• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Are you Going to buy the new Zeiss Conquest HDX Binoculars? (1 Viewer)

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Are you going to buy the new Zeiss Conquest HDX binoculars? I am having a hard time deciding if they are worth the upgrade. The optics haven't been changed that much outside of a field flattener with the FOV remaining the same, and It is questionable if they have changed the glass quality or coatings. The 8x42's are a few ounces lighter with a new magnesium frame, but the 8x32's weight hasn't changed much at all. They have a slightly modernized design with new armor, a new case, better eye cups and tethered objective covers, but are those changes worth the almost $400 difference over what you can get the older Zeiss Conquest HD for now that it is discontinued and heavily discounted. I am not sure. Are these upgrades worth the difference in price to you?
 
It’s an upgrade from the HD’s.
Lighter weight with super rugged Magnesium frame and a Slight upgrade to the glass package, better armor ( little grippier) , removable eyecups so they can be flushed under water and cleaned, lockable diopter ring. Field flattener / aspheric lens design, more vibrant and bright. Still 90% light transmission, phase corrected prisms… ZEISS t* coatings, fast focus wheel with no backlash. 1.3 turns from 0 to infinity.
 
While I haven't examined them, no one has, I knew they were coming. I purchased the old version 8x32 anyway. Eye relief is fine for me with my glasses. The improvements in the new one seem to be nice, but it is also nice to save 300-400 dollars. I considered waiting to see what the new ones would be like, but in the end I decided to go with the ones on sale. They are very good.
 
It’s an upgrade from the HD’s.
Lighter weight with super rugged Magnesium frame and a Slight upgrade to the glass package, better armor ( little grippier) , removable eyecups so they can be flushed under water and cleaned, lockable diopter ring. Field flattener / aspheric lens design, more vibrant and bright. Still 90% light transmission, phase corrected prisms… ZEISS t* coatings, fast focus wheel with no backlash. 1.3 turns from 0 to infinity.
Doug. Do you think they are worth $400 difference? When are you going to be getting them in stock? Do you have any prices yet? Thanks for your comment!
 
Last edited:
While I haven't examined them, no one has, I knew they were coming. I purchased the old version 8x32 anyway. Eye relief is fine for me with my glasses. The improvements in the new one seem to be nice, but it is also nice to save 300-400 dollars. I considered waiting to see what the new ones would be like, but in the end I decided to go with the ones on sale. They are very good.
If Zeiss had at least increased the FOV to 8.3 degree instead of leaving the FOV at 8 degree, I think it would have been worth the upgrade, but just a field flattener as the only optical upgrade doesn't seem enough to justify the $400 difference, especially since I don't think a Zeiss field flattener will give you the sharp edges of say a Swarovski if past history is any indication. I don't think Zeiss will upgrade the glass or the coatings at the $1000 price point either. Thanks for your comment!
 
Last edited:
I'm curious enough to check them out. Seeing as the manufacturing source has changed, it looks like a complete tear-down and rebuild from scratch. I'd like to check out the focuser, the edge sharpness, color correction, etc. if they show up at the local store. I've got SF's so I probably won't buy them, but who knows, the SFL's came out nice, I'm interested in how these work.

The 56mm's are 2 ounces heavier than my current 10x56, that's probably enough to stop me from buying them, but maybe the trial will go well....
 
I don't think Zeiss will upgrade the glass or the coatings at the $1000 price point either.
I imagine the coatings in the HDX have to be the latest to achieve a natural color balance.

from the Zeiss site they mention more natural colors. The original Conquest was always said to have a slight greenish or cold bias.
I'm expecting a good color balance in the HDX.

"Thanks to the high-definition (HD) concept, the Conquest HDX impresses with a particularly well-balanced optical system. With a light transmission of over 90%, the image is always bright, even in low light conditions. The ZEISS T* multi-coating, carefully selected lenses and the phase-corrected roof prism ensure clear and true-to-life images without color fringing or color casts."
 
I'm curious enough to check them out. Seeing as the manufacturing source has changed, it looks like a complete tear-down and rebuild from scratch. I'd like to check out the focuser, the edge sharpness, color correction, etc. if they show up at the local store. I've got SF's so I probably won't buy them, but who knows, the SFL's came out nice, I'm interested in how these work.

