• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New Zeiss Victory SF !!!!!! (1 Viewer)

Steve C

Well-known member
All armor is loose. On all binoculars, somewhere. Armor is NOT a permanent feature. It has to, in some instances be able to be removed so the technician can get into the guts of the binocular for repair. You can get some armor wiggle around the objectives on any binocular I've ever tried, including any Zeiss I've seen or the Swarovskis I have been recently buying/trading, including the SV 10x50 I now have. The definition of "loose armor" is likely directly related to the degree of OCD possessed by the complainer. Chances are at least 99% that it is not an issue.
 
Last edited:

Troubador

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
I'm a satisfied green owner, but I will definitely take a look at the SF, as well as the 10X50 SV when the new local Cabelas opens. Higher contrast levels seem to always hide shadow details whether it be digital images, HDTV displays, optics, etc. On my plasma, to get the highest level of detail in dark areas, I always end up with a somewhat washed out look on quite a bit of material. Electronics might be able to overcome this, a non digital optical system, I'm not sure. It's always about tradeoffs.

Robert

Anyone who has played with Photoshop or Lightroom knows only too well what you lose when you up the contrast too much. The loaded question here of course is 'what is too much?'. Extra contrast might be good for looking at road signs and USAF charts and can help with some gulls, terns, auks and shearwaters.

You said its all about tradeoffs and thats exactly right. Some tradeoffs appeal to one person, but the guy next in line might find it objectionable.

Lee
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
All armor is loose. On all binoculars, somewhere. Armor is NOT a permanent feature. It has to, in some instances be able to be removed so the technician can get into the guts of the binocular for repair. You can get some armor wiggle around the objectives on any binocular I've ever tried, including any Zeiss I've seen or the Swarovskis I have been recently buying/trading, including the SV 10x50 I now have. The definition of "loose armor" is likely directly related to the degree of OCD possessed by the complainer. Chances are at least 99% that it is not an issue.
I have never noticed what I would call loose armour on any binocular I have had. But I really have never sat there and tried to move it around either. I wonder HOW loose it is on this guys Zeiss SF for him to complain about it.
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
I'm a satisfied green owner, but I will definitely take a look at the SF, as well as the 10X50 SV when the new local Cabelas opens. Higher contrast levels seem to always hide shadow details whether it be digital images, HDTV displays, optics, etc. On my plasma, to get the highest level of detail in dark areas, I always end up with a somewhat washed out look on quite a bit of material. Electronics might be able to overcome this, a non digital optical system, I'm not sure. It's always about tradeoffs.

Robert
It would make sense that contrast could wash out details on fine shading and colors that are close to each other but I still like it in my binocular. It just makes everything look more alive.
 

Steve C

Well-known member
I have never noticed what I would call loose armour on any binocular I have had. But I really have never sat there and tried to move it around either. I wonder HOW loose it is on this guys Zeiss SF for him to complain about it.

I have never poked around with armor much either. However, when I start hearing complaints, my curiosity is up, not trying to harpoon anybody for their complaint, but in my personal searches for duplication of the complaint, even with the same binocular, sometimes you are left wondering just what is up. But most armor is loose to some degree around the objective, sometimes maybe a bubble elsewhere.

There is a story about a lady who was doing some sort of article in which she got to go to the Swarovski factory. She had a EL, which they offered to inspect as necessary to illustrate the service warranty aspects of Swarovski. She surrendered her EL. the tech dug into the armor with fingers and proceeded to literally rip the armor from the binocular. The lady reported she nearly fainted at the sight. Looked briefly for it, but no luck.
 
Last edited:

Kammerdiner

Well-known member
I have never poked around with armor much either. However, when I start hearing complaints, my curiosity is up, not trying to harpoon anybody for their complaint, but in my personal searches for duplication of the complaint, even with the same binocular, sometimes you are left wondering just what is up. But most armor is loose to some degree around the objective, sometimes maybe a bubble elsewhere.

There is a story about a lady who was doing some sort of article in which she got to go to the Swarovski factory. She had a EL, which they offered to inspect as necessary to illustrate the service warranty aspects of Swarovski. She surrendered her EL. the tech dug into the armor with fingers and proceeded to literally rip the armor from the binocular. The lady reported she nearly fainted at the sight. Looked briefly for it, but no luck.

