Here are the new Victorys: Victory HT (1 Viewer)

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Dear all,
Comparison of focussing speeds does not tel us a lot when one does not take into account the logaritmic focussing of the Swarovskis (and perhaps also other manufacturers), since that enables fast focussing at longer distances and still fast and accurate focussing at shorter distances. That mechanism is different from linear focussing devices and I found it really comfortable.
Gijs

 

[Troubador]

Dear all,
Comparison of focussing speeds does not tel us a lot when one does not take into account the logaritmic focussing of the Swarovskis (and perhaps also other manufacturers), since that enables fast focussing at longer distances and still fast and accurate focussing at shorter distances. That mechanism is different from linear focussing devices and I found it really comfortable.
Gijs

Hi Gijs

Discussing focusing speeds of HTs (and FLs) doesn't tell us much about how they compare with Swaros its true. But we weren't discussing Swaros. Only providing info to folks interested in HTs who haven't tried them yet.

Swaros variable-speed focus action is interesting. What would be more interesting would be a cure for the variable-feel and variable-reliability of the focus mechanism.

Lee

 

[james holdsworth]

Dear all,
Comparison of focussing speeds does not tel us a lot when one does not take into account the logaritmic focussing of the Swarovskis (and perhaps also other manufacturers), since that enables fast focussing at longer distances and still fast and accurate focussing at shorter distances. That mechanism is different from linear focussing devices and I found it really comfortable.
Gijs

I've tried em', they are too slow, much too slow. Who needs two and a half rotations of cranking?

And how did this become a Swaro referral?

 

[brocknroller]

James

My 8x42 HT takes about half a turn to go from focussed on the edge of our terrace (about 10') to houses at the bottom of the valley that we overlook (c 500 yds).

My FL 8x42 takes about 1.2 turns from closest focus to infinity and the HT takes about 1.4. The HT feels just a bit slower but this is already proving useful when trying to focus on birds close by in bushes and stuff where it was easy to 'overshoot' when focusing the FLs. When looking for butterflies and dragonflies settled in vegetation I expect the HTs to be more controllable too.

Lee

That's the way I like it

<B>

 

[SEOW]

Hi Robert (and James)

Did the HT focusing job again. This time instead of estimating the 'turnage' required for each increment, I made note of the position of a small mark on the focus wheel, before and after the focusing. Unlike the FL focus wheel which has an index mark for you to roughly line up and get infinity, the HT wheel is not marked in this way.

So, this time I got the following:

Closest focus to 6m 1 turn
6m to infinity 0.4 turns

Lee

Hmmm, the HT is now sounding to me like it's clearly slower than one would want for getting on fast-moving, small birds at closer distances. It's a bit odd that, if the HT and the FL were really designed for different markets, that they've now stopped making the 8x & 10x FL's.

 

[Hermann]

It's a bit odd that, if the HT and the FL were really designed for different markets, that they've now stopped making the 8x & 10x FL's.

Well, there are several possible explanations for that. If the HT was designed for the hunting market (and the focus on maximum transmission in low light seems to indicate that may well be true) AND the FL's are phased out (which I haven't heard before), well, what may that mean? That Zeiss is giving up trying to sell bins to birders?

I don't think so.

Hermann

 

[Troubador]

Hmmm, the HT is now sounding to me like it's clearly slower than one would want for getting on fast-moving, small birds at closer distances. It's a bit odd that, if the HT and the FL were really designed for different markets, that they've now stopped making the 8x & 10x FL's.

In my view that's because the HT was designed for all markets but was marketed first to hunters.

Lee

 

[Troubador]

Well, there are several possible explanations for that. If the HT was designed for the hunting market (and the focus on maximum transmission in low light seems to indicate that may well be true) AND the FL's are phased out (which I haven't heard before), well, what may that mean? That Zeiss is giving up trying to sell bins to birders?

I don't think so.

Hermann

Hermann the HTs have replaced the two 42mm FLs. The 32s and 56s remain in production at the moment.

