I own both the Ultravid 8x20 and the Victory Pocket 8x25. I've tested them pretty extensively against each other as well as against the CL 8x25's, plus other 8x32's (including my wife's Conquest HD's you see in the photos). We were looking for small, lightweight binoculars for hiking. Neither of use wears glasses. As per all binoculars, you really need to test them out in person to truly get a feel for them, but here are my thoughts:
1. Regardless of what some people here are saying, take it from an actual owner - the VP's are very much a pocket binocular, even though they are slightly bigger than the Ultravids. I take them with me on hikes and near daily walks in the park - they always fit in my pockets. I use them without their case or strap - they fold up quite nicely. Obviously they won't fit in a tight jeans pocket (neither will the Ultravids or probably anything else for that matter). But they easily fit in the pockets of all my shorts, sweat pants, and track pants (all of which have regular sized pockets, not cargo sized). Anywhere the Ultravids go, these can go. The same can not be said with the Conquest HD 8x32's, which are significantly bigger and more than twice as heavy - they were always carried in their case, slung around my shoulder. Like many others here, my Victory Pocket's have replaced my 8x32's.
2. The VP's are definitely best-in-class optically. They are brighter, sharper and have a wider FOV than the CL's. Compared to the UV's it is more of the same, with brightness being even more significantly higher (as others have mentioned, they let in 56% more light than the 20mm objectives on the Ultravids). The tiny exit pupils on the UV mean they suffer a very noticeable drop in brightness in anything but very sunny conditions (even a cloudy day), whereas the VP's hold their own against even premium 8x32's. In fact, they are brighter, sharper and have less CA than the Conquest HD 8x32 - their tiny size and low weight (290g without a strap vs over 800g for the Conquests with their eyecups / covers / strap) make them significantly more pleasurable to use overall, right up until the last 10-15 minutes of the day. Given that more than 95% of my use is primarily during the day, I am more than happy to trade an extra few minutes of use for their outstanding optics and compactness.
3. The Ultravids are impressively tiny without a doubt - the leather covered barrels on my pair exude quality. But I find them a bit fiddly to use. While my wife doesn't have any issues with handling them, they are far too small for my hands - so small that I find them difficult to line up properly and rather awkward to grip. I'm also not a fan of their slippery, flimsy-feeling eyecups - the VP's are in a different league: very solid feeling, and locking with a satisfying click. And the small black leather case the Ultravids come with, while elegant and soft to the touch, offers very little protection against drops or knocks. The Zeiss case is quite solidly padded and is essentially a tiny version of the Victory SF case.
My first serious pair of binoculars were a pair of 8x32's. Like many, I sought a jack of all trades, but ended up with a master of none. Most 8x32's do not actually feel compact to me - in fact, they are not even significantly smaller or lighter than some 8x42's (ex: I have a Ultravid 10x42 that is very nearly the same size and weight than the Conquest HD 8x32 - so much so that they feel absolutely identical to carry on hikes). In his review of the Victory Pocket 8x25's on Scope Views, Roger Vine's asks: "instead of buying 8x32s, why not a full-sized pair and these as a lightweight backup?" I definitely echo his thoughts here - the VP's make a perfect pocket-sized companion for those occasions when you'd rather leave your 42's at home.
