Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
More discoveries. NEW: Zeiss Victory SF 32

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New Zeiss Victory SF !!!!!!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 181 votes, 4.98 average.
Old Wednesday 9th July 2014, 16:22   #426
ronh
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Alamos, NM
Posts: 1,966
I guess it's possible that the focusing lens is a cemented ED doublet. If the focusing lens carries enough of the net power, it could be necessary to preserve FL levels of color correction. Giving the focusing lens more power would thin out the group at the front of the binocular even more, shifting the balance rearward, and result in 2 ED elements.

In principle, lateral color will be present with any widely air spaced objective, but lots of it also originates in the eyepiece per se, and that part can be controlled to some extent by eyepiece design.

Considering the flow of the discussion, I think I needn't apologize for the speculation!

Ron

Last edited by ronh : Wednesday 9th July 2014 at 16:29.
ronh is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 9th July 2014, 16:23   #427
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chosun Juan View Post

Actually, I'd just really prefer lighter weight! Much seems to be made by the Blue suit marketing types of the 780g weight, and yet that's more than the FL's! (what was that about emperor's new clothes, and everything old being new again?!)

Chosun
if you want to go true lightweight,
then go for the Swarovski SV 8x32,
cheaper, lighter (580g), more compact, wide FOV,
top-notch viewing comfort, 20 mm eye relief, works even for me who is very picky,
If I would buy a new pair of binos today
I would very likely choose them,

(currently using Zeiss 7x42 FL)
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 9th July 2014, 16:54   #428
CloseFocus
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Detroit MISH
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan van daalen View Post
Bob,

This is why I found it "odd" that Leica upgraded their Geovid to HD by simply replace the focusser lens for an Fluorite containing lens.
Makes no sence at all, other then for marketing reasons!!

Jan
Jan,

Televue is a high end astronomical scope company that has been using a "Nagler-Petzval" design to great success:

"This four-element air-spaced Nagler-Petzval system has a 127mm aperture ED doublet at the front of the scope, with a second field-flattening/aberration-correcting ED doublet at the rear."

Using a color correcting lens away from the objective has a long history, and it's probably cheaper than using more expensive or multiple lenses at the front. As long as all the colors of the spectrum come to a focus when they reach the eye, it doesn't matter how it's done.

Joe
CloseFocus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 9th July 2014, 18:59   #429
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,143
nikon 400mm tele lens construction:

http://imgsv.imaging.nikon.com/lineu...nstruction.png

16 elements in 12 groups (including two fluorite (purple) and two ED glass elements (yellow),
(previous version had "only" 3 ED elements and no FL elements),
canon have been using "FL" for ages,
for complete CA control,
FL is the way to go, it seems..
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 9th July 2014, 19:55   #430
brocknroller
gainfully unemployed
 
brocknroller's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 5,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloseFocus View Post
Jan,

Televue is a high end astronomical scope company that has been using a "Nagler-Petzval" design to great success:

"This four-element air-spaced Nagler-Petzval system has a 127mm aperture ED doublet at the front of the scope, with a second field-flattening/aberration-correcting ED doublet at the rear."

Using a color correcting lens away from the objective has a long history, and it's probably cheaper than using more expensive or multiple lenses at the front. As long as all the colors of the spectrum come to a focus when they reach the eye, it doesn't matter how it's done.

Joe
Thanks, Joe. I wondered if the faster, shorter focal length systems of binoculars required having the ED element in the doublet, because that seems to be the standard arrangement in binoculars. However, if it could be done more cheaply in the EPs, it makes more sense to do that, but if so, why it isn't done?

Perhaps adding yet another optical element to a company's standard EP design requires that the other optical elements need to redesigned to accommodate the ED element, which could add costs rather than savings. Whereas with a doublet, they would only have to redesign one element to accommodate the ED glass. There's got to be some reason other than "if it ain't broke, don't fit it" that they always put the ED glass in the objective.

I also wonder if companies know that negative focusing elements increase CA, then why do they continue to use them instead of using positive focusing elements?