The 56mm's are 2 ounces heavier than my current 10x56, that's probably enough to stop me from buying them, but maybe the trial will go well....
If you try them, be sure to let us know how they compare with your SF's. I might try a pair also, just because I am interested in how they might have changed from the original Conquest HD. Thanks for your comment!
 
The original Conquest was always said to have a slight greenish or cold bias.
I'm expecting a good color balance in the HDX.

"Thanks to the high-definition (HD) concept, the Conquest HDX impresses with a particularly well-balanced optical system. With a light transmission of over 90%, the image is always bright, even in low light conditions. The ZEISS T* multi-coating, carefully selected lenses and the phase-corrected roof prism ensure clear and true-to-life images without color fringing or color casts."
Well well. That's of course advertising lingo. Phase-coatings have got nothing at all to do with color fringing or color casts.

Hermann
 
I imagine the coatings in the HDX have to be the latest to achieve a natural color balance.

from the Zeiss site they mention more natural colors. The original Conquest was always said to have a slight greenish or cold bias.
I'm expecting a good color balance in the HDX.

"Thanks to the high-definition (HD) concept, the Conquest HDX impresses with a particularly well-balanced optical system. With a light transmission of over 90%, the image is always bright, even in low light conditions. The ZEISS T* multi-coating, carefully selected lenses and the phase-corrected roof prism ensure clear and true-to-life images without color fringing or color casts."
You're right, and that alone could be a good reason to try them. The original Conquest did have a greenish hue, which Zeiss got rid of with the SFL's. From your statement from Zeiss, it sounds like they could have improved the CA control also, which would be good because the original Conquest HD had a little CA around the edge. You're very good at detecting color balance. Thanks for your comment!
 
Well well. That's of course advertising lingo. Phase-coatings have got nothing at all to do with color fringing or color casts.

Hermann
Hermann. Is it just the glass quality or do coatings affect CA control, or is it also the design of the optical train in the binocular? I have always wondered how you improve CA in a binocular. Thanks for your comment!
 
Hermann. Is it just the glass quality or do coatings affect CA control, or is it also the design of the optical train in the binocular? I have always wondered how you improve CA in a binocular. Thanks for your comment!
AFAIK it's the combination of different glass types in combination with the design of the optical train.

But I may be wrong, you'd need to ask Henry, Holger or Kimmo.

Hermann
 
Well well. That's of course advertising lingo. Phase-coatings have got nothing at all to do with color fringing or color casts.

Hermann

I always thought without phase correction there can be more CA.
quick AI search:

  • Explanation
    Binoculars' lenses and prisms are good at splitting white light into a rainbow because different wavelengths of light bend differently as they pass through the glass. This causes color fringing, which is a type of chromatic aberration. Phase-correction coatings are applied to the shorter of the two paths to equalize the distance between beams of light. When the beams recombine, they reinforce each other instead of interfering, which can help reduce chromatic aberration
 
Well well. That's of course advertising lingo. Phase-coatings have got nothing at all to do with color fringing or color casts.

Hermann
I was always under the assumption multi-coatings can affect the color balance.
another quick AI search:

Yes, manufacturers can formulate coatings to provide better color balance and reduce or eliminate the yellow tint. By carefully selecting and layering different materials in the coatings, they can enhance the transmission of certain wavelengths while minimizing others. This allows for more accurate color reproduction and a more neutral color balance12.

back to the Zeiss marketing blurb, they mention multi-coatings AND phase-corrected roof prisms. So I think the phase correction refers to correcting 'color fringing' and the multi-coating to the 'color casts' :

"The ZEISS T* multi-coating, carefully selected lenses and the phase-corrected roof prism ensure clear and true-to-life images without color fringing or color casts."
 
I always thought without phase correction there can be more CA.
quick AI search:

  • Explanation
    Binoculars' lenses and prisms are good at splitting white light into a rainbow because different wavelengths of light bend differently as they pass through the glass. This causes color fringing, which is a type of chromatic aberration. Phase-correction coatings are applied to the shorter of the two paths to equalize the distance between beams of light. When the beams recombine, they reinforce each other instead of interfering, which can help reduce chromatic aberration
Well, this shows that the GIGO principle still applies (garbage in, garbage out). Seems like the AI found some of many wrong explanations on the net ...

