• 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.

Reasons not to buy Zeiss SF 8x42? (1 Viewer)

asp09

Well-known member
Hello all,

I'll soon be ready to buy my first set of high-end bins (currently using Vanguard Endeavor EDII 8x42). I've narrowed my search down to the Swarovski El 8.5x42 and Zeiss SF 8x42. I've tried both pairs on two occasions now, once in reasonable light, once in low light. I think that optically, I would be happy with either; I love the wide FOV and (to my eyes) superior brightness of the Zeiss, but would also settle for the higher magnification (and possibly more neutral colours?) of the Swaro. When it comes to ergonomics, however, I much prefer the Zeiss. Not that the Swaro is bad, but the Zeiss just feels a lot lighter and has a much smoother focus. So all in all, the Zeiss made a greater impression on me than the Swaro. Despite this, I can't help thinking that the latter would be a safer option. It is a known quantity which has stood the test of time, and I would get total piece of mind thanks to Swarovski's apparently unrivalled customer service. Conversely, I keep coming across posts expressing doubt about Zeiss's build quality and quality control, and not just in relation to the older grey version; certainly, the sales person at my preferred optics retailer does not think much of Zeiss build quality and after-sales service and much prefers Swarovski. As I'm fairly cautious by nature, and hope to keep whichever pair I buy for at least the next 20 years, I'm still considering getting the Swaro even though I prefer the Zeiss.

I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on the matter, and whether you think these are legitimate concerns.
 
As far as I know, there has only been one published durability test for binoculars and Zeiss was the winner - take that any way you want.

I own many Zeiss models and all work perfectly, some over 40 years old. I certainly wouldn't worry about build or warranty just as I wouldn't worry about all the reports of bad Swaro focussers.
 
Just go with your gut feeling. Both are great bins. I was in the same dilemma and a bit skeptical on the Swaro ergonomics in the beginning but now I've gotten used to it. Still I would say the SF have the edge in ergo/handling but I prefer the optics of the Swaro.

Swaro are known for their high level of service but I don't think Zeiss would let you down either*. In any case, keep your old bins as backup, if you have to send your new pair in for service in the future.

*Service in EU is probably a bit faster than in US?
 
Last edited:
You've got reasonable concerns, but I don't think you can go wrong with either one. Its more a matter of what dessert you want to choose. A personal choice. For every one who champions one over the other, you'll likely find someone on this forum who will dispute and disparage the positive qualities others seem to enjoy.

I myself have the SF 8x42 and enjoy the eye relief, the wide field and excellent ergonomics. I've used it for 10 months and have had zero issues with it. No complaints. If you want more magnification, I'd consider a 10x down the road as an alternative choice for seasonal or environment change. It is a fairly 'big' binocular, but for 3-5 hour birding walks in my neck of the woods, no problem. If I was doing a lot of climbing, I might opt for a smaller, lighter pair.

I did briefly compare the 8.5x42 Swaro to the 8x42 SF in a store. I could see a small color shift between them, in that the blues appeared slightly more prominent in the Swaro. The difference in Field of view was noticeable. I preferred the handling (balance and focus feel) of the SF, but that's just my opinion, nothing more.

I can attest to Swarovski's excellent customer service, as I've used it to fix my wife's 8x32 Swaros. It took several months, but they came back working great. I own several Zeiss bins and have yet to need any repair work on them.

I do use other binoculars, and some of those I DO have criticisms of, but many of those issues I consider to be adaptive, or something I can overlook, because the quality of the view is good, and/or the size/weight of the binocular is what's preferable for that trip, etc.

Whichever one you choose, I'm certain you'll enjoy it a lot. It is hard to not have some nagging feeling that perhaps one is missing 'something' by these either/or decisions, but it is primarily hair splitting to a great degree, that is magnified by the polarized, though often well meaning, opinions on the forum.

I hope you enjoy whatever one you pick!

-Bill
 
I wouldn't worry about Zeiss customer service. I've only ever had exceptional service from Zeiss UK.

SF optics and handling are superb. Only niggle I have with my 10x42 is an eyepiece prone to collapsing on me from time to time.

Alan
 
I've been using SFs for the last 3 years and have used them hard on the islands off the west of Scotland in all weathers, including hours-long rain and hail. They have been knocked against rocks next to the sea, inundated with sea-spray, laid on in seaweed and bogs while I took ground-level photos and they have taken it all in their stride: no problems. I have no doubt a Swaro EL would do the same.

SF feels quite a bit lighter than an EL but actually it is not significantly lighter, it just feels that way due to the different optical train layout inside, see pic below with SF on the right. But the lighter feel of SF has made some folks think it is not as robustly built while it simply has IMHO a better balance in the hand.

Go with what your heart tells you is most appealing.

Lee
 

Attachments

  • Cutaway SF with EL SV doc size.jpg
    Cutaway SF with EL SV doc size.jpg
    104.2 KB · Views: 827
Last edited:
We own 4 glasses from Zeiss.

The oldest one, a 10x56 DS got a Service for free from Zeiss on goodwill. (I destroyed it with a cutter, and told them, they repaired for free, anyway)

The second oldest, a 10x32 FL got a premium service after app. 15 years of daily use often under harsh conditions. (the central focus needed a service). I paid for it, and had very nice communication with Zeiss whilst the service. After it came back, it was literally as new.

