ZEISS Victory SF Appreciation Thread (2 Viewers)

[mgp13]

Isn't he that do-gooder pedo apologist?

Most certainly NOT. He's one of the pioneers of the free software movement. His opinions are certainly not the most accessible but at no point would he have defended paedophiles.

 

[Ignatius]

Most certainly NOT. He's one of the pioneers of the free software movement. His opinions are certainly not the most accessible but at no point would he have defended paedophiles.

Are you quite sure about that?

 

[mgp13]

Isn't he that do-gooder pedo apologist?

Most certainly NOT. He's one of the pioneers of the free software movement

Are you quite sure about that?

I haven't been following him for years now and wasn't aware of his commentary on those issues, sorry. While some of his comments do appear quite disturbing, he is nevertheless a man of incredible intellect and achievement who has spent almost his entire life thanklessly defending and advocating for free software, which is something of great importance in my life. So you can forgive me if I see him in a different light to how you've described him.

 

[Elpha8888]

The SF 8x42 are a very special binocular, my first time picking up a pair was a dream, however part of my binocular use involves a fair amount of astronomy and there is nothing I have used that quite performs like a Swarovski under the night sky.

 

[[email protected]]

I love the ergonomics and everything about the Zeiss SF 8x42, but I have tried four of them and with every one I get an orange crescent of flare on the outside bottom right of the FOV. It irritates me because other than that deal killer they feel like great binoculars.

I just tried another one a few days ago, and I got the same orange crescents. I think it is because I have shallow eye sockets because the fellow I was going to buy them from did not see the orange crescents, but I noticed his eye sockets were much deeper. Has anybody else seen these orange crescents?

 

[Paultricounty]

Dennis , you really should get your eyes examined, you seem to see unusual amounts of glare in an unusual amount of binoculars. If not the eyes , maybe seek seek out a good cosmetic surgeon to alter your eye sockets and maybe cut back those Herman Munster brows.

 

[mgp13]

I

I love the ergonomics and everything about the Zeiss SF 8x42, but I have tried four of them and with every one I get an orange crescent of flare on the outside bottom right of the FOV. It irritates me because other than that deal killer they feel like great binoculars.

I just tried another one a few days ago, and I got the same orange crescents. I think it is because I have shallow eye sockets because the fellow I was going to buy them from did not see the orange crescents, but I noticed his eye sockets were much deeper. Has anybody else seen these orange crescents?

I've seen the orange crescents with effort but they don't seem to cause me any distress. I pointed several pair of binoculars directly at and around a light source and the Vic SF 8x42 handled the task the best of the lot, producing the orange crescents rather than the whole field getting covered with "white noise" like the other binoculars. Do yours have the internal reflection problem where a white sliver appears just outside the FOV?

 

[[email protected]]

I

I've seen the orange crescents with effort but they don't seem to cause me any distress. I pointed several pair of binoculars directly at and around a light source and the Vic SF 8x42 handled the task the best of the lot, producing the orange crescents rather than the whole field getting covered with "white noise" like the other binoculars. Do yours have the internal reflection problem where a white sliver appears just outside the FOV?

I never bought them because I couldn't tolerate the orange crescent. I don't get a white sliver. It is more of an orange sliver. It is really weird. I have never seen anything like it in any binocular I have owned. They just don't work for me.

 

[Troubador]

I never bought them because I couldn't tolerate the orange crescent. I don't get a white sliver. It is more of an orange sliver. It is really weird. I have never seen anything like it in any binocular I have owned. They just don't work for me.

Experiment with eyecup position and you can solve this.

 

[[email protected]]

Experiment with eyecup position and you can solve this.

I just tried the Zeiss SF 8x42 again two days ago with the seller that has them in the Bird Forum classifieds for $1550. He happened to live 5 minutes away from me! I tried every eye cup position down to the eye cups being completely closed, and I still got the orange crescents at the bottom right of the FOV on the edge. The guy that was selling them didn't see anything, but he had deeper eye sockets. I didn't buy them even though it was a great bargain.

 

[AlphaFan]

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

Looking at this overall conclusion in the context of results of personal preferences and comparison with completing models in the same class I generally agree. The rich, easy and immersive view through my 10x42 SF is consistently spectacular across a wide swath of environments and combined with the super-smooth balance and handling makes them a joy to use.

