ZEISS Victory SF Appreciation Thread (1 Viewer)

[mgp13]

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.

I can understand that. The 148m FOV (61 deg apparent) of the 8x SF is definitely a selling point. But the 10x is so wide at 120m (61.7 deg apparent) I haven't noticed the difference much at all. The 10x definitely offers a "wide angle" view.

 

[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?

Mal, hopefully this didnt get lost. It seems a fair request. Folks often chime in with their preference for this or that magnification. Sometimes the conversation gets inexplicably heated. Though would seem there's usually an underlying reason for the preference. That explanation might help people understand why you like what you like, and enable them to compare to their circumstance.

 

[Maljunulo]

Tom; I’m trying hard not to appear rude or churlish, but I have no intention of filling out your little questionnaire, and getting drawn into endless circular, redundant, and subjective debate.

You have yourself a nice day, now.

 

[BarnetMike]

I use the 10x42, and find them optically excellent, well balanced and relatively light weight. It's not the most rugged - the black finish wears easily, the compensation dial came off and the eyecup height adjustment is easily disturbed, but these are compromises I'm happy to accept for the superb optics and reduced weight.

 

[GrampaTom]

Tom; I’m trying hard not to appear rude or churlish, but I have no intention of filling out your little questionnaire, and getting drawn into endless circular, redundant, and subjective debate.

You have yourself a nice day, now.

Why would you think that? Endless, circular, redundant, subjective? Its your story, (which is of course would be subjective). But what's wrong with that? The rest? By telling us why you changed from 10 to 8 we get to go, "Oh, I see, I get that. Makes sense." Wouldn't be me that turns it into endless, circular, redundant.

 

[Paultricounty]

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.

I switched as well from 10x to 8x, and even enjoy 7x lately. Was it just FOV for you to switch to the lower magnification?

 

[GrampaTom]

I switched as well from 10x to 8x, and even enjoy 7x lately. Was it just FOV for you to switch to the lower magnification?

Uh... Here it comes. Why? What changed for you? Was it a birding change thing, e.g. chasing smaller species in tighter terrain, for instance?

 

[Paultricounty]

Uh... Here it comes. Why? What changed for you? Was it a birding change thing, e.g. chasing smaller species in tighter terrain, for instance?

I’m more of a nature observer than a birder. I like to look at everything.

I started with 10x42’s and tried just about everything on the market from $500 and all the way up. Started with Nikon, went to Leica, then Zeiss, then Swaro. I used many of them for over a year, then I wanted to try something compact , so I figured I’d try the 32’s in 8x. Fell in love with the format and went out and tried just about everything in that configuration. I Tried the Terra, Conquest then on to the SF’s and Leica UV’s and many others. I started using the 10 x 42 and 8 x 32‘s together and noticed that under 90% of my observing, I enjoyed the 8 x 32s more. I then wondered if I’d like an 8x42, thus started me on to the 8 x 42‘s bandwagon , which are now my favorite format. Its the FOV, more DOF, and more immersive image feel and easier to stay steady on objects. For me it’s a combination of all things coming together.

Paul

 

[mgp13]

I'm thrilled with the 10x guys. The 8x were easier to like straight out of the box but the 10x has grown on me to the point I prefer it.

 

[Scott98]

Having the 8x42 I've always wanted the 10x42 SF, but that would be too "luxurious" Can't justify the expenditure. Would also love an 8x32 SF.

What's with this "switching" from 8x to 10x, etc....there's no "switch" you can still use whatever you want right? They all look good to me, I like to have options from 7-10x and a 15x would probably be good too

 

[dorubird]

For me, SF 10x42 has such a good ergonomics and balance in the hands that it behaves like a 8x bino. Advantage of 10x over 8x magnification it feels in micro details, when it is wel stabilized!

 

[Bentley03]

I agree with Scotty, I feel all mags can be enjoyed to the same extent and each can serve a slightly different purpose, depending upon where, when and what you are viewing, similar to the weight vs aperture conundrum.

I will use 10x far more through the winter months than summer months, when I prefer greater depth of focus under a full canopy.

Probably best I don't get too involved in the sentiment of this thread (I've been deliberately avoiding it), the Victory SF range simply don't work for me, so I can't/don't 'appreciate' them (sadly).

 

[Maljunulo]

Probably best I don't get too involved in the sentiment of this thread (I've been deliberately avoiding it), the Victory SF range simply don't work for me, so I can't/don't 'appreciate' them (sadly).

Can you expand a bit on “simply don’t work”?

 

[Gdavis248]

I agree with Scotty, I feel all mags can be enjoyed to the same extent and each can serve a slightly different purpose, depending upon where, when and what you are viewing, similar to the weight vs aperture conundrum.

I will use 10x far more through the winter months than summer months, when I prefer greater depth of focus under a full canopy.

