Gradusted from Leupold binocs to Zeiss Victory 8 x 40 three years ago...good quality binoculars but I need a great pair for the first and last 5 minutes of the day. I have tried a friends 10 x 42 Swarovski EL's and the difference is enough to probably justify the additional expense.

1) Do you think they are worth the difference?

2) If so, do you prefer the 8x or 10x models?

Thanks.

If you hunt woods a lot you might prefer the 8.5x42 EL's, if you hunt open fields or open mountains as in Colorado you will prefer the 10x42's.
I've spent a good bit of time looking through the EL's, Ultravids and Zeiss FL's. The 10x42 EL's are the best binoculars I've ever looked through. I use binoculars constantly while hunting and I'm glad that I spent the extra funds on the hunting item I use the most, Swarovski 10x42 EL's..............DJ

I have the 10 x 32's. I strongly considered the 42's but I wanted something a little more portable. The 32's provide that. Mine are used in the Northeast, TN mountains- everything from small fields to infinity. They are a wonderful piece of optics.

Hank,

I've had the 10x42 EL for about 5 years now. Absolutely great glass, clear, bright and relatively light for their capability....but...are they worth $3-400 more than an equivalent Leica? Nope, not by my side by side comparison in a local optics shop. I'f I had to do it over again I'd go for the Leicas

Thanks
Paul

quote:

Originally posted by Hank H.:
Gradusted from Leupold binocs to Zeiss Victory 8 x 40 three years ago...good quality binoculars but I need a great pair for the first and last 5 minutes of the day. I have tried a friends 10 x 42 Swarovski EL's and the difference is enough to probably justify the additional expense.

1) Do you think they are worth the difference?

2) If so, do you prefer the 8x or 10x models?

Thanks.

I have compared my Swaros 8.5x42 EL to my Zeiss Victory II 8x40 and definitely prefer the Swaros. They are better both in terms of optical quality as well as ergonomics. That said, I use the Zeiss a lot, and am totally happy with them in the field - not least considering they cost only 60% of what I paid for the Swaros.

I doubt a pair of ELs will make the difference in low light. In particular not if you choose the 10x version. The 8.5s will perform better in low light. If low light performance is what you need, you'll have go with a larger objective lens, and pay the price in increased weight. In Central Europe, this would be a no-brainer. In the US, I personally doubt this would be worth the hassle.

I personally perfer 8x (or 8.5x) magnification to 10x. The 8x's will have a better depth of field, and not need adjustment for sharpness at different distances as frequently as the 10s.

- mike

i have the 10x42 els and love em. I picked the swaros over leica because they leica refused to stand behind their warranty on a pair of 10x25's that came out of alignment

I have a pair of 8.5 X 42's and love them.

I drove the gun shop guys crazy looking through their inventory and looking through every one.

Swaros had the best clarity and no distortion that I could detect at the edges. I picked the 8.5 instead of the 10 power for a coouple of reasons. First, the 8.5 had better low light capability. Second, the 10 power distorts even small movements. A small shake becomes a large shake in the view. If you are going through difficult terrain, that heavy breathing plays hell with your viewing capability.

Mine got their first tryout on Kodiak Island, Alaska. Up there, 10 power would have been useful, since you are spotting up to a few miles away. The guide had a pair of 10 power something or others, but all said, I preferred the 8.5.

And the EL's are LIGHT. Not a big deal in the gunshop, but after 8 hours on the vertical tundra, every ounce made a difference.

Hank: I see by your particulars you hail from Georgia. DJ' advice is right on the money. I'd go for the 8Xs here in the south. Better light transmission in the deer woods than the 10Xs I think. THe new Zeiss' are excellent as well as are the Leicas but given your choices, the 8.5 ELs are the way to go. jorge

No way would I spend what they want for a pair of EL's if I already had a Zeiss Victory 8x40. You may as well take $700.00 and flush it.

Not that the EL's aren't great binos, but they're not that much better, if any, than the Zeiss you already own. I sometimes question the build quality of the newer Zeiss binos, but they've never lacked brightness...

I have a pair of the Swaro 8x30s and bought the 8.5x ELs. I'm happy I did (so are my grandsons who borrow the 8xs). The 8.5x is the most power that I seem to be able to hold steadily. 10x "jiggles" on me. Even in Colo, I enjoy the 8.5 more than the 10x.