Brock
__________________
Brock

"Political ideology can corrupt the mind and science.
-- E. O. Wilson
brocknroller is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 9th July 2014, 20:57   #431
CloseFocus
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Detroit MISH
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocknroller View Post
Thanks, Joe. I wondered if the faster, shorter focal length systems of binoculars required having the ED element in the doublet, because that seems to be the standard arrangement in binoculars. However, if it could be done more cheaply in the EPs, it makes more sense to do that, but if so, why it isn't done?

Perhaps adding yet another optical element to a company's standard EP design requires that the other optical elements need to redesigned to accommodate the ED element, which could add costs rather than savings. Whereas with a doublet, they would only have to redesign one element to accommodate the ED glass. There's got to be some reason other than "if it ain't broke, don't fit it" that they always put the ED glass in the objective.

I also wonder if companies know that negative focusing elements increase CA, then why do they continue to use them instead of using positive focusing elements?

Brock
Brock,

There may be some brands that have color correcting lenses only behind the objective, but these are probably not what we would call premium binoculars. But there are probably many other types of high performance glass besides ED and fluorite that we know nothing about. For all the more difference they make, sometimes I think these much advertised new lenses are just an excuse of the manufacturers to jack up the price of their binoculars. But they wouldn't do that, would they?

Joe
CloseFocus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 10th July 2014, 12:33   #432
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
 
Chosun Juan's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central West NSW, Australia
Posts: 7,487
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronh View Post
I guess it's possible that the focusing lens is a cemented ED doublet. If the focusing lens carries enough of the net power, it could be necessary to preserve FL levels of color correction. Giving the focusing lens more power would thin out the group at the front of the binocular even more, shifting the balance rearward, and result in 2 ED elements.

In principle, lateral color will be present with any widely air spaced objective, but lots of it also originates in the eyepiece per se, and that part can be controlled to some extent by eyepiece design.

Considering the flow of the discussion, I think I needn't apologize for the speculation!

Ron
Ronh,

This is precisely the type of thing I had in mind when I posed the question. I had hoped that the optical design guru maven mob (henrylink, holger et al.) may have jumped in before now with some further options, but two superachromat groups (one objective, one focusing), would definitely make use of the uber-fluoride glass and succeed in shifting the weight back, whilst tackling CA.

It would also leave some room in the eyepiece for some HT glass, 'cause sure as dammit Swarovski has got something equivalent like that in their SV's when you look at the very high ("exceeding the value of 93%") blue spectrum transmission achieved as with the 10x42 SV as measured by allbino's: http://www.allbinos.com/223-binocula...arovision.html




Chosun
Chosun Juan is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 10th July 2014, 15:41   #433
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chosun Juan View Post
I had hoped that the optical design guru maven mob (henrylink, holger et al.) may have jumped in before now with some further options...
This member of the mob wouldn't go beyond Ron's suggestion that the focusing lens could be a doublet, like the 56mm FLs. I like it when the suppositions stay a little grounded in what is known. In this case we know the focusing lens is positive and the fixed objective group has reportedly been reduced from 3 elements to 2. So, I think it's most probable that the SF has a version of the 3 element design used in the old Swarovskis with the addition of FL glass. It doesn't make sense to me to put any label on the the separate parts of the objective (super-achromat, etc.) because they're designed to work together, and I sure don't plan to join Brock and Joe down in the rabbit hole discussing irrelevant or fanciful objective designs or glass types "we know nothing about".

Henry

Last edited by henry link : Thursday 10th July 2014 at 18:42.
henry link is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 10th July 2014, 16:04   #434
CloseFocus
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Detroit MISH
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry link View Post
This member of the mob wouldn't go beyond Ron's suggestion that the focusing lens could be a doublet, like the 56mm FLs. I like it when the suppositions stay a little grounded in what is known. In this case we know the focusing lens is positive and the fixed objective group has reportedly been reduced from 3 elements to 2. It doesn't make sense to me to put any label on the objective groups (super-achromat, etc.) because they're designed to work together, and I sure don't plan to join Brock and Joe down the rabbit hole of discussing irrelevant or fanciful objective designs or glass types "we know nothing about".

Henry
Henry,

I wasn't making any suggestion about what kind of optical design a binocular has, only that there are many possible design options available. As to the glass types we know nothing about, I don't recall CA being too much of an issue before the HD lines started coming out, and frankly, I don't think they have made that much of a difference. So the unnamed glass that performed so well before has now been supplemented with expensive new lenses that greatly increase the price of the binocular, but don't really seem to improve the view more than a few percent, for those who can see a difference at all.

Joe
CloseFocus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 10th July 2014, 18:04   #435
The Kingfisher
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: South of Sweden
Posts: 478
It is always interesting with new binoculars of high quality, but the focus wheel seems to be located more towards the center (just as in the HT) than eg Nikon EDG. I do not like it at all because it means that I can not grab the binoculars in the way I usually do. I wear glasses and tend to support the binoculars by keeping my index fingers against my forehead. Completely impossible to use this method with Zeiss HT..and probably also with the new Zeiss SF. Is there no one else who thinks that the focus wheel on these models seems misplaced?
The Kingfisher is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 10th July 2014, 18:09   #436
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kingfisher View Post
It is always interesting with new binoculars of high quality, but the focus wheel seems to be located more towards the center (just as in the HT) than eg Nikon EDG. I do not like it at all because it means that I can not grab the binoculars in the way I usually do. I wear glasses and tend to support the binoculars by keeping my index fingers against my forehead. Completely impossible to use this method with Zeiss HT..and probably also with the new Zeiss SF. Is there no one else who thinks that the focus wheel on these models seems misplaced?
I thought so too, but it took all of a few minutes to adapt. Now they are the best balanced, best handling bino. I have and everything else feels awkward.
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 10th July 2014, 18:11   #437
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 10,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kingfisher View Post
It is always interesting with new binoculars of high quality, but the focus wheel seems to be located more towards the center (just as in the HT) than eg Nikon EDG. I do not like it at all because it means that I can not grab the binoculars in the way I usually do. I wear glasses and tend to support the binoculars by keeping my index fingers against my forehead. Completely impossible to use this method with Zeiss HT..and probably also with the new Zeiss SF. Is there no one else who thinks that the focus wheel on these models seems misplaced?
I used to focus using my middle finger. Since getting my HTs I now grab the bins by the barrels and my 1st finger falls immediately on the focus wheel and away I go. It now feels totally natural and such an improvement from th FL.

Lee
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 02:28   #438
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kingfisher View Post
It is always interesting with new binoculars of high quality, but the focus wheel seems to be located more towards the center (just as in the HT) than eg Nikon EDG. I do not like it at all because it means that I can not grab the binoculars in the way I usually do. I wear glasses and tend to support the binoculars by keeping my index fingers against my forehead. Completely impossible to use this method with Zeiss HT..and probably also with the new Zeiss SF. Is there no one else who thinks that the focus wheel on these models seems misplaced?
I wear glasses and am very happy to see the focus wheel moved farther from my face. The original B&L Elite was excellent in that regard, with the focus wheel on the other side of the hinge. My glasses are robust, so I support my bins by pressing them into my glasses. The benefit of moving my hand farther from my face is that it allows for better air circulation around my glasses and less contribution of perspiration from my hands and wrists to the humidity of the air around my bins, thus reducing the tendency of my glasses to fog (which can be a problem in hot and humid situations). It's one of the reasons I prefer most full sized bins over most x32 models.

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 04:19   #439
eddy the eagle
Registered User
 
eddy the eagle's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: los barrios cadiz spain
Posts: 1,341
I am going to the UK birdfair for the first time and I hope I can get my hands on the New SF,pun intended,as I find the double bridge of the Swarovski SV awkward for hand placement but the HT with itīs long barrels perfect even for one handed viewing.The SF has a triple bridge so it will be interesting how the ergometrics work with my large hands.Time will tell......Eddy
eddy the eagle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 04:42   #440
brocknroller
gainfully unemployed
 
brocknroller's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 5,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloseFocus View Post
Be careful Brock, there are those who may deem your topic irrelevant.

