-
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 ht discontinued ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Robert Moore
- Start date
Steve C
Well-known member
CJ,
Hmm...took me awhile to remember this thread and the fact I'd posted here on it :eek!:
I agree that in a certain sense that the two pronged approach makes some sense. Particularly when one looks at Swarovski with the SV and SLC or Leica with the Ultravid, Noctovid, and Trinovid. However the SLC and the Trinovid are attempts to get the company name out there to more people for less money with an excellent binocular. I was thinking more along the lines of two very high end, expensive binoculars. I wonder if the Noctovid has reduced Ultravid sales volume?
It makes less sense to me (and may well make more sense to others) to abandon the traditional Zeiss A-K prism design in favor of the SP prism SF. I've yet to see either one. About the only way I will be able to do that is to buy one sight unseen, and for that kind of money...no way.
As to marketing fluff, that is a manipulation of human psychology, I see nothing strange in a company buying into their own hype. I do see some strangeness in the Zeiss record of product introduction with the HT and the SF. I initially thought the SF might be a way to cover for the HT introduction mess. They simply followed one mess with another one.
I agree the body material of the FL was a good one. However I think there is an ingrained prejudice against anything other than magnesium alloy chassis in binoculars, particularly expensive ones. I would not at all mind seeing a HT with that body type.
As to including Schott HT glass in the SF. It would be a good bit of marketing fluff, and it is kind of hard to understand why they didn't use it from the sales standpoint. As to the noticeable improvement in the SF with HT glass, I am not so sure. Zeiss states 95% overall transmission fot the HT and 93% for the SF. We are told human eyes need about twice that difference for it to be noticeable. I tend to think that some people think that Schott must have a secret hidden valley high with a strain of Tinkerbelle Pixies. Schott technicians tend to the Pixies and the Pixie dust is infused into the glass for a magical product. I say this to illustrate marketing fluff, not to knock Schott, they earned their reputation. It does not seem to me to be enough difference to matter in the HT vs the SF discussion, except as marketing fluff. There does seem to be a lot of discord with SF users over color tint. Having no experience with either I can't comment other than to say it seems there is a coating issue involved and that the SF transmission levels are as high as the eye can use, if not higher. It might well be a shame to see the design go away. However keeping in mind that the SP prism system was invented in 1899 and the AK in 1905, maybe it is time for some innovation in prism technology.
Last edited:
garymh
Binocular Engineer
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Steve,
Don't let Ed hear you say that the Swaro SLC is not "high end" :-O
It's a good strategy by Swarovski.
Zeiss would do well to do likewise, by keeping a successor to the HT alive (with A-K prisms ..... unless they can strike a deal with Leica to use the Perger prisms
. With the increasing use and ubiquity of all manner of carbon fibre recipes these says (even 3D printed) - harking back to the FRP of the FL, but updating it to CFRP shouldn't be a big ask of the market to accept (and flock to ! in this day and age. I'd like to see Nikon Monarch HG style ergonomics (though probably with longer barrels) , but that's just a personal preference, and really that's a can for Zeiss to kick down the road.The main thing is the use of advanced lightweight materials since this is a prime consideration for birders who aren't in the habit of running over their bins in Hummers ! :eek!: Obviously the HunTing crowd weren't big enough supporters of the HT to ensure its survival in 42mm guise.
Zeiss went too far with the quasi contrast enhancing (ever so slight) warm tint to the SF (by not maximizing the blue). Some may appreciate it for Northern Hemisphere Fall viewing, or on the African Savanah, but even in the dry outback I prefer totally neutral colour rendition.
Let's be realistic HT glass in the SF would only add a couple of percent transmission to the blue spectrum, but the way the CIE Standard is, that helps brightness too, even if it wouldn't necessarily raise the 92(3)% transmission tangibly, it would aid vibrancy, and see less stray light floating about. Coatings could then be correspondingly re-indexed to suit for even more benefits. As we get closer to the wall every little bit helps. There are other things Zeiss could do - maybe they'll be curious enough to drop me a line and find out :cat:
Chosun :gh:
Last edited:
Steve C
Well-known member
CJ,
I didn't mean the SLC was not high end, even though it can seem that way. My bad :eek!:. Swarovski as a brand name will likely never be thought of as anything but high end. I was trying to say that it is a binocular of very high quality with the Swaro name available for substantially less money than the EL SV. Personally I think the SLC starting in 2010 is the best binocular Swarovski has ever made. Admittedly my aversion to rolling ball plays a part here. Oddly enough I like the Leica Trinovid better than the Ultravid. Just illustrates the most expensive option is maybe not always the best option.
Hope you get that call from Zeiss :t:.
I didn't mean the SLC was not high end, even though it can seem that way. My bad :eek!:. Swarovski as a brand name will likely never be thought of as anything but high end. I was trying to say that it is a binocular of very high quality with the Swaro name available for substantially less money than the EL SV. Personally I think the SLC starting in 2010 is the best binocular Swarovski has ever made. Admittedly my aversion to rolling ball plays a part here. Oddly enough I like the Leica Trinovid better than the Ultravid. Just illustrates the most expensive option is maybe not always the best option.
Hope you get that call from Zeiss :t:.
For sure... ALSO....the HT is always among the brightest binoculars tested if not THE brightest, both 42mm and 54mm.
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
How so??? My only criticism is the presence of the "sand catcher" by the focus knob, but that is a design issue rather than a build quality issue.
--AP
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
I think the premise of more solid stems from the fact the HT body is metal, and that premise is pretty subjective. I own both, both are well built and durable.
I'd go so far as to say that FL has been around long enough now with no repetitive build problems reported to be declared pretty soundly constructed.
Lee
Hermann
Well-known member
Sorry, but that's plainly not true. I've seen FLs that looked like they'd survived a major war after 10+ years of hard use, including a couple that survived falling off a car when the owner forgot anbout them when driving off. I've not yet seen ONE bin where the body failed.
In fact, I think these GFK bodies are probably tougher than any metal body. A shame that Zeiss switched to magnesium because people who didn't really understand modern technology made such a lot of noise.
Hermann
Hermann
Well-known member
I am in the Northern Hemisphere, and I don't like the greenish cast the SF shows in some lights. Not at all.
Hermann
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Yep, I'd go as far to say that, after 14 years production, we can say the entire binoc. was / is a very reliable and trusty performer, from build to water/ /dust proofing to mechanics.
This is a strange phenomenon in the light of Gijs van Ginkel's findings:
https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=321724 Post 2
Quote: "I have not studied the 10x42 SF but we did a thourough investigation of the 8x42 SF and it definitely does not have a green cast or color infidelity. That was established by eye and fully confirmed by the measured transmission spectra. Gijs van Ginkel".
Lee
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
Lee, post 77,
Yes that is correct and I have no reason to change my conclusion. I live also in the Northern Hemishere.
Gijs van Ginkel
Yes that is correct and I have no reason to change my conclusion. I live also in the Northern Hemishere.
Gijs van Ginkel
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
Do you think the 8x42 HT is still available in Britain even if discontinued?
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Here in the Southern Hemisphere, the SF shows as a "green ham" colour cast ..... though thankfully the smell remains entirely neutral ! :-O
Chosun :gh:
