• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Zeiss Victory SF and HT - technical data, diagrams, cutaway views and more (1 Viewer)

NDhunter

Experienced observer
United States
Back on subject, Zeiss has decided on their highest binocular model, and that is the Victory SF.

The Victory HT has been dropped, it is just a warmed over FL, and it was designed by hunters for hunters. ;)

I have tried most all of the top binocular models, and I do not favor any
brand. I am not a fanboy.

I regard my favorite the Zeiss Victory SF, it is top of the heap right now.

Jerry
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
How I hold the Swarovski 8.5x42 ELSV, which I find superb for handling, but not as perfect as the 8x32 EL or Zeiss 7x42 BGATP!

I focus using both index and middle fingers.

--AP
Alexis - have you ever thought that instead of wrapping your thumbs around the underside of each barrel (your photo number 5), that instead, you extend each thumb over to the underside of the opposite barrel? This is what I do with my Zen ED3 and my thumb tips reach to the far end of each thumb indent under each opposite barrel. This makes for the steadiest hold I've ever had on any binocular. You can do this on lots of open bridge designs.

None fits my hands better like this than the Zen ED3 (well the Swarovski 10×50SV feels likewise great, but the relatively dinky little focus wheel and slow focus, and kilo weight takes it off the top step. [what a unit that would be with a CFRP chassis and variable speed quick focuser!])



Chosun :gh:
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
Chosun:

This is a Zeiss thread, not ZR, not sure why you posted.

Jerry
Jerry, not sure why you singled my post out.

I was responding to a post by Alexis - it has nothing to do with you, unless you would also like to make a comment or add to the discussion of that particular subject.

See the OP and the ensuing discussion on grip, ergonomics, etc. Then you will be sure.

FYI - All of the cutaways I have seen line up at the objective end. This is misleading. By your posts I can see you're not aware of this despite it being pointed out multiple times in multiple threads by multiple people.

A better impression is gained when lining up the cutaways at the eye cup end (both collapsed). Then you can clearly see that the SF's rearward bias is part glass weight distribution, and part smoke and mirrors forward placement of the focuser.

The distribution part is great :t:
The smoke and mirrors part not so much :smoke:

The artificial hands forward position of the SF puts an excess turning moment of force on the shoulders. It affects some, while others not so much. YMMV ;)



Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:

NDhunter

Experienced observer
United States
Jerry, not sure why you singled my post out.

I was responding to a post by Alexis - it has nothing to do with you, unless you would also like to make a comment or add to the discussion of that particular subject.

See the OP and the ensuing discussion on grip, ergonomics, etc. Then you will be sure.

FYI - All of the cutaways I have seen line up at the objective end. This is misleading. By your posts I can see you're not aware of this despite it being pointed out multiple times in multiple threads by multiple people.

A better impression is gained when lining up the cutaways at the eye cup end (both collapsed). Then you can clearly see that the SF's rearward bias is part glass weight distribution, and part smoke and mirrors forward placement of the focuser.

The distribution part is great :t:
The smoke and mirrors part not so much :smoke:

The artificial hands forward position of the SF puts an excess turning moment of force on the shoulders. It affects some, while others not so much. YMMV ;)



Chosun :gh:

You don't know what you are talking about. There is no artificial handling at all with the Zeiss SF, it is all about being a very nicely balanced binocular.

I have been a very pleased owner of the SF 10x42 for over 3 years.

Your entire post is just frustrating, just smoke and mirrors, all BS. Not sure why your very negative attitude. Tell us more.


Jerry
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
You don't know what you are talking about. There is no artificial handling at all with the Zeiss SF, it is all about being a very nicely balanced binocular.

I have been a very pleased owner of the SF 10x42 for over 3 years.

Your entire post is just frustrating, just smoke and mirrors, all BS. Not sure why your very negative attitude. Tell us more.


Jerry
Are you a qualified engineer Jerry ? :cat:

It is unfortunate that you find my post frustrating - I realize it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks - never mind, other hepper catz may gain something from it. :cool:

If you're very pleased with your SF that is great. Perhaps you would be less frustrated if you spent more time looking through it, and less time here as a Mr. Crankypants trying to put sh*t on people, though like old dogs and new tricks I realize that it is even harder for a leopard to change it's spots! o:)
 

NDhunter

Experienced observer
United States
I am an engineer, I get to do that everyday in my job. I work with metal, plastics, wood and
many materials on my farm.

As a diversion, I like optics, and I have experience with lots of them.

I also can tell when someone needs correction. If you don't like that, then too bad.


Jerry

Edit to add: My latest project involves, 1/2" AR, (abrasion resistant) steel, for skid shoes, on my 9 ft. wide snowblower, we
have winter in ND.
 
Last edited:

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
I am an engineer, I get to do that everyday in my job. I work with metal, plastics, wood and
many materials on my farm.

As a diversion, I like optics, and I have experience with lots of them.

I also can tell when someone needs correction. If you don't like that, then too bad.