Then I own a 20x60S. I sent it in after app. 10 years, with the wish for a internal cleaning. (It was not necessary, but I wanted to go sure, to get every subtlety from it) I can not complain about the service.

The 4th, a 8x32 FL is also daily in use under harsh conditions and now app. 13 years old without any problems.

Summary: the service is as reliable as the glasses.

Some weeks ago I tested the Swarovski El 8.5x42 and the Zeiss SF 8x42 for a German newspaper. If you'd ask me, I would prefer the SF. But the Swaro is also a great bino.


Edit:
SF feels quite a bit lighter than an EL but actually it is not significantly lighter,
The SF weighs 790 g the EL weighs 835 g (I weighted them)

SF feels quite a bit lighter than an EL
In the test above, there have been also other glasses e.g. Olympus 8x42 Pro with 670 g and they feel heavier than the SF!

A friend of me has a 10x42 SF for many years (1. Generation in grey.) It works perfect.
 
Last edited:
I have many Zeiss glass from jena through dialyt through FLs and they are great. With respect to the two models mentioned, I chose the EL SV 8.5X42 and never looked back.

Andy W.
 
I sent my 7x42 T*FL in just for a 'deep cleaning/inspection' after purchasing it used; no issues whatsoever with the service.
If I were able to afford (or more accurately, justify) the SF, I'd own one already. Optics and ergonomics are great, on par or superior to any of the other top models, and there is a wider view afforded than in any of the other alphas.

Justin
 
Thank you all for your very helpful and balanced replies. It's great to hear your first-hand experiences, as over here the vast majority of birders have Swaro's and it's hard to get opinions on Zeiss. Anyway, it sounds as if I really don't need to worry about being let down by the Zeiss build quality or customer service, so I can now focus my decision purely on the optics and handling. I’ll compare the two models at least once more (hopefully this week) before buying, but as things stand I’m leaning towards the SF for the larger FOV and lower perceived weight.
 
Reasons why to buy the Zeiss SF

The title to your post is backwards. You should look for reasons to purchase
the Zeiss SF.

I have had the Swaro. EL models for many years and currently have the
8x32 and 8.5x42 EL SV. Both are very nice and at the top of the heap.
Lots of love for those on here.

I have also had the Zeiss Victory SF 10x42 for several years now, and now
I feel Zeiss has done things better. Those advantages are mentioned here
already, the wider FOV, ergonomically better, the better smoother focuser
is in a better place. The nice balance makes viewing better all day long.

I feel Zeiss has the best binocular model out there right now.

I have used Zeiss service, and I rate it very good.

Jerry
 
Sounds like you're taken with the SF, that's great just go with it and don't look back. They're both quite different in their own ways, so to have a particular preference is a good thing. Getting the opposite to your preference because of a possible lesser build quality when Zeiss is one of the oldest and most respected makers of binoculars seems a little crazy in the nicest possible way. Good luck!
 
As I recall, one of the most frequently mentioned gripes with the SF was the poor, 'plasticky' quality of the eyecups. Don't know if this still applies but it's worth looking into (pardon the pun) as they are your only interface with the binocular and their form and function are vitally important - perhaps more so than apparent weight, location of focus wheel etc.

RB
 
As I recall, one of the most frequently mentioned gripes with the SF was the poor, 'plasticky' quality of the eyecups. Don't know if this still applies but it's worth looking into (pardon the pun) as they are your only interface with the binocular and their form and function are vitally important - perhaps more so than apparent weight, location of focus wheel etc.

RB

Have you been bothered by the eyecups on yours, or are you just a sofa expert ?

Jerry
 
As I recall, one of the most frequently mentioned gripes with the SF was the poor, 'plasticky' quality of the eyecups. Don't know if this still applies but it's worth looking into (pardon the pun) as they are your only interface with the binocular and their form and function are vitally important - perhaps more so than apparent weight, location of focus wheel etc.

RB

Since I wear glasses when viewing, eyecups that sit directly on my lenses are what I deal with, not my eye sockets. I have no complaints with the Zeiss eyecups in this regard. However, the eyecups of an Ultravid BR that I own make a sort of squeaky sound on my glasses, which I don't like!

-Bill
 
Have you been bothered by the eyecups on yours, or are you just a sofa expert ?

Jerry

Sorry, did I say something to upset or offend you? If so, just ignore it as I wasn't addressing you! I simply raised a frequently reported issue that I thought the OP may be interested to explore before making his decision.

RB
 
If the choice is that close, go with the one that you can hold the steadiest over a long period of time (the influence of shakes is likely to outweigh any optical differences), and shows you the most detail /pleasing view.

Which one do you like looking through the most?
Which one has the best fit to your eyes/face and is the easiest view for you?

As you say there are the colour cast differences and these are valid considerations. Which one shows a better view of what you look at most/would like to look at?

Subconsciously you will have a preference for one view/feel over the other ....... if you spotted a fleeting glimpse of a disappearing bird of a lifetime with the naked eye, and both binoculars were laying equidistant on a table - which one would you grab?

Go with that one. :t:




Chosun :gh:
 
Sorry, did I say something to upset or offend you? If so, just ignore it as I wasn't addressing you! I simply raised a frequently reported issue that I thought the OP may be interested to explore before making his decision.

RB

I like user reviews, not so much from those that have no experience with the binocular. :eek!:

So, take it as such. The eyecups are plastic, but work very well and just as intended. It is not an issue.

Jerry
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top