Zeiss SFL 8x30? (2 Viewers)

[limonabe]

Oh man, decisions, decisions....

The new Zeiss has a little more eye relief than the Ultravid 8x32. The Zeiss has better close focus, and a teeny bit more FOV. Costs several hundred less than the Leica too.

Is anyone considering these Zeiss' as a serious threat to their Ultravid? I've got the Ultravid, but I can't decide if I want to give the Zeiss a try.

 

[brocknroller]

That FOV is 465 feet is a bit more than 8.8 degrees, that is a wide FOV.

The 8x30 E2 of roofs....except $1,000 more. Nope.

 

[brocknroller]

Oh man, decisions, decisions....

The new Zeiss has a little more eye relief than the Ultravid 8x32. The Zeiss has better close focus, and a teeny bit more FOV. Costs several hundred less than the Leica too.

Is anyone considering these Zeiss' as a serious threat to their Ultravid? I've got the Ultravid, but I can't decide if I want to give the Zeiss a try.

The grass always looks greener, particularly through Zeiss SF binoculars where the light spectrum is boosted in the yellow and green. Don't sell the Ultravids until you've compared them to the SFL side by side. You might regret it.

 

[lmans66]

How much is too light, too small in size etc ? ..... I bring this up as I too view the specs of the Zeiss for the first time. When I had a 8x30 MHG, for some reason it just felt too light.....it lacked substance. It was quality, but I preferred something with just a little bulk to it. Am I the only one that see this?

For instance, when I pick up a Meopta or Conquest, they have a bit of bulk and thus almost easier to bird with as they are not much, but longer or weigh more. Thoughts?

 

[gweller]

The 8x30 E2 of roofs....except $1,000 more. Nope.

The question I think, is whether it's worth 500 euros more than the Swaro CL 8x30, which seems it's natural competitor rather than the Ultravid.

 

[Bill Atwood]

Short hands on review up over at Rokslide.

A nice positive review, however it should be noted that Zeiss is a Rockslide sponsor.

 

[brocknroller]

The question I think, is whether it's worth 500 euros more than the Swaro CL 8x30, which seems it's natural competitor rather than the Ultravid.

So, IOW, it's not an "alpha?"

 

[dries1]

The 8x30 E2 of roofs....except $1,000 more. Nope.

Brock,

I was alerted by Bill Atwood that the FOV is actually 8 degrees not 8.8 that I incorrectly stated.

 

[brocknroller]

I received an email from Zeiss today about the 8x30 SFL. It said: Equipped with sufficient snacks, tripod, spotting scope and binoculars, the heavy weight of the equipment can become a burden, especially on long nature tours. With the new ZEISS SFL 30, we are introducing the newest and most lightweight member of the ZEISS SF line of binoculars.

I think it depends on what kind of snacks you're talking about. Doritos or

Brock,

I was alerted by Bill Atwood that the FOV is actually 8 degrees not 8.8 that I incorrectly stated.

I know, that's why I edited my post and added "Nope."

8* is good. The MIJ Cabela 8x32 Guide has an 8* FOV, and I find the view open and quite good, particularly for the price. The body is similar in design to the SFL (except the inverted focuser), and the open space between the barrels provide enough space for my fingers to wrap around, which gives me a comfortable and stable grip; however, for $1400 more, I would expect eyegasms from the SFL.

The Big Three Euro brands make excellent binoculars, but Japanese binoculars offer a bigger bang for the buck.

 

[Richard D]

How much is too light, too small in size etc ? ..... I bring this up as I too view the specs of the Zeiss for the first time. When I had a 8x30 MHG, for some reason it just felt too light.....it lacked substance. It was quality, but I preferred something with just a little bulk to it. Am I the only one that see this?

For instance, when I pick up a Meopta or Conquest, they have a bit of bulk and thus almost easier to bird with as they are not much, but longer or weigh more. Thoughts?

In general, more mass adds to a more stable image and I can't say I've ever found any 8x32 too heavy to be comfortable carrying but presumably Zeiss think some people do.

 

[tenex]

In general, more mass adds to a more stable image and I can't say I've ever found any 8x32 too heavy to be comfortable carrying but presumably Zeiss think some people do.

I agree... but Swaro CL seems very popular. (Zeiss will find out how much that had to do with its price point)

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

For those who do not have the monye to spent more than 1000 euros for the new Zeiss SFL 8x30 or another top 8x32/8x30 binocular, one of the good quality aternatives could be the GPO Passion ED 8x32:

• FOV 139/m1000m
• Close focus 1,7 m
• Weight 520g
• Light transmission 90%
• Price 380 euros

Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Brummie]

A nice positive review, however it should be noted that Zeiss is a Rockslide sponsor.

And a sponsor of BirdForum, so you can't trust anyone!

 

[gweller]

So, IOW, it's not an "alpha?"

I was not suggestion that it is not an "alpha", merely that it's advantage/USP over other 8x30/32's is it's weight.

Thus a perspective buyer is probably interested in it (like me!) because it is very light, in which case it is directly competing with other lightweight "'alphas" like the CL 8x30 or the Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 and, as Gijs suggested, even the GPO Passion ED 8x32.

Given that these are all a lot cheaper, it's got to be a lot better optically etc to make it an attractive proposition to a buyer. I would assume though that it's not so good optically as the SF 8x32 or the NL 8x32 , so in that respect maybe it's a second tier ''alpha'' (maybe an "alpha beta" ?? )

 

[lmans66]

The main issue with the GPO passion.....is that the focus wheel in from what I assume (my personal experiences with 3 of them and from what I read on this forum) is still the amount of play in the focus wheel. If you are comfortable with 'play'...(1/4 or so), than the GPO is a good bin. But for the life of me I can't figure out why GPO allows that play in their focus wheel. That to me is an obvious 'issue' that needs to be fixed and something I know they are aware of as I have written them at least three times on that ....

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

I have the GPO Passion in front of me and there is no play in the focussing wheel , it is now used for almost a year.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[lmans66]

I know Gijs....I have communicated to you prior on the forum and that is what you said. So good.... But I have had three GPO 8x32's and perhaps just my luck, but I have seen others on this forum who have stated there is play in their GPO too. I really feel that in GPO's case, that their idea of 'quality control' is to have an acceptable amount of play in the focus wheel. If so, they have achieved it, but otherwise, it isn't the normal thing one finds in a binocular and accepts. Great binocular otherwise for the money. I just found by going out birding and trying to hone in on a bird with 1/4 play in focus wheel, really goofed my birding up jim

 

[Binocollector]

For instance, when I pick up a Meopta or Conquest, they have a bit of bulk and thus almost easier to bird with as they are not much, but longer or weigh more. Thoughts?

There is definitely a point when it becomes too lightweight for me. For example my Nikon 6x15 skeleton bino. It's still awesome but it's greatest advantage -- being super small -- also leads to a lot of shaking when not pressing it against my face with some fingers on top and stabilizing it somehow. Just balancing it between the fingers without anchoring it somehow it is more shaky than a 10x50.
But I think 400+ gr is still okay. I have an Optolyth 8x30 porro that weighs about the same as the SFL and it works just fine. But a bit more weight definitely reduces shaking until that effect is reversed when a bino is so heavy that my muscles start shaking from the weight .

 

[lmans66]

I feel how much is too little in terms of weight will differ between us all. I had a MHG and when I went out birding, while I loved the binoculars, ...in the end when I birding with them I felt like I was birding with a toy. But surprisingly when I birded with the CL, I didn't.... but perhaps the configuration of the CL made it feel bigger (if that makes sense).

When I bird with my Leica Retro 7x35.... it is small and while I somewhat get the feel of a toy, it isn't quite the same toy as the MHG. I prefer the Meostar 8x32 as my perfect size/bulk binocular.

I wonder if it has something to do with the barrel (30 or 32")? jim

 

[ariban]

This is what three binoculars felt in my hands. The SFL 10x30 is small. Two fingers around the barrel with my medium sized hands. Index finger came straight on the focuser. Pinky gets to dangle.

The Swarovski CL 8x30B a good solid three finger grip. Focuser easy on the index finger.

SF 8x32 - firm three finger grip on barrel between hinges, index finger on the focuser.

As a functional birding tool the SFL 30 is great. If the ergonomics suit you, it is unlikely you will miss a bird. A field wider than the CL but a field shorter than the SF.

Also you may like to a size comparison- SF 8x32 vs SFL 8x30

Arijit