How much do you want to spend. truth is the new zeiss FL's give up nothing optically, in hgact they are the best.
abbe-konig prisms and flourite glass

plus in the 8X42 - the FOV is 405 feet! the largest in its class!!!

lastly, the zeiss is cheapest....if you look you can find them for well under list price

A roof prism takes some special attention if it is going to work at all. In the most common roof prism, the Schmidt Pechan, one of the glass-air boundaries is at an angle such that it can not produce total internal refection for any of the light that strikes it. Most of the light would pass right through. This problem is solved by “coating†that surface of the prism with a mirror coating: a thin layer of reflective metal which turns all the light that strikes it (producing the “roof†in the “roof prism†design). Silver roofs were used until aluminum became readily available (aluminum has the advantage of not tarnishing or loosing its reflectivity as quickly as silver). Most high quality roof-prisms have returned to the use of silver because it reflects light more efficiently, and because the silver does not tarnish in a binocular that is waterproof and filled with inert nitrogen gas anyway.

Unfortunately, even the best silvered surface is not as efficient as a proper glass-air bounday at the correct angle. Some of the light that strikes it always leaks through: up to 15% for an aluminized prism. Therefore, until recently, no roof-prism binocular was as bright as a porro prism binocular of equal quality in side by side testing.

Then too, when light reflects back from a mirror, its phase is changed. One way of picturing this is to say that light waves come in bundles, with the waves arrayed in all directions, and crossing at the center of the bundle. When light reflects from a mirror, it becomes partially polarized, with more of the waves aligned, shall we say, horizontally than vertically. Some energy (brightness) and some information (resolution) is lost, and even more is lost when these partially polarized rays interact (interfere) as they are recombined in the image.

The Abbe-Konig has the advantage of not having a surface that requires mirroring: all the light is turned by total internal reflection. That means that the Abbe-Konig design is inherently brighter than any normal Schmidt Pechan system of equal quality in side by side comparisons.

In the 1980s, Zeiss optical engineers developed a coating for prism surfaces. It is similar to the anti-reflective coatings used on lenses in that it consists of multiple thin layers of high index of refraction minerals, and it eliminates the phase distortion in the Abbe Konig design. Other manufacturers soon applied similar coatings to the Schmidt Pechan design to improve both the brightness and the resolution of images formed with their erector systems.

This is generally called “phase coating†and allows at least the Abbe-Konig design (which has, remember, no mirror leakage) to equal, for the first time, the efficiency and performance of the best porros (above 90%). The improvement in the Schmidt Pechan systems was more subtle, primarily, in my experience, consisting of increased contrast and sharpness.

Of course, we use only the highest quality materials, and employ the most up-to-date machinery, but when building the finest optical instruments, there is no substitute for this kind of hands-on attention to detail and quality. Machines alone just don’t do the job: it requires a human eye and a human touch, and a human commitment to quality at every stage of the process, to produce the kind of optics that Zeiss is known for, worldwide.

We are confident that our customers experience and appreciate the difference in quality. Most, however, are not aware of the hundreds of individual hands and minds that make that quality possible.

So, next time someone asks you, “What makes Zeiss binoculars so good?†(Or, for that matter, “What makes Zeiss binoculars so expensive?â€) remember the hundreds of hours of labor, the hundreds of careful hands and conscientious minds that are reflected in every Zeiss product.

We are Zeiss. We have been producing high-quality optics for 158 years, employing our hands and minds to push back the boundaries of optical excellence. We don’t know any other way to make the kind of optics we can put our name on.

What the Zeiss Victory FLs provide is, as near as is technically possible, a completely “natural†contrast range, wide open to both ends, the blackest blacks and the whitest whites, the reddest reds, the bluest blues, the greenest greens. We manage this without compromising the brightness of our image.

We could adjust our contrast range, by playing with our coatings and glass types, to produce the “high apparent contrast†image common in other optics…but why would we do that? Why would we sacrifice image detail in the dark and light areas of the image, color discrimination, and brightness overall, to achieve an increase in contrast that is only apparent?

In fact, over time, our users come to appreciate and expect the full natural contrast image that the Zeiss Victory FLs provide…so much so that other optics appear “clipped†and “dim†by comparison.

“Full Natural Contrast Rangeâ€: it is a Victory FL difference you can see.


any ?'s

Wow...did not expect such a great response...thanks! My Victory binoculars are about 3 years old...they are not the super expensive Victorys I see advertised now. That being said, they were about $900 back then.

I borrowed a friend's 10 x 40 Swaro ELs last night and took em out this morning for some low light comparison with the Victory. Interestingly, the 8x Zeiss held their own against the 10x Swaros at pink light and beyond. I was shocked. I love my Swarovski scopes and expected more light gathering from their binoculars, but, with my eyes, that was NOT the case.

The only advantage was the difference in magnification..that was all. I got to wondering though, if an 8x pair of Swarovskis might not gather more light than the 10x and I,therefore, was not comparing apples with apples this morning, especially after reading some comments that the 8x do, indeed, gather more light.

Conclusion: with MY eyes, there was no difference between the 10x Swaros and the 8x Zeiss. Now, I guess I need to consider the 8x Swaros for comparison...

