Battle of the small binos-Zeiss conquest hd 8x32 vs victory pocket 8x25 vs maven b3 8x30

[willfrye027]

I’m on the hunt for a new set of compact binos to complement my massive 10-15x50 duovids. While I love the duovids, they are serious overkill for timber hunting, turkeys, and a go-everywhere kind of bino. I’ve ordered all three of these to do some testing over a couple weeks. I’ll post an ongoing review here in case anybody else is looking for a similar set of glass.

I settled on these three for a few reasons. Based on all the reviews I could find, especially from the birdwatching guys, the conquest and maven lead the pack in the 8x30 platform for this price range (near-alpha, I’ll call it). I’m sure there are other great options but a combination of head-to-head reviews and FOV specs made these two the most intriguing to me. I’ll also admit that I’m very partial to Zeiss based on my experience with the conquest hd 10x42s that I owned for years. Why the victory pocket? In my research these came up frequently as an impressive bino for their size (10.2 oz) and were incredibly close to the 8x30 glass in performance, something previous compact glass has not been able to do. I’m a sucker for ultralight gear so I had to give them a shot as well, even though I was skeptical they could provide the low light performance I was looking for. We’ll see what these small binos can do!

 

[prm]

I really like the smaller binos. I went with the Swaro 8x30 CLs. I was previously using 10x Vortex and 10x Swaro ELs. I did not have the opportunity to compare against those you listed. But after a season using the CLs Mule Deer hunting I’m completely satisfied. Smaller and lighter is a plus and they are perfect in the timber. I’m sure one of those you ordered will be fantastic.

 

[willfrye027]

Today I received the two Zeiss binos. Unfortunately it’s raining so I won’t get to do any rigorous tests. In terms of ergonomics and build quality, they are both excellent. The victory compact is tiny! Both have superb feel in the hands, good eyecups, and crisp, smooth focus wheels without any play or slop. I felt like my conquest 10x42s had a focus wheel that was a tad too fast for my liking. I often went past focus when quickly acquiring a new target. The 8x32s feel perfect comparatively, probably due to the better depth of field with the 8x. The victory’s are also a good focus speed for me. Both binos come to the eye very easily and are forgiving enough for me on eye placement. The 8x25s have the tiniest bit more of hand shake, but not bothersome or game changing. This is an acceptable trade off to me considering it weighs less than half of the conquest. I cannot see anyone being disappointed with either bino here. I imagine either one would become an extension of my hands after getting used to it.

In full daylight, the 8x32 is noticeably brighter, but only slightly so. The 8x25 is equal in apparent brightness to my duovids on 10x50 mode (what?!?). I suspect this has more to do with color bias and coatings than actual light gathering ability. Both are exceptionally sharp, though I plan to test resolution more formally. At first glance there is no clear winner here.

As the light fades I am looking at an old Eastman’s magazine cover pinned to a tree outside my window with all three bins on a tripod. It’s not a perfect test because of some stray light from streetlights, but it’s in the shade and raining so I think it will work for now. The duovid clearly shines here in resolving power with a massive exit pupil and higher magnification. The conquest did very well here and had no problems picking up details from the magazine cover. The victory’s were noticeably behind on this test, but still did very well beyond legal shooting light. Yes, the conquests were better. But I wonder if the victories could still get the job done here. I think they will but I’m going to need more testing with them to be sure.

Overall I’m very pleased with both binos. I think a guy could buy either one and be pretty dang happy. The conquests do have an edge on FOV and low-light performance, but the victory’s perform exceptionally well for their size which might end up being a deciding factor between the two. It’s definitely a closer race than i expected and will require more time to bear out the differences. The mavens will also come in this week which will not make my choice any easier...

 

[willfrye027]

I really like the smaller binos. I went with the Swaro 8x30 CLs. I was previously using 10x Vortex and 10x Swaro ELs. I did not have the opportunity to compare against those you listed. But after a season using the CLs Mule Deer hunting I’m completely satisfied. Smaller and lighter is a plus and they are perfect in the timber. I’m sure one of those you ordered will be fantastic.

I’ve read good things about the CLs but I was swayed by my Zeiss bias in the end. Like you I’m not convinced that bigger is better or necessary in some situations.

