Sig zulu6 12x42 vs zulu6 14x50 hdx pro

[JArcher]

Can confirm that the 2nd gen are the way to go. I purchased both for a side by side comparison. New pros were quite a bit larger and heavier. The glass was better but marginally(didn’t test low light). I kept the 2nd gen’s because they were lighter, better stabilization and $600 cheaper. The new stabilization on the pros wasnt as steady as the scan mode on the 2nd gen. The target mode really sets them apart.

I wanted to dislike them so I could feel better about owning my NL’s. In two weeks I’ll be taking the Zulu’s and NL’s to Maui for a hunt. I have a feeling i will be grabbing the Zulu’s over the NL’s.

Swaro,

If you are listening, we are ready for a set of IS bins.

The kind of review I’m looking for!

 

[armiller1991]

I did get to play around with these two (Non-PRO 12x42s and PRO 14x50s) side by side in my local sportsmans' warehouse.
Obviously hard to compare any optical quality in the store... but I ended up ordering the 14x50s.

It seems to me the stabilization was faster with the Pros. Fastering meaning how quickly it settled when pulling up and after moving. Also, I think you are getting slightly more magnification with no downsides.. the field of view is the same and with the (advertised) better coatings and 50mm objective, I don't think you would be sacrificing any low light performance.

The PROs are heavier and bulkier, but still seemed to fit just barely in my Marsupial Gear No-Mag Enclosed Bino Harness (Size MED, their website says you need LRG). While heavier than the non-pros, they are still very similar weight to many non-IS 12x50s on the market.

Should arrive next week.