Joe
I'm irrelevant? You're irrelevant. This whole court is irrelevant!

Henry's all right, he helped me recently when I asked for his advice in a PM about a problem I had with a bin. I just feel he could use a bit more patience and tact when explaining technical issues to others.

Brock
__________________
Brock

"Political ideology can corrupt the mind and science.
-- E. O. Wilson
brocknroller is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 09:33   #441
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 2,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddy the eagle View Post
I am going to the UK birdfair for the first time and I hope I can get my hands on the New SF,pun intended,as I find the double bridge of the Swarovski SV awkward for hand placement but the HT with itīs long barrels perfect even for one handed viewing.The SF has a triple bridge so it will be interesting how the ergometrics work with my large hands.Time will tell......Eddy
found this in the SF instruction manual:

"The groundbreaking balance and design of the Zeiss SF
will make them SUCK into you eye sockets and stay there, until removed by force,
and your hands are free to use for other, more important things, such as pointing fingers to other inferior brands owners,
to remove the binoculars from your eyes, just pull them forward until you hear a popping sound."


Last edited by Vespobuteo : Friday 11th July 2014 at 10:21.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 13:11   #442
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 2,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
found this in the SF instruction manual:

"The groundbreaking balance and design of the Zeiss SF
will make them SUCK into you eye sockets and stay there, until removed by force,
and your hands are free to use for other, more important things, such as pointing fingers to other inferior brands owners,
to remove the binoculars from your eyes, just pull them forward until you hear a popping sound."

Are there batteries included
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 13:17   #443
SteveTS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,310
There's pun in there somewhere, Jan, where you substitute Zeedijk for Zeiss SF in Vespobuteo's quote but I can't quite make it work ...
SteveTS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 15:53   #444
jan van daalen
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: maarssen holland
Posts: 2,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samandag View Post
There's pun in there somewhere, Jan, where you substitute Zeedijk for Zeiss SF in Vespobuteo's quote but I can't quite make it work ...
LOL,

I think Zeiss is making multi functional tools. If it doesn't SUCK, at least it will.....

Jan
jan van daalen is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 16:00   #445
The Kingfisher
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: South of Sweden
Posts: 478
I donīt think I will buy the Zeiss SF - way too expensive! The lowest price on Pricerunner for a pair of 10x42 is 99999 SEK, ie 14723 USD or 10817 EUR...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Pricerunner.jpg
Views:	83
Size:	116.9 KB
ID:	505011  

Last edited by The Kingfisher : Friday 11th July 2014 at 16:02.
The Kingfisher is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 16:15   #446
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 10,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chickadee Whisperer View Post
Yes. This is correct--I did not notice any shift in the weight during actual focusing. I wasn't paying specific attention to that, but if there was a difference, it sure wasn't apparent.
Hey Laura

All of the reports praise the SF's focusing speed but at 1.8 turns this sounds slower than the HT (1.4) and FL (1.2).

How was it for you?
Did Zeiss explain how the focus works?

Lee
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 16:18   #447
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 10,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kingfisher View Post
I donīt think I will buy the Zeiss SF - way too expensive! The lowest price on Pricerunner for a pair of 10x42 is 99999 SEK, ie 14723 USD or 10817 EUR...
Tough luck Kingfisher, looks like your government devalued the SEK while you weren't looking.

Nevermind, some meatballs and a bottle of Spendrups Old Gold will make all the problems go away

Lee
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 16:34   #448
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 10,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespobuteo View Post
found this in the SF instruction manual:

"The groundbreaking balance and design of the Zeiss SF
will make them SUCK into you eye sockets and stay there, until removed by force,
and your hands are free to use for other, more important things, such as pointing fingers to other inferior brands owners,
to remove the binoculars from your eyes, just pull them forward until you hear a popping sound."

Nicely translated VB.

And of course in this context, eye relief is what you feel when you take the bins off your face.

The interpupillary distance range refers to how, with the SFs sucking your eyeballs, you can use the bins to squeeze your eyes closer together to utilise the extreme close focus distance, or stretch the distance between your eyes for a more porro-like 3-D view. Get this wrong and its likely you will suffer from rolling eyeballs, although its always less than with EL SV of course.

For those who find the whole eye-sucking and IPD adjustment experience too extreme, Zeiss is introducing the Zeiss Acute Rehabilitation Programme (ZARP) where intense councelling methods are employed to slowly and gently return you to reality. Of course you will not be allowed to view Bird Forum during this healing process as this could prejudice your recovery.

Enjoy in good health.

Lee
Troubador is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 16:47   #449
brocknroller
gainfully unemployed
 
brocknroller's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 5,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kingfisher View Post
I donīt think I will buy the Zeiss SF - way too expensive! The lowest price on Pricerunner for a pair of 10x42 is 99999 SEK, ie 14723 USD or 10817 EUR...
Kingfisher, you have the dubious honor of being our first price barrier alpha drop out! The Consumer Optics Price Index Poll is starting to kick in.

Given that Zeiss is only making a limited quantity of SFs, perhaps they should dispense them through some sort of lottery system to assure that buyers internationally get a fair shot at owning one, rather than most being sold in the U.S.

I had a thought that made me feel a little better about the SF. Again, I will go to the auto industry for an analogy because I write about the industry for a business journal, and I read Car and Driver and Motor Trend every month, so I'm familiar with how the industry works.

Many automakers design top of the line, limited production cars that few people can afford to buy or even want to buy. For example, the Honda NSX-Rs, which sells for $130,000. Or the Honda S2000 for $70,000 (I think that model was recently discontinued). Another example is the Nissan GT-R AMS Alpha 12, which cost $200,000. Just a few examples, but most well known brands have such limited production uber expensive cars.

What does that means to us plebes who could never afford to buy one even if we had our extra organs harvested? Well, it turns out that some of the technology developed for these top models eventually trickle down the food chain to more affordable cars such as Honda's V-tec engine, ABS brakes, GPS, etc. Of course, this has increased the price of the average car. There's no "free lunch" unless it's Made in China.

We've also seen "trickle down binonomics" in sports optics, too -- phase coatings, dielectric prism coatings, improved AR coatings, twist up eyecups, on the focuser diopter control, open hinge designs, ED glass, etc. Thanks to off shoring, these improvements haven't greatly increased the price of low- to mid-priced sports optics.

Someday we could see an open bridge Conquest HD II, maybe even with field flatteners. Made in China to keep the cost within range of the upwardly mobile but not so deep-pocketed buyer.

Brock
__________________
Brock

"Political ideology can corrupt the mind and science.
-- E. O. Wilson

Last edited by brocknroller : Friday 11th July 2014 at 17:30.
brocknroller is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 11th July 2014, 17:38   #450
Chickadee Whisperer
Registered User
 
Chickadee Whisperer's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Duluth, MN
Posts: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Hey Laura

All of the reports praise the SF's focusing speed but at 1.8 turns this sounds slower than the HT (1.4) and FL (1.2).

How was it for you?
Did Zeiss explain how the focus works?

Lee
Hey, Lee:

If they explained it, it went over my head. During my field use over three days, I wasn't needing to move it much to bring new things into focus--it seemed as effortless as anything I've ever used in the field before. The few times I really tested them on nearby insects, I had to turn it a bit, but it seemed relatively effortless (and boy do they focus close up!), but I'm afraid I didn't actually count how many finger movements I had to make. It seemed so easy I didn't think about it--just thought, "Yep. Smart Focus alright."
__________________
Laura Erickson
Chickadee Whisperer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are Zeiss victory 8x20 and 10x25 victory phase corrected? nyatt Zeiss 7 Sunday 18th May 2014 07:56
Zeiss Victory 7 x 42 T* FL stuartl Zeiss 8 Monday 13th September 2010 18:54
Zeiss Victory RF ThoLa Zeiss 1 Friday 8th February 2008 11:26
Zeiss Tries Again for Victory Dave G Zeiss 32 Friday 13th February 2004 22:35

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.68245411 seconds with 40 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:51.