 

[Mike7]

This will be interesting. I have the Maven 8x30s and really like them, but I think my dream all around bino might be (if they made one) a Zeiss Victory SF in 8x33 and weighing less than 20 ounces. That would hit all of my requirements, except for affordability probably.

 

[willfrye027]

This will be interesting. I have the Maven 8x30s and really like them, but I think my dream all around bino might be (if they made one) a Zeiss Victory SF in 8x33 and weighing less than 20 ounces. That would hit all of my requirements, except for affordability probably.

Exactly why I didn’t buy them! I also tend to go for the value price range rather than absolute top of the heap. I’m sure the victory sf is better but I don’t think it’s $1000 better.

 

[WestNE]

Not an option you mentioned but I had both and would put the Euro HD 8x32 ahead of the conquest. For whatever reason the eyecups for me better, eye placement is less finicky, and focus is quicker and easier to find.

No experience with the others but the Maven really intrigues me.

Nick

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[willfrye027]

I received the mavens today. Without going overboard on details, I will say the build quality and ergonomics are superb. Nothing left to be desired here. The focus wheel is probably the best I've used. Smooth, and just the right amount of tension for me. I generally like a slightly tighter focus knob so that it stays on the same setting going in and out of a bino harness. The hinge is nice and tight. Eyecups are also great, much better than the zeiss which is not as smooth and has a reputation for failure (I've experienced this first hand).

Eye relief is perfect for me (no glasses). There are no black-outs. The view is also excellent. Very crisp, very bright, good contrast. There is a bit of field curvature only noticeable if you are looking right at the edge of the image. With a touch of the focus you are sharp right at the edge of the field. I think some would call this the "sweet spot". To my eyes it is plenty good and leaves nothing to be desired. Similarly, the FOV is excellent. Its reported at 430 FOV but I have read that this is an underestimation and that is measures out closer to 440 or something like that. Overall, the view leaves nothing to be desired.

Now for comparisons. I took all three down to my usual glassing spot where I can overlook the James river and spot ducks, geese, osprey, and look through some timber/brush out to around 800 yards. I glassed from both hand-holding and off a tripod.

The small victory was noticeably the weakest of the bunch today. This is mostly due to slightly more finnicky eye placement required to avoid blackouts. This can be expected with the smaller exit pupil. I also feel like it could use an extra millimeter or two of eye relief so that the eyecup would snug up to my face better. It also has a noticeably smaller FOV (although 400ish feet is not bad at all!) and is slightly less bright. However, the image is exceptionally sharp and generally very pleasing. If a guy was interested in a compact bino, this would be the ticket. I have to be pretty picky when I say that its not quite as easy to use as the other two. If weight and size were the primary concern, these guys would be the winner and would sacrifice very little until you get to the end of legal shooting light. Overall exceptional glass to my eyes.

I spent about 2 hours going back and forth between the maven and the conquest as the sun went down. There was no obvious winner at first. In terms of overall image quality, I think the Zeiss ever so slightly edges out the maven when it comes to contrast and color rendition. The maven has a slightly whiter or washed-out color bias. This could also be my own perception because I've used conquests for years and am very comfortable with their image. I also felt like the conquest had the slightest edge when looking through the brush, but I could not put my finger on exactly why. Both were equally sharp, bright, and provided expansive fields of view. I did not notice a bigger FOV on the maven. They seem about the same to me. Where the maven started to take the lead was with scanning around and quickly acquiring new targets. For some reason, I find it easier to come into focus with the maven. The zeiss was just a little bit touchy for me, similar to my old conquest 10x42 but a little more forgiving. The maven snaps right into focus without much trouble. Some people may prefer the slightly faster and looser focus of the zeiss, but for me the maven was the winner here. I have to emphasize that I am being VERY critical and picky here. The difference is subtle. I also felt like the maven had the perfect amount of eye relief and fit my face a little better than the zeiss, giving me fewer blackouts especially when quickly throwing them up to look at something. I just felt a little more comfortable using the maven, but it honestly took me about 1.5 hours to come to that conclusion. It was that close!

To summarize, I slightly preferred the image of the conquest after getting it perfectly focused. For whatever reason it is just a more pleasing image to my eyes. The resolution seems to be the same, brightness is equal, and FOV is similar, but my eyes just liked the image better. However I much preferred the ergonomics of the maven, especially the focus wheel which I feel is absolutely critical for my applications. If I was using these mostly off a tripod, I might have favored the zeiss. But for general use and especially hand-holding, the mavens were the ticket for me. I also did a quick test in low light and could not discern a difference between the two.

