ZEISS Victory SF Appreciation Thread (1 Viewer)

[mgp13]

Hi all, as I've mentioned in other threads I had to send my 8x42 SFs back due to a lack of blackening on one of the eyepiece surfaces causing a small reflection to appear just outside the field. At the time I considered it a defect of that specific pair and thought I'd try my luck at getting a repair or replacement (one or two others in here say that resolved the problem). However, I now think it may well be a "defect" that's present on all Vic SFs (threads in this forum suggest that may be the case) and if so I'm willing to accept that. Zeiss have not commented or offered me any closure although that doesn't really matter since now I just badly want them back, reflection or no reflection.

The store I bought them from have struggled to get any feedback from Zeiss over the last three weeks and due to that and a lack of stock of 8x42 they yesterday offered me a full refund. The thing is this, there is absolutely nowhere I'd be able to get the 8x42 SF at that price again (approx $2040 USD albeit I paid $1820 USD with a coupon), in fact they're out of stock at most places, and I'm not interested in the least in NL pures or EL SVs (I could pick up NL x32s for $2130 or SVs for $1945) because I just love the features of the SF way too much. I'm also far too hesitant to go for SF x32s since I prize the light gathering capabilities and 92% transmission of the x42s. So, I did something inspired and asked for a pair of 10x42 SF as a replacement instead. The retailer agreed to this, nothing more to pay, and they've now dispatched them.

From the moment I owned the 8x42 SF I decided the only other binocular I could ever want would be the 10x42 SF so to say I'm excited for their arrival would be a huge understatement. I simply can't afford both so I'll always be making a compromise one way or the other. I am lead to believe the 10x42 will produce outstanding detail and dusk penetration (superior twilight factor), at the cost of the wider FOV I'd get from the 8x42. I also wonder if the relative brightness of the 8x was perhaps slightly too much (more on this later).

I did get a lot of field time in with the 8x42 and I remember its characteristics well. Thus, after I've owned the 10x42 for a week or so I'll be able to compare and contrast the two and post my findings here. Obviously user preference matters a lot in comparing 8s to 10s but I'll be able to provide an account of differences that do exist. I have a strong suspicion I'm going to narrowly prefer the 10s, because even though I recently became an enthusiastic 8x convert, I've had to use my old Leica Trinovid 10x over these last few weeks while I've waited for my replacement pair. Viewing through these made me realise that a) even a 336ft FOV looks good and plenty wide enough through the right glass and b) the extra detail through 10x bins is perhaps no small thing. It also happens to be the magnification I've used most of my life. I also had a seawatching experience with SFL 8x40s and found the lower magnification quite a serious impediment when trying to glean detail from distant shearwaters. In any case we'll see. I think one way or another I'll stick with the 10s because I can't imagine I'll miss the wide view through the 8s so much that I'm unhappy with the advantages that come with 10s.

In closing, I must say I'm just thrilled I'll have the Victory SF back in my hands by the end of this week. 8x or 10x, I just absolutely need my SF 42s back - and soon.

 

[dorubird]

10x has a smaller FOV but a slightly wider AFOV than 8x, which helps the feeling of immersion. I'm sure you'll like it, especially since you say you're used to 10x in the past.

 

[mgp13]

10x has a smaller FOV but a slightly wider AFOV than 8x, which helps the feeling of immersion. I'm sure you'll like it, especially since you say you're used to 10x in the past.

Really? That's awesome to know.

 

[mgp13]

Tough crowd around here.... sheesh :-o

It's OK, I was fully expecting it. Surely it has to be apparent to others as well as myself that I'm an absolute raving lunatic without a shred of rationality when it comes to my favourite binoculars

 

[mgp13]

 

[mgp13]

They arrived. Observations so far:

• The 10x is shakier than the 8x as you'd expect, but the shakes are minimal and the binoculars are easy to stabilise.
• More blackouts with the 10x initially but these seem to be becoming less of an issue as I get accustomed to the pair. Perhaps the 10x isn't quite as accommodating, but panning is still largely free from blackouts at most focal distances.
• Depth of field is less in the 10x although it's still better than most 10x I've tried and the slight blurring creates a nice bokeh. The 8x had incredible depth of field, perhaps some would even find it too deep as there was hardly ever any blurring of the background.
• As already mentioned, the internal reflection from an unblackened eyepiece rim isn't present on this pair. I am very grateful for that. I believe it's an unfortunately rather common QC issue present on some 8x and 10x.
• The focus suits the 10x more than the 8x; achieving perfect focus is faster and easier since I can make out fine details more clearly.
• The cool colour cast is perhaps slightly more noticeable in the 10x but I very much like it. I don't know if it's due to my protanopia (a form of congenital red-green colour blindness where reds are darker and harder to make out) but it's really splitting hairs to say my Leica Trinovids resolve colours better. It's extremely close between the two and I can pick reds out just fine with these SFs and more easily than I could with the 8x.
• Somehow the 10x seems even better at controlling stray light than the 8x did. They're both superb at it, but the maligned "red crescents' are absent on the 10x. It may well go hand in hand with that internal reflection issue since it's the same part of the field that was affected.
• As with the 8x, I am unable to detect any CA with the 10x. Not sure if this has anything to do with my protanopia, but I just can't see it.
• The field is slightly better corrected in the 10x and it's easier to appreciate the sharpness all the way to the edge.
• The very high brightness of the SF possibly suits the 10x better; there were times I found the 8x excessively bright.
• The 8x had a woozy distortion effect at the edges when panning that seems to be attenuated or absent in the 10x.
• The 10x seems to magnify my astigmatism more than the 8x did, not sure why this is. It's more obvious through the 10x that my vision is blurry in one eye more than the other. I really do need to hurry up and get some contacts.
• More details later.

 

[Maljunulo]

I hope you will be happy with it.

The only niggle I have is that depth field can never be "too deep" because a deep DOF means less twiddling the focus wheel.

You are trying to see better, not create artsy effects.

 

[dorubird]

They arrived. Observations so far:

• More blackouts with the 10x initially but these seem to be becoming less of an issue as I get accustomed to the pair. Perhaps the 10x isn't quite as accommodating, but panning is still largely free from blackouts at most focal distances.

You can get rid of blackouts very easily if you raise the eyecups very slightly until the unpleasant effect disappears!! A click stop may be enough (each person's eye has its own position). If it is less than a click stop, you can put a hair elastic or gasket to keep it in position (I did the same with my pair).

I'm glad for you because the great joy that these binoculars give you!

 

[laurencejackson]

These binoculars deserve an appreciation thread so here it is. I'll open the proceedings.

I own the 8x42. Despite the fact I've had to send them back for replacement due to a QC issue (lack of blackening causing an internal reflection), I still consider them the best binocular for birding bar none. They are that good that even if the verdict from ZEISS was every pair of them suffers from the same annoying issue, I'd still happily accept them as my primary birding binoculars. That is because the Victory SF with a defect is still better than any other binocular without defect.

I believe this is an objective fact.

No binocular handles better or disappears so completely during prolonged viewing of a stationary object. The ErgoBalance concept alone deserves huge praise, not just from me but from everyone. The field of view, though since bested by Swarovski's NL Pures, is so wide one forgets he is viewing through binoculars. The brightness is incredible - the Victory SF effortlessly penetrates the twilight and bright moonlight, giving me breathtaking views of absolutely everything. The view through these binoculars is absolutely gorgeous and combined with the ease of handling make this the best binocular ever manufactured.

I think I would like to marry my replacement pair of ZEISS Victory SF 8x42 when they arrive.

I love my ZEISS Victory SF 8x42. They are the world's best binoculars, and I own them. I don't have Victorys so I can go birding, I go birding so I can use my Victorys.

It sounds to me that you quite like them... If that's the case, maybe you would you like to buy another pair? I have mine on sale here at BF (I'm in. Perth)...Just a not so serious thought! Glad you like them, they are amazing aren't they?

 

[mgp13]

It sounds to me that you quite like them... If that's the case, maybe you would you like to buy another pair? I have mine on sale here at BF (I'm in. Perth)...Just a not so serious thought! Glad you like them, they are amazing aren't they?

Good luck with the sale! They're truly amazing bins.

 

[mgp13]

You can get rid of blackouts very easily if you raise the eyecups very slightly until the unpleasant effect disappears!! A click stop may be enough (each person's eye has its own position). If it is less than a click stop, you can put a hair elastic or gasket to keep it in position (I did the same with my pair).

I'm glad for you because the great joy that these binoculars give you!

I already have the eyecups fully extended. I find it's to do with the interpupillary distance, it has to be spot on (and a bit narrower than I'm used to) or I get blackouts when panning. It just means the binoculars sit a bit differently in my eye sockets from what I'm accustomed to but it's fine.

 

[mgp13]

I was able to get the binoculars to produce some false colour today under extreme conditions. The false colour only occurred in the outer 5% of the field at most, the large majority of the field is CA-free to my eyes.

 

[tenex]

(I'm in. Perth)

Have you seen numbats, and how difficult is it? I've long wanted to, for some reason... perhaps reminiscent of thylacines?

 

[Maljunulo]

I was able to get the binoculars to produce some false colour today under extreme conditions. The false colour only occurred in the outer 5% of the field at most, the large majority of the field is CA-free to my eyes.

A determined search for flaws will usually find at least one.

 

[mgp13]

Hi all, I've now spent a good four days using the 10x42 SFs. I can report that I absolutely love them and they continue to grow on me.

More observations on the 10x versus 8x SF:
 
The 10x42 were initially not as easy to use as the 8x, particularly with respect to blackouts, but I've carefully worked around that with precise interpupillary distance adjustment. The higher magnification really brings the sharpness of these binoculars to life. The view is incredibly steady for a 10x and they excel at one-handed use almost as much as the 8x. Very wide angle for a 10x providing a view that is simultaneously immersive and detailed. Virtually free of CA. Stray light suppression is excellent although only about 95% as good as the 8x (there are traces of veiling glare in very harsh light that weren't present with the 8x).

All in all it is very tough to pick a winner since they both excel in their own right. It's a very even match although I do prefer the 10x slightly for its exceedingly well-corrected field which means it doesn't produce that image-bending artefact at the field edge when panning. The brightness is incredibly high in both the 8x and 10x and they can't be separated on that. Contrast seems a tad better through the 10x but is excellent on both.

If you prefer 8x binoculars, get the 8x. If you prefer 10x binoculars, get the 10x. Neither is clearly superior to the other, even though I believe the whole philosophy of the SF suits the 10x ever so slightly better.

 

[mgp13]

Some binocular "porn" for people considering buying the SF and wanting some close-ups:

 

[Patudo]

Would titillate more if you could pose them in the setting you were using them in, and maybe let us know what you saw with them?

 

[Gdavis248]

Hi all, I've now spent a good four days using the 10x42 SFs. I can report that I absolutely love them and they continue to grow on me.

More observations on the 10x versus 8x SF:
 
The 10x42 were initially not as easy to use as the 8x, particularly with respect to blackouts, but I've carefully worked around that with precise interpupillary distance adjustment. The higher magnification really brings the sharpness of these binoculars to life. The view is incredibly steady for a 10x and they excel at one-handed use almost as much as the 8x. Very wide angle for a 10x providing a view that is simultaneously immersive and detailed. Virtually free of CA. Stray light suppression is excellent although only about 95% as good as the 8x (there are traces of veiling glare in very harsh light that weren't present with the 8x).

All in all it is very tough to pick a winner since they both excel in their own right. It's a very even match although I do prefer the 10x slightly for its exceedingly well-corrected field which means it doesn't produce that image-bending artefact at the field edge when panning. The brightness is incredibly high in both the 8x and 10x and they can't be separated on that. Contrast seems a tad better through the 10x but is excellent on both.

If you prefer 8x binoculars, get the 8x. If you prefer 10x binoculars, get the 10x. Neither is clearly superior to the other, even though I believe the whole philosophy of the SF suits the 10x ever so slightly better.

Really enjoy your write ups and review of the SF's. Thanks for reporting back!

 

[Maljunulo]

I switched from 10X to 8X, after years of stoutly declaring that I had “never wished for a smaller image”.

I won’t go back.

 

[GrampaTom]

I switched from 10X to 8X, after years of stoutly declaring that I had “never wished for a smaller image”.

I won’t go back.

Context is important. Why did you make this change? What changed for you? For instance, did age enter into it, did you find it harder to hold a 10 steady as you got older, (if you are). Or did where you live, where you bird change?