Zeiss Conquest vs. Swarovski SLC 10x42's

[jk_13]

I'm looking at both of these as well - seems the takeaway is to try and look through both of them side by side, on tripods, at low light and let your eyes make the decision.

 

[rileybassman]

I would say CA sensitivity and ergos/ eyecups are more important... I think either will get you to last light.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[rileybassman]

In my opinion the Conquests compare very well to the SLCs and I’d be happy with the Conquests if that’s what I could afford, but one area where the SLCs excel over the Conquests is chromatic aberration. In the SLCs I can see it only on the outer edges of the view and it wasn’t all that bad. With the Conquests I could pretty much see it throughout the whole view and the effect was quite a bit more noticeable as well. If you’re CA sensitive you’ll be glad to go with the SLCs, but if you’re not you’ll be happy to save the $700.

Agree with this... Especially in snow.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Newtosavage]

In my opinion the Conquests compare very well to the SLCs and I’d be happy with the Conquests if that’s what I could afford, but one area where the SLCs excel over the Conquests is chromatic aberration. In the SLCs I can see it only on the outer edges of the view and it wasn’t all that bad. With the Conquests I could pretty much see it throughout the whole view and the effect was quite a bit more noticeable as well. If you’re CA sensitive you’ll be glad to go with the SLCs, but if you’re not you’ll be happy to save the $700.

Some people are very susceptible to CA, while others are not. I am fortunate that I am not. But if you are, then yes, this would make a difference.

 

[rileybassman]

Some people are very susceptible to CA, while others are not. I am fortunate that I am not. But if you are, then yes, this would make a difference.

Don't look for it... Once you see it can't unsee


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[kong]

Love my swarvo 10x42’s. Pricing I got a good deal from Cameraland I think it was suppose to be a demo set but he sold me a new set for a hundred more under black friday deals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I got some conquest 8x42s here on rockslide as sort of an impulse buy because the price was good. I ended absolutely loving them, at the time I had SLCs on order and ended up selling them and keeping the conquests because for me, I just couldn’t justify the $$$ at the time for an upgrade that wasn’t perceptible to me.

those conquest 8x42s are my go to binos, I don’t leave home without them.

 

[PHo]

Don't look for it... Once you see it can't unsee


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I completely agree. If you don’t know what CA is or don’t notice it then DO NOT look for it, especially when comparing binos. I was never really sensitive to it until I read about it and started to look for it. Now it has become one of the first things I notice when I look through any set of binos and it bothers the heck out of me.

 

[rileybassman]

I completely agree. If you don’t know what CA is or don’t notice it then DO NOT look for it, especially when comparing binos. I was never really sensitive to it until I read about it and started to look for it. Now it has become one of the first things I notice when I look through any set of binos and it bothers the heck out of me.

Ditto lol

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[bayoublaster7527]

I had a set of Zeiss conquest HD 10x42s, I now have a set of swaros. The Zeiss were good quality binos with clear glass but they just weren’t easy to look through, especially for long periods of time. The swaros are just so easy to get that first clear picture through and then maintain. Both are great but it was worth the upgrade to me.

 

[Lionhound1975]

I have used both and prefer the SLC. My eyes had blackout problems with the Conquest HDs regardless of how I adjusted the eyepieces. The SLC has better glass in my opinion (and should for the price difference). The only thing I preferred about the Zeiss was the focus. It has a very fast focus but I liked it much better than the SLC focus. There are other good options in the price range of the Conquest that I prefer like the Meostar HD and the Trinovid HD). But everyone's eyes are different.

 

[Newtosavage]

I completely agree. If you don’t know what CA is or don’t notice it then DO NOT look for it, especially when comparing binos. I was never really sensitive to it until I read about it and started to look for it. Now it has become one of the first things I notice when I look through any set of binos and it bothers the heck out of me.

I frequent the birding forums quite a bit for optics advice because there are some genuine optical engineers who post there and, I'm not afraid to admit I also go birding. Many people there give the exact same advice. Don't go looking for CA. So I never have.

 

[shedfinder7]

Meostar? Surprised no one has mentioned them yet?

 

[Elite]

It depends. $700 is a ton of money for some people and not so much for others.

I had 10x Conquest HDs and sold them for 8x SLCs. I like the SLCs more, but not by much. Both are great and will serve you well. The focus knob on the SLCs sucks and I'd say the Conquests feel every bit as well built, if not better. The glass is slightly better, for my eyes, in the Swaros. I had blackout issues with the Conquests (even with the extended eyecups). No blackout issues with the SLCs. Both are infinitely better than the Nikon Monarchs I was using previously.