Lee

 

[Hermann]

I really fancy a new pair of 8x32s, is it worth waiting to check out a potential HT?

Several people here mentioned that Zeiss told them there were no plans to make a 32mm HT (whatever that means).

So far, so good. However, I met someone from Zeiss at a fair a couple of months ago, and after having had a look at the HT I mentioned I was mainly interested in a new 32mm, not so much in 42mm binoculars. Now, he knows that I'm a birder and that I have a few decent binoculars. His reply was something like "Well, you've got a few good binoculars, so you don't need one right now." He wouldn't elaborate further.

Make of that what you will.

Hermann

 

[Troubador]

Several people here mentioned that Zeiss told them there were no plans to make a 32mm HT (whatever that means).

So far, so good. However, I met someone from Zeiss at a fair a couple of months ago, and after having had a look at the HT I mentioned I was mainly interested in a new 32mm, not so much in 42mm binoculars. Now, he knows that I'm a birder and that I have a few decent binoculars. His reply was something like "Well, you've got a few good binoculars, so you don't need one right now." He wouldn't elaborate further.

Make of that what you will.

Hermann

That is interesting Hermann.

I suppose that just because the HT will not give birth to a 32mm it doesn't mean there cannot be a different new Zeiss 32. And the info from the USA suggests the remaining FLs will be replaced which presumably includes the FL 32.

Lee

 

[hinnark]

I see no indication at all that the HTs are designed exclusively for the hunting market. Doesn't make much sense IMO. I think if they wanted to produce something dedicated for the hunters they should have started with the 56mm bins. High transmission is a strong point for Zeiss, ever was and they probably concentrate on their strong points in order to hold on the distance to the competition in that respect. One precondition for a 32mm HT could well be that the special high transmittance glass by Schott is also available for the glasses needed for the SP-prisms.

Steve

 

[jan van daalen]

As far as I know the HT model was designed and made for the needs of hunters.
Jan

 

[hinnark]

As far as I know the HT model was designed and made for the needs of hunters.
Jan

Jan,

as I said above, that doesn't make much sense to me. I hope your claim has nothing to do with your special relastionship with Zeiss.

Steve

 

[jan van daalen]

It does not!
But even as it would be (which is not), my findings are the same.
Jan

 

[motts]

I don't see why the HTs wouldn't be amazing for birders. It's obvious that their initial marketing seems to be aimed at Hunters, but I see no reason to believe that the HTs would somehow not be good for birding because of this...purely a marketing strategy.

With the exception of the Steiner Predator, which alters light filtering in order to "bring out game," hunters want to see just as clearly and accurately as birders. Hunters may be a bit harder on the equipment, so if Zeiss made the model more robust without affecting the view, I don't see how that hurts birders either.

Zeiss could've come out first with a marketing campaign aimed at birders and we could've all said it's not as good for hunters. Comaparing a pair to the other known "birding" binoculars is the only way to know.

 

[jan van daalen]

The HT is an hell of a bin. No doubt about that.
Every birder should be thrilled to own one, just like he/she would be with an SV, but I thought the issue was wether this bin was designed for hunters or not. And it is!
Jan

 

[james holdsworth]

The only part of the HT design that caters to hunters specifically is the slower focus.

In that case, it would mean that Swaro. designed all of the EL's exclusively for hunters...

 

[jan van daalen]

Correct me when I am wrong, but wasn't the complete marketing strategy offering special Schott optic glass called HT for hunters? It was called so bright an 56mm would not be necessary anymore.
Never read the mentioning of an slow focussing anywhere in a Zeiss announcement on this subject.
Jan

 

[james holdsworth]

Correct me when I am wrong, but wasn't the complete marketing strategy offering special Schott optic glass called HT for hunters? It was called so bright an 56mm would not be necessary anymore.
Never read the mentioning of an slow focussing anywhere in a Zeiss announcement on this subject.
Jan

''High Transmittance'' = HT

 

[jan van daalen]

Sorry?