Sig Zulu6 PRO (NEW GLASS)

[_MountainBum]

Just put a down payment on the new Sig Zulu6 14x50’s with Doug @cameralandny for an awesome price!

Very excited for these going into this rifle season, I originally scoffed at them because they seemed like a gimmick, and the fact that I’m NOT Sig’s biggest fan.

After getting hands on use with them I completely changed my mind. Using the standard HDX 12 or 16’s left some to be desired on glass performance, FOV, light transition/gathering, etc but they STILL were go to’s based off the I.S alone.

I’ve traditionally always ran 12x binos in the field and can say first hand I’ve missed a lot of opportunities to field judge deer due to instability of my optics off hand. My go to is to usually sit and glass off knees, drop pack and glass off pack, or if it’s questionably a shooter judge through rifle scope which I don’t believe is very efficient past a second or two.

These offer the ability to literally pull them out while tired and shaky to judge an animal (pr what you think is an animal) as if you’re looking off a tripod.

I do not believe these can replace alpha glass in a dedicated glassing role, maybe the new glass will compete better, but for timber use, quick judging, or glassing from the truck these are phenomenal.

New glass/system improvements are listed as follows:

-HDX PRO optical system combines fully redesigned ED glass lenses, prism, and prism coatings to deliver significantly enhanced light transmission and glare reduction

-OmniScan OIS technology enhances image stabilization using a digital accelerometer to optimize the level of stabilization applied based off your movement and vibration for the most advanced Optical image Stabilization System we've ever developed

-2o Image compensation angle

-Will also feature a wider FOV due to increased objective size and design

Would love to hear others experience with current models, and/or hopes for the new models.

 

[Bugger]

It wasn’t clear in the post, have you actually looked through the new ones yet?

 

[_MountainBum]

It wasn’t clear in the post, have you actually looked through the new ones yet?

I have not, only the current HDX!

 

[Sundodger]

How is the FOV in this latest version? That was one of my biggest concerns when they initially came out.

 

[_MountainBum]

How is the FOV in this latest version? That was one of my biggest concerns when they initially came out.

I have not looked through the new ones yet, but I am assuming it will be largely improved upon from listening user feedback and the wider 50mm objective (hopefully)

 

[Bugger]

I have not looked through the new ones yet, but I am assuming it will be largely improved upon from listening user feedback and the wider 50mm objective (hopefully)

It unfortunately got narrower by a little bit. 3.8° on the old model vs 3.7° for the new ones.

New Sig Zulu

I’m curious why the 16s are the most expensive. Maybe they figure they will be the most popular. I bet the 18s will be popular, nice field of view for the magnification and a much better eye relief than the current 20s, even a little better than the current 16s.

rokslide.com

 

[ericacymcdonald]

I still can't really wrap my head around it but larger objective actually makes FOV smaller due to the focal length.

 

[lcx321]

I don`t know if it worth double the cost of the previous gen.

 

[180ls1]

If they had just made the 12x42 with the same FOV as the 10x30 I would have paid whatever that want.

 

[_MountainBum]

I didn’t know that on the FOV, I figured a larger objective would equal wider FOV! That’s crazy!

 

[alexnelon]

I think one of the biggest problems with the first ones was that FOV is absolutely abysmal (3.8 degrees/219ft@1,000yds) and the pro is somehow even worse (3.7 degrees/214ft@1,000yds)

14x NL Pure is 279ft@1,000yds for reference.

I'm not seeing a use case for any of these.

The 10x doesn't range, so it's useless for rifle hunting, and the higher mag options are going to cripple your ability to find animals due to the tunnel vision. They seem like they're supposed to be for field judging animals you've already spotted, but at that point I'd already have a tripod out so what's the point of stabilization?

 

[Oregonhuntrboi]

I think one of the biggest problems with the first ones was that FOV is absolutely abysmal (3.8 degrees/219ft@1,000yds) and the pro is somehow even worse (3.7 degrees/214ft@1,000yds)

14x NL Pure is 279ft@1,000yds for reference.

I'm not seeing a use case for any of these.

The 10x doesn't range, so it's useless for rifle hunting, and the higher mag options are going to cripple your ability to find animals due to the tunnel vision. They seem like they're supposed to be for field judging animals you've already spotted, but at that point I'd already have a tripod out so what's the point of stabilization?

