• 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.

zeiss sf 8x42 vs zeiss ht 8x42 (1 Viewer)

Doesn't the 18% bigger field of view by area of SF 8x42 compared with HT 8x42 interest you? Field of view isn't everything of course and HT does have a very nice quality of view.

Lee

This is a case where true field of view differences (136m vs 148m) doesn't always tell the entire story. Zeiss state 62° apparent fov on the 8x42 HT vs 64° for 8x42 SF. The SF is a bit wider than the HT but it's not night and day different as 18% would suggest, at least to my eyes anyway.
 
This is a case where true field of view differences (136m vs 148m) doesn't always tell the entire story. Zeiss state 62° apparent fov on the 8x42 HT vs 64° for 8x42 SF. The SF is a bit wider than the HT but it's not night and day different as 18% would suggest, at least to my eyes anyway.

I have both HT and SF and love the HT's quality of view but to my eyes the difference between the areas of the fov is enormous. But fov isn't everything of course and this doesn't automatically mean SF is better.

Lee
 
This is a case where true field of view differences (136m vs 148m) doesn't always tell the entire story. Zeiss state 62° apparent fov on the 8x42 HT vs 64° for 8x42 SF. The SF is a bit wider than the HT but it's not night and day different as 18% would suggest, at least to my eyes anyway.

The AFOV specs seem odd because, rather than using one of the mathematical estimates both Zeiss and Swarovski appear to have been actually measuring AFOV for their specs over last few years. Depending on your point of view that leads to a stretched AFOV spec for a binocular with substantial pincushion distortion like the 8x42 HT or a compressed AFOV for a binocular with substantial angular magnification distortion like the SF. In any case these measured specs express the "true" angle subtended on the retina.
 
I am new to this hobby and I want to choose between this two binos, which will give me more clearer and 3-dimensional view? Many thanks!

For 3d and brightness and transparency, in the 42mm realm nothing (except a porro of course) beats the Zeiss AK prisms - so: HT, FL are the way to go. FL 7x42 is the most "3D" roof I know of.

SF is dark and not especially 3D. A strange bin.

On the other hand, HT and FL have huge disadvantages, too.

You really need to try a few different bins yourself. You might then find that ease of view is more important then the rest... and end up with a SLC, or Ultravid...
 
I think Zeiss subtly in there material point the HT more to hunters and the SF's more to birdwatching. I had an HT briefly and it will give you ten to fifteen minutes on either end of the day but not necessarily with enough color present to make an ID on a bird but with a deer or elk or what ever color isn't importante the general outline and does it have antlers. In my case the HT's weren't enough for me to park my Kowa's the SF's were.
Steve

The SF birdwatching thing is a bad joke. Why should a birdwatching bin have a strong green cast to increase contrast except to save Zeiss precision in manufacturing?

HT has much more neutral colors, is much brighter, sharper, etc. It´s also a somewhat difficult glass in use and three steps back from the predecessor in size and ergonomy.
 
The SF birdwatching thing is a bad joke. Why should a birdwatching bin have a strong green cast to increase contrast except to save Zeiss precision in manufacturing?

Egad, for a second I thought Dennis had created another account under a different name. 8-P

I have a pair of SF's coming next week and will determine for myself how much of a joke they are for birdwatching, and whether this "strong green cast" makes the natural world appears as if viewed through my late aunt's jello salad...

Sharp optics, reasonable weight and balance, a wide, well corrected field, and accommodations for eyeglass wearers, all seem to be useful criteria for birdwatching... at least for me!

I've already tried them. But only extended use will let me know whether they really suit me.

-Bill
 
Last edited:
I am agree with Tobias and WDC, i couldn't live with the strong green cast of SF was a good binocular with a huge muted FOV.

My Binoculars are the SV FP 10X50 the perfect all around travel binocular.

The Leica NV, the best of the best, amazing contrast and exquisite color plus the 3D separation due to amazing glare and flare resistance and contrast.

The Zeiss HT 8X54 amazing low light and bright binocular, is a late 2017 model and it have a very accurate color and surprising good contrast even i bright sunny light.

Cheers.
 
I am agree with Tobias and WDC, i couldn't live with the strong green cast of SF was a good binocular with a huge muted FOV.

My Binoculars are the SV FP 10X50 the perfect all around travel binocular.

The Leica NV, the best of the best, amazing contrast and exquisite color plus the 3D separation due to amazing glare and flare resistance and contrast.

The Zeiss HT 8X54 amazing low light and bright binocular, is a late 2017 model and it have a very accurate color and surprising good contrast even i bright sunny light.

Cheers.

Actually, if you agreed with both Tobias and I, your head might explode.

I've tried the SF's and, for me, they are worth purchasing and living with for awhile. THEN, I will make up my mind. I'm sure eventually I'll work my way through the alphas, but I'm not in a hurry.


-Bill
 
"Egad, for a second I thought Dennis had created another account under a different name." Hmmm. I WAS going to buy your book.3:) Why argue over the HT and SF? The HT is dead anyway.

Wrong guy, Dennis. I'm the 'other' Bill. (younger, and not as much of a curmudgeon.....yet)


Interestingly, when enough folks lavish praise on a bin, especially one that has been around for awhile, it is probably worth seeing if it is a good fit, and where it lands in the ' personal hierarchy' of experience with these dad-blamed contraptions...