Here's the story. Hard to forget a name like Zickafoose. She's a very good writer by the way. :t:

http://juliezickefoose.blogspot.com/2008/08/swarovski-optik.html
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
I have never poked around with armor much either. However, when I start hearing complaints, my curiosity is up, not trying to harpoon anybody for their complaint, but in my personal searches for duplication of the complaint, even with the same binocular, sometimes you are left wondering just what is up. But most armor is loose to some degree around the objective, sometimes maybe a bubble elsewhere.

There is a story about a lady who was doing some sort of article in which she got to go to the Swarovski factory. She had a EL, which they offered to inspect as necessary to illustrate the service warranty aspects of Swarovski. She surrendered her EL. the tech dug into the armor with fingers and proceeded to literally rip the armor from the binocular. The lady reported she nearly fainted at the sight. Looked briefly for it, but no luck.
Yes, I heard of that also and it is probably true. That is probably how they take it off. Just grab it and rip it off.
 

brocknroller

A professed porromaniac
United States
What would have happened if Zeiss made an SF 10X50? I frankly do not know....
...
Rolling Stone,

I could guess. Provided the optical quality was on par with the 8x and 10x42 SFs, the Zeiss 8x and 10x54 HT would be history. They already have a black mark against them with reports of spherical aberration, with only 4mm more aperture, I can't imagine too many people buying the HT unless the SF was priced significantly higher, the 8x and 10x54 HTs sell for $2,499.

If Zeiss expands the SF line upward, it would more likely be an 8x56 and 10x56 SF, though that seems unlikely since Zeiss said the SFs were made for birders, so more likely they would limbo lower with 8x and 10x32 SFs, which would sell much better.

Beatle Brock (guitar and vocals on the Beatles never released "Everyday Chemistry" album).
 
Last edited:

HighNorth

Well-known member
North had some issues, North owns a Swaro, North has said even with the problems it's still the one he turns to. But you don't even acknowledge those comments. Running everyone elses binocular down doesnt make you are your swaro look any better. Nope, there's an agenda behind your postings.

You are unfathomably correct Perterra! I also have to add that I don't just own any Swaro, but the vaunted 8x32 EL SV, a.k.a "the best binocular in the world" according to a certain poster! ;)

HN
 

Gijs van Ginkel

Well-known member
Jerry, post 125,
The crystal division of Swarovski is much much larger than the Swarovski optical division let alone the enormous Tyrolit division, which is also part of the large Swarovski company.
Gijs van Ginkel
 

ceasar

Well-known member
Loose armour - seen 6 samples never seen any problems with loose armour

....................................

...............................................................................................
Eyecups - ....................... What I did have with the Swaro is the rubber bit linked to the metal bit (tech speak!) distorts a lot on the metal after a while and spins or worse still you look down and it's gone lying next to the Trogon you never saw!

.....................................................................................................

............................................................

If anyone was reading this and thinking of buying an SF they would be sorely mistaken thinking there were problems that swaro will never have, there is often a blind loyalty to the old faithful green machine! (I should say Swaro are very good too!....not as good as the SF for my needs though!;))




Did anyone else ever have the problem Simple describes above with the Swarovski eye cups?

I have an eyecup on my 8x30 SLC where the rubber ring on it has come loose and spins when I try to tighten it. If I squeeze it hard I can tighten it.

This came about when I was changing the eye cups to use the optional winged eye cups I have for it.

Is it possible to pull it off an re-glue it to its original tightness or should I contact SONA and purchase another one to replace it while they still have them in stock for this discontinued binocular?

Bob
 

simple

Inglorious Bustards
Did anyone else ever have the problem Simple describes above with the Swarovski eye cups?

I have an eyecup on my 8x30 SLC where the rubber ring on it has come loose and spins when I try to tighten it. If I squeeze it hard I can tighten it.

This came about when I was changing the eye cups to use the optional winged eye cups I have for it.

Is it possible to pull it off an re-glue it to its original tightness or should I contact SONA and purchase another one to replace it while they still have them in stock for this discontinued binocular?

Bob

I had those Bins once - pretty good ! Yeah you should be able to get a replacement rather than glue it, I always run scared of glueing anything on optics if I can avoid it!

It is also likely that the rubber itself has become distorted and damaged due to exposure to the world! so I would get a replacement. Don't the rubber rings on the EL and new SLC fit anyway? Can't recall!
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top