Zeiss Victory Fl

[svillalobos]

I was hoping to get some feed back and opinions on the Zeiss Victory Fl 10x42s. I’m guessing these are a couple models back since they are not the current Victory HT or SF? How would these hold up against current model Conquests/Razors or Swaros. Best case scenario is getting them side by side to look for myself but any previous experience and feed back is appreciated
Thanks

 

[Xycod]

Personally I would take them over any conquest, the ones I had were as bright as my current RF’s and center resolution is about the same. The main difference I see is the RF’s have a better fov and aren’t as soft at he edges as the FL’s., some say contrast is a bit better in the newer bins but if so I don’t see much. Again mine are RF’s not ht’s or sf’s though, anyway the fl is great bin imo, but so is the slc, especially in a 10x50.

 

[svillalobos]

Thanks for the info, I went through this with comparing Conquests and some 2003 Swaro ELs. Obviously ELs are known as top of the line binos and even being 17 years old they hold there own to the Conquest. My guess is the same scenario with the Victoy Fl.

 

[PHo]

I had the FL 8x32 for a short while and they are excellent. Compared to the conquests, the FL’s have zero chromatic aberration, or at least none that I could tell. The conquests have a significant amount of CA. I was not able to compare them in low light conditions, but I own the Swaro SLC 8x42’s now and the FL only lost out against the SLC’s in low light by a very thin margin. It’s quite impressive really when you consider that I was comparing the 32mm objective of the FL with the 42mm objective of the SLC. The FL won out against the SLC as far as CA goes, like I said I did not detect any from the FL. The SLC has a small amount of it. Ultimately I went with the SLC mainly because I liked the overall optical view a little better than the FL, but I would have been totally happy with either.

 

[JBB111]

The 7x42 FL were one of the finest images I ever looked thru.

 

[Xycod]

Agreed.