Zeiss SFL 10x40: A Field Review (1 Viewer)

[tenex]

I might be jumping to conclusions but I think I see the difference in how we are both using these binos. You said "Perhaps it would have helped to have a yellow bird in the tree". I am using these binos to look at subjects that grab my attention, as I hope you can tell from reading my review. Your description of looking at a tree with no bird in it suggests you are just looking at an available scene and then trying to analyse how the bino has represented it. I humbly suggest it would be better to wait until any kind of bird lands in that tree (or anywhere else) and then focus on the bird. I think having a genuine central subject of interest would enable a better assessment of the bino's view.

I doubt we use them differently. Sometimes one sees a target like a bird first, then brings up the binocular; I could even suggest that the store nail a Norwegian parrot to the tree in their parking lot for the purpose. But often one is only scanning for something or exploring a landscape, and must focus on whatever's there.

If you have a continuing difficulty in seeing what is in focus and what is not, it suggests to me that you need to re-set the bino's dioptre adjustment and/or visit an optician to have your vision tested.

That's insulting and irrelevant. I clearly said that I had no such issue with other bins, and am simply curious why I seemed to here, and whether anyone else has.

 

[nkbj]

An unfamiliar white shape out on the open sea just outside the bay, was revealed by the SFLs to be a Black Guillemot in winter plumage. We have adopted the Shetland name for these birds: Tystie (which we pronounce as ‘tice-sti’) as we see this species most often when visiting Islay in the winter months and it seems logically clumsy to us to be calling a white bird a Black Guillemot, and Tystie, to us at least, sounds friendlier.

The name Tystie must be inspired by the old Norse language. The Black Guillemot is called Tejst i Danish (pronounced as ‘ticest’).

 

[edwincjones]

Do we know what compromises Zeiss made for these to be smaller and lighter?

edj

 

[Bill Atwood]

Do we know what compromises Zeiss made for these to be smaller and lighter?

edj

"The lens diameter has been reduced by 2 mm, making it possible to use thinner lens elements at closer spacing and thus reduce the binoculars’ weight by up to 20% and their volume by up to 13% compared to the ZEISS Victory SF models."

 

[Troubador]

Do you think we were all born yesterday? You've clearly never even been to Scotland - most of your pictures show sunshine.

LOL! But to get technical for a moment, Scotland's area of heaviest rain that gives it a reputation for constant downpours starts a little to the east of the west coast of the mainland. This is because the clouds arriving from the Atlantic are forced upwards by the hills and this results in rain. Meanwhile the islands off the west coast do get plenty of rain but not as much as the mainland, or at least that was the case from charts I saw some years back.

Lee

 

[Troubador]

That's insulting and irrelevant. I clearly said that I had no such issue with other bins, and am simply curious why I seemed to here, and whether anyone else has.

Please accept my apologies. No insult was intended, I was simply responding to your comment: "I wasn't quite sure where or when it was focused because nothing seemed clearly out of focus".

Lee

 

[Troubador]

Excellent write-up, Lee, with lots of extra info.
You said: "But best of all were the regular flocks of Barnacle Geese, one of which was certainly over 700 strong". I guess to count them you used the well known method of counting the legs and then divided by two.

I haven't tried that method but it sounds fun. According to published statistics over 30,000 Barnacle Geese visit Islay each year. When estimating the numbers in a flock I count off 10 geese and note the size of this group and then estimate the area covered by 10 times this, making an estimate of 100 geese, and finally, making a guess at how many times this group of 100 birds is repeated in the flock flying by. No, it isn't scientific, but with over 30,000 Barnies roaming around over the grazeable parts of Islay you can imagine some of the flocks are huge. Sometimes the geese are strung out in long vee-shaped formations making it relatively easy to count off 10 birds then estimate how many more groups of 10 there are, and hence a total, but when they are simply in a mass flock, constantly changing shape, it is more of a challenge.

Lee

 

[PeterPS]

I haven't tried that method but it sounds fun. According to published statistics over 30,000 Barnacle Geese visit Islay each year. When estimating the numbers in a flock I count off 10 geese and note the size of this group and then estimate the area covered by 10 times this, making an estimate of 100 geese, and finally, making a guess at how many times this group of 100 birds is repeated in the flock flying by. No, it isn't scientific, but with over 30,000 Barnies roaming around over the grazeable parts of Islay you can imagine some of the flocks are huge. Sometimes the geese are strung out in long vee-shaped formations making it relatively easy to count off 10 birds then estimate how many more groups of 10 there are, and hence a total, but when they are simply in a mass flock, constantly changing shape, it is more of a challenge.

Lee

I was pretty sure that was the method you used and cannot think of a better one. Any other method for estimating the size of a huge flock?

