Zeiss SFL versus Zeiss Victory FL contrast and color reproduction. (1 Viewer)

[crinklystarfish]

On the other hand, people who took their time, tried the 8x40, etc have a different opinion. Maybe that's the reason.

Yes, it could be: though @Troubador has taken perhaps more time and trouble to subjectively assess and review both in great detail and ascribes comparable optical performance to both formats.

I feel that autosuggestion is a powerful concept and its not beyond the realms of possibility that in some instances we see what we are (self) conditioned to see: rather than what we actually see.

 

[edwincjones]

........... 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?

I have blue eyes, and I like (over 25 years)
miyauchi-2,
fujinon-4,
zeiss-4,
kowa-3,
SW-1,
canon-1,
leica-2,
papillios-2
but these are USA blues.

edj

 

[Troubador]

If I understand correctly, in UK 40% of people have blue eyes.
Is there a dominant brand?

Swarovski is the leading brand.

Lee

 

[Rg548]

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.

'cos it looks nicer

 

[Maljunulo]

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 can’t but agree with this.

Well said.

 

[tenex]

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.

I somehow suspect that the fairy dust is in the world seen through a binocular, rather than inside it.

 

[Troubador]

I somehow suspect that the fairy dust is in the world seen through a binocular, rather than inside it.

Absolutely right.

Lee

 

[GrampaTom]

Well maybe both....

I surely agree what I see through binos, is magical. Its why I own them and why I seek out things to see. As a kid playing with Dad's binos, looking out into the neighborhood it seemed the stuff of fairy dust. Still provides wonder, joy.

That said, as an admitted recovering gear head, with some time in the world of how things are made, I used to think of the folks who design and figure out how to make things, as kind of sparkly brained. As In "How'd they do THAT?" It is a marvel to take something apart, admire the design of each part and how they work together as a system.

 

[Troubador]

Well maybe both....

I surely agree what I see through binos, is magical. Its why I own them and why I seek out things to see. As a kid playing with Dad's binos, looking out into the neighborhood it seemed the stuff of fairy dust. Still provides wonder, joy.

That said, as an admitted recovering gear head, with some time in the world of how things are made, I used to think of the folks who design and figure out how to make things, as kind of sparkly brained. As In "How'd they do THAT?" It is a marvel to take something apart, admire the design of each part and how they work together as a system.

AFAIK bino optics (and scopes) are designed using software that will tell you what resolution you can expect with your design, using your choice of glass, and lens curvature, and what kinds and levels of distortions/aberrations you can expect. So what we get when we buy one of these instruments is the result of definite choices made by the development team, working within their available budget.

I may have been lucky but I have not yet encountered any binos that so distracted me with optical effects that I couldn't enjoy the magic of looking at birds, animals and insects through them, so yes, I too find myself thinking that binos sprinkled with magic-dust back at the bino-factory.

Lee

 

[Declan Joseph Deasy]

AFAIK bino optics (and scopes) are designed using software that will tell you what resolution you can expect with your design, using your choice of glass, and lens curvature, and what kinds and levels of distortions/aberrations you can expect. So what we get when we buy one of these instruments is the result of definite choices made by the development team, working within their available budget.

I may have been lucky but I have not yet encountered any binos that so distracted me with optical effects that I couldn't enjoy the magic of looking at birds, animals and insects through them, so yes, I too find myself thinking that binos sprinkled with magic-dust back at the bino-factory.

Lee

Hi Lee
Any rumors of a facelift for the SF 8x42?

 

[Troubador]

Hi Lee
Any rumors of a facelift for the SF 8x42?

No but all brands are vert shy about leaking news of new models.

Lee

 

[crinklystarfish]

I somehow suspect that the fairy dust is in the world seen through a binocular, rather than inside it.

Almost!

The actual world is pretty much as it is and no amount of fairy dust will change that.

It's the user end of the binocular where the sprinkling of fairy dust is alarmingly effective. Ask any marketing guru.

 

[b-lilja]

I own the 8x40 SFL and a 7x42 Uvid, and recently gave my 8x42 FL (early coating) to my young brother in law, who is a budding birder.

The following are my personal, subjective, impressions.

I think it is hard to generalize about the FL - there is clearly a v1 and v2, early coating and later coating. The later coating seems consistent with what Zeiss used for the Conquest HD and SF. It is quite poppy and skews the view slightly yellow/green. The earlier coating is true to color but somewhat washed out. I prefer the early coating.