The basic article by Weyrauch/Dörband ("Verbesserte Abbildung bei Ferngläsern durch phasenkorrigierte Dachkantprismen", Deutsche Optikerzeitung 4/1988), the two scientists that developed phase-coatings, doesn't even mention CA. Cf. also Holger Merlitz' summary in his book (p. 63-66). There's also a (very) short summary in Wikipedia: Optical coating - Wikipedia.

Hermann
 
I will not buy a pair. I would though I were in that market. That $400 doesn't bother me a bit.
The previous Zeiss objective covers were the worst I have ever seen. I don't use them anyway, so it is never a consideration of mine, but they were really bad.
The weight savings on the 42s is worth some money to me though.
Get them Denco! I want to read your thoughts.
 
Well, this shows that the GIGO principle still applies (garbage in, garbage out). Seems like the AI found some of many wrong explanations on the net ...

The basic article by Weyrauch/Dörband ("Verbesserte Abbildung bei Ferngläsern durch phasenkorrigierte Dachkantprismen", Deutsche Optikerzeitung 4/1988), the two scientists that developed phase-coatings, doesn't even mention CA. Cf. also Holger Merlitz' summary in his book (p. 63-66). There's also a (very) short summary in Wikipedia: Optical coating - Wikipedia.

Hermann
Under phase coating in the Optical Coating article in wikipedia it mentions "polychromatic light".
doesn't this cause CA if not corrected ?

"From a technical point of view, the phase-correction coating layer does not correct the actual phase shift, but rather the partial polarization of the light that results from total reflection. Such a correction can always only be made for a selected wavelength and for a specific angle of incidence; however, it is possible to approximately correct a roof prism for polychromatic light by superimposing several layers.[8] In this way, since the 1990s, roof prism binoculars have also achieved resolution values that were previously only achievable with porro prisms.[9] The presence of a phase-correction coating can be checked on unopened binoculars using two polarization filters.[6]"

Another quick AI search:

When polychromatic light passes through the roof prisms in binoculars, it can undergo dispersion, where different wavelengths of light are refracted by different amounts. This can lead to chromatic aberration, where colors may not converge at the same point, causing color fringing around objects
 
Under phase coating in the Optical Coating article in wikipedia it mentions "polychromatic light".
doesn't this cause CA if not corrected ?

"From a technical point of view, the phase-correction coating layer does not correct the actual phase shift, but rather the partial polarization of the light that results from total reflection. Such a correction can always only be made for a selected wavelength and for a specific angle of incidence; however, it is possible to approximately correct a roof prism for polychromatic light by superimposing several layers.[8] In this way, since the 1990s, roof prism binoculars have also achieved resolution values that were previously only achievable with porro prisms.[9] The presence of a phase-correction coating can be checked on unopened binoculars using two polarization filters.[6]"
Polychromatic light is basically just "normal" light that always consists of different wavelengths, i.e. white light, in contrast to monochromatic light that consists of only one wavelength (and thus one colour). A single layer phase-coating can only correct one wavelength, so the problems caused by interference (e.g. loss of resolution and loss of contrast) persist for the other wavelengths. If you add more layers you can correct more wavelengths, thus you get less interference, i.e. a better result (image).
Another quick AI search:

When polychromatic light passes through the roof prisms in binoculars, it can undergo dispersion, where different wavelengths of light are refracted by different amounts. This can lead to chromatic aberration, where colors may not converge at the same point, causing color fringing around objects
Wrong once again. It's not dispersion that's the problem, it's interference. Never trust an AI on a complex topic ...

Hermann

Edit: Deleted the attached article for possible copyright violations.
 
Last edited:
Wrong once again. It's not dispersion that's the problem, it's interference. Never trust an AI on a complex topic ...
thanks for the info. So I assume good ED/FL lenses clean up most CA. I always thought phase coating help reduce it to some degree.

about color bias in the image: if AR multi-coatings don’t influence colors in the image to some degree then how do manufacturers optimize the colors to achieve the type of color balance they want? Is it only from the type or quality of prism glasses and their transmission values of light?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top