 

[Troubador]

I doubt we use them differently. Sometimes one sees a target like a bird first, then brings up the binocular; I could even suggest that the store nail a Norwegian parrot to the tree in their parking lot for the purpose. But often one is only scanning for something or exploring a landscape, and must focus on whatever's there.


That's insulting and irrelevant. I clearly said that I had no such issue with other bins, and am simply curious why I seemed to here, and whether anyone else has.

We are back home now and I have re-read our posts and I agree with you that my post was unkind and inappropriate. I apologise again and hope you can accept this.

Lee

 

[tenex]

We are back home now and I have re-read our posts and I agree with you that my post was unkind and inappropriate. I apologise again and hope you can accept this.

Of course, thanks. But somehow this question has become problematic and led nowhere useful, so I simply won't mention it again.

 

[Brummie]

There's now a review up on Scopeviews.co.uk - in summary, Roger Vine liked them a lot. His only gripe was the non-European manufacture potentially making it harder to get post-warranty service.

So the only two extensive reviews I've seen have both been very positive.

 

[tenex]

But interestingly, Roger remarks:
"The focus snap is such a fine point it’s almost a minor problem, with just the slightest nudge required to get it perfect."

He seems to be saying that correct focus is a bit tricky due to the speed of the focuser (which I hadn't considered in a brief trial) rather than the optical rendering (which I'm not going to mention again).

 

[Maximc1]

But interestingly, Roger remarks:
"The focus snap is such a fine point it’s almost a minor problem, with just the slightest nudge required to get it perfect."

He seems to be saying that correct focus is a bit tricky due to the speed of the focuser (which I hadn't considered in a brief trial) rather than the optical rendering (which I'm not going to mention again).

I tried a pair of the 10x40's and also found focusing a bit tricky but it was only a minor issue for me. A greater issue for me was the level of false color (green and purple fringing on some objects) which proved to be a deal breaker for me.

 

[Troubador]

But interestingly, Roger remarks:
"The focus snap is such a fine point it’s almost a minor problem, with just the slightest nudge required to get it perfect."

He seems to be saying that correct focus is a bit tricky due to the speed of the focuser (which I hadn't considered in a brief trial) rather than the optical rendering (which I'm not going to mention again).

Using my standardised focus speed test SFLs are very similar to FL 8x32, Terra ED 8x32, and Trinovid HD 8x32, not as fast as Conquest HD 8x32 but noticeably faster than Ultravid HD 8x32 and significantly faster than any SF32 or 42.

In normal field use I do not try to go straight to perfect focus but go past it a short distance, then come back slowly to the point of sharpest focus. This is the technique recommended by Zeiss many decades ago. I had no problems focusing SFL 8x or 10x.

Lee

 

[SUPPRESSOR]

Using my standardised focus speed test SFLs are very similar to FL 8x32, Terra ED 8x32, and Trinovid HD 8x32, not as fast as Conquest HD 8x32 but noticeably faster than Ultravid HD 8x32 and significantly faster than any SF32 or 42.

In normal field use I do not try to go straight to perfect focus but go past it a short distance, then come back slowly to the point of sharpest focus. This is the technique recommended by Zeiss many decades ago. I had no problems focusing SFL 8x or 10x.

Lee

A fast focuser like my Zeiss 10x42 Victory fl's is a delight to use, but, requires a delicate touch. This I perfected in my youth. Not on binoculars you understand!!.
Peter.

 

[Troubador]

A fast focuser like my Zeiss 10x42 Victory fl's is a delight to use, but, requires a delicate touch. This I perfected in my youth. Not on binoculars you understand!!.
Peter.

I understand perfectly, you are clearly referring to table tennis .

Lee

 

[ragin-cajun]

my 2 cents after spending time w/ the SFL40. nice glass w/ good colors. they shine at dusk. FOV was ok. was surprised how small they felt in hand.. but there are better glass options available.... the SLC (or SF or NLs) have much better edge-to-edge views imo. my-no-experience w/ binos-wife tried the SFL and SLCs and she much preferred the SLC view... I'm not impressed with the rubber on the Zeiss body or eyecups. scuffs and feels cheap. I wouldn't own a Zeiss until they fix the cheap rubber feel. the Swaro (or Noctivid) body and cups blow Zeiss outta the water. after trying several I'm saving up for the NL 8x42s.

 

[Troubador]

My wife’s brother, for a long time a lover of Leica and Kowa has at last been persuaded to buy an SFL 10x40 and he is absolutely delighted with it.

 

[Thotmosis]

My brother is very happy with the Swift Audubon 10x50 i gave him but his wife prefers the old Trinovid 7x42 i gave her. My wife likes the Swarovski Habicht and Zeiss FL 7x42 the best. Me i like them all, i prefer used bino’s made in the old European countries, like e.g. Germany, Portugal and Austria. But i also have these perfect Swift from Japan. I would never buy Chinese though. Only take away

 

[Dyrlege]

Lovely write-up. Thank you, Lee