Probably best I don't get too involved in the sentiment of this thread (I've been deliberately avoiding it), the Victory SF range simply don't work for me, so I can't/don't 'appreciate' them (sadly).

Can you elaborate as to why they don’t work for you?

 

[Bentley03]

Can you expand a bit on “simply don’t work”?

Can you elaborate as to why they don’t work for you?

Mal, I'm surprised you need to ask, we've shared several exchanges regarding my struggles with the SF range on various threads on here in the past, but hey ho.

@Gdavis248, hi, it's my inability to set them up as precisely as they demand for completely comfortable 'forget they're there' viewing. The combination of me, the instruments in question and my glasses don't work, sadly. A marriage made in heaven we are not.

I do, however, love their ergonomics, and I completely 'get' why, for many, these are their best of the best binoculars.

Conquest HD's I find super comfortable, likewise the x40 SFL's.

Probably best I leave it at that.

 

[Maljunulo]

Mal, I'm surprised you need to ask, we've shared several exchanges regarding my struggles with the SF range on various threads on here in the past, but hey ho.

@Gdavis248, hi, it's my inability to set them up as precisely as they demand for completely comfortable 'forget they're there' viewing. The combination of me, the instruments in question and my glasses don't work, sadly. A marriage made in heaven we are not.

I do, however, love their ergonomics, and I completely 'get' why, for many, these are their best of the best binoculars.

Conquest HD's I find super comfortable, likewise the x40 SFL's.

Probably best I leave it at that.

My memory is no longer what it once was.

 

[Bentley03]

My memory is no longer what it once was.

Nor mine, but because I know you own some 8x32 SF's, I've always sensed my more negative SF observations to cause a degree of offence, where none is intended. 🍻

 

[Maljunulo]

Nor mine, but because I know you own some 8x32 SF's, I've always sensed my more negative SF observations to cause a degree of offence, where none is intended. 🍻

If so, it is unintentional.

I am not a fan boy of anything, and never play “mine’s better” games.

It too bad that you and the sF don’t get along, but obviously here are a few other choices.

 

[Gdavis248]

Mal, I'm surprised you need to ask, we've shared several exchanges regarding my struggles with the SF range on various threads on here in the past, but hey ho.

@Gdavis248, hi, it's my inability to set them up as precisely as they demand for completely comfortable 'forget they're there' viewing. The combination of me, the instruments in question and my glasses don't work, sadly. A marriage made in heaven we are not.

I do, however, love their ergonomics, and I completely 'get' why, for many, these are their best of the best binoculars.

Conquest HD's I find super comfortable, likewise the x40 SFL's.

Probably best I leave it at that.

I see. I'm also a glasses wearer and know that sadly all binoculars I've tried are inherently more finnicky because of my need for glasses. Some are just better than others! I currently own some Swaro EL 8.5x42s but I haven't had a chance to try an SFs. I wish they were more easily accessible in stores that I could get just a few hands on minutes to know whether they would work for me. I would probably know pretty quickly. It's hard to just drop a couple thousand and then possibly have to deal with the hassle of returning.

 

[Bentley03]

I see. I'm also a glasses wearer and know that sadly all binoculars I've tried are inherently more finnicky because of my need for glasses. Some are just better than others! I currently own some Swaro EL 8.5x42s but I haven't had a chance to try an SFs. I wish they were more easily accessible in stores that I could get just a few hands on minutes to know whether they would work for me. I would probably know pretty quickly. It's hard to just drop a couple thousand and then possibly have to deal with the hassle of returning.

I do find it frustrating when, on paper, I should find a binocular very usable, based on spec, but find the reality to be less than perfectly comfortable, or at the very least, less comfortable than their equivalents from other manufacturers, especially at this price point.

With the SF's, I instantly embraced both the concept of the ergonomics and how they handle and operate. What I was unable to do was find that perfect setting which, once familiarity and perfect (or almost perfect) positioning had become second nature, allows you to forget the mechanics of using them out in the field. I could find no consistency, and for me there was always an unpredictability as to how we would get along on any given day (I carry binoculars for between 3 and 5 hours most days).

The problem, I believe, is that there is very little tolerance in the eyebox for anything less than absolutely perfect positioning at precisely the right distance from the ocular (eye relief, in other words). In addition, the position of my glasses in relation to the binoculars is always going to be variable to some degree, which adds to the potential to affect where I position the binoculars in relation to my eyes.

I have owned, and moved on, three of the four versions of the SF's. The 10x32's I knew instantly I wasn't going to get along with, but the other three I gave proper auditions to (months of ownership). And, whilst I frequently thought I'd mastered one or other of them, as soon as I picked up an EL, NL, Ultravid, Noctivid or EDG equivalent, I realised I hadn't, I can use all of the aforementioned reliably and with complete comfort.

I have theories as to why I find SF's so difficult to use, and used to believe I was simply incompetent, but over time have concluded they just don't work for me, sadly. Forbidden fruit!