Some other factors: The maven weighs considerably less (16oz vs 22 oz). The maven comes with both objective and eyepiece covers. The maven has a better warranty (although my experiences with zeiss have been very positive). The maven has a bino stud (I don't think the zeiss does but I could be wrong). The maven is around $500 while the zeiss is around $800. The zeiss probably has better resale/name brand value. The zeiss brand will certainly be around for my lifetime. I hope the maven brand does well but its definitely newer, and breaking into the optics world can be tough (Zen Ray comes to mind).

In the end I decided to go with maven. It could have gone either way, but ergonomics wins with all else being equal. I hope this review was informative. I may continue to post some thoughts about the 8x30 format in general as I use these in the field over the next year. Feel free to ask me questions if there is something I did not comment on!

 

[mtwarden]

thanks for the comprehensive report! I'm also in the market for a 8x30-ish bino for dark timber elk hunting

 

[AGPank]

Nice review. I really like the 8x32 platform for archery elk.

I’ve used:
- 7x30 SLC (refurb with 2014 glass:coatings)
- Cabelas instinct (Meostars) HD 8x32
- EL SV 8x32
- Ultravid 8x32 (non hd)

Bang for the buck is the Meostars, but ergonomics / eyecups weren’t right for me.

SLC in the 7x was a little narrow FOV and have ring finger focus.

I love the ELs (I found a great deal, but still more than other listed). One nock is they are bigger than other 32mm platforms.

The Ultravid could be my ideal, but the eye relief isn’t quite right for me. Maybe an HD or HD+ improves this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wannakillabigbull]

Without going overboard on details

Then proceed to type another 1000+ words All joking aside, great write-up.

 

[willfrye027]

Then proceed to type another 1000+ words All joking aside, great write-up.

Hahahaha yeah that was me trying not to go overboard!!

 

[willfrye027]

Nice review. I really like the 8x32 platform for archery elk.

I’ve used:
- 7x30 SLC (refurb with 2014 glass:coatings)
- Cabelas instinct (Meostars) HD 8x32
- EL SV 8x32
- Ultravid 8x32 (non hd)

Bang for the buck is the Meostars, but ergonomics / eyecups weren’t right for me.

SLC in the 7x was a little narrow FOV and have ring finger focus.

I love the ELs (I found a great deal, but still more than other listed). One nock is they are bigger than other 32mm platforms.

The Ultravid could be my ideal, but the eye relief isn’t quite right for me. Maybe an HD or HD+ improves this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Off topic but...how did you get swarovski to upgrade the glass like that? Cost? I’m wondering if Leica would do that for my duovids with some Noctivid glass...

 

[AGPank]

Off topic but...how did you get swarovski to upgrade the glass like that? Cost? I’m wondering if Leica would do that for my duovids with some Noctivid glass...

SONA is unique. I bought them from original owner. He paid $250 for a refurb. There was a caveat that they were limited by design what they could upgrade. I read somewhere the old SLC NEU can’t be upgraded to HD glass.

I’m not an optical designer, but I would be very surprised if Leica could swap glass, especially in models as different as the dual power and the new HD Noctovid. Optics deal greatly with geometry of design, not just quality of glass/prisms. I think there is a reason no one makes a dual power as good as Leica, it’s not easy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MikeG]

Excellent review! I loved the little mavens when I played with them a few times, might just be my new glass as well.

 

[willfrye027]

Excellent review! I loved the little mavens when I played with them a few times, might just be my new glass as well.

The more I use them the more I love them!

 

[Tower]

I’ve had the Maven B3 in 10x30 since last summer and have been thoroughly impressed.

 

[ljalberta]

I appreciate the comparison. My next pair of binos will be some 8x30/32. Looking forward to doing some comparisons of my own. The Maven is definitly gonna be included.

 

[willfrye027]

I appreciate the comparison. My next pair of binos will be some 8x30/32. Looking forward to doing some comparisons of my own. The Maven is definitly gonna be included.

I think missing binos in this price range were MeoStar and kowa for sure. Maybe the trinovids but the FOV specs are not impressive to me.

 

[Neil944]

I just demo’d the 8x B3 and they blew the Monarch M7 out of the water, as expected. It was unanimous across the informal office poll.