-
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.
SF 32, First Impressions (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter Troubador
- Start date
Even more questions on the SF 8x32 ...:king:
a. Any photos not just of the rainguard but also of the strap provided? And what do they weigh?
b. In which direction does the 8x32 focus (e.g. anti-clockwise to infinity, like any decent binocular, or the other way round)?
Hermann
who made up his mind to get the 8x32 - provided
it's optically *better* than the Nikon 8x32 SE ...
Michael and Hermann
Sorry, the SF32 came without any accessories whatsoever although I have obtained a photo of the case which many will be glad to learn is not of the clam-shell semi-hard kind as the SF42.
Hermann
SF32 focuses in the same direction as every other Zeiss binocular I have ever tried, which is to say clockwise to infinity.
Lee
Last edited:
Hermann
Well-known member
You're right, I got confused. Clockwise to infinity is the "right" way.
They did use anti-clockwise to infinity in some of their binoculars (including the Victory 10x40 BGATP), and that really did take some getting used to.
Thanks.
Hermann
The first Victory models (8x40 and 10x40) were the other way around, a fact that brought Zeiss considerable criticism. And it did not facilitate motivating customers from other brands to switch.
Hermann and Robert
I have never had the 'pleasure' of trying an original Victory and don't recall reading about the focus direction in the couple of reviews I have found. So this is little nugget of Zeiss information I wasn't aware of, so thanks to you both. I am glad they reverted to clockwise for the model which came after the Victory, which was Victory FL, as it was this model that tempted me back to Zeiss after a time with a Swarovski EL.
Anyway Hermann, not only can you relax in the knowledge that SF32 focuses in the right direction, I can also tell you that the focus action is the sweetest.
Lee
Last edited:
OhWeh
Well-known member
Same good feeling as with 8x42SF and/or 8x32 FL?
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
Used my SF against the FL 32 yesterday afternoon and thought the SF focus was just slightly smoother overall but still preferred the "snap" sharp of my little FL, even though it is a very early model. The session reaffirmed for me how well the SF is balanced and handles regarding grip, focus wheel position and operation.
Lee
Is the x32 SF another standout like the x42 or simply a very good binocular?
Edmund
Edmund
Its a standout. A mega-standout.
I am still working on the field testing for the review and with the current lock down it is not easy. And I am under pressure because Zeiss need this unit back fairly soon.
Lee
Foss
Well-known member
Let me know if I can lend a hand and I'll PM my shipping address. o
Fossie that is so kind and selfless that I am lost for words, in fact I...
Lee
Maybe that will provide a much needed kick in the ass to Leica to make better not prettier instruments
Edmund
Yes, because I have my order in for that one. So don't beat it up!
I don't know about that. The new Leica Retrovid 7x35 is quite impressive optically with class leading transmission.
Last edited:
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
As I recall, the Zeiss 8x30 Diafun, another bin of that era, also focused the wrong way (counter-clockwise to infinity).
--AP
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Clockwise 4 Eva !!!
Thank goodness !
'Otherwise' such sacrilege may have had to be reported to the Moderators ! :eek!: :-O ||
Chosun :gh:
Thank goodness !
'Otherwise' such sacrilege may have had to be reported to the Moderators ! :eek!: :-O |
|Chosun :gh:
There used to be a website listing binoculars that focused counter-clock towards infinity but I have been unable to relocate it. Does anyone know if its sunk or have a link if it is still extant?
Lee
This isn't political correctness, the virus has a name and it's Covid-19. Or you could more generically call it coronavirus as that's the family of viruses it belongs to. Calling it anything else is what's political.
John A Roberts
Well-known member
Hi Cajanuma,
There is a fundamental technical distinction between:
a) the name of the virus, which is ‘severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2’ aka SARS-CoV-2, and;
b) the disease that it causes, which is ‘coronavirus disease 2019’ aka COVID-19
And while the distinction is of course scrupulously observed in the medical literature, in common usage the effect has been conflated with the cause
Though of course the distinction does not materially alter the point that you were making
FYI
John
There is a fundamental technical distinction between:
a) the name of the virus, which is ‘severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2’ aka SARS-CoV-2, and;
b) the disease that it causes, which is ‘coronavirus disease 2019’ aka COVID-19
And while the distinction is of course scrupulously observed in the medical literature, in common usage the effect has been conflated with the cause
Though of course the distinction does not materially alter the point that you were making
FYI
John
Last edited:
