Zeiss conquest HD vs ultravid nonHD/HD vs SLC WB

[CO2130]

I’m looking at possibly pulling the trigger on some zeiss conquest hd’s. I also found some ultravid non hd, for quite a bit more though. Could anyone help compare the conquests and/or ultravid non hd to the ultravid hd and the older Swarovski slc wb? These are the main two higher end binos I have experience with so I’m curious what differences people notice. Thanks guys!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PHo]

I’ve compared the Conquests with the SLCs in 10x42 at the store in the daytime the other day. The biggest differences that I saw were the Conquests have more CA and more field curvature (pincushion?) whereas the SLCs had a flatter view and close to no CA. I did not try them in low light.

 

[CO2130]

Thanks for the feedback PHo. I found a deal on the conquests that was kind of a take it or leave it price so I went ahead and took it. Hopefully I like them, still looking forward to what people have to say on this comparison!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PHo]

The Conquests are great binos. I can’t speak to their low light performance but based on what I saw in store the other day they are an excellent choice especially at their price. Enjoy them!

 

[2blade]

PHo is right, the slc controls chromattic abberation a lot better. The slc''s also have a larger center of view before you encounter edge distortion. I was comparing a set of Slc 8x42 wb's the other day to a set of 10x42 conquests at twilight, they are about the same. But that was viewing out my back window off hand at my favorite dead tree at 800 yards, not a resolution chart.