New Zeiss APO Binoculars (1 Viewer)

[william j clive]

Just got this off a USA astronomy Optics Forum. Zeiss are to introduce Victory bins with APO glass. So the goalposts have been shifted again. EL's or Ultravids anyone. I will be happy to take yours for £10 more than the optics shops offer you for your Leica's and Swaro's in part exchange for the new Zeiss!

Clive

 

[Sleeper]

Clive are you trying to keep in line with your own admission in your biography? LOL

 

[william j clive]

Clive are you trying to keep in line with your own admission in your biography? LOL

I must be more than a little dense. What biography? :h?:

 

[Sleeper]

Oh dear!!! Check your own profile for the Bird Forum.

 

[william j clive]

Oh dear!!! Check your own profile for the Bird Forum.

Oi, cut that out, you impertinent young whipper snapper, or you'll feel the weight of my pension book. :bounce:

Clive

 

[Andy Bright]

Just got this off a USA astronomy Optics Forum. Zeiss are to introduce Victory bins with APO glass.
Clive

Sounds extremely unlikely to me....maybe some crossed wires from stories about the impending release of the Conquest series in N. America.

 

[Leif]

Sounds extremely unlikely to me....maybe some crossed wires from stories about the impending release of the Conquest series in N. America.

I thought the main source of chromatic aberration in binoculars was the prisms, rather than the objectives?

 

[Sleeper]

Sorry Clive could not resist.....I said RESIST!

It does stir up some interest when new optics are rumoured to be around.

I wonder why we we are (in general) so intrigued. Surely the optics are up to such a standard now that we will all be happy with what we have got. or rather is it more to do with the ergonomics of a new optic rather that the optical performance?

I could only see a step forward in design and "personal" suitability being the biggest quandry...maybe!

 

[Edward woodwood]

I was more than happy with my zeiss 7 x 42 till i dropped em. Been many places over the last 13 years, including two years in the humidity of Indonesia and not a single problem...I for one won't be trading in my bins for the new untested models. (my mates Swaros have fogged three times in Peru)

 

[Leif]

Sorry Clive could not resist.....I said RESIST!

It does stir up some interest when new optics are rumoured to be around.

I wonder why we we are (in general) so intrigued. Surely the optics are up to such a standard now that we will all be happy with what we have got. or rather is it more to do with the ergonomics of a new optic rather that the optical performance?

I could only see a step forward in design and "personal" suitability being the biggest quandry...maybe!

Well the latest Bird Watching survey concluded that the new Leica Ultravids were a step up from anything else. So it must be true. However, I have heard the opinions of several people who own both Swaro ELs and Ultravids - and who know a thing or two about testing optics - and they consider them roughly on a par. (Basically the Ultravid brings Leica up to the level of Swaro.) I won't summarise as it's too tedious. I reckon a lot of it is snobbery and the thrill of the new

 

[Edward woodwood]

yeah, loads of (misplaced) snobbery involved Leif.

I've heard stories of the focussing mechanism developing problems on the Els.......

 

[CJW]

And still no-one is mentioning the Zeiss Victory 2s....they blow the Leicas out of the water!

 

[Edward woodwood]

never heard of em Chris.... not another new model?

 

[CJW]

Not a new model at all Tim. I've had mine for at least 6 months.

http://betterviewdesired.com/zeiss/Victory.html

 

[Jonathan B.]

And still no-one is mentioning the Zeiss Victory 2s....they blow the Leicas out of the water!

In what way do you think? I bought the Ultravid 7x42 a couple of months ago after testing virtually everything on the market over a period of three years. It is the only binocular I have found that matches the optical performance of the Nikon SE 8x32 (which I have owned for several years) or the Swarovski EL (which I have been able to use for extended periods of time). I decided against the latter because of the focusing mechanism. I eliminated the Nikon VLX/HG 8x42 from consideration long ago, because I see considerable chromatic aberration in it, though in every other way it is superb.

I initially rejected the Zeiss Victory because I simply was unimpressed with it. Just last week I had the opportunity to compare the Zeiss Victory II side-by-side with the Ultravid. The Victory II is an excellent performer with fine ergonomics (the ergonomics are probably more like the Ultravid than any other binocular), and it may be the best porro-prism binocular in its price range. The modification of the binocular strap-mount is a vast improvement, and contrary to Stephen Ingraham (BVD), I did not find that the armor smelled like automobile tires.

However in my comparison, the Victory II did not exhibit nearly the resolution or contrast of the Ultravid. I would be curious to know if anybody else has compared these binoculars carefully.

