I think optically speaking, you're right. So why do I keep looking at Leica 8x32 Ultravids online? I haven't even seen a pair to handle and look through and there's not a fault I can think of on the Conquests save for the diopter adjustment; I hate them on the right barrel and would prefer a locking center diopter.
-
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.
New here, happened upon the conquest HD 8x32. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Raym0016
- Start date
The point of diminishing returns starts setting in pretty hard at Conquest HD level. I'd say they're definitely knocking on alpha's door, though I do see incremental differences. Conquest HD 8x32 are wonderful bins.
MandoBear
Well-known member
I think the thing with the Conquest HDs is that although they give wonderful views, they don't feel quite "premium" in the hand. Tough, rugged, efficient... yes, but not quite as refined as top-level alphas. If you want that bit of extra refinement you have to pay rather more for it.
Not being an expert, this resonates with me. I have looked through most of the top alpha binoculars and compared to say, NL pure 8x32, there is a bigger difference in build quality than optically.
Last edited:
That sounds right to me. I recently upgraded from some 8x42 conquest hd to Swarovski but decided not to part with them and keep them in my car.
The colours don’t quite match the swaros particularly on flying birds and they don’t feel anything like as comfortable in the hand or on the eye but they are still really nice binoculars.
Because Ultravids are just so nice!!!!
But there's not much in it optically, I have looked through them both.
Actually there's not much in it optically between the 32UVHD+ and my CL 8x25's.... certainly not enough for me to swap!!
Funny, I have absolutely no problem with the dioptre on the barrel, it never moves, and if it does, it's easy to spot.
But...... we all love a bit of quality, and those Leicas are just gorgeous..... I've got a real soft spot for Leica, even though I don't own any anymore..... but maybe one day...( after I've got those Habichts I keep promising myself )😀
I wrote elsewhere that I ordered the 7x35 Retrovids and 7x42 UV from BH a couple weeks ago. Very nicely made, great optics, but fiddly and lacking in ergos that made them a poor fit for me. They went back the same day. I think I'm happy with my Zeiss. No knock on Leica. I would have loved either one of them to work for me.
Peregrine Took
Well-known member
I honestly thought that about the Swarovski's I handled while trying out a whole bunch of bins recently. Never held a Swaro before, so I had to scratch an itch - I found them tough, rugged, heavy and a little bit agricultural. Instead I bought the Conquest, having decided to pay a little less for that bit of extra refinement. lol
.
I called US customer service and I had them a few days later.
What he said. I just got yet another replacement pair of the extended eyecups. They are the same ones for both the 8x32 and 8x42 Conquest HDs.
Sydneybirder
Active member
See Troubadour's post above, #4 in this thread, where he gives the name of Zeiss's authorised UK repairer.
I have been considering to get Conquest HD 8x32 since long time but chose 8x42 because I knew eye relief is longer, and because ER in few cases are satisfying with 8x32s.
Last autumn I got Swarovski NL Pure 8x42, and think it's hard to justify having two 8x42s of such high class.
And today I for the very first time visited a dealer which has Conquest HD 8x32 in stock.
First impression is that while it's pretty bulky to be a 8x32, it feels noticeably lighter and smaller in the hand than the 8x42. Definitely a difference which is appreciated if I get out on hiking and don't want to carry extra weight.
But the most important for me is the eye relief.
I checked the eyecups and noticed that they were not possible to extend much for use without eyeglasses. But with the eyecups in the bottom level I got a full unshadowed view with my eyeglasses. Fully sufficient!
This makes me to seriously consider to replace the 8x42 with 8x32. Even if 8x32 today is higher priced than 8x42 was earlier.
Conquest HD 8x32 is consequently one of the few 8x32s with for me satisfying ER. Swarovski EL 8x32 is another example.
Last autumn I got Swarovski NL Pure 8x42, and think it's hard to justify having two 8x42s of such high class.
And today I for the very first time visited a dealer which has Conquest HD 8x32 in stock.
First impression is that while it's pretty bulky to be a 8x32, it feels noticeably lighter and smaller in the hand than the 8x42. Definitely a difference which is appreciated if I get out on hiking and don't want to carry extra weight.
But the most important for me is the eye relief.
I checked the eyecups and noticed that they were not possible to extend much for use without eyeglasses. But with the eyecups in the bottom level I got a full unshadowed view with my eyeglasses. Fully sufficient!
This makes me to seriously consider to replace the 8x42 with 8x32. Even if 8x32 today is higher priced than 8x42 was earlier.
Conquest HD 8x32 is consequently one of the few 8x32s with for me satisfying ER. Swarovski EL 8x32 is another example.
Hi Richard you are so right. And in places like Grote Peel with birds, dragonflies and butterflies occuring rapidly at different distances Conquest HD 8x32' fast focus speed is just so useful.
Lee