I own(ed) many others but the one most automatically chosen model to compare against the SF is the NL, which I also own in 42mm. The biggest challenge that I find in directly comparing these two models is how vastly different they are in both view and handling characteristics except for both of them being superb in their own right.

A few characteristics that stand out to me when comparing the NL/SF (personal observations, YMMV):

• both are bright and crisp with very high resolution and wide FOV
• NL FOV is a bit wider, and the image flatter to the edge, with the trade-off of a more finicky eye position
• personally find the SF color saturation a bit more natural, while the NL more saturated (almost unnatural)
• both have high contrast but the deeper NL color saturation may give the edge in apparent contrast to NL
• agree with OP’s observation of SF‘s highly immersive view
• hunters express preference for NL due to FOV, color contrast - for spotting game while using tripod
• NL wider FOV and flatter image may be better for astronomy
• having used both in extensive glassing sessions (raptors, etc) I find the SFs result in less viewing fatigue
• ergonomics/haptics preference = SF, ergobalance is a joy, focus is super-snappy and smooth
• find NL wasp barrels very annoying = force me to hold in a position that puts stress on wrists/forearms
• NLs are slightly heavier but feel much heavier in the hand
• NLs externally fog easier IME = possibly due to lack of SwaroClean; SF still has LotuTec
• NL pre-thread for a tripod stud is better thought out and positioned
• SF is notably larger
• SF eyecups are very fragile and the detents strip quite easily - already replaced a few

The above are my observations based on extensive use of both. I thoroughly enjoy using both the SF and NL. Which one I would choose to use would vary depending on application. For picking apart a distant landscape while mounted on a tripod, I’d be packing the NL. For most hand-held birding applications I’d have a slight preference for the SF. These are all just my direct observations/preferences, but it does reinforce the sage advice often posted here on BirdForum, “it is best to try before buying.”

 

[[email protected]]

Looking at this overall conclusion in the context of results of personal preferences and comparison with completing models in the same class I generally agree. The rich, easy and immersive view through my 10x42 SF is consistently spectacular across a wide swath of environments and combined with the super-smooth balance and handling makes them a joy to use.

I own(ed) many others but the one most automatically chosen model to compare against the SF is the NL, which I also own in 42mm. The biggest challenge that I find in directly comparing these two models is how vastly different they are in both view and handling characteristics except for both of them being superb in their own right.

A few characteristics that stand out to me when comparing the NL/SF (personal observations, YMMV):

• both are bright and crisp with very high resolution and wide FOV
• NL FOV is a bit wider, and the image flatter to the edge, with the trade-off of a more finicky eye position
• personally find the SF color saturation a bit more natural, while the NL more saturated (almost unnatural)
• both have high contrast but the deeper NL color saturation may give the edge in apparent contrast to NL
• agree with OP’s observation of SF‘s highly immersive view
• hunters express preference for NL due to FOV, color contrast - for spotting game while using tripod
• NL wider FOV and flatter image may be better for astronomy
• having used both in extensive glassing sessions (raptors, etc) I find the SFs result in less viewing fatigue
• ergonomics/haptics preference = SF, ergobalance is a joy, focus is super-snappy and smooth
• find NL wasp barrels very annoying = force me to hold in a position that puts stress on wrists/forearms
• NLs are slightly heavier but feel much heavier in the hand
• NLs externally fog easier IME = possibly due to lack of SwaroClean; SF still has LotuTec
• NL pre-thread for a tripod stud is better thought out and positioned
• SF is notably larger
• SF eyecups are very fragile and the detents strip quite easily - already replaced a few

The above are my observations based on extensive use of both. I thoroughly enjoy using both the SF and NL. Which one I would choose to use would vary depending on application. For picking apart a distant landscape while mounted on a tripod, I’d be packing the NL. For most hand-held birding applications I’d have a slight preference for the SF. These are all just my direct observations/preferences, but it does reinforce the sage advice often posted here on BirdForum, “it is best to try before buying.”

You forgot one very important characteristic. The NL's are glare prone and the SF's are more glare resistant for most people.

Review: Swarovski 8x32 NL Pure vs. 8x32 EL WB

 

[Paultricounty]

You forgot one very important characteristic. The NL's are glare prone and the SF's are more glare resistant for most people.

Review: Swarovski 8x32 NL Pure vs. 8x32 EL WB

That is absolutely 100% untrue. NL’s are NOT glare prone for most people, on the contrary it’s actually the direct opposite. Is it just me , or do others notice that the majority of your posts are about glare? There is absolutely not one doubt in my mind, I am 100% sure that you are more prone to glare than most people.

