-
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 8x42 HT (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Robert Moore
- Start date
I compared the Zeiss 8x42 SF and HT and I preferred the SF because of it's slightly bigger FOV and balance but the HT is very nice and I you will really appreciate the 94% transmission in twilight. If you can get an HT for a good price they are a bargain being slightly better IMO than the Zeiss FL.
marcsantacurz
Well-known member
I got a pair of 10x42 HT's used for a great price and am very happy with them. Zeiss serviced them for free, as the focuser had some play in it, even though I made it clear I was 2nd owner. They sent them to Germany and back from the states, no charge; it took a while, but they did offer loaners if I needed them for any events. Amazing service for 2nd hand pair.
Robert Moore
Well-known member
I had all of the fl series at one time and the 7x42 and 8x56 was my favorite for daytime. The 10x56 was excellent for astronomy. The only improvement I see with the HT is in the way the reds look and a more transparent view in the central part of the view where the extreme sharpness is. The reds always had this weird brown tint to me in the Fl. The FL is an excellent Binocular if this doesn’t bother you. Everyone’s eyes see things differently.
dries1
Member
Thanks Robert for your actual experience with both. I still have a few FLs and they are the brightest 8X42 and 10X42 I have. The 10X56 is without a doubt still a great low light glass, and like you I actually enjoy using the 8X56 during the day.
Enjoy the 8X42 HTs, a tough glass to find these day; it seems that there are more 10X42s out there.
Andy W.
Enjoy the 8X42 HTs, a tough glass to find these day; it seems that there are more 10X42s out there.
Andy W.
Robert Moore
Well-known member
You’re welcome. I have no experience with the 10x ht but really like the 8 x. My 10x now is the Zeiss SF and it is just phenomenal. It actually out resolved my 10x50 Fujinon on the night sky. I could see Io next to Jupiter one night when it was really close to Jupiter cleanly separated and could not see it at all with the Fujinon. It also shows stars just as faint and maybe can even surpass the Fuji. Both mounted on tripods of course.
Robert Moore
Well-known member
This is from fairly light polluted skies. Might be different from a truly dark sky as far as seeing the faint stars but resolution shouldn’t change
gvca1
Well-known member
Maybe because the SF exists?
Product Marketing is not an exact science. There are a number of reasons why product life cycle decisions are made. Competitive pressures (both internal and external), bill of materials costs, component availability, supply chain problems, manufacturing issues, etc. all come into play.
Perhaps the 'flat field' feature became a must-have after the HT was introduced. Or maybe Zeiss just perceived the Swaro EL as the target, hence the field flatteners and double-bridge design of the SF winning out in the boardroom.
None of this is meant to imply that the HT is an inferior product. To the contrary-- they are very nice binoculars.
At the time of HT's launch I wrote that the handling improvements were at least as important as the optical, and I still feel that is true. It established hand-position principals that carried over to SF.
And from a business point of view I did wonder how long Zeiss could maintain two premium binos competing with each other for the same sales. It just doubles the costs. I have no inside info on this but I am sure HT42 was chopped to stop this intra-brand cannibalisation and cost-doubling.
Lee
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
LEE, POST 11,
The design of the HT was very practical for using it in the new series of rangefinder binoculars based on the HT design, so it certainly was not a waste of time and investments for Zeiss.
Gijs van Ginkel
The design of the HT was very practical for using it in the new series of rangefinder binoculars based on the HT design, so it certainly was not a waste of time and investments for Zeiss.
Gijs van Ginkel
Yes Gijs, this is absolutely correct. And I am sure that HT42 won many friends for Zeiss during its life. It is a fine bino.
Lee
Last edited:
.I haven’t been on in a long time but was wondering what happened to the HTs and what you all thought of them so popped on to look around and found this thread. I purchased the 8x42 ht a few years ago and think they are terrific. I did compare their brightness to my friends 10x42 El in low light conditions and it was harder to differentiate than I expected, and hoped. I know there are many variables and this test was far from conclusive but mine seemed very marginally brighter, so hard that I had to evaluate closely to see the difference and it was very subtle.