Incidentally, I am not trying to convince myself that I made the right decision. I am looking for a pair of porro-prism binoculars for my wife, and am keeping an open mind. For instance, at the same time I compared the Victory II and the Ultravid, I was able to handle the Nikon VLX/HG 8x32 for an extended period for the first time. I am impressed with its optical performance (it equals the Victory II), but like its big brother, the VLX/HG 8x42, it shows too much chromatic aberration, and I dislike the focusing mechanism for the opposite reason that I dislike the Swarovski EL--the little Nikon focuses so fast that fine focus is difficult, though it has excellent depth of focus.

 

[Leif]

yeah, loads of (misplaced) snobbery involved Leif.

I've heard stories of the focussing mechanism developing problems on the Els.......

Hi Tim: I presume your reply was intended as sarcasm though I'm not sure why. My post was not intended to be rude. I simply think that magazines tend to go overboard when reviewing certain instruments. It is as if they are the flavour of the month. The Swaro 8x42 EL was one such example when it first appeared. They seem to lose all sense of objectivity.

I simply cannot understand why there is such a big difference in opinion between UK magazines, and my own experiences. I have seen quite a few optics reviews by amateur astronomers and amateur birders and they seem to agree with my own conclusions more than they do with the UK press. As an example some people hate the Swaro 8.5x42 EL due to the slow focus. A BW magazine review made no mention of this very important aspect. (For some people it is a fatal flaw.) The Leica 8x32 BN has small eye relief and lots of chromatic aberration. A recent BW magazine review mentioned neither aspect.

I tend to agree with an earlier poster that the top brands all produce excellent optics, and that as the differences in the optics are small, it is really a case of try them for yourself and see what you like best. The Leica 8x42 BN feels too big for my hands, despite excellent optics. Many many people disagree! It's a case of horses for courses.

Anyway, in my obviously completely objective and unbiased opinion, if most people really cared about optical quality then they would spend less money and buy the Nikon 8x32 SEs! :bounce:

 

[Leif]

I am looking for a pair of porro-prism binoculars for my wife, and am keeping an open mind. For instance, at the same time I compared the Victory II and the Ultravid, I was able to handle the Nikon VLX/HG 8x32 for an extended period for the first time.

Hi Jonathon. I have used the Nikon 8x32 HG in the field and I do agree with you that there is a lot of chromatic aberration. The Swaro 8x30 SLC is better corrected, but it is not as bright, does not focus so close, and the focus wheel is in an odd position. Maybe someone who owns one can give you a more informed opinion that I can.

BTW I think you mean 'roof-prism', not 'porro-prism'?

 

[normjackson]

Wouldn't worry Leif, who'd dare accuse someone who admits to liking a cheap, leaky pair of bins with bad spherical aberration of the eyepieces of snobbery? 3 3 3 Seriously glad to see you've reached your nirvana there.

Re. modest power roof prisms boasting their ED glass, Minox have been doing that for a wee while :
http://www.brayimaging.co.uk/Astro/binoculars.html
Looks like a bit of a snipe at birders in the Leica section.

"Eider knot Bill Oddie snipe!"

 

[Leif]

Wouldn't worry Leif, who'd dare accuse someone who admits to liking a cheap, leaky pair of bins with bad spherical aberration of the eyepieces of snobbery? 3 3 3 Seriously glad to see you've reached your nirvana there.
"Eider knot Bill Oddie snipe!"

They do say that love is blind. You forgot to mention the rotten eye tubes and tacky soft case.

 

[scampo]

I find it hard to believe that Nikon HGs have any worse aberration than other top-end binoculars. They have always excelled in reviews - the weight of the 8x42HG an occasional negative comment.

On the other hand, I remain convinced that in certain condition all binoculars can produce an image that has noticeable colour fringing. It certainly surprised me when I first saw it with my own Swarovski ELs - and yet I cannot at all easily replicate this effect - it just seems to occur in certain unusual lighting or viewing conditions.

I have looked through a pair of Nikon 8x42HGs fairly regularly and their 8x32HG just a few times and have yet to see anything but an amazingly bright, sharp and clear view - not once have I seen any colour fringing at all (and it is a very noticeable thing when it occurs). I would happily use the Nikon 8x32s instead of my Swaros.

Out of interest, a respected local birdwatcher now uses Nikon 8x42s having recently changed from Leica. He even visited the head offices of a couple of binocular manufacturers to discuss the optics before buying them - such was his concern and interest. It does seem very odd that, after this level of concern and testing, cost not being an issue at all, he ended up rejecting 'the best' in favour of a pair that suffer from bad correction and aberrations! It simply cannot be so - he doesn't subscribe to BF but he would surely have something to say in reply to some of the comments here.