I agree with the glass being very good on the SLCs but the focus knob feels cheap and is not smooth on my SLCs. Only disappointing parts of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Newtosavage]

In my opinion the Conquests compare very well to the SLCs and I’d be happy with the Conquests if that’s what I could afford, but one area where the SLCs excel over the Conquests is chromatic aberration. In the SLCs I can see it only on the outer edges of the view and it wasn’t all that bad. With the Conquests I could pretty much see it throughout the whole view and the effect was quite a bit more noticeable as well. If you’re CA sensitive you’ll be glad to go with the SLCs, but if you’re not you’ll be happy to save the $700.

I'm sure glad I'm not sensitive to CA.

 

[Q child]

I have the SLCs, conquest HDs, and have had viper HDs. Viper to conquest is a bigger jump for sure then conquest to SLC.

No question SLCs are the best - but the conquests are very good and maybe within 10% of the SLC. Viper is probably 20% below the conquest... just rough numbers.

The Zeiss is a “cooler” picture - blueish and the SLC is a warmer picture or yellowish. SLC controls CA quite a bit better then the Zeiss.

In good, sunny weather, sharpness and clarity in the center will be close... the Zeiss sweet spot is similar to the SLC in favorable conditions. The Zeiss sweet spot is smaller the... SLCs have a much larger sweet spot.

Low light was actually closer then I thought it would be - both are usable as long as shooting light for sure. SLC last a smidge longer but not tons.

Flat light the SLCs are gonna give more detail...

Zeiss are very good binos - but I do like the SLCs more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep. A lot of good stuff by rileybassman. Particularly the description of the color bias and chromatic aberration control. Very much in line with my experience. I compared these two side by side a few years ago.
If you are going to spend $1000 for Conquests, then there are a couple of good options out there. My favorite are the Leicas. And I would also probably get the Nikons before the Conquests.
The SLCs are kind of a tweener. They are better than the cheaper options by a slight margin and worse than the more expensive options by a slight margin.
Some people think that they are as good as the more expensive options. It's not a crazy opinion to have. They are extremely good. Just an older design philosophy.
If you can still get SLCs then I would go for it. They are discontinued, and will probably always be regarded as a classic.

 

[Spiral Horn]

Since the last of the SLCs are quickly disappearing from the shelves this comparison will soon be a moot point. Yes, completely agree that the SLC is truly unique and the entry point into Alpha Glass when considering everything as a complete package - optics, build quality, ergonomics, etc; and at a unique price-point to boot. But the price difference makes it an unfair comparison. Similarly the Zeiss Victory SF T* is optically superior to the SLCs (at least to my eyes).

But I really feel the very minor flaws of Conquest HDs are way overblown, primarily due to the fact they are the binocular most often directly compared to the SLCs (which usually cost 40% or so more). If talking pure optics, the SLCs will come out on top to most folks but it is more marginally better than obviously. The Conquests are a very serious binocular optically with exceptional brightness and resolution for it‘s price point. If my luggage was lost in transit and someone handed me a Con HD to use on the hunt, I’d be wearing an ear-to-ear grin.

Re-read this entire thread and find the Conquest CA concerns overstated. I’m fairly CA sensitive and can almost always spot it when it is there. The SLCs have very little CA. Would put the Conquest’s CA control equal or better than most other binoculars in it’s price range, about equal with the Nikon Monarch HGs and Trinovid. It’s there, but more lateral at the very edge of the image. The center image is gorgeous, very bright and crisp. The CA phenom also diminishes in lower magnification and the 8x32 Conquests are a gem - currently trying to decide between a pair of those or Kowa Genesis 8x33s.

 

[JGRaider]

Main dislikes of the Conquest HD IME are that the focus is waaay too fast (suits birder dudes perfectly), and the eyecups suck for me. Zeiss must have realized many potential Conquest HD users couldn't use the much too short eyecups though, as they used to (may still, IDK) offer an extended eyecup free for the asking. I prefer the Toric to the Conquest HD anyway for less money, as well as the Meostar HD.

 

[Ramcharger]

The Zeiss Conquest HD does many things well, it is very bright and sharp. It is well built and ranks high on
the list of the mid-range binoculars. The Conquest focuser is very smooth and works well, and it earns high
marks all the way around.

The last SLC I tried had a bad focuser, stiff and that was a weakness there.

So don't dwell on getting an SLC,, some are chasing them because they have been discontinued.

 

[bird35]

The focus wheel on my slc 8x42 is also the weak point. I bought them new but the focus wheel feels like there is sand in it , and much stiffer one direction than the other.