• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Any experience with Sig Sauer ZULU6 10x30mm IS? (1 Viewer)

Ted Y.

Forum member
Canada
This binocular is a Schmidt-Pechan and I would like to know more about optics: CA correction, central sharpness, contrast.
Any experience is welcomed.

A Porro II binocular IS have almost the same price, and I am under impression that for the same price, a Porro is optically superior.
 
Last edited:
This binocular has Schmidt-Pechan prisms.
A Canon Porro II binocular IS have almost the same price, and I am under impression that for the same price, a Porro is optically superior.
 
Hi Ted,

I just noticed your posts. I have owned the SIG 10x30 and the SIG 16x42 for about three months each. I recently sold the 16x but still have the 10x.

I'm not sure that I can provide a proper review of either in terms of optical quality, but would say that the stabilization works really well. At least to my satisfaction. The motivation for me in trying these models was to see if I could avoid using a tripod and spotting scope for certain uses.

The biggest flaw that I see with both models is mirage or shimmer. Or heat haze, is what I see it called on this forum?

I don't notice CA with the 10x30, but could check again. It's obviously not the best in low light but much better than I expected. I had 8x25 CL a few years ago, and I swear that they got dim really fast at dusk in comparison. However, I have not compared the 8x25 CL directly to the SIG 10x30. I was just expecting the SIG to be even worse than the CL. I did compare the SIG 10x30 to 10x42 HG and 10x42 Toric UHD numerous times, but that doesn't seem like an apples to apples comparison.

I tend to think of the SIG 10x30 as somewhat of a substitute for a compact 8x, if that makes any sense. It is definitely taller than my Kowa 8x33, but to me it is in that same sort of size class but you get an extra 2x and stabilization. I don't think I would like a 10x33 Kowa, and so for me the 10x30 SIG and 8x33 Kowa are competitors for my uses. May not make sense for others though.

I no longer have the SIG 16x42, 10x42 HG, or 10x42 Toric UHD but still compare the 10x30 to my 8x33 Kowa and new to me 8x42 SLC. I'm not experienced at performing resolution tests, but when I got the SLC I was expecting it to handily outperform the Kowa. I spent over an hour looking at a resolution chart at various distances (relatively close though) and with different amounts of good daylight. I couldn't notice a difference between the Kowa and SLC, but was hoping the SLC were going to blow me away!

That stated, under certain conditions and at farther distances there are times that I can see more detail with the SLC than the Kowa. That is what I was hoping for when spending much more on the SLC and dealing with the extra weight and size! The SLC appear brighter, but I was expecting that.

Anyway, when I see something that I can with the SLC but can't with the Kowa it makes me want to compare with the SIG 10x30. For example, today I was looking at some pine cones at a few hundred yards. Midday, bright sunshine. I could distinctly see detail in a pair of pines cones with the SLC that I could not with the Kowa. Sometimes I can spend a long period of time and not see a difference between the SLC and Kowa, unless it is dark or objects of a certain color show up better with the SLC. With the SIG 10x30, that extra 2x must be just enough to allow me to see similar detail in those pine cones as the SLC. And the image is more stable than the SLC (elbows on table, no tripod today). But, there was a little bit more heat haze seen too (not while viewing the pine cones though). And I don't think it's just because it is 10x vs 8x. I think there is something to the design or lack of aberration control?

The 16x had noticeable longitudinal CA but was something that I could overlook having a steady view at 16x and no tripod. I went on a backpacking trip to a wilderness area where we saw deer and elk past a mile. Where 8x and 10x were not enough magnification to view elk and deer very well at 1500 yards, the 16x did the trick. At sunset I watched two bucks chase each other at 1.3 miles (estimated with GPS app). That went on for many minutes and it was really fun to watch. I couldn't see a lot of detail and in hindsight I wish that I had brought a spotting scope, but the 16x42 only weighs 20 ounces! The only problem was that the stabilization automatically turns off after five minutes, to conserve battery life. That happened a few times, and it was difficult to relocate animals at times, so I would occasionally turn the stabilization off then back on, rather than get caught off guard. So I must have watched those deer for 15 - 20 minutes in total, along an amazing mountainside. I'll never forget it.

Anyway, let me know if you want more information. Full disclosure though, I am selling the 10x30. And the 8x33 Kowa. Actually selling one, and keeping the other for my kids. I don't really have a preference which we keep as both have merit for our uses. So that might give you an idea of how I like the 10x30 overall. I can certainly nitpick the 10x30 but when simply using them and not looking for faults, the stabilization is pretty handy along with the size and weight.

Jason
 
Thanks Jason, very nice and elaborated presentation.
With a lot of reviews for Canon IS, I bought a Canon IS 12x.
 
No problem. The Canon IS 12x are interesting to me as well.

Hi 4th point, do you remember where the 16x42 was made?

Edit: made in china. I initially thought japan as some say made by kamakura, but box photo online says china.
 
Last edited:
Hi 4th point, do you remember where the 16x42 was made?

Edit: made in china. I initially thought japan as some say made by kamakura, but box photo online says china.
You are correct. The SIG ZULU6 are made in China. Image attached.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20220818_123138.jpg
    IMG_20220818_123138.jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 23
Warning! This thread is more than 3 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top