New Zeiss Bino—SFL 10x40–Review

[glassman]

I have never thought Swarovski SVs or NLs to have 3D views.

 

[anthnichols]

Interested in these and if it's true that an 8x30 is in the future, that would be an enticing set.

 

[Brummie75]

Interested in these and if it's true that an 8x30 is in the future, that would be an enticing set.

I have a pair of the 10x40 on sale in the classifieds

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

I just ordered a pair of the 8x40 SFL's to compare, and possibly compliment, my 10x32 NL's.
At one point I had the 8x32 SF's and loved them, but the 10x along with the wide field of view of the 10x NL's won out for sheep hunting use.
In low light, I do struggle a bit with the small exit pupil though. Also when scanning non alpine areas, 10x can be a bit much at times. The 8x40's will be evaluated to see if they might become my bow hunting bino's, specifically for deer. I'll give an update after I have a chance to use them a bit.

 

[Spiral Horn]

The 8x40's will be evaluated to see if they might become my bow hunting bino's,

I really love my 8x40 SFL, and think it will be replacing my Monarch HG for forest and bowhunting duties. Spectacular color accuracy and saturation, great “snappy“ focus, very well balanced and easy handling - even in one-handed situations.

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

I really love my 8x40 SFL, and think it will be replacing my Monarch HG for forest and bowhunting duties. Spectacular color accuracy and saturation, great “snappy“ focus, very well balanced and easy handling - even in one-handed situations.

You wen't exaggerating! I just got them in this afternoon. It's a dull afternoon and starting to snow. The view through them is super nice. They are bright, the color rendition is so much better than the 8x32 SF's, the focuser is sublime. Overall, Zeiss has done an incredible job. The view is more immersive in the 10x32 NL's, which are still the best sheep hunting bino's ever made in my mind. However for everything else, due to the ease of use of the SFL's and their larger exit pupil, these are going to stay with me. I already got the wife's approval haha.
We are going to Costa Rica in December and these are what I will be bringing with me, along with a Kowa 77 of course!
I cant wait to get these out in the sun to see how they handle glare, but I suspect they will do better than the Swaro's in that regard.

 

[Kostrize]

Have you guys noticed any kidney bean blackouts/spherical aberration with the SFL? Asking because I had some with the 8X42 SFs

 

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Have you guys noticed any kidney bean blackouts/spherical aberration with the SFL? Asking because I had some with the 8X42 SFs

Only if I have the eyecups down too far. When they are adjusted right, and still having the full field of view, I have no issues. They are easier to get behind than the 8x32 SF and leaps ahead of the 10x32 SF, which were unusable for me. They’re not quite as immersive as the SF with their super wide fov, so it’s possible that this makes for a more forgiving bino.

 

[stevie]

After reading all the positive comments, had to order a pair. Received today, only had a half hour looking through them. Just to make clear, I am new to higher end binoculars. My older pair are cheap hand me downs from my father. I recently picked up a pair of Conquest HD 10x42, thought they were great except for the "sort of" short eye relief since I wear glasses. They do work but I lose a little imagine. I also got a set of the extended eyecups which help much when I remove my glasses.

The SFL 8x40 are totally different in that regard. With cups all the way down, I can use these perfectly with my glasses. With cups extended they work great without glasses. The only issue I have with both pairs is my lazy eye which give me some black outs when I look in a certain direction but that's not the binoculars' fault.

I found the SFL to have better clarity, resolution and brighter colors than the Conquest. While I was fine with Conquest, the SFL while more expensive stands out way above the Conquest in useability for me. I was a little surprised to see that the SFL looked very similar to the Conquest except for the size.

 

[Runs-with-elk]

Has anyone done a comparison between the 10x40 SLCs and the Maven B1.2 10x40s?

 

[Beendare]

Robbie great review as usual.

Q; Without weight as a consideration , Is the 10x Victory SF better glass?

 

[robby denning]

Robbie great review as usual.

Q; Without weight as a consideration , Is the 10x Victory SF better glass?

The SF Victory Glass in the previous review of the 8x & 10x is better performing glass is resolving power than the glass in SFL in this review (and FOV)

But I as I said in this review:

“For me, I’m liking the better Twilight Performance of the SFLs for only a small loss in resolving power, FOV, and a 1.4 oz weight penalty. Add in the ¼-20 tripod adaptability and the $700 savings, it’s the SFL for me. More discriminating users whose budget isn’t a big factor and are OK with using after-market solutions to tripod mount the SFs will enjoy more FOV & resolving power, and slightly less weight in the SFs”

and proof is that I’m selling the 10x32; they’re in the classifieds right now:

WTS - Zeiss Victory SF 10x32

Great condition, with no scratches. It will ship in the original box. $1400 Here is the review on them https://www.rokslide.com/zeiss-victory-sf-32-binocular-review/ @robby denning

rokslide.com

 

[Beendare]

Thanks for that Robby.…and I get what you are saying. I packed the old version Leica Geos around for 7 years…great glass but the extra weight of those stretched my neck strap over time. They were noticeably heavy.