I really do enjoy reading a lot of your posts, and I agree with many things you write about Binoculars, but you really, really truly do a disservice to new people who come here , to get information and advice on what binoculars they should try and consider buying. You portray what many (if not most)
people consider to be the best Binoculars in the world today (I believe allbinos agrees and gave it the highest rating, don’t quote me I’m not going back to read it) and label it a glare monster for most people. I think the only thing that most people agree with is how out of bounds and destructive some of your posts are. 😒.

 

[Maljunulo]

The problem with Dennis is that new people believe him.

 

[Paultricounty]

The problem with Dennis is that new people believe him.

Maybe we need a disclaimer to be attached to each one of his posts. Something like informing all the newcomers to beware, and not to give any consideration to anything posted as objective.

Paul

 

[mgp13]

Looking at this overall conclusion in the context of results of personal preferences and comparison with completing models in the same class I generally agree. The rich, easy and immersive view through my 10x42 SF is consistently spectacular across a wide swath of environments and combined with the super-smooth balance and handling makes them a joy to use.

I own(ed) many others but the one most automatically chosen model to compare against the SF is the NL, which I also own in 42mm. The biggest challenge that I find in directly comparing these two models is how vastly different they are in both view and handling characteristics except for both of them being superb in their own right.

A few characteristics that stand out to me when comparing the NL/SF (personal observations, YMMV):

• both are bright and crisp with very high resolution and wide FOV
• NL FOV is a bit wider, and the image flatter to the edge, with the trade-off of a more finicky eye position
• personally find the SF color saturation a bit more natural, while the NL more saturated (almost unnatural)
• both have high contrast but the deeper NL color saturation may give the edge in apparent contrast to NL
• agree with OP’s observation of SF‘s highly immersive view
• hunters express preference for NL due to FOV, color contrast - for spotting game while using tripod
• NL wider FOV and flatter image may be better for astronomy
• having used both in extensive glassing sessions (raptors, etc) I find the SFs result in less viewing fatigue
• ergonomics/haptics preference = SF, ergobalance is a joy, focus is super-snappy and smooth
• find NL wasp barrels very annoying = force me to hold in a position that puts stress on wrists/forearms
• NLs are slightly heavier but feel much heavier in the hand
• NLs externally fog easier IME = possibly due to lack of SwaroClean; SF still has LotuTec
• NL pre-thread for a tripod stud is better thought out and positioned
• SF is notably larger
• SF eyecups are very fragile and the detents strip quite easily - already replaced a few

The above are my observations based on extensive use of both. I thoroughly enjoy using both the SF and NL. Which one I would choose to use would vary depending on application. For picking apart a distant landscape while mounted on a tripod, I’d be packing the NL. For most hand-held birding applications I’d have a slight preference for the SF. These are all just my direct observations/preferences, but it does reinforce the sage advice often posted here on BirdForum, “it is best to try before buying.”

That's a fantastic breakdown, thanks very much for that.

 

[mgp13]

I just tried the Zeiss SF 8x42 again two days ago with the seller that has them in the Bird Forum classifieds for $1550. He happened to live 5 minutes away from me! I tried every eye cup position down to the eye cups being completely closed, and I still got the orange crescents at the bottom right of the FOV on the edge. The guy that was selling them didn't see anything, but he had deeper eye sockets. I didn't buy them even though it was a great bargain.

While I find it strange that something like the red crescents could put you off so much, I do empathise somewhat. I sent mine back due to an internal reflection that I just couldn't stand. Replacements are on their way.

 

[[email protected]]

While I find it strange that something like the red crescents could put you off so much, I do empathise somewhat. I sent mine back due to an internal reflection that I just couldn't stand. Replacements are on their way.

What did you see in the internal reflection? Was it similar to what I saw? I have a had a lot of binoculars, but I have never seen an orange crescent on the bottom edge of the FOV like I did with the Zeiss SF 8x42 in any of them. Why should I tolerate something like that when there are plenty of other binocular choices that don't have it?

 

[mgp13]

Why should I tolerate something like that when there are plenty of other binocular choices that don't have it?

1. It's not that noticeable.
2. The Victory SF is a brilliant binocular in almost every conceivable way.

 

[mgp13]

What did you see in the internal reflection?

It's just outside the FOV, a white sliver caused by an improperly blackened edge to one of the innards of the eyepiece.