-
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
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Perhaps not as profound as you might thinkI agree with your very profound statement......
:cat:Whilst Schott makes many types and grades of glass, the Schott 'HT' (and HTultra) glass is a very specific and limited range (currently 13) of glass with high transmission properties.
It therefore is something special.
It would also be available to anyone apart from Zeiss, willing to pay for it. Designers can select the appropriate glass for their puposes (lenses, or prisms, flint, or crown) in a variety of forms, dimensions, and degree of finishing.
On our Australian website translation I can find no reference to the 'HT' being trademarked, but it has been a dedicated name for this specific range of glass from Schott for quite some time and so would be defensible under trade law.
Other makers may have a top end ranges of glass, but the graphs in the Schott catalogue indicate that Schott claims their glass leads the market (particularly in that blue transmission range as shown)
https://www.schott.com/advanced_opt...rials/optical-glass/ht-and-htultra/index.html
Chosun :gh:
Lee have you got those blue tinted glasses on again?!?
Surely that's a subjective call?, and plenty don't appreciate the weight increase of the HT (up to or more than 2&1/2Oz
Personally I find the ergonomics of the HT woeful!
I think you will find the ~18% (area) Fov increase applies at ALL distances - not just 1000m
Chosun :gh:
CJ
Of course I was giving my own opinion on HT's handling: who else's opinion would I give? And the way my fingers comfortably grip the right hand tube and my first finger easily finds the focus wheel is the basis of my opinion.
And yes the fov advantage applies at all distances and my reference to 1000 metres was a clue to allow readers to check the calculation using the published figures.
I don't wear blue tinted specs these days CJ having enjoyed too many other binos bearing different logos.
Lee
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
When I returned the 10x42 SF loaned to me by my local shop they told me the 8x32 FL, which as you know is still available, was mentioned by their Zeiss rep very recently. Apparently Zeiss are going to give the 32s a bit of a marketing push.
Do you think prices might go down? And that they might be trying to clear their stock ready for a new 8 / 10 x 32 HT or SF or successor-design replacement? Interesting, as the SF and HT are larger than FLs but 32 generally needs to be small.
Wish I could get hold of a really nice 7x42 FL. I just missed one on eBay three weeks ago. But got a great BGATP Dialyt instead, so shouldn't complain!
Tom
Last edited:
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
Only just saw your post now, Lee! Thank you. Might have to pass up on these now but I bet they are fantastic if I can hold them steady. (I loved the handling of the SFs I borrowed.)
Well, rumours have been rife for 3 years now about the future of Zeiss and the 32mm format. That it would be SF rather than HT was already a physical certainty (based on prism design); but would it be as small and convenient as the FL? Or would there be an FL with 'improved glass?'
Perhaps the decision to withdraw the HT is making Zeiss' product strategy a little clearer, but i for one am not holding my breath. A lot has been said of the Pocket and that 'it rivals 32mm bins'; so what happens next?
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
Don't think Zeiss sell much of the 8x32 FL so a replacement is unlikely.
A brand new model with new optics etc. would be even more expensive to manufacture and sell even less due to a higher price, especially if made in Germany.
Bins made by Kamakura like the Conquest HD and Victory Pocket seem to be what Zeiss want us to buy from now on.
Haven't tried the Pocket's yet, maybe they could replace a 32mm bin but I'm not sure about that, but if they are as good as some say I might get a pair.
A brand new model with new optics etc. would be even more expensive to manufacture and sell even less due to a higher price, especially if made in Germany.
Bins made by Kamakura like the Conquest HD and Victory Pocket seem to be what Zeiss want us to buy from now on.
Haven't tried the Pocket's yet, maybe they could replace a 32mm bin but I'm not sure about that, but if they are as good as some say I might get a pair.
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
Perhaps not as profound as you might think
Whilst Schott makes many types and grades of glass, the Schott 'HT' (and HTultra) glass is a very specific and limited range (currently 13) of glass with high transmission properties.
It therefore is something special.
It would also be available to anyone apart from Zeiss, willing to pay for it. Designers can select the appropriate glass for their puposes (lenses, or prisms, flint, or crown) in a variety of forms, dimensions, and degree of finishing.
On our Australian website translation I can find no reference to the 'HT' being trademarked, but it has been a dedicated name for this specific range of glass from Schott for quite some time and so would be defensible under trade law.
