for extended periods simply due to eye positioning). At 65-70% is what I suppose is mild field curvature which I was able to easily refocus. I do not notice much if any aberrations before that 65-70% mark, and even there it is very reasonable/mild and pretty typical of any binocular I've used that does not utilize field flattener technology. At the very edge I also notice a slight ring of CA and very mild darkening of the field.

Justin
 
I'd agree with Alexis' conclusion regarding the field curvature in the Pocket, although i have come to my conclusion that i don't prefer flat fields anymore - the trade-off in focus depth is not one i like to make. I have really struggled to see any CA in the Pocket so far, and in that regard, it seems very closely-related to the 8x32FL in particular. It really is a remarkable optical progression, to get so much that is regarded as a 'positive' as far as birding is concerned into such a small package.
 
I do, but in two ways. With the eyecups out, i prop them against my eyebrows (MOLCET) with no problems.
I often use them with the eyecups down though, with my 'hovering optics technique' (HOT), holding them in front of my eyes and looking into them. This is something i do regularly with smaller binoculars, and it seems to afford the best FoV. A bit of practice and it's easy.
Haven't had any blackouts either way. I think with smaller bins, you have to give yourself a couple of minutes to get used to holding them right before you do anything serious. Each one seems to have its own characteristic.
 
wachipilotes said:
Anyone have used this pocket without spectacles?
Blackouts?
Thanks
Click to expand...

I've mentioned a few times on here that I find the view easy and handling excellent.
Mine are used with the eye cups extended, I'm not a spectacle wearer. No blackouts whatsoever for me.
After another look I'd say I use mine in the manner that Paddy describes with the eyecups extended.
 
Last edited:
Troubador said:
I agree 100%. The performance of the 8x25 is extraordinarily good and of course it folds away neatly.
Click to expand...

Uh huh, does it? In the supplied case?

With all the glowing talk of the little Victorys, my curiosity has been aroused.
Putting aside some quality control issues that somehow always seems a topic with Zeiss these days, what's up with the case?

That's what the designers at Zeiss think is a good solution?
It's a little insulting that they offer a "pocket" binocular with an oversize semi rigid case that's the same size whether it's holding a bin or not. What is compact about that? It makes me think that the people designing them never get out and use them.

Are they so concerned about the fragility of this bin that a soft form fitting case that houses the bin in it's folded position is out of the question?

I always think of Zeiss' build and design as a step down from Leica and Swaro, though their optics are often top of the class.
 
Kevin Conville said:
Uh huh, does it? In the supplied case?

With all the glowing talk of the little Victorys, my curiosity has been aroused.
Putting aside some quality control issues that somehow always seems a topic with Zeiss these days, what's up with the case?
<snip>
Click to expand...

Love the binocular, hate the case. The same is true of the SF 8x42. I've ordered Maven bags and hard cases for both. An Amazon basics compact camera case also works quite well for the folded 8x25. I will also pocket them in a cleared coat or pants pocket.

Alan
 
The case is absurdly bad, the strap ridiculously convoluted, and the lack of a rainguard infuriating; the optics, mechanics, and build quality are nothing short of 'alpha' in my mind, though.
 
I'll just note that the semi-hardshell case provided with the Zeiss 8x25 Terra ED is a better fit to that bin. Nevertheless, my Zeiss 8x25 Victory Pocket in the Nikon case that I use with it is significantly more compact than the Terra in its case.

--AP
 
james holdsworth said:
A hard case is great for travelling, to prevent crushing damage. I'd switch to a soft case for every other situation.
Click to expand...

If you say so. I don't buy it. What crushing damage? Are you stacking crates on top of the bins on a concrete floor?

Bins go in glove boxes, duffel bags, backpacks, luggage, on an auto seat, and so on. How much weight against what hard surfaces would constitute "crushing damage"?

In the realm of hard cases, Zeiss' take would still be pathetic. It's not even a real hard case. The case that Leica (Leitz) used to supply with their Trinovid minis I would hold up as a good example of a hard case.
It was barely larger (by a few millimeters) than the folded bins themselves. Was made of hard, thick plastic that actually would offer protection from being smashed by something, as unlikely as that would be.

The best cases, IMO, are those that allow the bins to be placed within them, then buckled, and utilize the bin's strap as the carrying strap. When empty they can be flattened, folded, and even put in a coat or back pocket if desired. Then, avoid warehouses and forklifts.

Vortex and Leupold are two examples.
 

Attachments

  • Two Cases 2.jpg
    Two Cases 2.jpg
    458.4 KB · Views: 243
Last edited:
Kevin

I use the bino cases for all my binos in the same way. At home the binos are in their cases, in an oak chest or in a cupboard and if a bino comes out to get used the case remains in the chest / cupboard. If we go for a walk or drive to a nature site the binos are around our necks and the cases at home. When we go to Scotland or France our binos remain in their cases while we are in transit, stuffed in a back pack (as many as 5 pairs if I am reviewing) and get carried into overnight hotels. With so many crammed into my backpack I appreciate cases that provide good protection. On our last day of traveling to our destination we usually get one pair each out and have them around our necks and the cases stay in the backpacks. At our rental cottage the binos come out of our backpacks and get lined up on a spare bed and whenever a bino is required they come out of their cases which stay in the cottage and off we go with bins around our necks.

When roaming the hills and coasts the binos are always around our necks and we never take the cases out with us. The Pockets are treated like any other binos except they can fold into a breast pocket if required to keep them out of the way if using photo gear or scrambling over rocks etc.

For me, the Pockets case is fine and there would be no advantage to me if it was squashable or foldable and its plenty protective enough and looks classy. I can find nothing to complain about regarding the case. The neck strap is weird but works OK and the lack of rainguard I guess is due to them being regarded by Zeiss as binos for casual use and to slip into a pocket when not in use or when its raining. Ironically its because they are much better than that that a rainguard would be good to have even though when equipped with one, the Pockets might no longer be foldable.

Lee
 

Similar threads

J
Brief reviews about Zeiss victory SFL 8/10 x40
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Declan Joseph Deasy
D
M
Zeiss victory pocket 8x25: occasional very strong flat green veiling?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Ted Y.
T
R
Terra ED 8x25 soft pouch + lens covers
Replies
9
Views
2K
mwhogue
M
C
Victory Pocket owners...focus wheel tightness?
Replies
16
Views
2K
chipito
C
C
The Zeiss SFL 8x30 compared with select current 8x30/8x32 roof binoculars
15 16 17
Replies
324
Views
54K
Maljunulo
M

Users who are viewing this thread

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