If you do try an FL10x32 I would be interested in your opinion of it Dennis as I have never tried one myself.
Lee
-
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.
Comparing Zeiss and Swarovski 32 /30 models (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Swissboy
- Start date
If you do try an FL10x32 I would be interested in your opinion of it Dennis as I have never tried one myself.
Lee
Has there been any news about a possible upgrade in the FL or Conquest? I agree they both are great as is but it would be fun to see if Zeiss could make them even better.
henry link
Well-known member
Hi Ron,
Hopefully Zeiss will be putting an end to speculation about this soon. In the meantime I'll just add a few more cards to my house.
Check out the specs for the Leica 8x32 and 10x32 Ultravids below. Leica used to include the number of lenses in each model, so we can see that there are two extra lens elements in the 10x32 compared to the 8x32. What could those be if they're not a Smyth/Barlow type doublet for increasing the magnification? The eye relief also takes a tiny hit just like in the Zeiss 10x32 FL. True, the Ultravid isn't the FL, but I wouldn't be surprised to find a similar approach in both.
Henry
Last edited:
I'm puzzled by their designation of "watertight". I take it, that is not the same as waterproof?
i recently bought a Swarovski SV 10x32 even though I have always heard 10x32's aren't that great. It surprised me how good it is for a 10x and I bet the Zeiss 10x32 FL is very good also. I think if you get an alpha 10x32 they can be quite good with the advantage of being nice and small and compact like an 8x32.
wa·ter·tight
/ˈwôdərˌtīt,ˈwädərˌtīt/
adjective
closely sealed, fastened, or fitted so that no water enters or passes through.
"a watertight seal"
synonyms: waterproof, water-repellent, water-resistant, weatherproof; More
I believe it because I recently reviewed Meopta's B1 10x32, the first bino of this format I have tried, and found it delightful and easy to use if a little unsteady compared with a 42. After a bit more practice I seem to have got around this minor downside and as you point out it can be great to have 10x firepower in a compact package.
Lee
When native languages get translated into English for international use and the translation is performed by folks who are fluent in English but not in bino tech there can be all manner of errors. In this case there is probably nothing sinister in 'watertight' except that it is not the term usually used and so excites suspicions.
I am just waiting for the first bino to be described as 'trauma-proof' instead of shock-proof............
Lee
Neat detective work Henry.
Just after my conversation with my product development contact I tried a few searches on the internet to find out if any sectional drawings (schnitt) of the FL10x32 had been released by Zeiss but all I found were the same drawing of what is presumably the 8x.
Lee
Mystery solved
I did some more internet searching, more in hope than expectation and to my surprise found this:
Go to: https://shop.zeiss.co.uk/ZEISS-Victory-10x32-T-FL-zid4047006323104
Scroll down and look on the left for the pic of a Pied Kingfisher and title Newly Developed Ultra-FL Lens, and you will find the paragraph below. Note the final sentence:
"The innovative Ultra-FL lens system provides outstanding image quality and light transmission of 92 %. Fluoride lenses made from the highest-quality SCHOTT glass ensure even better colour reproduction and high detail resolution. A seven-lens eyepiece with field flattener ensures sharp focus all the way to the edges".
Lee
I did some more internet searching, more in hope than expectation and to my surprise found this:
Go to: https://shop.zeiss.co.uk/ZEISS-Victory-10x32-T-FL-zid4047006323104
Scroll down and look on the left for the pic of a Pied Kingfisher and title Newly Developed Ultra-FL Lens, and you will find the paragraph below. Note the final sentence:
"The innovative Ultra-FL lens system provides outstanding image quality and light transmission of 92 %. Fluoride lenses made from the highest-quality SCHOTT glass ensure even better colour reproduction and high detail resolution. A seven-lens eyepiece with field flattener ensures sharp focus all the way to the edges".
Lee
Last edited:
NoSpringChicken
Well-known member
Lee, that sentence is also in the description of the 8x32 FL, so it seems that they are both the same. Incidentally, the 8x32 is out of stock at the Zeiss site and just about everywhere else in the UK. Are they being discontinued?
Ron
Ron
John A Roberts
Well-known member
FL 10x32 CONSTRUCTION
The FL 10x32 has 11 lenses per side (along with the 2 prisms)
The construction is specifically noted by Zeiss in this page about Lens Concepts - see the last paragraph:
https://www.zeiss.com/sports-optics.../competences/lens-concepts.html#lens-concepts
In contrast the FL 8x32 has 9 lenses per side, as can be seen in the attached cross-section
And as indicated by Henry, it's likely that the extra 2 lenses would be used as an eyepiece doublet
John
p.s. the 8x32 image clearly shows the space where the extra 2 lenses could be placed
The FL 10x32 has 11 lenses per side (along with the 2 prisms)
The construction is specifically noted by Zeiss in this page about Lens Concepts - see the last paragraph:
https://www.zeiss.com/sports-optics.../competences/lens-concepts.html#lens-concepts
In contrast the FL 8x32 has 9 lenses per side, as can be seen in the attached cross-section
And as indicated by Henry, it's likely that the extra 2 lenses would be used as an eyepiece doublet
John
p.s. the 8x32 image clearly shows the space where the extra 2 lenses could be placed
Attachments
Last edited:
My contact said there was no field flattener in the 8x and the drawing shown elsewhere in this thread (see below) demonstrates that. Probably the webmaster who put the FL details together had never heard of Zeiss having different designs in 8x and 10x and assumed this paragraph applied to both.
