Victory RF 10x42 vs Swaro 10x42 EL’s

[Brightwhite]

I love the idea of the Zeiss victory range finding Binos, but would I be disappointed optically coming from Swaro 10x42 EL’s (no range finding)? I also have a pair of 8x42 SLC’s that I love equally as much...just a little paranoid going outside of Swaro glass.

I have read Matt’s review and everyone seems to rave about the victory line from Zeiss, but specifically reading about the Victory RF - no one has said “they are as good as swaro EL’s.” Everyone just says they are great optically, that I have found.

 

[WRO]

I love the idea of the Zeiss victory range finding Binos, but would I be disappointed optically coming from Swaro 10x42 EL’s (no range finding)? I also have a pair of 8x42 SLC’s that I love equally as much...just a little paranoid going outside of Swaro glass.

I have read Matt’s review and everyone seems to rave about the victory line from Zeiss, but specifically reading about the Victory RF - no one has said “they are as good as swaro EL’s.” Everyone just says they are great optically, that I have found.

Because they're not..

Great piece of glass and technology, but they're not as clear, have edge distortion (reasonable) and still have a slight blue tint. Fact is, no one makes a set of RF binos that are as good optically as their top end equivalent line.

That being said, I'd run them but I'd be hard pressed to give up my 12x50 ELs..

 

[Brightwhite]

Because they're not..

That being said, I'd run them but I'd be hard pressed to give up my 12x50 ELs..

That’s exactly my concern, investing $3k and then still grabbing my Swaro’s would be a problem.

 

[WRO]

That’s exactly my concern, investing $3k and then still grabbing my Swaro’s would be a problem.

I stopped running RF binos about 6 years ago, If it's under 300, it's point and shoot. Past that I still have to run my ballistics anyway. Plus I figured if my electronic's ever fail, I don't want to be short both bino's and a range finder.

 

[TravKatQ]

I love the idea of the Zeiss victory range finding Binos, but would I be disappointed optically coming from Swaro 10x42 EL’s (no range finding)? I also have a pair of 8x42 SLC’s that I love equally as much...just a little paranoid going outside of Swaro glass.

I have read Matt’s review and everyone seems to rave about the victory line from Zeiss, but specifically reading about the Victory RF - no one has said “they are as good as swaro EL’s.” Everyone just says they are great optically, that I have found.

I just picked up the new Zeiss RF’s in 10x42 on eBay...they are badass! I’m coming from swaro els and though they aren’t as good as the el’s optically they are still great. The glass is comparable to the swaro SLC’s in my opinion and the rangefinding capabilities is top notch. I think I found the best all in one package for sure.
-Travis


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Brightwhite]

Well I think between stepping backwards in glass and losing the ability to mount an outdoorsmans stud has sealed the deal for me to keep waiting on a better range finding Bino. I like the idea and I’ll bet they will continue to get better. Thank for the inputs.

 

[Browninglover1]

I stopped running RF binos about 6 years ago, If it's under 300, it's point and shoot. Past that I still have to run my ballistics anyway. Plus I figured if my electronic's ever fail, I don't want to be short both bino's and a range finder.

With the new Zeiss the ballistics are already run on-board in the binocular. I had great success with 2 elk kills this year and both required only a single shot at distances of 965 and 1040 yards. The optics in them are not lacking but you are 100% correct that they do not have full edge to edge sharpness like the EL's do. I'm used to running 8x32 EL's and I did not feel that using the Zeiss was a step backwards in performance even though the edges are a little soft.

 

[WRO]

With the new Zeiss the ballistics are already run on-board in the binocular. I had great success with 2 elk kills this year and both required only a single shot at distances of 965 and 1040 yards. The optics in them are not lacking but you are 100% correct that they do not have full edge to edge sharpness like the EL's do. I'm used to running 8x32 EL's and I did not feel that using the Zeiss was a step backwards in performance even though the edges are a little soft.

I'm sure they work great, but when the electronics fail (they all fail eventually) I don't want to not have my bino's while they're in for repairs.

If I were to own RF bino's, these would be them...

 

[Pronghunter]

Well I think between stepping backwards in glass and losing the ability to mount an outdoorsmans stud has sealed the deal for me to keep waiting on a better range finding Bino. I like the idea and I’ll bet they will continue to get better. Thank for the inputs.

I’ll add my .2 here.
Glass.. yes it’s not as good as the EL’s. As of now, they don’t have the technology to do so. Swaro will tell you the same thing. They cannot use the same glass they use in their EL (field flattening lens) as they do in their EL Range. Leica same way. They can’t use Noctivid glass in their Geovids.
But, the glass/prism design in the new Zeiss RF is not the same as their older RF bins, it’s better! With that said and just like Leica and Swaro, they can’t use the SF glass in their RF binos. Just the way it it as of now. I have the Geovid HBD3000, Swaro EL Range and the new Zeiss RF. The Zeiss is optically better (IMO) than the Leica, but a tad behind the EL Range only on the near edges of the FOV, but the Zeiss makes up for it due to its impressive FOV.
I wouldn’t say the Zeiss RF would be a step backwards. It makes up for its view in other departments compared to the EL’s.
Also, before July, you WILL be able to put an Outdoorsman Stud on the Zeiss RF. August at the latest.