Sig Sauer Zulu6

[bigbuckdj]

The 12x42s are what I have and the FOV is 3.8 deg vs the meostar 12x50 i have which is 5.3 deg. It’s noticeable obviously but I’ll still be using them a lot this year. A curious thing to me is the listed field of view. It would seem that the 16s have the same field of view as the 12s.

[mention]Christenson9 [/mention] spent more time with the 12s and 16s maybe he can comment on that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Oregonhuntrboi]

The 12x42s are what I have and the FOV is 3.8 deg vs the meostar 12x50 i have which is 5.3 deg. It’s noticeable obviously but I’ll still be using them a lot this year. A curious thing to me is the listed field of view. It would seem that the 16s have the same field of view as the 12s.

[mention]Christenson9 [/mention] spent more time with the 12s and 16s maybe he can comment on that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ya I’ve spent some time looking through both at various distances from 100-800 ish yards. I didn’t really notice that much field of view difference. Because the difference was so minor I decided to go with the 16x42 for myself to get the extra magnification.

 

[bigbuckdj]

I only looked through both at tac and I remember the 16s feeling a little more tunnely and the 12s felt a little easier to get behind, but maybe that was due to the exit pupil or eye relief differences between the two. If one wasn’t available I would’ve bought the other, the stabilization is the star of the show.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Oregonhuntrboi]

I only looked through both at tac and I remember the 16s feeling a little more tunnely and the 12s felt a little easier to get behind, but maybe that was due to the exit pupil or eye relief differences between the two. If one wasn’t available I would’ve bought the other, the stabilization is the star of the show.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I would think, looking at open terrain and further distances somewhat removes the “tunnel” view that you described compared to looking inside a store for example.

 

[bigbuckdj]

Yeah, could be, this is making want to try the 16s again and see if I’d still choose the 12s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[180ls1]

Thanks, guys. I just sent them an email asking for FOV clarification and will update you with their response.

 

[180ls1]

Ya I’ve spent some time looking through both at various distances from 100-800 ish yards. I didn’t really notice that much field of view difference. Because the difference was so minor I decided to go with the 16x42 for myself to get the extra magnification.

So that is your go-to chest rig? It certainly would be one to "do it all" and I could leave the spotter.

I am having a hard time wrapping my head around 16x on my chest, not the 10x. For the record I like a 8x or 10x on my chest with a large FOV. Small FOV 10 is problematic for me, 12x is a total no go unless on tripod.

 

[Oregonhuntrboi]

So that is your go-to chest rig? It certainly would be one to "do it all" and I could leave the spotter.

I am having a hard time wrapping my head around 16x on my chest, not the 10x. For the record I like a 8x or 10x on my chest with a large FOV. Small FOV 10 is problematic for me, 12x is a total no go unless on tripod.

Yes I am now running the Zulu hdx 16x42 only. I am not a trophy hunter, I am simply trying to fill tags. So with the 16x I can spot animals miles away and tell if they are legal. No need to carry a spotter for me. And now I carry a tripod but it’s strictly setup for shooting off of.

 

[cmeadors13]

what kind of adaptor are you using for glassing on a tripod?

 

[Oregonhuntrboi]

what kind of adaptor are you using for glassing on a tripod?

Not using a tripod to glass with the binos. The image stabilization combined with sitting in resting elbows on knees lets me glass without fatigue. I have the rrs anvil head setup on my tripod for shooting off of, and if I really wanted to I could still glass off that with a spotter. But currently I am not carrying a spotter.

 

[bigbuckdj]

Just figured I’d share
These are my meostar 12x50s on a tripod

This is me handholding the 12 Zulu 6
https://imgur.com/a/yLopq8J

Gives you an idea of the field of view difference but also how sweet the image stabilization is

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nguerrero5]

I have a new pair of the 12x42 hdx for sale if anybody is interested in them .

Still available?

 

[gb7]

Thanks, guys. I just sent them an email asking for FOV clarification and will update you with their response.