I have no information that suggests FL32s are being discontinued.
Lee
Thanks John, a very neat stitching together of what has emerged.
And weren't those sectional drawings that Zeiss published back in the day really terrific.
Lee
Lee,
The Zeiss Product Lines shown in the link include the introduction to the Terra Series so this "flat field" must be a very recent addition.
I have a Zeiss Catalog I picked up from Anacortes Optics in the state of Washington in 2006 that shows all the Victory FL series binoculars and nowhere is there mentioned any one of them having a "Flat Field."
Bob
henry link
Well-known member
These negative eyepiece field lenses have been used to increase magnification at least as far back as the original Leica Trinovids. While they accomplish some degree of field flattening that wasn't their main purpose. The degree of field flattening most likely varies and is probably never as good as something like a Swaro SV. I can see from old spec sheets that the Trinovid/Ultravid lines used them in the 10x32 and 12x50, but curiously not in the 10x42. Whether they're called "Field Flatteners" or not is purely a matter of marketing semantics.
As I recall the big complaint against the larger Zeiss Victory FL T* binoculars was that they had "astigmatic" edges.
In any case, none of these things ever bothered me. My Zeiss Victory 7x42 FL T* Lotutech is still the best binocular I have ever owned!:t:
(And that includes my new Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 B which I am currently raving about!
Bob
In any case, none of these things ever bothered me. My Zeiss Victory 7x42 FL T* Lotutech is still the best binocular I have ever owned!:t:
(And that includes my new Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 B which I am currently raving about!
Bob
Last edited:
I asked Zeiss again about field flatteners on the Zeiss 10x32 FL mentioning the additional lenses in the 10x32 FL and they are quite sure the Zeiss 10x32 FL does not have field flatteners. Here is the email to Zeiss and response. I think we can assume there are no field flatteners in any of the Zeiss FL's. The only Zeiss binoculars that utilize field flattener's are the new SF's which are a big selling point for them.
"I'm not sure about your lens count but the FL does NOT employ field flatteners.
In fact they are renowned for their depth of field.
Best Regards,
Everett Sherman
Customer Care Representative
Zeiss Consumer Optics
Your original inquiry:
Email: [email protected]
Subject: Zeiss 10x32 FL Binoculars and field flatteners?
Comment:
On Bird Forum which is an online binocular forum we are getting into an argument about whether the Zeiss 10x32 FL has field flatteners or not. The Zeiss 10x32 FL have 11 lenses per side and the Zeiss 8x32 FL have 9 lenses. If the extra 2 lenses in the 10x32 FL are not field flatteners what are they for? Please confirm that the 10x32 FL does not have field flatteners. Thanks!"
"I'm not sure about your lens count but the FL does NOT employ field flatteners.
In fact they are renowned for their depth of field.
Best Regards,
Everett Sherman
Customer Care Representative
Zeiss Consumer Optics
Your original inquiry:
Email: [email protected]
Subject: Zeiss 10x32 FL Binoculars and field flatteners?
Comment:
On Bird Forum which is an online binocular forum we are getting into an argument about whether the Zeiss 10x32 FL has field flatteners or not. The Zeiss 10x32 FL have 11 lenses per side and the Zeiss 8x32 FL have 9 lenses. If the extra 2 lenses in the 10x32 FL are not field flatteners what are they for? Please confirm that the 10x32 FL does not have field flatteners. Thanks!"
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
This line, Dennis......''In fact they are renowned for their depth of field'', should tell you all you need to know - you are speaking to a PR / Marketing dude, not someone with actual optical knowledge.
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
To anyone reading this thread with high interest, if you search old threads for detailed discussions on these topics, you will find ample explanation that having a flat field (i.e. low curvature of field) is not the same thing as astigmatism correction. So-called field flattening lenses can correct one problem, the other, or both. Field flattening does not inevitably lead to rolling ball, nor does it have anything to do with depth of field, except that curvature can make foreground to background in better focus when its curvature from edge to center is aligned with the planar dimension of that view.
It's been a long time since I tried the 10x32, but I have the Zeiss 8x32 and know it very well. The 8x32 has plenty of off-axis astigmatism but it also has a _very_ flat field. In fact, back in the day (before the Swarovski SV, and Nikon EDG), Steve Ingraham, in his capacity as Zeiss spokesperson, claimed that the Zeiss 8x32 FL had the flattest field available in an 8x32 roof with the exception of the Nikon 8x32 LX/HG. I was very skeptical at the time, but after some testing and some learning about the difference between field curvature and astigmatism, I found that he was correct.
--AP
It's been a long time since I tried the 10x32, but I have the Zeiss 8x32 and know it very well. The 8x32 has plenty of off-axis astigmatism but it also has a _very_ flat field. In fact, back in the day (before the Swarovski SV, and Nikon EDG), Steve Ingraham, in his capacity as Zeiss spokesperson, claimed that the Zeiss 8x32 FL had the flattest field available in an 8x32 roof with the exception of the Nikon 8x32 LX/HG. I was very skeptical at the time, but after some testing and some learning about the difference between field curvature and astigmatism, I found that he was correct.
--AP
Similar threads
