Conquest 8x30 vs Victory 8x32 Color Cast (1 Viewer)

[Nessus]

Hey all. I'm thinking of upgrading my my Conquest 8x30's to a pair of Victory 8x32's but I was wondering about the color rendition in the victory's. I like the richer view my conquests have over that of my 10x42FL's, Yes the FL's are brighter and whatnot but there is a washout effect and a general less saturated view the larger Victory's. I'm wondering if the smaller 32mm ones share this characteristic, I know they are not ABK prisms and have schmidt pechans like the Conquest.

Can anyone with experience in both give me an idea of how the Victory's compare color rendtition wise? I know about all of the other differences and features, it's just this one area I have concerns about. As it stands if they have the brighter and more washed out look of the larger Victories I think I will pass and just stick with my Conquests so any opinions are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

 

[FrankD]

Nessus,

In my experience the Conquests have a very unique color representation that is shared by few other bins. Their level of contrast and color tend to remind me of the Leica Trinovids to an extent. Their specific contrast/color are very relaxing to my eyes. The images are just comfortable to look at.

For the most part I think the little FLs are similar but not identical in that regard. They are brighter than the Conquests and the apparent sharpness is also similar in my opinion. I have not compared the two in some time but I don't think you would find the contrast/color representation that different.

As long as you buy them from a place with a good return policy though it should not hurt to try the comparison yourself.

 

[Nessus]

For comparisons sake do you have any experience with the 42mm FL's and if so what are your thoughts on the color rendition difference between those and the Conquest? Because I like the look in my Conquests so much more than my larger FL's. Whenever I have my FL's out I wish they had the look of the Conquests and whenever I have the Conquests out I just love the look of the view so much. The huge FOV in the 8x32 FL's would be the best of both worlds if only they can keep that nice rich image.

 

[Mac308]

I far and away prefer the color rendition of the Leica or Swarovski 8x32/30's over the Zeiss FL 8x32. I also am not a fan of the fast focus of the Zeiss.

 

[Nessus]

So I went down to Cameraland Friday to check out thier demo 8x32's and they were sold out. They had 12 pairs of Victory 8x32 for $769 and they sold them out in a few hours. I should have known better as that was a fantastic deal. I looked through a pair they had there and besides the larger FOV I could barely tell the difference between them and my Conquests so I'll be sticking with them.

As for the color cast they are a bit cold like other Zeiss but I just couldn't judge the saturation that well in the store.

 

[gkw]

"I far and away prefer the color rendition of the Leica or Swarovski 8x32/30's over the Zeiss FL 8x32. I also am not a fan of the fast focus of the Zeiss."

"As for the color cast they are a bit cold like other Zeiss"

I thought those three points were interesting N & M, Just how I found the difference between the Swaros and the Zeiss when I got my 8 x 32FL's the other week, But I do like the fast Focus of the Zeiss, very much now after a few weeks out in the field.

The colour rendition was one of the things that eventually stopped me buying the swaros - I could not decide whether what I was seeing was real or not. Also, the Zeiss are so nice to hold and handle(for me)

Ultimately, I could have been happy with either.

But it just shows "what suits one", as one of my birding friends who came with me to try them a few times, could not see any colour difference, when it hit me immediately.

 

[FrankD]

Nessus,

Sorry for not replying sooner.

For what it is worth, Doug should have another 8x32 FL for $769 by tomorrow. I sent my pair back to him. I actually prefer the image and handling of the Meopta 8x32s over the Zeiss's. The Zeiss do have a cleaner image with a hair more contrast than the Meoptas but the Meoptas have that relaxing contrast/color representation plus the edge sharpness is so much better.

Just thought I would mention it.

 

[Nessus]

I was in there Friday and saw the pair you returned, the guy knew your name, I think it was Neil although I mainly dealt with Mark. There was a problem with one of the eyecups on that pair where when it went all the way out it kept spinning and it would get stuck and not want to go back in. I think they are going to send them back. They had another one and I took that but am unsure whether I will keep it. I swear the conquest are brighter and the FOV doesn't really seem much bigger on the Victory's. I haven't seen them in the sun yet so I'm waiting for a nice day to make my decision. I do love the size and handling and that the eyecups come out farther making it easier to see the image as one solid circle. Damm they are tack sharp though, but so are the Conquests except for the edges. So my main question is, is the center image any better than the Conquests? It may possibly not be quite as good. The center field image on the pair of Conquests I have is as sharp and contrasty as anything I have ever looked through at any price so it's going to come down brightness and color cast.

 

[FrankD]

Hmm, your comment is surprising. I detected nothing wrong with the eyecups on the model that I returned. I do not use them though as I need to have them fully collapsed in order to see the full field of view.

...and for what it is worth, no, I don't see much of a difference in the centerfield performance between the little Conquest and the little FL.

 

[Nessus]

Good thing you didn't get it then because the eyecup was definitely messed up. I used the Victorys for the first day today in the sun and was enjoying them. I really like the feel and form factor but I'm still not sure which color cast I like better. There were plenty of times were the Conquest just plain out performed it looking into dark areas and whatnot but there were other times were I seemed to get a hair better contrast out of the Victory's. And of course they are less finicky in getting the field aligned. I'm becomeing convinced that part of the problem with the Conquests is the eye cups need to come out another quarter inch or so. I notice if my eyes are further out from the oculars the images overlap more easily. You might not notice this as you keep them collapsed for glasses use.

Did you happen to notice it seems like one of the main differences between the two is that conquest has an added flat lens about half inch past the objective that seems to serve no purpose except to make it dimmer than the victory and perhaps cause flare? I've been wondering if that lens is critical to the seal of the binocular. I wish I had the kind of money where I could risk carefully breaking and removing it. The binocular might become brighter and less flare prone and except for FOV it would womp all over the Victory, that is if you don't ruin it altogether. I googled for people who had broken the outer lens but had no luck.

I also picked up a conquest 12x45 recently and absolutely love it. I remember someone posting about a set of rubber lens covers from some Swaros that fit those, was that you?

 

[Kevin Purcell]

Did you happen to notice it seems like one of the main differences between the two is that conquest has an added flat lens about half inch past the objective that seems to serve no purpose except to make it dimmer than the victory and perhaps cause flare?

It's not a flat lens ... it's a glass plate. It keeps the Conquest waterproof. The Conquest focuses (like the previous Zeiss 8x30B and the Canon IS models) by moving the objective. The glass plate seals the bin. The FL focuses by moving an internal focussing lens.

In terms of number of surfaces between the plate and the internal focusing lens it's a eash (they both have two sides). The FL has more transmission (is brighter) due to both the dielectric coating on the SP prisms and (I suspect) better AR coatings.

As I mentioned before I find the Conquest has narrower FOV (duh! ), the warm color cast and it tests to suffer more from stray light (perhaps because of the smaller exit pupil).

I still like both of them for different occasions but the FL is better.

 

[end4]

The FL has more transmission (is brighter) due to both the dielectric coating on the SP prisms and (I suspect) better AR coatings.

I cannot find the numbers for this. Where can I find them?

 

[Nessus]

I still like both of them for different occasions but the FL is better.

Me too. I've been doing a lot of side by side comparison since I got the FL's and I have to say there are a fair amount of situations where the Conquest will just flat out beat the FL's, at least in looking at a particular object. I swear the Conquests are brighter and have less a saturated and contrasty view. I Think people just asume the FL's are brighter because the 42mm one's are but quite a few times I was looking deep into bushes at a squirrel or looking back into a dimly lit store and was able to out resolve with the Conquests.

Tomorrow will be sunny here at last so I can get a nice view of the rich color. At least I'm expecting a more saturated color in the sunlight from the FL's, they seem less cyan too but are still on the cold side. Overall I really like the fit and feel of them and and the ease with which the images align compared to the conquest.

The AFOV doesn't seem as much larger as I thought it would be. I thought it would be as big as my 10x42 FL's. I'll have to do some testing on that.

At first I was sure I was going to sell my Conquests but now I'm not so sure, I need some more side by side time with them, maybe there's a spot in the arsenal for both. ( Although the whole idea of that just feels absurd, only a forum like this would understand) |:d|

 

[ronh]

I wouldn't expect the FL to be any brighter. They have the same type prisms, Schmidt Pechan, and equally good coatings, judging from the ads at least, except the FL now has Lotutec. I'd guess what you're seeing is mostly a perception related to the color cast, or something else.

I have not seen any measurements of the Conquest transmission. Nor have I seen a comparison between the transmission of Lotutec and non-Lotutec FL which certainly look different, for what that's worth.

Some time back there was a discussion of the reduction in transmission of SP prisms compared to AKs. Henry Link and Surveyor were in on that one, and it turned out the larger AK-prism FLs were coming in around 95%, the 32mm SP-prism FLs two or three percent less. Also I'm think but am not quite certain, that those values were averages over the daytime eye's color response. Maybe one of those guys will chip in here.

Wider field, heavier construction, and reduced CA are what the FL offers over the Conquest.
Ron

 

[Nessus]

I'd guess what you're seeing is mostly a perception related to the color cast, or something else.


Ron

I think the reason for the slight edge in brightness on the Conquests is that smaller FOV and the way the coatings are designed, they don't give as rich an image and that's because they appear to be letting more light through. But still all things considered they are a better bin.

I just love how tiny they are and when you hand them to someone they are thinking, "Ohh lets get a look through this little bincocular" Meanwhile it's probably the best image they've ever seen through glass of any size in their life.

NYC has been overcast forever now, I'm dying to get them out in the sun.

 

[mayoayo]

It took my a while to figure what kind of color bias or rendition the FL 8x32 has...i was definitely used to more neutral views in ED binos( swift 820 ED,pentax ED 8x32,zen ED 8x)..even non ed like the nikon LXL or SE offer more neutral and saturated views than the FL,but the FL is brighter than any of them..sometimes it feels like it pushes the bluish tone of the atmosphere itself!!!.but some other times,it represent a more neutral cast .always offers incredibly bright images and a relaxed view.It is taking me a little time to get used,but..this said,i think it is the best bino i have handled,...resistent to glare and reflections comfortable,extremely sharp,natural to point,amazing DOF and perfect size..oh ,and the focussing action is even better than the LXL..

 

[[email protected]]

It took my a while to figure what kind of color bias or rendition the FL 8x32 has...i was definitely used to more neutral views in ED binos( swift 820 ED,pentax ED 8x32,zen ED 8x)..even non ed like the nikon LXL or SE offer more neutral and saturated views than the FL,but the FL is brighter than any of them..sometimes it feels like it pushes the bluish tone of the atmosphere itself!!!.but some other times,it represent a more neutral cast .always offers incredibly bright images and a relaxed view.It is taking me a little time to get used,but..this said,i think it is the best bino i have handled,...resistent to glare and reflections comfortable,extremely sharp,natural to point,amazing DOF and perfect size..oh ,and the focussing action is even better than the LXL..

I'll second that. Plus it comes with the best case, strap, rainguard and tethered objective covers. Awesome binocular.

 

[[email protected]]

I wouldn't expect the FL to be any brighter. They have the same type prisms, Schmidt Pechan, and equally good coatings, judging from the ads at least, except the FL now has Lotutec. I'd guess what you're seeing is mostly a perception related to the color cast, or something else.

I have not seen any measurements of the Conquest transmission. Nor have I seen a comparison between the transmission of Lotutec and non-Lotutec FL which certainly look different, for what that's worth.

Some time back there was a discussion of the reduction in transmission of SP prisms compared to AKs. Henry Link and Surveyor were in on that one, and it turned out the larger AK-prism FLs were coming in around 95%, the 32mm SP-prism FLs two or three percent less. Also I'm think but am not quite certain, that those values were averages over the daytime eye's color response. Maybe one of those guys will chip in here.

Wider field, heavier construction, and reduced CA are what the FL offers over the Conquest.
Ron

"Wider field, heavier construction, and reduced CA are what the FL offers over the Conquest" and resolution, contrast and definitely brightness and you have it in a nutshell.