Let us now what you think of it!
In what why does it complement your line up of binoculars?
I bought the Zeiss SFL 8x30 as a successor to my Nikon M7 8x30. I think the Zeiss is the most beautiful 8x30 binoculars available and it looks robust, which does not mean that it is. It fits comfortably in the hand and I quickly got used to the center position of the focuser. But visually I never experienced the wow feeling. That may be because my Nikon was also very good optically. So I don't experience the Zeiss as clearly better than my much cheaper Nikon. I find the field stop in the Zeiss annoying, which is a vague black edge and if I press my eyes deeper into the eyepiece, it improves slightly, but then ends up in black spots. On my Nikon, the field stop is razor-sharp, which gives a more pleasant and tidy overall image. In retrospect, I actually think the Zeiss is a bit too expensive for what it offers. I would like to compare my Zeiss with the Swaro Companion, which I think are nice binoculars, but as someone once wrote here "too boutique appearance"
Why not just go with SFL 8x40...that's what I would do. If you like them better than the 8x30 SFL or 8x30 CL then that's it. The SFL 8x40's are the ones you like. They're quite a bit lighter than the SLC's so you could justify it that wayThanks. If I didn't have the Swarovski SLC 8x42 I think I would go for the SFL 8x40 as well. They are really comfortable in de hands and the focuser is on the right spot. I have my doubts about the placement of the focuser of the SFL 30's.
I agree that the Zeiss SFL's are much too expensive for what they offer. The field stop in both my SFL's had a blue tint, probably similar to the black edge you are describing, which I found very annoying.I bought the Zeiss SFL 8x30 as a successor to my Nikon M7 8x30. I think the Zeiss is the most beautiful 8x30 binoculars available and it looks robust, which does not mean that it is. It fits comfortably in the hand and I quickly got used to the center position of the focuser. But visually I never experienced the wow feeling. That may be because my Nikon was also very good optically. So I don't experience the Zeiss as clearly better than my much cheaper Nikon. I find the field stop in the Zeiss annoying, which is a vague black edge and if I press my eyes deeper into the eyepiece, it improves slightly, but then ends up in black spots. On my Nikon, the field stop is razor-sharp, which gives a more pleasant and tidy overall image. In retrospect, I actually think the Zeiss is a bit too expensive for what it offers. I would like to compare my Zeiss with the Swaro Companion, which I think are nice binoculars, but as someone once wrote here "too boutique appearance"
The constant downplaying of these models by Dennis, more than all other models combined I suspect, is strange to be honest.Based on three SFL I have owned, I think they are priced where they’fit in’. Dennis is obsessed with blue ring (which I have never seen). I find the SFL’s equal or better than anything short of NL or NV.
Other birders see the 'Blue Ring of Death' or rather the 'Black Ring of Death' in this case. It is not just me. He didn't think the SFL was any better than his M7, and I agree.Based on three SFL I have owned, I think they are priced where they’fit in’. Dennis is obsessed with blue ring (which I have never seen). I find the SFL’s equal or better than anything short of NL or NV.
Sorry I didn't get to this before now...Why is that exactly? The newer CL is a bit lighter, a bit brighter (according to a test of HouseOfOutdoors), has a bit larger FOV and eye relief. Or is het just the ergonomics that suite you better?
I don't know if your "blue ring of death" is the same phenomenon as my hazy fieldstop. What is strange is that I have not heard any other SFL 8x30 owners complain about the "blue ring of death" or a hazy fieldstopOther birders see the 'Blue Ring of Death' or rather the 'Black Ring of Death' in this case. It is not just me. He didn't think the SFL was any better than his M7, and I agree.
"So I don't experience the Zeiss as clearly better than my much cheaper Nikon. I find the field stop in the Zeiss annoying, which is a vague black edge and if I press my eyes deeper into the eyepiece, it improves slightly, but then ends up in black spots. On my Nikon, the field stop is razor-sharp, which gives a more pleasant and tidy overall image. In retrospect, I actually think the Zeiss is a bit too expensive for what it offers."
I don't object to other's opinions/reviews. At this level of quality they are just POV's and very subjective. I simply prefer to present my opinion with the YMMV caveat, rather than repeatedly hammering some awful perceived fault.Other birders see the 'Blue Ring of Death' or rather the 'Black Ring of Death' in this case. It is not just me. He didn't think the SFL was any better than his M7, and I agree.
"So I don't experience the Zeiss as clearly better than my much cheaper Nikon. I find the field stop in the Zeiss annoying, which is a vague black edge and if I press my eyes deeper into the eyepiece, it improves slightly, but then ends up in black spots. On my Nikon, the field stop is razor-sharp, which gives a more pleasant and tidy overall image. In retrospect, I actually think the Zeiss is a bit too expensive for what it offers."
Yea verily!As binocular buyers we are swooned by charts/graphs/photos/reviews UNTIL we actually own/use said products. As experience grows and our optic rearview mirror has many roads we have once traveled we realize the differences between two really good binoculars are in fact very small indeed. Much wisdom is gained by spending $1100 on a "better" binocular only to realize there was nothing wrong with the previous binocular to start with!
Today I will pick up the SFL 8x30.
This will be very interesting. If the optical quality is as good as Conquest HD 8x32 but with sufficient eye relief I will be completely satisfied.
Sorry I didn't get to this before now...
So we have basically 17oz vs 18oz via my scale. Really that's no difference at all IMO.
Light transmission- 90% vs. 92%. I sure can't tell the difference.
FOV- Really...this was the whole reason I purchased the new Companion CL B, increased FOV. For me at least, the difference is minor in actual use. I'll be the first to admit to being a FOV junky....and it certainly is a box I would have checked and in fact did check.
ER- the difference has been of no consequence for me either way. I use both all the way in/down.
Focus- the previous CL focus is linear and smooth. Excellent. For me the CL B while still a good focus IS a step down from the CL.
Diopter adjustment- I wonder if the CL B is the worst designed diopter adjustment? It's pretty close.
Size- The CL is just a little bit smaller/compact. At one time this was the smallest binocular I had so at one point this made a difference. Now, I have more compact choices!
Yes, on paper the CL B SEEMS as if it would bury the model it replaced. As binocular buyers we are swooned by charts/graphs/photos/reviews UNTIL we actually own/use said products. As experience grows and our optic rearview mirror has many roads we have once traveled we realize the differences between two really good binoculars are in fact very small indeed. Much wisdom is gained by spending $1100 on a "better" binocular only to realize there was nothing wrong with the previous binocular to start with!
I came to the same conclusions when I compared my 8x30 original CL to the CL-b. Overall I prefer the original CL even though the CL-b image is a bit better.For what it's worth I've tried both the old and new CL 8x30. I much preferred the feel of the old version in the hand - it's nicely compact and doesn't use the FieldPro system. However I thought the view through the new one was definitely a step up. The only thing that stopped me buying the new model was that damned dioptre! Optically though, I thought it was pretty decent.
It sounds like you hate the FP system as much as I do. I have actually grown to hate it because when your strap gets twisted you have TWO different things to untwist the FP attachment swivel AND the strap, and you have to figure out which one is twisted which by trial and error.For what it's worth I've tried both the old and new CL 8x30. I much preferred the feel of the old version in the hand - it's nicely compact and doesn't use the FieldPro system. However I thought the view through the new one was definitely a step up. The only thing that stopped me buying the new model was that damned dioptre! Optically though, I thought it was pretty decent.