Thank you Tucsonan Dude for your very honest appraisal , which is very interesting and surprising. It was very useful and brave of you to invest in them both for this comparison...not many would have done that, so very much appreciated ! Thanks again !!
I went with the Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42. Considered the Vortex Viper and Leica Trinovid HD. Never considered the SLC based purely on price. The $1000 range was already stretching it for me. I would have loved to be able to reasonably consider the SLC. But WOW the Swaro EL and NL and Zeiss SF are truly incredible. Every time I look through a Swaro I'm blown away. But Ive been very impressed and very happy with my Conquest 10x42! Definitely would recommend. BUT...take the eyecups apart and properly clean/lube the mechanism, and really tighten down the eyecups so they dont come undone when you extend the eyecups. Once I did that I have no complaints about this biggest weakness most people notice with the Conquest. Now it is a distinct, precise click into each of the detents.
Thanks for review! A few weeks ago I compared my Conquest HD 8x42 to Swarovski SLC 8x42. My impression was pretty much the same as your of the 10x models. Honestly I had hard to see a difference in optical performance between them. The SLC has a few percent higher light transmission but that is still a very subtle difference, maybe noticeable in low light. SLC has sligthly wider FOV which I really liked. Also it felt really good in the hand, actually bit better than Conquest. My reasoning is: when I already have the Conquest(since 5 years) I am fine with that. If I didn't have it I would consider the SLC. Especially today when the price recently increased ~20% on the Conquest HD series, so the price difference is less than some year ago.
@@TucsonDude Noo! How could you sell one of your babies? I just bought the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 model and LOVE them! Increadible sharp and really wide field of view. I also own: Zeiss Victory pocket 8x32, Swarovski SLC 15×56, Swarovski EL 8.5x42 and the Swarovski BTX 85 mm 😋😍. I'd say my collection is now complete.
@@mrmaxaxl Nice! I agree! For me...I have so many other hobbies, that I sometimes have to "cull the herd". Between collecting fireamrs, binos, drones, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, computers, ham radios, rock specimens, guitars...I can't keep everything. :)
I leaning toward the Zeiss 10x42 binoculars because they seem to get consistent reviews for clarity and brightness. I have used several pairs of AF Steiners over the years with the 8x30 being my favorite for hunting. I’ve never owned roof prism binoculars and am looking step up to near alpha glass. The Conquests look like they would be a good choice for AZ hunting. Thanks for the comparison!
@@travist6345 I haven’t bought them yet and since hunting season is over, I’m going to wait for a good deal or something better. Last year I was set on a pair of 15x56 binoculars from Cabelas, but they never marked them down. In hindsight I should have bought a pair of their 10x42’s when they were on close out because I would have gotten more use out of them. For now I’m going to stick with a spotting scope and lowered-powered binoculars.
In my experience from many years selling binoculars, Zeiss have a quality control problem. If you get a good Zeiss, then they are very good, but I have had serious problems with some Zeiss, with customers rightly complaining of problems, which Zeiss refuse to accept!
I ended up returning a pair of 8x32 Zeiss Conquest HD binoculars. They seemed to be well built but even with the extended eyecups, they weren’t for me. If they had been 8x42’s, I might have kept them because the price was heavily discounted. I’m now looking at trying Leica Trinovids or Opticron Auroras. Thanks for the reply and happy holidays!
When I bought my Conquest HD's a few years ago in Aus, the price difference wasn't that much. While the Zeiss had a little bit more off axis chromatic abberation, it's edges felt sharper and the eye relief was better and as I wear prescription glasses, the extra eye relief won out. I felt the HD's were certainly better than the Zeiss FL's I looked through even though the FL's were twice the price. I also looked through a pair of 10 x 30 EL Swarv's and they were beautiful, but hard to justify 2.5x the cost at the time.
I’ve just purchased the Zeist bins, I’m in no way an expert on these things but Im well pleased with my purchase. I did consider getting the Swarovski bins but the £650 differential just wasn’t worth it.
Tucsonan Dude blackouts? Interesting. I have a Zeiss victory 8x25 pocket as my first binoculars. I notice there is a lot of blackouts not so it seems. Is this less with a larger binoculars? What do you think of the 8.5 x 42 Swarovski? Would this be a serious upgrade for me?
@@MrGflan the 8.5 x42 is the EL series, it is higher end than the SLC. it is a very serious upgrade ! (i own the EL10x42). if you wait a bit, there is the new Swarovski NL pure comming in september, wich is an upgrade over ... the EL !!
I have a pair of Steiner “predator 10X50” ..It has a left eye focus that I don’t like..I giving some thought to Swarskis..Have you done any comparisons to them?
No idea about Steiner. The are the official bino for federal agencies. So, they're probably "good enough". You might have a left eye astigmatism. I do.
@@TucsonDude Thank You…I do have “Sawarski” spotting scope ..I want to put mike binoculars on a mono / binomial for scanning, then using my tripod for shooting
Conquest is a disappointment to me.. At first glance, sharp, clear, but when I carefully observe the image as if I were looking through a magnifying glass, very unnatural.. Vanguard Endeavor has a much more natural image, just not sharp. But I notice the most difference when I compare Conquest to Nikon SE.