The reviews you and others have done here are the best anywhere on the net- period.
Using that resolution chart and side by sides in low light……then guage that with the tradeoffs of ergos, weight, etc- all Critical comparisons for hunt optics.
Well Done.

 

[robby denning]

Thanks for that Robby.…and I get what you are saying. I packed the old version Leica Geos around for 7 years…great glass but the extra weight of those stretched my neck strap over time. They were noticeably heavy.

The reviews you and others have done here are the best anywhere on the net- period.
Using that resolution chart and side by sides in low light……then guage that with the tradeoffs of ergos, weight, etc- all Critical comparisons for hunt optics.
Well Done.

thanks again Beendare, I'll let @Matt Cashell @Travis Bertrand & @Josh Boyd know.

 

[Runs-with-elk]

Has anyone done a comparison between the 10x40 SLCs and the Maven B1.2 10x40s?

Oops - meant Zeiss 10x40 SFCs and Maven 10x40 B1.2

 

[fjmcguigan]

I've had the 8x40 SFLs for a couple days and have been comparing them to 8x32 NLs and 8x42 NLs.

At this point I'd keep the SFLs, sell the 8x32 NLs and maybe sell the 8x42 NLs. Handheld in general use, reading distant street signs, and astronomical viewing, the SFLs appear to have resolution slightly better than the 8x32s and almost equal, and at times equal, to that of the 8x42 NLs.

I'm not very sensitive to CA and haven't found any yet. Scuttlebutt is that it has some CA, but not excessive levels.

The focus wheel is stiffer than I like, but far end focus is fast and I haven't had much issue zeroing in on viewing targets.

I like the objective covers although they are a bit difficult to close, they seem to be getting better with use.

Versus the 8x42 NLs, the 8x40 SFLs give you a 40% $$$ savings and half a pound weight savings. However you give up 57 ft of FOV (420 vs 477) and various high end design elements and luxury bits.

If you still have the 8x42 NL and the SFLs, would you mind posting a photo to show the size differences?

 

[Jlt1313]

Has anyone compared UHD’s 10x or NL 10x42 with the SFL 10x40? Would there be any huge differences between them or in the mornings/evenings?

 

[Spiral Horn]

Has anyone done a comparison between the 10x40 SLCs and the Maven B1.2 10x40s?

Have owned both the 42mm SLC and B1.2. In direct comparison while the B1.2 is a quality optic the SLC is a smidge better all around. To my eyes the SLC is a smidge sharper, with better color saturation - also, the SLC is wonderfully compact and handles quite well. The Maven B1.2 is very close on build quality and handling but I’m personally not a huge fan of the image produced by that particular model. IMO the combination of extremely high transmission, wide FOV and very short focal length teases the limitations of physics. Originally bought the B1.2 to replace my Monarch HG and ended up keeping the HG. My biggest complaint is the depth of color saturation.

 

[Spiral Horn]

Has anyone compared UHD’s 10x or NL 10x42 with the SFL 10x40? Would there be any huge differences between them or in the mornings/evenings?

The three binoculars considered couldn’t be more different. The UHD is physically very large and has a high performing Abbe-Koenig Prism based optical system. The NL is more of a standard-sized 42mm binocular. Its specifications are an engineering marvel, stressing extremely flat-field and high resolution. The SFL 40mm design attempts to optimize sharp optics and an easy / saturated view in a very compact and easy handling design. Although I’ve never had them side-by-side at last light would be surprised if there was significant enough last light-light performance to sway my buying decision. If glassing mostly from a tripod, I’d likely favor the NLs, if 50/50 or mostly hand-held I’d lean toward the SFL. Just my take.

If you still have the 8x42 NL and the SFLs, would you mind posting a photo to show the size differences?

NLs are noticeably larger and heavier than the SFL.

 

[robby denning]

Our friend Jay Nichols at Mindful Hunter ( @Grasp on Rokslide) had me on his podcast and mentioned he'd like to review these Zeiss if he could get his hands on some. I sent him a care package after the podcast. Here is his review. Along with mine, should pretty much answer it all: