SLC 8x56 vs Conquest HD 8x56 Shootout (5 Viewers)

[Malloot]

Interesting test indeed.

But I wondered which model year they have used for the SLC.

I noticed that the minimal focus distance 4,7 mtr was, the specs Swarovski states are 3,9 mtr.
I even get in focus under 3 mtr.

Also the light transmission of the SLC is in the test ~1,2% lower then the Conquest, but in the data have seen the SLC performed a few percentages better then the Conquest.

Gijs, can you correct me if I'm wrong or tell which different interpretations have been made?

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Malloot, post 21,
I found a close focus of 3,8 meter for the SLC 8x56 and the light transmission values we measured for the SLC were around 95% at 550 nm (daylight vision), which is higher then the values in the test report. The transmission values of the all Conquests we measured (32 and 42 mm) were lower and around 89-90% (consistent with the top binoculars made by Kamakura, who makes the Conquests for Zeiss), but we did not measure the 8x56 Conquest yet.
Gijs

 

[NDhunter]

Here's another shootout including (among others) the Victory 8x54 HT, Victory 8x56 FL, Conquest 8x56 HD and the Swarovski SLC 8x56 HD:

http://www.manfred-alberts.de/big-six-im-vergleich-fernglaeser-8-x-56er-test

Very interesting review with night and day light transmission measurements.

I am planning on getting either a top 7x50 or one of these 8x56 light gathering monsters (I already own a Zeiss Conquest HD 15x56) so I'm very interested in this or any similar thread.

Good of you post the link, I could open the site but not the test
with my browser and translator.
I would find the test interesting.
Could someone post a link or this test in English ?

Thanks. Jerry

 

[plc22]

Malloot, post 21,
I found a close focus of 3,8 meter for the SLC 8x56 and the light transmission values we measured for the SLC were around 95% at 550 nm (daylight vision), which is higher then the values in the test report. The transmission values of the all Conquests we measured (32 and 42 mm) were lower and around 89-90% (consistent with the top binoculars made by Kamakura, who makes the Conquests for Zeiss), but we did not measure the 8x56 Conquest yet.
Gijs

The Conquest HD 56mm models use Abbe-Koenig prisms and have therefore at least an extra 3-4% compared to your 89-90% measurements for the schmidt-Pechan models.
The SLC 8x56 is the latest HD model (see the 133m FOV).
Be careful when you measure light transmission because your value seems to be the peak of the curve and not the integral.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

plc22,
The SLC 8x56 we tested was also the most recent model, it was brand new. I am aware that 95% transmission we measured was the value at 550 nm, which is of course the peak value located at that particular wavelength. In the Zeiss flyers a value of 95,2 % transmission value is mentioned for the 8x42 HT, a value we also measured but again only as a peak value at 550 nm. It depends on the quality of the optical glass and the coatings of the 8x56 Conquests if they have a transmission value of 95% also with Abbe-König prisms. But we will see: "meten is weten" as we say in Dutch (Lee can translate it),
Gijs

 

[kestrel1]

Piers observation about better resolution in Conquest seems acknowledged by this review, moreover, the conquest is best with 3,2. automated google translate http://translate.google.com/transla...+&cd=1&hl=sk&ct=clnk&gl=sk&edit-text=&act=url make shift in rows, so better is to make translation by copy paste into G-translate.

 

[Malloot]

plc22,
The SLC 8x56 we tested was also the most recent model, it was brand new. I am aware that 95% transmission we measured was the value at 550 nm, which is of course the peak value located at that particular wavelength. In the Zeiss flyers a value of 95,2 % transmission value is mentioned for the 8x42 HT, a value we also measured but again only as a peak value at 550 nm. It depends on the quality of the optical glass and the coatings of the 8x56 Conquests if they have a transmission value of 95% also with Abbe-König prisms. But we will see: "meten is weten" as we say in Dutch (Lee can translate it),
Gijs

At how many nanometer you consider it to be twilight? 600 nm, 700 nm?

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Malloot,
In de schemering verschuift de optimale ooggevoeligheid naar het blauw d.w.z rond 500 nm (de staafjes zijn dan als lichtgevoelig pigment actief, lees ook mijn artikel over Color vision etc. op de WEB-site van House of Outdoor, daarin heb ik een uitgebreide literatuurstudie neergelegd over dit soort zaken).
Gijs

 

[Troubador]

plc22,
"meten is weten" as we say in Dutch (Lee can translate it),
Gijs

Hi Gijs

Sorry to admit defeat with this phrase. I think 'meten' is measuring or similar but I have no idea about the final word: weten has me beten :-O

What tiny bit of Dutch I know comes partly from working with a South African colleague who spoke Afrikaans when we visited customers in Belgium and the Netherlands. So, for the opportunity to translate your Dutch I can only say:
'Donkey Manure' or 'danke mijnheer' :king:

Lee

 

[kabsetz]

To measure is to know

-Kimmo

 

[Malloot]

Malloot,
In de schemering verschuift de optimale ooggevoeligheid naar het blauw d.w.z rond 500 nm (de staafjes zijn dan als lichtgevoelig pigment actief, lees ook mijn artikel over Color vision etc. op de WEB-site van House of Outdoor, daarin heb ik een uitgebreide literatuurstudie neergelegd over dit soort zaken).
Gijs

Je hebt gelijk. En ik daarmee ook een verkeerd gelijk gemaakt in Maarssen waarbij ik vooral op de hoge nanometers heb gelet op de grafieken, het rood in plaats van het blauw.

 

[Malloot]

Hi Gijs
........
'Donkey Manure' or 'danke mijnheer' :king:

Lee

This is a great way to remember the words.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Malloot,
You do not have to worry much since the transmission spectrum of the 8x56 SLC is almost flat between 500 and 600 nm, so the performance at low light levels is very good and the question is: how is the 8x56 Conquest in comparison. It most likely does not have High Transmission optical glass otherwise Zeiss would have introduced an in house very strong competitor for its 8x54 HT at a much lower price and that would not be wise from an economic point of view. Actually I consider the 8x54 HT and the 8x56 SLC direct competitors and I fear that the SLC may win that battle for very critical users, but as I said: "meten is weten", so we will see what the investigation will tell us.
Gijs
Gijs

 

[Malloot]

Gijs, I actually didn't worry at all. I have used the SLC a few times in well into the darkness and they very pleasing.

I didn't like the HT for handling. I loved the Conquest for handling and also the SLC for handling.
And handling is quite important for me, since I can't observe well if the handling doesn't feel right.

It should be a big laugh if the 8x5x bins of Zeiss would perform almost identical in the dark hours.
I doubt they will, indeed for economical reasons.

 

[Troubador]

To measure is to know

-Kimmo

Thanks Kimmo :t:

Lee

 

[plc22]

At how many nanometer you consider it to be twilight? 600 nm, 700 nm?

Day (or photopic) vision peaks at 555nm and night (scotopic) vision peaks at 507nm, so twilight is in between.

 

[Malloot]

Last days I used my SLC 8x56 for which I intended to buy them; Badger watching in the dusk till dark and what a results.

I'm pretty confident I missed quite a few badgers in the past. What a brilliant low-light performance these SLC 8x56 provide. Well into the dark I could see Badgers and which I'm pretty confident about, I wouldn't have seen them with my previous bins (Bushnell Legend 8x42 / Swarovski Habicht 7x42).