I love the Leica color rendition, to me true to color but somewhat saturated and sur-real. In my case I find however the Uvid to lack quite the crispness I like. The Nvid is great, but also heavy and big.

I personally find the 8x40 to be ideal - true, crisp, on the money in terms of essentially a magnified version of what my eye sees. As can be read elsewhere, I am a huge fan.

 

[tenex]

The actual world is pretty much as it is and no amount of fairy dust will change that.

I see I should have said "magic" instead to avoid confusion with your derisive use of "fairy dust".

I think it is hard to generalize about the FL - there is clearly a v1 and v2, early coating and later coating.

Some comments and photos here show also an odd intermediate one that reflected red-orange. The late FL I just acquired has a familiar purplish one that strikes me as quite normal.

In my case I find however the Uvid to lack quite the crispness I like.

I finally came to this conclusion also with the 10x32 UV, like BN before it, after years of using them. Which format are you talking about? I've wondered whether this varied.

 

[Patudo]

There is definitely a group of people that like saturated colours - a lot of folks with a background in photography seem to prefer the Leica image and I've always wondered whether this was because in photography you are so often seeking the best light, that makes colours and tones glow. Beyond aesthetics, I find that distance and gloom (of the kind one often encountered in European winters) often leaches out colour, so some additional punch in terms of colour saturation is not necessarily a bad thing. But, in all frankness, I haven't looked through a binocular (at least not a modern one of reasonable quality) that I found displeasing in terms of colour rendition. I thought the Noctivid was great, but so were the "green" SF and the "cold" EL/SV. I guess I'm just easily pleased...

I somehow suspect that the fairy dust is in the world seen through a binocular, rather than inside it.

If that is really so, why buy alphas?

 

[tenex]

If that is really so, why buy alphas?

OK, now I wish I hadn't made that remark at all. It turned out to be cryptic and easily misunderstood, instead of a cute way of reflecting what Lee said himself about his reviews (and is obvious anyway), that they're more about the beauty of nature than the binocular:

As usual I will not attempt a forensic technical assessment of the SFL’s optical performance as I am more interested to learn whether they can deliver enjoyable and informative nature observations.

One could have a lovely experience with a Tasco on Islay, and describe it in much the same words. But said so plainly that could sound critical, which wasn't my intention.

There is definitely a group of people that like saturated colours - a lot of folks with a background in photography seem to prefer the Leica image and I've always wondered whether this was because in photography you are so often seeking the best light, that makes colours and tones glow.

Yes, I think a sense of warmth vs coolness is psychologically very important to begin with, and relates to natural sunlight in the way you suggest. I still prefer a slightly warm cast for photography myself, except perhaps for glaciers. But in binoculars I agree with you that slightly different presentations of color can be equally pleasing and even interesting for variety. (The only one I've ever actually disliked was Nikon SE, which seemed oddly reddish.)

 

[tehri]

OK, now I wish I hadn't made that remark at all. It turned out to be cryptic and easily misunderstood

No no, Tenex, please don't regret a thing about this wonderful comment that perfectly captures your feelings of observing nature through the highest quality optics !!
For quite some time now, I've wanted to write about it, and will do soon... the often exciting discussions here are almost always basically technical, but all too rarely describe the feeling, almost magic by the transcendence of the vision brought by what is known as the 'Alphas' Optics :!!
Many things to say about it, to describe, and not only in terms of Absam ring, Collimation, Kidney bean, Blackout, Parallax effect, glare, etc etc and so on... but in terms of poetic feeling, emotion, transcendence, magic, 'supravision', etc etc...
High end binoculars really do sprinkle some magic on reality... 'Fairy dust' becomes more visible !!... You are absolutely right !

(°v°)

 

[tenex]

Thanks, I never qualified for my poet's license...

 

[tehri]

Thanks, I never qualified for my poet's license...

Poetry doesn't need any licence !!... neither eyes and soul to perceive that 'fairy dust' emanating from nature...
; )

 

[Troubador]

Thanks, I never qualified for my poet's license...

Well, 'fairy dust' is a poetic turn of phrase and perfectly sums up my feelings after I have picked up a compact but wide-field 32mm bino. And yes I know the fov is governed by the eyepieces and not the size of the binos, but I have nevertheless often said to myself 'this little bino has a sprinkle of magic' which I am sure is just another way of saying 'fairy dust'.

Lee