If I can find an HT, I'll endeavor to look through one. Just wearing glasses has a way of eliminating an enormous amount of optics I'd like to enjoy, but am shut out of, in a practical sense.
 
I thought you were going to say younger and better looking.;)

My youth, relative to the venerable Mr. Cook, is empirical, whereas an assessment of my beauty would be (gasp) subjective. A shocking thing to find on this forum..

Enjoy your new bins. I hope you will compare them DIRECTLY to the 8x56. (and without quoting Henry) ;-)

-Bill
 
I was checking the SF this morning to see that "green cast"...

I can say that maybe the wave breaking on rocks were a little bit on the green side than on the blue one...and the tree a grass was have maybe a more pronouced green color.

BUT this is a very very very small green bias for me.
 
In hundreds of hours of viewing and through about a dozen units, I have never seen a green cast (by which I understand that the entire view has a green tint to it) through SF 8x or 10x. If I could see such a thing I would not be interested in using them as there are many other binos in the world. When I go Otter watching in Scotland in a few weeks time, I will be taking both SFs with me and I wouldn't be wasting precious Otter-watching time if the view was marred, to my eyes, by a colour cast.

As for HT I have reported before that I found the optics a useful but not a dramatic step forward over FL and that the ergonomics were at least as big an improvement as the optics.

Doesn't mean others might not have differing opinions and experiences but these are mine.

Lee
 
Last edited:
Little update. Today it is cloudy whith lot of humidity in the air, there is almost fog...So i took my Zeiss SF and yes now i understand what some means by green cast ! It is a little bit disturbing !

There is like a white haze in the air and with the bino it appears greenish !

It was impossible to me to see that with bright sunny days that is almost the Norm here in spain !
 
Little update. Today it is cloudy whith lot of humidity in the air, there is almost fog...So i took my Zeiss SF and yes now i understand what some means by green cast ! It is a little bit disturbing !

There is like a white haze in the air and with the bino it appears greenish !

It was impossible to me to see that with bright sunny days that is almost the Norm here in spain !

That sounds similar to conditions that caused my Meopta 7x42s to show a yellow cast. Misty or foggy or very overcast days, usually when looking towards the sky. I never saw it on a clear day.
 
Little update. Today it is cloudy whith lot of humidity in the air, there is almost fog...So i took my Zeiss SF and yes now i understand what some means by green cast ! It is a little bit disturbing !

There is like a white haze in the air and with the bino it appears greenish !

It was impossible to me to see that with bright sunny days that is almost the Norm here in spain !

I can confirm that. To my eyes, there is no noticeable colour cast on blue-sky-days. At least I see nothing that would disturb me. In fact, I see an aesthetically pleasing picture.

But there is a quite pronounced shift to the yellow/green in overcast or dull weather situations. And this is definitely not aesthetically pleasing.

I personally care more about aesthetics than about (technical) colour fidelity. I'm still not sure whether I will keep my black SF 8x42. I love it, and I don't love it. For me, the SF is a Schönwetter-Fernglas :)

Tom
 
Last edited:
How are the ergonomics of the HT "Three steps back" from the FL??

The HT has the improved focus wheel position that puts it right under your index finger when the binocular is held.

One of the big selling points by Zeiss on the HT was improved ergonomics over the FL


Your opinion please.
 
How are the ergonomics of the HT "Three steps back" from the FL??

The HT has the improved focus wheel position that puts it right under your index finger when the binocular is held.

One of the big selling points by Zeiss on the HT was improved ergonomics over the FL


Your opinion please.

J
IMHO HT is more like three steps forward in handling and I have always said that the handling improvement is at least as important as the optical improvements. However some people prefer the 'grip' with which they are familiar with the hands closer to the face and I think some of them find HT's handling a challenge. It felt strange to me at first but within minutes I found it very comfortable.

Lee
 
I finally got my hands on an 8x42 SF for some extended viewing. Unfortunately weather was bright and sunny, what I think is the worst condition to evaluate optics - so I would consider this mini-review to be incomplete until I have a chance to try them in some cloud and gloom.

In the hand, really nice - great balance, lighter than they look, felt quality and focus was silky. View is sumptuous - very easy walk-in with no hassles whatsoever, tack-sharp across almost all of the field, no rolling ball and an expansive FOV that recalled an ultra-modern 7x42 BGAT/P.

Compared directly to my HT - HT looks a tad brighter if only because whites are whiter, SF a touch cream / warm. HT has a bit more contrast while SF has a bit more saturated colours, both great at suppressing glare. I am sticking with my HT but would say the SF has clear advantages in FOV and ease of view while I still think that [optically] the centre-field of the HT is more to my liking as I tend towards very clean whites and colour-neutral and I have yet to find a bin that is sharper or more contrasty.

My other ''want'' bin that day was the Noctivid but I was surprised to learn that the dealer [Pelee Wings, one of Canada's leading bin retailer] will not stock them. The owner said they were too pricey for a Leica and there was no demand...hrrmph!
 
I agree James. The Zeiss ht is second to none on center field contrast and whites are the best I have seen in any binocular. I wish I still had mine. I will get another because I miss that center field perfection.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top