Jerry

Edit to add: My latest project involves, 1/2" AR, (abrasion resistant) steel, for skid shoes, on my 9 ft. wide snowblower, we
have winter in ND.
Jerry,

If you're a qualified engineer then it should be a simple matter for you to do a force analysis. :cat:

You will see that fundamental physics are exactly as I described. Exactly. :king:

It doesn't matter what you, or I, or anyone else 'feels' about the bin - "ye cannae change the laws of physics" ! :smoke: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dF1t1_Rm6po

Too bad you're not Chuck Norris ;)



Chosun :gh:
 

NDhunter

Experienced observer
United States
Optics are all about vision and the brain, along with the ability to understand.

You do need to connect and experience is the teacher.

Go back to school, you need some learning. More than an 8th grade education is useful.


Up next, an engineering project includes some stainless steel, and some aluminum and advanced polymers.


Key words are experience and practice.


Jerry
 

SuperDuty

Well-known member
I have owned the 10x42, 10X50, and 8.5X42 Swarovision models, they were all superb, but the binoculars I decided to keep were the second pair of 10X42 SF I tried, they have the sharpest, brightest, most CA free veiw I’ve seen. I also really like the balance and ergonomics.

Back on subject, Zeiss has decided on their highest binocular model, and that is the Victory SF.

The Victory HT has been dropped, it is just a warmed over FL, and it was designed by hunters for hunters. ;)

I have tried most all of the top binocular models, and I do not favor any
brand. I am not a fanboy.

I regard my favorite the Zeiss Victory SF, it is top of the heap right now.

Jerry
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
Optics are all about vision and the brain, along with the ability to understand.

You do need to connect and experience is the teacher.

Go back to school, you need some learning. More than an 8th grade education is useful.


Up next, an engineering project includes some stainless steel, and some aluminum and advanced polymers.


Key words are experience and practice.


Jerry

That's driving really slow in the ultrafast lane -- even for you Jerry ! 3:)
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
I have owned the 10x42, 10X50, and 8.5X42 Swarovision models, they were all superb, but the binoculars I decided to keep were the second pair of 10X42 SF I tried, they have the sharpest, brightest, most CA free veiw I’ve seen. I also really like the balance and ergonomics.
SD, As the proud owner of an SF - are you (or anyone else with an interest) able to perform a little 'practical' test for us? It would be interesting to see where the c.o.g (Centre of Gravity) is for this bin - just balance it on top of something very thin placed perpendicular (across) to the viewing axis ..... a knitting needle or something should do (Jerry might even be able to spare you a bit of Aloominumb angle! :-O :)

Just move the bin backwards and forwards slightly until you find the point where it balances. Where exactly is this point? Could you describe or draw it on a photo of the SF'S? It will be interesting to compare this point to where you are forced to place your hands .... Thanks :t:




Chosun :gh:
 

Troubador

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Smoke and Mirrors

Chosun and Jerry, lets all play together nicely.

Smoke and mirrors sounds like something that doesn't really exist, which is a strange way to describe the position of the focus wheel on SF, which is a development of the position on Zeiss's HT and that contributes materially to the balance of SF by giving it an eyepiece-heavy balance rather than one that is objective-heavy.

Doing your experiment Chosun, SF balances perfectly with my fingertip under the very end of the focus wheel nearest the objectives. When I slide my three fingers around the barrel, and my first finger falls without effort on the forcus wheel, the notch between my first and second fingers is aligned with this point of balance. This means that the weight is partly within my grasp but mainly tipping towards the eyepiece which is exactly the result that Gerry Dobler was looking for, so that objective-end dominance was overcome and the weight rests towards your face. I can't see any smoke and mirrors in a design feature that is a) deliberate and b) is successful in achieving its aims.

Its a shame that SF doesn't suit your shoulder Chosun but you are happy with your ZR and me and Jerry and more than a few others are happy with our SFs.

Peace.

Lee
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
Chosun and Jerry, lets all play together nicely.

Smoke and mirrors sounds like something that doesn't really exist, which is a strange way to describe the position of the focus wheel on SF, which is a development of the position on Zeiss's HT and that contributes materially to the balance of SF by giving it an eyepiece-heavy balance rather than one that is objective-heavy.

Doing your experiment Chosun, SF balances perfectly with my fingertip under the very end of the focus wheel nearest the objectives. When I slide my three fingers around the barrel, and my first finger falls without effort on the forcus wheel, the notch between my first and second fingers is aligned with this point of balance. This means that the weight is partly within my grasp but mainly tipping towards the eyepiece which is exactly the result that Gerry Dobler was looking for, so that objective-end dominance was overcome and the weight rests towards your face. I can't see any smoke and mirrors in a design feature that is a) deliberate and b) is successful in achieving its aims.

Its a shame that SF doesn't suit your shoulder Chosun but you are happy with your ZR and me and Jerry and more than a few others are happy with our SFs.

Peace.

Lee

Lee, I always play nice o:) ...... though if someone starts it, I'm going to finish it - there's no need for some on here to act like pork chops. I can't stand a bully.

Thanks for conducting the little experiment (that's the way I did it last time I had a pair in hand), and about the result expected from crunching the numbers on the back of an envelope.

