Amateurs’s thoughts on Zeiss SFL 8x40 (1 Viewer)

[snapshot2022]

I have a small Zeiss 10x25 T* P* as my walk around binocular might not be your pick but it works for me.

 

[DrewskiMT]

I think you are Spot On correct @Dwest . My experiences using the $800-$1000 Zeiss products and Nikon Monarch HG optics up against Swaro EL 8x32 has produced similar wow factor, low light perfomance, and color contrast. The differences are very very subtle between the $1000 glass and $1,700-$2,000 glass. Very very subtle. You need to really challenge them in low light, looking into shadows, looking into the sun, across water with bright glare, observe dark objects against bright white backgrounds to test them hard enough to bring out the differences. The Nikons are not quite as sharp the Zeiss Conquests, but otherwise are very very good. None are as sharp, nor chromatic abberation free, to the edges as the EL 8x32s. Build quality on the Conquests are bombproof durable. Same with the Swaros. The Nikons are less tough, but treated well and they will last many many years. Ultimately the dealbreakers are your own facial structure and the ipd and eye relief and eye cup positions of each optic. I havent put the Conquests up against the SFLs or SFs yet, but I am confident the 8x32 Conquests are absolutely enough optical horsepower for even the most discerning user. I run my optics hard, and I am very picky, and I cannot find fault with those little Conquests except for their slightly heavy weight. And that is why I got the 8x25 Victory pockets for $700 used, and I they are also EXCELLENT! Pure alpha views in a pocket bino for less than a grand. Phenominal! - Cheers

 

[GrampaTom]

I think you are Spot On correct @Dwest . My experiences using the $800-$1000 Zeiss products and Nikon Monarch HG optics up against Swaro EL 8x32 has produced similar wow factor, low light perfomance, and color contrast. The differences are very very subtle between the $1000 glass and $1,700-$2,000 glass. Very very subtle. You need to really challenge them in low light, looking into shadows, looking into the sun, across water with bright glare, observe dark objects against bright white backgrounds to test them hard enough to bring out the differences. The Nikons are not quite as sharp the Zeiss Conquests, but otherwise are very very good. None are as sharp, nor chromatic abberation free, to the edges as the EL 8x32s. Build quality on the Conquests are bombproof durable. Same with the Swaros. The Nikons are less tough, but treated well and they will last many many years. Ultimately the dealbreakers are your own facial structure and the ipd and eye relief and eye cup positions of each optic. I havent put the Conquests up against the SFLs or SFs yet, but I am confident the 8x32 Conquests are absolutely enough optical horsepower for even the most discerning user. I run my optics hard, and I am very picky, and I cannot find fault with those little Conquests except for their slightly heavy weight. And that is why I got the 8x25 Victory pockets for $700 used, and I they are also EXCELLENT! Pure alpha views in a pocket bino for less than a grand. Phenominal! - Cheers

Yup. What he said.

 

[DrewskiMT]

haha! Thanks @GrampaTom !~

 

[DrewskiMT]

Yeah. I don’t know that you can 100 percent “Beat the System “ but I guess you can get close with a few trade offs.

The only optics that can hang tough and compete - equal and or best the Conquests for $1,000 are the Maven B1.2's. Lots of side by side photos of the view through both binos to prove the Mavens are a touch better. Same can be said of the larger B6 10x50s. Those are also the best money you can spend at a grand.