New Sig Sauer Zulu6 HDX Pro vs Gen 2 Zulu6 HDX

[swavescatter]

Background: I bought the new 18's and they sucked hard. Sig said they meet spec and I'm just a crybaby, even though I provided proof. Relevant threads here here here here.

Got my 18x50 HDX Pro's back from Sig with a note that they're amazing and I'm an idiot. Grabbed another set of 18x50 HDX Pro's from Sportsman's, as well as the new 16x50 HDX Pro's to compare against my 16x42's.

Bottom line - only the 18x50 pair that I got from Sportsman's could be imagined to be slightly better optically if you try really really hard. You get MAYBE two minutes more glassing time when it's dark. The difference between 18x50's was noticeable and repeatable. I could mix them up and pick which one was which based on image clarity. Sig must have pretty loose specs for their QC. The 16x50's were atrociously bad. Holy cow.

Save your money - don't buy the HDX Pro's.

Sig Sauer 16x42 Zulu6 HDX:


Sig Sauer 16x50 Zulu6 HDX Pro


Sig Sauer 18x50 Zulu6 HDX Pro #1


Sig Sauer 18x50 Zulu6 HDX Pro #2


These were taken during sunset, so the color isn't something that can be compared. I wanted to stick around until sunset to test the low light performance. No pics of that, but there was a very small improvement after last light. Not a $700 improvement for sure.

 

[voltage]

Thanks for sharing. I really like my HDX 16x42s, so selfishly, I’m happy to hear this.

Have you considered taking advantage of Sig’s new warranty with the lemon pair?

 

[swavescatter]

Thanks for sharing. I really like my HDX 16x42s, so selfishly, I’m happy to hear this.

Have you considered taking advantage of Sig’s new warranty with the lemon pair?

I already sent in the 18 pros and they told me thank you for your money, these meet spec so go suck eggs.

 

[focker34]

I'm seeing more and more positive reviews for the pros. I'd love to hear your response to a video like this:

 

[swavescatter]

I think he's full of it and trying to stay on Sigs good side. He's not sponsored.... Yet.

The new pros are better at low light. That's it.

He even mentions not expecting them to be as clear as the Gen 2's during daylight "due to the low light coating" or some crap. That's not how photons work my guy. You can't allow "nighttime" photons in as a compromise for blocking out "daytime" photons.

His rationale for choosing to carry bigger, heavier, less stable, less clear binos is pretty thin. Just because he's not sponsored doesn't mean he isn't auditioning.

As far as I know I'm the only one who put 3 separately purchased Pros on a tripod next to a Gen 2 and tried to be objective. The QC with the pros was all over the map. But maybe I got the world's best Gen 2 16's???

 

[6.5x284]

I believe it. I sent my Gen 2’s packing because I was disappointed. They cost too much to just use as a truck bino which for me was all they turned out to be. I wanted to love them. I think in 5-10 years we’ll have some competition in this space. For now I would rather throw my NLs on a tripod.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Benjblt]

From what I’ve heard, don’t go with anything over 14 power with any of the Zulu 6’s. . Even Steve Speck who sells them said the 16’s suck. (I believe those were his words). I looked through the gen 2 16’s and it was an immediate NO for me.

 

[voltage]

From what I’ve heard, don’t go with anything over 14 power with any of the Zulu 6’s. . Even Steve Speck who sells them said the 16’s suck. (I believe those were his words). I looked through the gen 2 16’s and it was an immediate NO for me.

I love my HDX 16s. FOV is the same as the 12s.

 

[swavescatter]

From what I’ve heard, don’t go with anything over 14 power with any of the Zulu 6’s. . Even Steve Speck who sells them said the 16’s suck. (I believe those were his words). I looked through the gen 2 16’s and it was an immediate NO for me.

Based on my experiment, the optical clarity/resolution specs must be a mile wide. The three Pro models I tried ranged from atrocious to OK. I love my 16's but haven't tested other units to compare. Maybe I got lucky with a pair with great glass...

 

[Benjblt]

Based on my experiment, the optical clarity/resolution specs must be a mile wide. The three Pro models I tried ranged from atrocious to OK. I love my 16's but haven't tested other units to compare. Maybe I got lucky with a pair with great glass...

I will say that the quality of most binoculars, all other things being equal, seems to get worse as power goes up. That's difficult to evaluate as, generally, the objective does not increase relative to the power increase . . . so maybe thats were the degradation in quality from. I looked through multiple brands of 15's and most were decent. I looked through some 18 power Mavens and they were noticably more difficult to look through. All were off a tripod so steadiness was not a factor. I don't believe I'm telling you something new it's just. To me, it seems it takes a quite a jump in quality and maybe objective to make up for an increase in power. Or you could think about it in the reverse a lower power can make up for a mulititude of sins. 8x's are very pleasant to look through.

 

[bigbuckdj]

I have the 14x50s and have previously had the 16x42s, 12x42s, and 10x30s. I’m pleased with them but I’m going to hold off making a serious post until I can put them on a tripod with some friends 16x42s. I still have access to a few pairs of different prescriptions.

 

[bigbuckdj]

I'm seeing more and more positive reviews for the pros. I'd love to hear your response to a video like this:

I watched this last night and I agree this does seem a little salesmany. I agree with him on a lot of the points he makes generally but I won’t try to quantify the lowlight performance or sharpness until I can get them on a tripod next to the gen 2 16s.

Some points he makes that I’ll comment on:

One handing the binos is not completely out with the pros but it’s not comfortable or intuitive at all. I spent ALOT of time one handing the 16s and 10s and I can still do it with the 14s but the placement of the focus wheel and switch is such that I have to flick them on in my harness, pull the binos out, and kind of inch worm my hand forward to get semi crappy placement on the focus wheel. And obviously they are heavier, he says you can muscle a one handed view, I agree.

I’m getting used to the image stabilization being automatic but I was so used to the target mode switch that it’s taking time to adjust, it’s nice that it doesn’t do a big click jump adjustment like target mode can do if you scan with it on. Because it’s not trying to hold your position there, the weird blackout thing while you’re moving doesn’t happen as often. Probably a personal preference thing there.

He says they aren’t great as a chest bino, I agree, but the gen 2s don’t fit great in any harness I tried and a Kifaru medium is like the exact dimensions of the pros. It’s tight to close completely but outside of the weight, I don’t feel like I lost much if anything there.

I agree with him, I still think you kind of need a system, but I think there’s too much overlap in the gen 2 42mm and 50mm pros to justify having both. With the 16x42s I still found myself using the 10x30s or maven b3 8x30s sometimes for field of view in the 10s or the mavens for field of view, brightness, and sharpness. I literally only have the 14s right now, not another binocular, but I’ll be getting something else for when I know I won’t be doing any long distance glassing, some flavor of a nice 8x30 or sfl 8x40 or something. Or maybe the 10 zulus again, the easy one handed National Geographic HD video experience you get those in sufficient light is pretty cool.

That’s a long post. Hopefully in the next month, I can setup the scope cam and some tripods to get my own sharpness and low light data to share.