"Tier 2" Conquest HD or Trinovid (8x42) (2 Viewers)

[oetzi]

I know this is a similar subject to other threads (but aren't most of them anyway )...

So I really want a SV/UV/HT but SHOULD I decide willingly (or be forced financially) to drop my goals a notch, I am considering these to be the two main contenders.

I have used and commneted about some very different binos in the recent months. All excellent ones, but very differently priced. Meopta B1, Zeiss Conquest HD, Kowa Genesis, Swarovski EL.

They were all so much better than my skills as a bird watcher. But I kept the one, which did fit my eyes best: No need to fine-adjust the eyepieces at my eyesockets, the least amount of kidney beans for my eyes, the most relaxed view for my eyes.

If only the most expensive one would have met these criterias, I would have bought it. So it is one at nearly half the price and thats fine by me.

That said, I noticed a lot of differences when looking through all these, but these difference meant nothing compared with the ergonomics.

So try yourself before you buy, nothing else matters.

 

[A2GG]

That said, I noticed a lot of differences when looking through all these, but these difference meant nothing compared with the ergonomics.

[/B]

This is always my experience as well when choosing
a new binocular.

Nikon SE: I had a late model 550 serial#. It was indeed razor sharp. Brock is right to say that the
Swaro SV had better be superior when it costs 3 times more than the SE.
I tried the SV at the store when I owned the SE. If the SV has a better image
( I couldn't tell ) than it's not by much. I don't think the Trinovid or UV has better optics than the SE...just a different quality to the view.

 

[A2GG]

Bob,

Oh Chandler Robbins, what an awesome person. I actually have a copy of the "First 15 years" of the BBS as well as an older "Golden Guide" shoved away in my pseudo-library.
I've always wondered how he was able to get by using non-WP binoculars for so long. My 7x35 non-WP porro prisms I inherited are practically useless after being exposed to rain on several occasions.


Happy birding,
Justin

What a resume...sad that he died at a rather young age.

 

[[email protected]]

I have used and commneted about some very different binos in the recent months. All excellent ones, but very differently priced. Meopta B1, Zeiss Conquest HD, Kowa Genesis, Swarovski EL.

They were all so much better than my skills as a bird watcher. But I kept the one, which did fit my eyes best: No need to fine-adjust the eyepieces at my eyesockets, the least amount of kidney beans for my eyes, the most relaxed view for my eyes.

If only the most expensive one would have met these criterias, I would have bought it. So it is one at nearly half the price and thats fine by me.

That said, I noticed a lot of differences when looking through all these, but these difference meant nothing compared with the ergonomics.

So try yourself before you buy, nothing else matters.

Which one did you settle on? I use the same criteria but it just happened that I settled on the most expensive one. The SV. I have expensive tastes though.

 

[[email protected]]

This is always my experience as well when choosing
a new binocular.

Nikon SE: I had a late model 550 serial#. It was indeed razor sharp. Brock is right to say that the
Swaro SV had better be superior when it costs 3 times more than the SE.
I tried the SV at the store when I owned the SE. If the SV has a better image
( I couldn't tell ) than it's not by much. I don't think the Trinovid or UV has better optics than the SE...just a different quality to the view.

The SV has a bigger FOV, sharper at the edges, brighter, and better contrast tham the SE.

 

[[email protected]]

I know this is a similar subject to other threads (but aren't most of them anyway )...

So I really want a SV/UV/HT but SHOULD I decide willingly (or be forced financially) to drop my goals a notch, I am considering these to be the two main contenders. Bearing in mind I haven't yet looked through either one, I am interested in opinions of image quality, contrast, etc. I don't care for the cool blue color bias of the older Zeiss FL and older Conquest. I am guessing the Leica has better "contrast" and is more "warmer" but I'm open to all input.

Annabeth-I know your answer! :king:

If you have smaller hands you might try the Swaro 8x30 CL instead of the Conquest HD. The Conquest might have a little better optics but the Swaro has way better ergo's. I preferred the Swaro CL BUT I also have the SV 8x32 for optics. There is a lot of criticism of the Swaro 8x30 CL but it gives you that same beautiful view of the bird that the SV does on-axis that the SV does for a lot less money and I would put that view up against anything.

 

[Torview]

It would be nice to see at least one thread not descend into why the SV is the best binocular in the World especially as the op is asking about the next tier down.

The SE is a canny buy if 32mm is the desired objective.

Personally I still like the Trinovid over the Conquest, but have you tried the newest SLC, it`s quite a saving on the SV and may be just what you`re looking for.

If you get chance try an Opticron Aurora, its a grower when you spend time with it, much better than many people (who have never spent time with it) would have you believe (IMO), an its the size and weight of most 32mm offerings, always important to me.

 

[perterra]

It would be nice to see at least one thread not descend into why the SV is the best binocular in the World especially as the op is asking about the next tier down.

.

But how else would someone reading this post know that he owns one?

 

[A2GG]

The SV has a bigger FOV, sharper at the edges, brighter, and better contrast tham the SE.

Again, it costs 3 times more than the SE, so
it better perform at a higher level. How much
'better' it is is than the SE just comes down to
opinion and personal preference.

 

[oetzi]

There is a lot of criticism of the Swaro 8x30 CL but it gives you that same beautiful view of the bird that the SV does on-axis that the SV does for a lot less money and I would put that view up against anything.

Really? The CL I tried was definitely not in the league of a Conquest HD (which I tried) and a Kowa Genesis (which I tried), even though its in the same price range. Desirable for size and weight, as was the intention of Swarovski, but not much more. And the "beautiful view" of the SV (which I tried) I havent found in it, either. It has the same green rubber on the outside, though.

 

[oetzi]

Which one did you settle on? I use the same criteria but it just happened that I settled on the most expensive one. The SV. I have expensive tastes though.

I kept the Kowa and the Swaro. The Conquest HD, unfortunately, didnt fit my eyes, adjustment didnt come easy. (As was the Minox Hg 8x33 BR, which I would thorougly recommend the threadstarter to have a look at). The Meopta was a bit too yellowish and the eyepieces too narrow in diameter to fit in my humungos eye-sockets.

(My favourite by far - in fine weather - still is the EII, with the Opticron SRGA being the choice when size and weight are a premium.)

 

[[email protected]]

Really? The CL I tried was definitely not in the league of a Conquest HD (which I tried) and a Kowa Genesis (which I tried), even though its in the same price range. Desirable for size and weight, as was the intention of Swarovski, but not much more. And the "beautiful view" of the SV (which I tried) I havent found in it, either. It has the same green rubber on the outside, though.

I thought that at first about the Swaro 8x30 CL but the more I use the more I am impressed with it. Interesting you still like the EII. Nice wide FOV but IMO it's not as sharp as the alpha roofs especially the SV. I think it is getting a little "Old School" compared to the latest and greatest but too each his own. I have tried Kowa and they never impressed me that much. Swaro's have a certain type of view and you either like it or not. You can certainly tell the CL comes from the same lineage as the SV.

 

[Torview]

I found the CL to have the least "bang per buck" of any binocular I`v ever tried.

So it seems to me this one divides opinions like few others.

 

[jremmons]

I'd agree with Torview and oetzi regarding the Swarovski CL; I thought several of the far cheaper 8x32s beat it out, including the Vortex Viper HD I had at the time which also has better ER, close-focuse, and a wider FoV.

I still would like the chance to try the new Trinovid but at only 15.5mm listed ER I am skeptical as 16mm often seems to be pushing the minimum I require for my glasses.

Happy birding,
Justin

 

[[email protected]]

I'd agree with Torview and oetzi regarding the Swarovski CL; I thought several of the far cheaper 8x32s beat it out, including the Vortex Viper HD I had at the time which also has better ER, close-focuse, and a wider FoV.

I still would like the chance to try the new Trinovid but at only 15.5mm listed ER I am skeptical as 16mm often seems to be pushing the minimum I require for my glasses.

Happy birding,
Justin

That ER and eyecup length can be a deal breaker. You have to try the binocular most of the time to see if it works for you.

 

[[email protected]]

I found the CL to have the least "bang per buck" of any binocular I`v ever tried.

So it seems to me this one divides opinions like few others.

I don't think you gave the Swaro 8x30 CL enough of a try. It is quite good. I think when it came out a few people didn't like it so it got a bad reputation but in reality it is quite good. Remember it is a 30mm binocular with Swaro glass and Swaro coatings which are undeniably the best there is and it has excellent light transmission. There is no way an 8x25 is going to outdo it. Kikkert ranks it above the Zeiss FL and very close to the Conquest HD and that's about right where I would put it. It is interesting that the build quality of the Swaro is 2 points higher than the Conquest HD or FL. I would agree with that also. The Swaro is much finer and a higher build quality than either. It doesn't have the FOV of the SV but it has better edges than the Conquest or FL and better contrast and it is brighter than the Conquest HD and the FL. It has way better ergos than either and it is way smaller and lighter. It is a nice compromise for somebody that can't put up with a compact. I like it better than the FL or Conquest HD overall. It is impressive for the Conquest HD that it is that close to the Leica Ultravid at half the price. Look what's #1! The best birding binocular in the world the Swarovski 8x32 SV.

http://www.kikkertspesialisten.no/p...0_8x32_binoculars_review_kikkert_test8x30.pdf

 

[Torview]

I`m happy you like it Dennis, and you can quote tests all day long, but I found it terribly underwhelming, if you gave me yours it`d be on the bay quicker than you can say "Swaro is best", and I`d buy another of my Bga 7x42`, which by the way kick sand in its face.

 

[[email protected]]

I`m happy you like it Dennis, and you can quote tests all day long, but I found it terribly underwhelming, if you gave me yours it`d be on the bay quicker than you can say "Swaro is best", and I`d buy another of my Bga 7x42`, which by the way kick sand in its face.

I have tried a lot of Opticron's even ordered a couple from the UK. For one reason or another never kept any. Never got along very good with them. I think they are too British for me. The quality was never quite up to my high standards. For some reason I think Swarowski is making their binoculars for me. They work good for me. Too bad they are so expensive. But I don't mind the best usually is.

 

[Troubador]

I don't think you gave the Swaro 8x30 CL enough of a try. It is quite good. I think when it came out a few people didn't like it so it got a bad reputation but in reality it is quite good. Remember it is a 30mm binocular with Swaro glass and Swaro coatings which are undeniably the best there is and it has excellent light transmission. There is no way an 8x25 is going to outdo it. Kikkert ranks it above the Zeiss FL and very close to the Conquest HD and that's about right where I would put it. It is interesting that the build quality of the Swaro is 2 points higher than the Conquest HD or FL. I would agree with that also. The Swaro is much finer and a higher build quality than either. It doesn't have the FOV of the SV but it has better edges than the Conquest or FL and better contrast and it is brighter than the Conquest HD and the FL. It has way better ergos than either and it is way smaller and lighter. It is a nice compromise for somebody that can't put up with a compact. I like it better than the FL or Conquest HD overall. It is impressive for the Conquest HD that it is that close to the Leica Ultravid at half the price. Look what's #1! The best birding binocular in the world the Swarovski 8x32 SV.

http://www.kikkertspesialisten.no/p...0_8x32_binoculars_review_kikkert_test8x30.pdf

Glad you like it too Dennis, like all Swaros it is a lovely piece of kit.

But sharper and with more contrast than a Conquest HD? No sir.
Brighter than an FL 32mm? Hardly.

All IMHO and seen through my eyes not yours of course.

And Swaro glass and coatings are undeniably the best? :smoke:
I deny it !!!!!!!!! There, done it!

Amongst the best, certainly.

Lee

 

[Troubador]

I think they are too British for me.

I think you should start a new thread on this Dennis and tell us just what Britishness is in relation to binoculars, so we can all look out for it the next time we try out unfamiliar binoculars.

Perhaps you could get Albino's and Binomania to include it in their tests......:eat:


Lee