Specs aside, I spot way more game with mine over a mile away all the time. Often before people I’m hunting with that have premium glass.

 

[Bugger]

I think one of the biggest problems with the first ones was that FOV is absolutely abysmal (3.8 degrees/219ft@1,000yds) and the pro is somehow even worse (3.7 degrees/214ft@1,000yds)

14x NL Pure is 279ft@1,000yds for reference.

I'm not seeing a use case for any of these.

The 10x doesn't range, so it's useless for rifle hunting, and the higher mag options are going to cripple your ability to find animals due to the tunnel vision. They seem like they're supposed to be for field judging animals you've already spotted, but at that point I'd already have a tripod out so what's the point of stabilization?

Comparing to the NL’s FOV in any magnification is unrealistic since those specs are complete outliers. Against most 15’s, the 16 Zulu’s only lose 20’ or so at 1,000, and it’s got 1x more magnification. Sure they’re not the sharpest glass on the planet but if they were I don’t know that many people would drop $3k on something wearing a sig logo. My use case for them is still hunting and using them to really pick apart brushy edges for deer 300ish yards away. I rarely set up a tripod to glass that close and 8-10x isn’t enough to dig in and separate leaves from ears and antlers from branches. I like them for looking under pines for bedded elk out to a mile too. They’re not gonna replace anything that’s an established tool but I think they’re perfect for when you don’t quite need a spotter and want to cover a good bit of ground without sitting down and setting up a tripod a bunch of times.

 

[j_volt]

I don’t understand the hype of the Pros compared to the HDX…
-longer
-heavier
-less FOV
-2 batteries instead of one
-60% more expensive

What am I missing??

 

[Bugger]

I don’t understand the hype of the Pros compared to the HDX…
-longer
-heavier
-less FOV
-2 batteries instead of one
-60% more expensive

What am I missing??

Agreed. Canon already has a 15x50IS that is better in every way than these new Sigs, and cheaper. Sig beat the IS market by making them small and light. I hope the regular HDX 42’s don’t get discontinued, if I need a warranty replacement I’d be pissed if they sent out the new model.

 

[lundellhunting7]

I run the 12x HDX and won’t be “upgrading”

Since owning the 12s my Swaro Els have not left the house. Being able to be able to pull up my binos and not have any shake make up for the glass quality not being the same as the Swaros. Just yesterday hunting was using them and my dad had his 12 swaros… I think he now will be ordering the HDX now when seeing the difference while holding the binos.

 

[swavescatter]

I pre-ordered the 18's with Doug as well. Excited to see how these stack up against my HDX 16's. Love those except at low light. NL's and a BTX setup were on my shopping list this year but after running the 16's I have zero desire for alpha glass that still requires lugging around and setting up a tripod.

 

[Stocky]

I have not looked through the new ones yet, but I am assuming it will be largely improved upon from listening user feedback and the wider 50mm objective (hopefully)

Objective has no/minimal effect of FOV. Length of the optic (well actually focal length) and obviously zoom has significantly more effect. You will find typically the smaller objective actually have more FOV. Ie 8x42 nls vs 8x32 nls. The 32 have more FOV.

On a second note i have NLs but I find I use the 16x42 sigs and let the missus borrow my 8x32 NL pures. The sigs are lighter than the compact NLs and spot more game. They NLs are great on a tripod but with out it they are just out classed by stabilization. It's hurts that the sigs are so good. The new ones seem like a down grade unless the glass is amazing.

 

[_MountainBum]

Objective has no/minimal effect of FOV. Length of the optic and obviously zoom has significantly more effect. You will find typically the smaller objective actually have more FOV. Ie 8x42 nls vs 8x32 nls. The 32 have more FOV.

Interesting, I didn’t know that but it makes sense. I’ll be anxious to see how these do and stack up to my regular binos. The Schmidt pecan prisms and new coatings should be an improvement over the latest HDX. We’ll see!

 

[grackle45]

Interesting, I didn’t know that but it makes sense. I’ll be anxious to see how these do and stack up to my regular binos. The Schmidt pecan prisms and new coatings should be an improvement over the latest HDX. We’ll see!

The standard HDX have SP prisms too