I asked this question as well. Here was the response I got.

Yes, they both have the same angular FOV. However, they will differ in the visual FOV due to the magnification difference.

 

[180ls1]

I asked this question as well. Here was the response I got.

Yes, they both have the same angular FOV. However, they will differ in the visual FOV due to the magnification difference.

Thanks for the update. I never received a response from them.

Did they state what the visual FOV difference was? I am not sure how to quantify that in feet.

 

[bigbuckdj]

Does it work that way? Is there an example anywhere where two optics with the same angular fov produce a different fov in feet? I feel like X degrees at X feet is X field of view.

I had the 12s and 10s and sold the 12s, to me the 12s were seemingly a little sharper and brighter but I like the field of view on the 10s better and i wanted to try the 16s. My 16s should arrive any day now, maybe I’ll be able to offer some thoughts on the field of view difference.

I wanted to keep the 12s until the 16s got here but I think the random optics boxes are starting to alarm the wife. Gotta fly under the radar when I can.

Im not sure which pair I’ll end up with the but the stabilization is so nice in every pair I’ve messed with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[180ls1]

Does it work that way? Is there an example anywhere where two optics with the same angular fov produce a different fov in feet? I feel like X degrees at X feet is X field of view.

I had the 12s and 10s and sold the 12s, to me the 12s were seemingly a little sharper and brighter but I like the field of view on the 10s better and i wanted to try the 16s. My 16s should arrive any day now, maybe I’ll be able to offer some thoughts on the field of view difference.

I wanted to keep the 12s until the 16s got here but I think the random optics boxes are starting to alarm the wife. Gotta fly under the radar when I can.

Im not sure which pair I’ll end up with the but the stabilization is so nice in every pair I’ve messed with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's what I thought as well. In which case it would generally make sense to get the one with more magnification.

Let us know how those 16x compare and how they are to hand hold.

 

[bigbuckdj]

Sure, I messed with all of them at TAC and I can’t tell a difference at all in the stability of the image with increasing magnification. I don’t understand the technology but they all seemed equally stable.

My gut from that day was to get the 12s because i felt like they produced the best image. In hindsight, I may value the field of view more if the 16s are the same as the 12s. It’s probably splitting hairs but I’m excited to try the 16s again.

Even 10s and 16s together weigh about the same as a normal 12x50 or less than some 15s

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gb7]

Thanks for the update. I never received a response from them.

Did they state what the visual FOV difference was? I am not sure how to quantify that in feet.

They only replied with that one sentence, no other details.

I found out about the Zulu 6 at an sig demo event and was immediately impressed with the image stabilization. Bought them on a whim, went with the 12 power as an overall compromise, haven’t used them in the field yet.

 

[bigbuckdj]

Alright I got my 16s today. I just want to reiterate, regardless of the power, I really like the image stabilization. I kind of have my same opinion that i shared earlier between the 12s and 16s, it’s easier to get behind the 12s. I don’t have the 12s anymore but I found them to be more forgiving, brighter, and easier to come to focus.

The field of view thing addressed, the field of view seems the same. I have a scopecam adapter and I always push the eye cups and the adapter all the way to use it. The image(circle) is larger with the 16s but the image seems the same.

These are my meostar 12x50s again, which I love

This is the 12s but this was in really low light, not a far comparison for optical quality but focus on the size of the circle(image).

This is the 16s in excellent conditions, focus on the size of the circle.

Bonus maven b3 8x30s, massive circle territory

Again I think the 12s are easier to get behind, come to focus, and brighter, but the field of view seems the same. A larger circle with 16s seems to make a closer(?) image of the same thing. I wouldn’t judge the optical quality of these off the pictures.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[donrleonard]

Wow. The 16s really do cover as wide a field as the 12s. Seemed to good to be true. But I decided to pick up the 16s last night based on that stat. Took them out on a hike and was blown away. It redefines what a binocular is. I spot it with my eye, and immediately identify with my bino. On target mode it's like watching a nature movie that I'm the protagonist of.