The physics of the situation are what they are. :cat:

There are two parts to the SF's balance:
(i) Is the relative weights and distances of the glass elements from this balance point. The deliberate decision to design the optical train so as to place more glass in the eyepieces, and lighten the objectives is a good one which helps achieve this rearward weight balance. This part is a relatively free lunch (there are small moments at play, but I won't blur the issue by going into detail since they are easily countered by the natural range of motion and locking at the wrist).
(ii) The other one is somewhat more arbitrary. By placing the focuser (which can go anywhere within a reasonable range of positions) so far forward (quite clear when you line the cutaways up at the eyepiece end), you ensure that the grip point is forward of the c.o.g - thus also introducing another rearward weight bias.

This second part is a somewhat arbitrary decision that also drags the hands slightly away from the body, and the weight of the arms must be counteracted by a reactionary moment force about the shoulders. The muscles of the shoulder are small, though this is of little consequence if there is no injury, and the elevation angle of the binoculars is varied to release any likely fatigue. For this reason it's not entirely a free lunch, and that's where the smoke and mirrors part comes in.

It's more of an issue when looking horizontally or down, rather than skywards. On balance though (see what I did there!? :) ay ! ;) the SF works pretty well for a slight rearward weight balance that makes it seem lighter in the hand than it's actual weight. Anyway that's the physics of the situation, and there's no use anybody getting upset by it.

I of course prefer the Zen's zero gap finger separation method, but the SF is not a bad podium getter (MHG runner up). Of course I also prefer the Zen's better quality eye cups, but sadly that's were the quality advantages end, and it's SF all the way from there! though at about 7× the price :) As always people are individuals and YMMV - though that's no reason not to play nice ;)



Chosun :gh:
 

Troubador

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Hi CJ

As Gijs says, you give a succinct description of SF although your use of the word arbitrary to describe the hand position is really puzzling. 'Arbitrary' means based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system, when that position has been deliberately chosen (see what I did there :-O) to achieve precisely the balance that you describe.

Clearly this doesn't suit you with your shoulder problem, but this doesn't mean it doesn't suit others, and there is no use anybody getting upset about it:

tenex: I handled an SF for the first time recently and instantly liked it for the clever balance despite its size

asp09: You're right about the SF being instantly likeable……………the wonderful ergonomics

temmie: Regarding all abovementioned merits a fine birding binocular has to have……….. three very important aspects: FOV, fast focusing and balance.

wdc: I preferred the handling (balance and focus feel) of the SF

alan kennedy: SF optics and handling are superb.​


Lee
 
Last edited:

Gilmore Girl

Beth
Supporter
United States
This crudely edited photo may help people envision the differences here. I wonder what the exact difference is in inches or mm's between each from where your finger rests on the wheel to the top of the eyecup.

The arrow shows where I now rest my focus finger on the Ultravid. It seems a distance in between the Swaro and Zeiss and I do find it a little better ergonomically to use the bottom wheel.

The red arrow showing distance from focus to top of eyecup on the Swaro is compared on the other two to show the difference in length.

When I tried SF a couple times I found it very nice to hold and ergonomically very pleasing, but like CJ, I have shoulder issues and I'd need to use SF out in the field for like 4 hours or so to see if holding my arms just a little further out will cause more strain or not.
 

Attachments

  • focus position.jpg
    focus position.jpg
    18.1 KB · Views: 203
Last edited:

Troubador

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
This crudely edited photo may help people envision the differences here. I wonder what the exact difference is in inches or mm's between each from where your finger rests on the wheel to the top of the eyecup.

The arrow shows where I now rest my focus finger on the Ultravid. It seems a distance in between the Swaro and Zeiss and I do find it a little better ergonomically to use the bottom wheel.

The red arrow showing distance from focus to top of eyecup on the Swaro is compared on the other two to show the difference in length.

When I tried SF a couple times I found it very nice to hold and ergonomically very pleasing, but like CJ, I have shoulder issues and I'd need to use SF out in the field for like 4 hours or so to see if holding my arms just a little further out will cause more strain or not.

GiGi

Shoulder problems can be very debilitating as I found out a couple of years ago when I had double 'frozen shoulder' which struck without warning. It was hard to sleep some nights due to the nagging pain and my range of movement is about 90% now so not fully recovered yet.

Lee
 

Gilmore Girl

Beth
Supporter
United States
GiGi

Shoulder problems can be very debilitating as I found out a couple of years ago when I had double 'frozen shoulder' which struck without warning. It was hard to sleep some nights due to the nagging pain and my range of movement is about 90% now so not fully recovered yet.

Lee

ugh yep same thing here. I had a frozen shoulder (left side) too and, after a lot of PT, it's a lot better, but not 100%. Both shoulders are not like they used to be (when I was younger). There's more frequency now of body aches and weird pains and issues that come and go :-C
 

Troubador

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
ugh yep same thing here. I had a frozen shoulder (left side) too and, after a lot of PT, it's a lot better, but not 100%. Both shoulders are not like they used to be (when I was younger). There's more frequency now of body aches and weird pains and issues that come and go :-C

GiGi
The physiological effects of the more forward grip need not be detrimental either. The less acute angle of the bend at the elbow could mean better blood circulation to the forearm and hand, meaning less fatigue rather than more.

Lee
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top