Review: Zeiss Victory SF 10x32 (1 Viewer)

[Ground Control]

You are welcome Grial. Unfortunately I never tried an FL 10x32 so I can't make a comparison other than to comment that the SF's fov of 130m is a substantial improvement over the FL's 120m giving it an area of view 17% larger.

Lee

Hey. I'm new to this so go easy please. But i read that with field flattener lenses a larger actual fov was needed to make it APPEAR to have a similar AFOV? In other words the AFOV is roughly identical and the immersiveness/user experience is the same in the FL/SF.

 

[Ground Control]

As we await Lee's reply... (I'd speculate that he would lean toward the 8x) I have both 8x32 and 10x32 SFs and will say from my experience that I prefer neither, generally - they each serve quite well depending simply on the magnification level that you typically prefer as an individual. The two binoculars are practically identical in size, shape, weight, and function - I have to look at the label, when picking one of them up, to know which one it is.

In regular daylight they both appear as similarly bright to each other and to my 10x42 SFs. I enjoy having both, and use them more often than I choose my 10x42 SFs, which seem quite large and heavy in comparison to the 32s.

For longer distance viewing and for greater magnification, of course the 10x32 serves that application better.

For a more hand-held stability and larger field of view, the 8x32 is my preferred "all-arounder".

If I were forced to choose, I would likely lean toward the 8x32 for the greater hand-held stability and greater field of view.

Hey. Did you ever try the Zeiss Fl 8x32 or 10x32 and if so how would they stack up to the SFs in terms of immersiveness, resolution and depth of field? The SFs appear to have shallow dof (my conquest HD 10x42 are awesome but but very shallow dof). Was thinking about trying some FLs or HTs. Cheers

 

[Troubador]

Hey. I'm new to this so go easy please. But i read that with field flattener lenses a larger actual fov was needed to make it APPEAR to have a similar AFOV? In other words the AFOV is roughly identical and the immersiveness/user experience is the same in the FL/SF.

I don't give much importance to the concept of AFOV. I do have an SF10x32 but for normal use I favour SF8x32.

 

[Paultricounty]

Hey. Did you ever try the Zeiss Fl 8x32 or 10x32 and if so how would they stack up to the SFs in terms of immersiveness, resolution and depth of field? The SFs appear to have shallow dof (my conquest HD 10x42 are awesome but but very shallow dof). Was thinking about trying some FLs or HTs. Cheers

DOF is not determined by make or model, its mainly determined by magnification. DOF on all 10x will be the same, an 8x will have more DOF as a 7x will have more than the 8x. Optically the FL is excellent glass so you won’t be disappointed with them. The SF will give you a larger and flatter FOV and the ergonomics are different.

 

[AlphaFan]

Hey. Did you ever try the Zeiss Fl 8x32 or 10x32 and if so how would they stack up to the SFs in terms of immersiveness, resolution and depth of field? The SFs appear to have shallow dof (my conquest HD 10x42 are awesome but but very shallow dof). Was thinking about trying some FLs or HTs. Cheers

The Conquest HD you are currently running offers a fairly impressive view for its pricepoint. The biggest issue is a bit of CA (to me only obvious when searching for it) -- a bit better controlled in the 8x32 version IMO. I own an 8x32FL -- do I consider it a better binocular than the Conquest? Optically, it is close but the FL definitely has better CA control. However, there is a huge difference in size, the FL is lighter, and handling/haptics are more refined. The big wow of the 8x32 FL is packing that superb view into such a small, refined and great-handling package. Also have the new 8x40 SFL and feel Zeiss once again captured the same theme of superb optics (to me, a smidge better than the FL or Conquest HD) in a small and refined package for a 40mm objective. They just work. Will they replace my 8x32 FL? For certain applications yes, for others no. I've also sampled the 8x32 SF. Overall, I liked the view, handling and haptics, but I personally had issues with blackouts and kidney-beaning. However, I don't experience that in my 10x42 SF. That's why it's always best to try before buying -- every optic is a unique combination of features/design. None are perfect, and sampling a variety will help clarify individual preferences.