Even the older Zeiss Victory's (Pre FL's) were noted for their brightness. I seriously doubt you'll find a "brighter" bino, unless maybe you go with an 8x50-56mm or something along those lines..

I love my 10x42 EL.
[

quote:

Originally posted by PATRIOT76:
How much do you want to spend. truth is the new zeiss FL's give up nothing optically, in hgact they are the best.
abbe-konig prisms and flourite glass

plus in the 8X42 - the FOV is 405 feet! the largest in its class!!!

lastly, the zeiss is cheapest....if you look you can find them for well under list price

The first article I read about the new Zeiss FL's was that the pair of 10x42's they had was defective and had a focusing problem. The first pair I looked at in a store was also defective, they absolutely would not focus correctly.
This was early last year and perhaps they have corrected their manufacturing problems but I'm very suspect of Zeiss' larger FL's.
I also looked at the smaller FL's which have a different type of prizm's than the larger ones do and to my eyes the smaller FL's were superior to the EL's and Ultravids.
The larger FL's with the bugs worked out might be great glass but I wouldn't buy a pair without a really good return policy. I don't know that their US service is anywhere near as good as Swaro's should it be needed...................DJ

zeiss is easily the largest optical company (whereas swarovski might be the largest crystal company) in the world. THeir lifetime TRANSFERABLE warranty is something swarovski doesnt offer and i have heard about leaky swarovski binocs more than once...does that mean they aint good? nope! does that mean they dont fix em? nope. so some initial zeiss had some problems ,usually try on the first runs of any model from any company...

all 3(leica, zeiss, swarovski) are good, but i think zeiss hit a homerun with the new FL's and just about everyone that i have heard htat actually OWNS them, thinks the same thing...

Between the EL's, FL's and the Ultravid there aren't vast differences optically. They are all excellent. But when making a decision which one to drop some serious coin on issues such as construction quality, reliability and service quality can be more than enough to tip the balance.
And BTW I own more than one pair of Zeiss binoculars and probably will buy a pair of the smaller FL's but I certainly would not buy an expensive pair of binoculars that wouldn't focus. I've looked through 1 pairs of FL 10x42's in different stores and both were defective....................DJ

I own the 8.5 EL's the 7x50 SL and 10x Geoviods and own a number of Swaro PH and A rifle scopes not to mention some SB's..The glass is all good for my eyes..On the Binos for me it would be spliting hairs.. EL's are very good and I've used them the most so they get the nod..
AK

I am a big fan of Swarovski not least as they offer outstanding customer service here in the UK.

In fact, they go further than that in that they have donated a high end bino's as a prize for our hunting clubs raffle for the past several years...This year it was a pair of 10x42 EL's..

Zeiss always had a reputation for indifferent customer service with long turn around times and charging for parts and repairs whereever possible.

I am glad to say I have heard this has changed of late so the competion between the top makers is yielding results for us consumers..

With regards the bino issue, I have heard only good things about the 8.5x42mm and 10x42mm EL's but the smaller 32mm apparently were not so good when they were first introduced. I have read this has now been corrected, but I would check up on current reviews before buying any...

I am trying to justify trading in my 7x42mm SLC's for a pair of 8.5x42mm EL's but it proving a hard decision to make as I still find the SLC's excellent...They have been used extensively in the worst of the British weather, and they have never let me down in the dozen or so years I have owned them...

Regards,

Pete

quote:

Originally posted by PATRIOT76:
zeiss is easily the largest optical company (whereas swarovski might be the largest crystal company) in the world. THeir lifetime TRANSFERABLE warranty is something swarovski doesnt offer and i have heard about leaky swarovski binocs more than once...does that mean they aint good? nope! does that mean they dont fix em? nope. so some initial zeiss had some problems ,usually try on the first runs of any model from any company...

all 3(leica, zeiss, swarovski) are good, but i think zeiss hit a homerun with the new FL's and just about everyone that i have heard htat actually OWNS them, thinks the same thing...

I disagree. I have all three manufacturers and the ELs are the cream of the crop.

I have a pair of Zeiss FLs 10x42s, and decided to get a pair of Leica whatever they're called 10x42s with the 1300 yard range finder. I feel those are as good as the Zeiss in terms of clarity and brightness with the added benefit of the range finder.

For grins I recently bought a pair of Swarovski 10x42 ELs. Far and above better clarity, brightness and sharpness than the Zeiss. They are easier to focus, better depth, softer to look through yet have better clarity, far and above the best pair I own.


And I am a big Zeiss fan, bought a pair of classics from Cabelas (my second pair of those) when I heard they were being discontinued and use VM/Vs on nealry all my hunting rifles.