-
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.
Here are the new Victorys: Victory HT (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter frank.e.oy
- Start date
For starters, I'll admit I'm grumpy this morning anyway. And now this.
If the edge astigmatism is improved, you'd hope they'd have the sense to tell us about it. The eyepiece is certainly only average-fancy looking. In playing the transmission card, they've stuck with the AK prisms which have defined Zeiss for years now, but keep the objective focal length short, making it that much harder to achieve good field correction. Maybe they will surpise me, but it will be just that.
There are still Cro-Magnons among us who don't mind being stiffed a bit on blue, despite its undoubted benefits in low light situations. More blue than the FL would be like adding hops to IPA.
I do reckon it would grip nicely, but am not used to the look of all that unsupported barrel. Does this design strike anybody else as flimsy looking? I actually think the Conquest HD looks better.
I'm left thinking, WHY am I supposed to want this, since I already have an FL? Of course, for that very reason, I'm biassed--I'm trying not to want one! So far, though, it's easy.
Ron
edited note: it was later discovered by Henry Link that the eyepiece design that I referred to above is likely not really the one used in the HT.
If the edge astigmatism is improved, you'd hope they'd have the sense to tell us about it. The eyepiece is certainly only average-fancy looking. In playing the transmission card, they've stuck with the AK prisms which have defined Zeiss for years now, but keep the objective focal length short, making it that much harder to achieve good field correction. Maybe they will surpise me, but it will be just that.
There are still Cro-Magnons among us who don't mind being stiffed a bit on blue, despite its undoubted benefits in low light situations. More blue than the FL would be like adding hops to IPA.
I do reckon it would grip nicely, but am not used to the look of all that unsupported barrel. Does this design strike anybody else as flimsy looking? I actually think the Conquest HD looks better.
I'm left thinking, WHY am I supposed to want this, since I already have an FL? Of course, for that very reason, I'm biassed--I'm trying not to want one! So far, though, it's easy.
Ron
edited note: it was later discovered by Henry Link that the eyepiece design that I referred to above is likely not really the one used in the HT.
Last edited:
spacepilot
Well-known member
I haven't been interested in optics long enough to remember the launch of the Victory FL models. Was the 7x42 FL available at the beginning with the 8x and 10x42 models?
James Bean
Well-known member
The new Zeiss HT looks 'quite neiss' on the lines of the Nikon EDG, both of which will no doubt prove to be similarly superb, but I think I'll stick with my Zeiss BGAT and Nikon HG, whose unique shapes from now on will appear even more distinctive and whose optics will continue to be more than adequate for my tired old eyes...
And just think of the money I'll save!
And just think of the money I'll save!
FrankD
Well-known member
Henry,
It was in one of the links provided above. I don't remember which to be honest with you. Since I know you are fond of dissecting them I thought I would include it so you could offer some insight.....which is now much appreciated.
SP,
Yes, I believe they were but who knows nowadays considering the year to year releases of different configurations of a new model.
It was in one of the links provided above. I don't remember which to be honest with you. Since I know you are fond of dissecting them I thought I would include it so you could offer some insight.....which is now much appreciated.
SP,
Yes, I believe they were but who knows nowadays considering the year to year releases of different configurations of a new model.
looksharp65
Well-known member
Perhaps Meopta too. But the absence of a 7x42 might open up for a 7x32.
The 4.6 mm exit pupil with such transmission rate should be very bright in all but the deepest dusk.
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Interesting that the focus mechanism is in front of the focus knob (closer to EP) rather than behind it. That means the second bridge can be very thin, and probably quite comfortable--no stretch to focus. The frame must be magnesium given the long unsupported barrels. I'd guess it feels pretty good.
Diopter must be the second knob, front and center.
As for the looks? Hmm. Guess I'd want to see it in person.
Mark
Diopter must be the second knob, front and center.
As for the looks? Hmm. Guess I'd want to see it in person.
Mark
spacepilot
Well-known member
Thanks, Frank. I just wondered if the 7x42 will come out after the initial release of the 8x and 10x models.
michaelboustead
Well-known member
No 10x32 or 8x32? None expected?
Mike
Mike
henry link
Well-known member
I just noticed that the eyepiece image on the left below, apparently from a Zeiss HT, is actually lifted straight from a cutaway of the 8x56 FL on the right, so I don't think it can be relied on to accurately represent the design of the HT eyepiece. I deleted my first post on the subject to avoid disseminating misinformation.
Attachments
Last edited:
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
Yes it was, and at the time it commanded a lot of attention from optics enthusiasts because it was very much the test case for whether Zeiss' new model line would restore the brand's glory on the birding scene. Zeiss made its mark on the birding scene with the 10x40 and (later) especially the 7x42 BGATP models. The subsequent 7x45 Night Owl was awesome optically but also heavy, so it never displaced or replaced the 7x42. The original Victory was a flop overall for a variety of reasons, so Zeiss continued to offer the 7x42 Classic. Only when the 7x42 FL came out did the company have a worthy replacement and a model line that birders were enthusiastic about. If there is to be no 7x42 HT, it seems this story trajectory has lost its relevance in the current market. That said, I guess I'd be very surprised if there were no 7x42 since many consider Zeiss the leader in that configuration.
--AP
spacepilot
Well-known member
Thanks for the history lesson, AP. I didn't realize that the 7x42 models had such an important place in the Zeiss heritage. I'll have to try one some day now. :t:
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
To be fair, Zeiss' 16mm eye relief is like others' 18mm. True, it may not be as easy as the SV 20mm (which for me, even with glasses, is 1-2mm more than needed), but it should be fine for nearly all.
It is surprising that the HT might turn out a bit conservative in design, at least compared to the SV and the EDG, but I'm willing to wait and see. I suspect Zeiss isn't just "sitting on its FLaurels."
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Wait-and-look-through-the-bin............
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Ah, yes, faith looms eternal. Since all current FLs are spec'd at 16mm, do current owners agree with that statement? For me they didn't work very well with my glasses. (Last time someone told me a BA from MIT was equal to everyone else's MA, I had a similar pause for thought.
)Swaro's 8x42 SLC HD, incidentally, is spec'd at 18.5mm, which might better meet your needs. Also, having no field flattener, they might be a better comparison with the new Zeiss than the SV — except for price.
Ed
I do agree with Kammerdeiner, at least as far as the eye reliefs of the 8x42 FL and the 8.5x42 Swarovision go. With reading glasses on and eyecups fully down, I can see a wider true field with the Zeiss. Of course it has a little bit lower magnification, but taking that roughly into account, I am sure that the FL's 16mm and the SV's 20mm cannot be measured in the same way. They have essentially the same effective eye relief.
Ron
Ron
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
From appearance and specifications they don't look like anything to get excited about from a birders point of view but we will have to wait to look through them. The twin bridge with the big focus wheel between it is reminiscent of some of the older porro designs. That design quirk definitely makes me think they are going after the hunters with their gloved hands. Even they say that "The ergonomic Comfort-Focus allows a precise and relaxed usage - even with gloves". I don't think a fair weather birder needs a focus wheel that big with the extra weight that comes with it. I think I will stay with the Nikon EDG's which seem to be more focused on the birding market.
Last edited:
Robert Wallace
Well-known member
I'm with you all the way James.
I used my Zeiss 10x40 BGATs non phase corrected last Saturday and was very happy with my observation of an otter at Leighton Moss (RSPB Reserve).
I also visited the optics demonstration and could not justify buying the 8x32EDG against my 8x32HG.
I like the aesthetics of the Zeiss Classic 10x40 much better than any of their later models, only wish it had better close focussing. While the technical quality may not meet modern standards they are more than adequate for my eyesight and limited ornithological skills.
However in the UK it is clear that there are significant and increasing numbers of middle aged visitors to bird reserves with conspicuous displays of disposable income. This includes having the most expensive binoculars and telescopes not to mention huge telephoto lenses.
The market for expensive binoculars will not decline because of the image they project (there might be a horrible pun somewhere).