Other makers may have a top end ranges of glass, but the graphs in the Schott catalogue indicate that Schott claims their glass leads the market (particularly in that blue transmission range as shown)
https://www.schott.com/advanced_opt...rials/optical-glass/ht-and-htultra/index.html
Chosun :gh:
Transmittance seems to vary a lot between the types of HT-glass (79%-99% @400nm), which glass would you recommend for my DIY binocular project?
I don't want to get blind by to much UV-radiation looking close to the sun as I plan to baffle my bin agains glare as bulletproof as a Noctivid.
:smoke:
https://www.schott.com/d/advanced_o...ott-ht-and-htultra-glasses-april-2015-eng.pdf
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
I'd contact Schott first - their one off prices might dazzle you ! :hippy: :-O
Depends on your prism set up and optical design .... you'd also be wanting some fluorite lenses as well. The whole kit and kaboodle needs to function with the coatings and design as a coherent system.
I'd be wanting the transmission to fall off a cliff @399 nm and go straight to zero :eek!: .... you don't want to be flirting with UV radiation at all - though I did see a science report today on the discovery that our Blue-Tongued Lizards out here have a UV component to their tongues .... |
|Chosun :gh:
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Well that 'clarifys' things a bit Lee .... you were pretty adamant in your initial statement
Lots of folks here don't like the weight increase of the HT over the FL, and a non-insignificant number don't like the handling compared to the FL either. That's why I said it's a subjective thing ...... :cat:
I really don't like the forced hands forward position of the HT (even if it was lighter) , but then I've been spoilt rotten by the best in the world :king: (for me
) ergonomics of the Zen-Ray ED3.I'd like to see the HT optical formula stick around --- Zeiss would do well to stick the optical train in an extended CFRP version of the Nikon Monarch HG's chassis :t: ..... that would get my interest :brains:
Chosun :gh:
dries1
Member
While the optics of the SF are very nice, IMO I find the build quality short of the FL and that goes for the HT also. These will never out sell the FLs even if they keep them in production for the same length of time (HT X42 is gone, I forgot). Sorry but the design is flawed IMO, and I don't think they would do well in the endurance test that Allbinos did previously.
Andy W.
Andy W.
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
You may recall you also sent me these pictures to help when I was new to the forum about a month or so ago and asking about FLs. Well, you are partly responsible for my buying the 8x56 FL over the net today...
No pressure then! :t:
Tom
dries1
Member
Fl
Tom,
Enjoy the 8X56, I have had the 8X32 and the 8X42, and then added the 8x56, 10X56 and the 10X42. The 8X56 is a great glass to use anytime anywhere and cruising the Milky way is a pleasure with them. To my eyes the view is very relaxing. They also helped me to hold 10X steady, so the weight will take some getting used to, at least for me it did. I use the 10X56 for night viewing but it is a great glass also during the day for a bit more reach.
On axis the view is excruciatingly sharp. Let us know when you get them, you will enjoy the view. The size of the 8X56 middle 10X56 right compared to an 8X42 (same size as the 10X42).
Andy W.
Tom,
Enjoy the 8X56, I have had the 8X32 and the 8X42, and then added the 8x56, 10X56 and the 10X42. The 8X56 is a great glass to use anytime anywhere and cruising the Milky way is a pleasure with them. To my eyes the view is very relaxing. They also helped me to hold 10X steady, so the weight will take some getting used to, at least for me it did. I use the 10X56 for night viewing but it is a great glass also during the day for a bit more reach.
On axis the view is excruciatingly sharp. Let us know when you get them, you will enjoy the view. The size of the 8X56 middle 10X56 right compared to an 8X42 (same size as the 10X42).
Andy W.
Attachments
Well that 'clarifys' things a bit Lee .... you were pretty adamant in your initial statement
Lots of folks here don't like the weight increase of the HT over the FL, and a non-insignificant number don't like the handling compared to the FL either. That's why I said it's a subjective thing ...... :cat:
I really don't like the forced hands forward position of the HT (even if it was lighter) , but then I've been spoilt rotten by the best in the world :king: (for me
I'd like to see the HT optical formula stick around --- Zeiss would do well to stick the optical train in an extended CFRP version of the Nikon Monarch HG's chassis :t: ..... that would get my interest :brains:
Chosun :gh:
While I don't find HT 42 heavy I remain disappointed that Zeiss ditched the GRP tubes of the FL that served me so well for years, but at this price level it seems enthusiasts generally don't want to buy 'plastic' binos.
CFRP might be different though as CF tripods are widely embraced and if I get a chance to ask Zeiss about the potential for this material I surely will.
Lee
Last edited:
