• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Zeiss SFL versus Zeiss Victory FL contrast and color reproduction. (2 Viewers)

binomaniac

Well-known member
Romania
I have two 42 mm binoculars: Zeiss Victory FL 7x42 and Leica Noctivid 8x42 and I would like to keep only one but I can't decide because I love both : the over saturated colors of Noctivid and the cleaner colors of Victory. I've read a lot of reviews about the new Zeiss SFL and I think that since I want my binoculars to be smaller and lighter but still have a decent exit pupil and brightness, the Zeiss SFL might be the right binocular for me. . I would like to know from someone who had the opportunity to compare the Victory Fl with the SFL, how do the two binoculars compare in terms of color reproduction, is the new SFL much better in terms of contrast and colors than the Victory FL? Thanks in advance for any information.
 
I know that when it comes to the appreciation of colors and contrast, people can be extremely subjective because not everyone perceives colors in the same way, but I would like to know if there are such big differences that almost anyone can notice them. I have this curiosity because in many reviews people say that SFL has the most pleasant colors.
 
Yes, I think you are very right here because I have noticed that I have this obsession with wanting to see more colorful colors through the binoculars than in reality,:)
 
Yes, I think you are very right here because I have noticed that I have this obsession with wanting to see more colorful colors through the binoculars than in reality,:)
I have had FL 8x42 and 8x32 and have had both SFL 8x and 10x each for 3 weeks for the reviews I have posted on here.

I think the colour reproduction of both FL and SFL are realistic with SFL having slightly more gentle colours, more 'water-colours' to use an art comparison.
To me this doesn't mean weak colours but rather true to life and unexaggerated. I would be happy with the colours of either of these. My main binos are SF 8x32 so if you have some familiarity with this model then you know what kind of colours I prefer.

Lee
 
I have had FL 8x42 and 8x32 and have had both SFL 8x and 10x each for 3 weeks for the reviews I have posted on here.

I think the colour reproduction of both FL and SFL are realistic with SFL having slightly more gentle colours, more 'water-colours' to use an art comparison.
To me this doesn't mean weak colours but rather true to life and unexaggerated. I would be happy with the colours of either of these. My main binos are SF 8x32 so if you have some familiarity with this model then you know what kind of colours I prefer.

Lee
I had a Zeiss SF 10x32 but after 2 weeks I realized that the 10x32 format does not suit me due to the exit pupil of 3.2 mm and in addition quite a lot of parasitic reflections especially with the strong front light. I had to part with it even though I liked the resolution, contrast and colors. It also seems that I can't hold a 10x binocular steady enough. Too bad because I found it brand new for only 900 euros, without any accessories.
 
I must be some kind of troglodyte.

I truly do not understand why folks are incapable of accepting what is, and seeing things as they are (to normal, unenhanced vision) and always need colors to “pop” and so on.

Good grief! It’s the world …… not a TV screen with all the controls maxed out.
 
I read that people with blue eyes are more sensitive to light. Maybe this has an influence on binocular choice.
Someone with blue eyes can confirm this? (if is not an invasive question)
 
Last edited:
I’m not quite sure how a blue-eyed person can compare to determine whether they are or are not “ more sensetive to light” than a brown-eyed person. How do you isolate eye color from all the other variables between different people?

I cannot cite anything from literature, but it is generally accepted that a blue iris passes more light than a brown iris.
 
I’m not quite sure how a blue-eyed person can compare to determine whether they are or are not “ more sensetive to light” than a brown-eyed person. How do you isolate eye color from all the other variables between different people?
The question is not about light sensitivity.
And yes, it is possible; but is not easy to find a person with one eye blue and the other eye brown.

The question is about binocular choices. I will reformulate: maybe the people with blue eyes prefer some brand?
I cannot find info about this.

If I understand correctly, in UK 40% of people have blue eyes.
Is there a dominant brand?
 
Last edited:
SFL having slightly more gentle colours, more 'water-colours' to use an art comparison.
That is not the impression I got from your review of colors in the 8x40 ("pure", "bright", "fresh", "dazzling", "help with recognition" etc).

I truly do not understand why folks are incapable of accepting what is, and seeing things as they are (to normal, unenhanced vision) and always need colors to “pop” and so on.
Good grief! It’s the world …… not a TV screen with all the controls maxed out.
Well, there's a practical reason why a birder might like to detect small or subtly colored bits at a distance, and appreciate a little more contrast or saturation compared to other applications with different priorities, though the actual range of variation among modern instruments is quite modest. And similarly, it's very difficult to achieve a perfectly flat transmission curve in optics, so binoculars have always done something "abnormal" to colors, and one just has to choose between them based on how those deviations interact with individual perception of color. It's not at all like the range of adjustment on a TV (or camera), or a question of realistic vs artificial. Perhaps a psychological sense of "warmth" or "coolness" is so powerful that it exaggerates the effect.
 
That is not the impression I got from your review of colors in the 8x40 ("pure", "bright", "fresh", "dazzling", "help with recognition" etc).


Well, there's a practical reason why a birder might like to detect small or subtly colored bits at a distance, and appreciate a little more contrast or saturation compared to other applications with different priorities, though the actual range of variation among modern instruments is quite modest. And similarly, it's very difficult to achieve a perfectly flat transmission curve in optics, so binoculars have always done something "abnormal" to colors, and one just has to choose between them based on how those deviations interact with individual perception of color. It's not at all like the range of adjustment on a TV (or camera), or a question of realistic vs artificial. Perhaps a psychological sense of "warmth" or "coolness" is so powerful that it exaggerates the effect.
I defer to those with more experience with more different makes and models than I have.
 
That is not the impression I got from your review of colors in the 8x40 ("pure", "bright", "fresh", "dazzling", "help with recognition" etc).
By 'more gentle colours' I meant they were not over-saturated or over-intense, and I don't think this is inconsistent with pure", "bright", "fresh", etc.

Lee
 
Though I've only tried the 10x40 format, I personally concluded pretty quickly that though the SFL is optically very competent it's arguably enjoyed something of a slightly undeserved notoriety to produce almost magical qualities. I'd happily own one (but for the ergonomics) in the knowledge that it was competent and pleasing enough: if not sprinkled with fairy dust.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top