Interesting, I have ended up with the luxury of having a pair of 10x42 Vanguard Platinum as well as Swarovski SLC. My Swarovski SLCs are from 1992, so the close focus is disappointing; but apart from that stack up amazingly well to even my modern 8x42 in terms of brightness in low light. I still have to try more formal comparisons, but I love the premium quality to the Swarovski optics. The Vanguards give a great image too (not quite as classy feeling image as the SLC). With closer focusing and excellent quality build, I sometimes question the 10x difference in the used price I paid for each... though that speaks more to the quality of the Vanguards. I love the SLC image despite it being a 30 year old binocular.
Slc is better except that idiot and soft sticky armour. This year I'm going to send them to Swarovski to change armour. Shame. Leica, SW, Zeiss is going down the slope. :-) But the marketing is stronger than ever! The materials used for their binos weaker than ever. :-) The new slogan is biodegradable. :-)
Thank you Tucsonan Dude for your very honest appraisal , which is very interesting and surprising. It was very useful and brave of you to invest in them both for this comparison...not many would have done that, so very much appreciated ! Thanks again !!
Thanks! I sold the Zeiss and bought a mini-pair of Vortex binos for $140. I use them more than any of the others I own.
I went with the Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42. Considered the Vortex Viper and Leica Trinovid HD. Never considered the SLC based purely on price. The $1000 range was already stretching it for me. I would have loved to be able to reasonably consider the SLC.
But WOW the Swaro EL and NL and Zeiss SF are truly incredible. Every time I look through a Swaro I'm blown away.
But Ive been very impressed and very happy with my Conquest 10x42! Definitely would recommend. BUT...take the eyecups apart and properly clean/lube the mechanism, and really tighten down the eyecups so they dont come undone when you extend the eyecups. Once I did that I have no complaints about this biggest weakness most people notice with the Conquest. Now it is a distinct, precise click into each of the detents.
Thanks for review! A few weeks ago I compared my Conquest HD 8x42 to Swarovski SLC 8x42. My impression was pretty much the same as your of the 10x models. Honestly I had hard to see a difference in optical performance between them. The SLC has a few percent higher light transmission but that is still a very subtle difference, maybe noticeable in low light.
SLC has sligthly wider FOV which I really liked. Also it felt really good in the hand, actually bit better than Conquest.
My reasoning is: when I already have the Conquest(since 5 years) I am fine with that.
If I didn't have it I would consider the SLC. Especially today when the price recently increased ~20% on the Conquest HD series, so the price difference is less than some year ago.
We agree! One thing I prefer with the Swaros is fewer "blackouts" when viewing at an angle.
That is just what I was looking for, thank you for putting that together.
Thanks. I sold my Zeiss and kept my Swaros. Which are you thinking of?
@@TucsonDude Noo! How could you sell one of your babies?
I just bought the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 model and LOVE them! Increadible sharp and really wide field of view.
I also own: Zeiss Victory pocket 8x32, Swarovski SLC 15×56, Swarovski EL 8.5x42 and the Swarovski BTX 85 mm 😋😍.
I'd say my collection is now complete.
@@mrmaxaxl Nice! I agree! For me...I have so many other hobbies, that I sometimes have to "cull the herd". Between collecting fireamrs, binos, drones, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, computers, ham radios, rock specimens, guitars...I can't keep everything. :)
@@TucsonDude Wow! Very cool and fun hobbies you have :)
I understand. Enjoy!
I leaning toward the Zeiss 10x42 binoculars because they seem to get consistent reviews for clarity and brightness. I have used several pairs of AF Steiners over the years with the 8x30 being my favorite for hunting. I’ve never owned roof prism binoculars and am looking step up to near alpha glass. The Conquests look like they would be a good choice for AZ hunting. Thanks for the comparison!
have you used them in AZ yet? Also from AZ and thinking about getting.a pair of the Zeiss 15's
@@travist6345 I haven’t bought them yet and since hunting season is over, I’m going to wait for a good deal or something better. Last year I was set on a pair of 15x56 binoculars from Cabelas, but they never marked them down. In hindsight I should have bought a pair of their 10x42’s when they were on close out because I would have gotten more use out of them. For now I’m going to stick with a spotting scope and lowered-powered binoculars.
In my experience from many years selling binoculars, Zeiss have a quality control problem. If you get a good Zeiss, then they are very good, but I have had serious problems with some Zeiss, with customers rightly complaining of problems, which Zeiss refuse to accept!
I ended up returning a pair of 8x32 Zeiss Conquest HD binoculars. They seemed to be well built but even with the extended eyecups, they weren’t for me. If they had been 8x42’s, I might have kept them because the price was heavily discounted. I’m now looking at trying Leica Trinovids or Opticron Auroras. Thanks for the reply and happy holidays!
When I bought my Conquest HD's a few years ago in Aus, the price difference wasn't that much. While the Zeiss had a little bit more off axis chromatic abberation, it's edges felt sharper and the eye relief was better and as I wear prescription glasses, the extra eye relief won out. I felt the HD's were certainly better than the Zeiss FL's I looked through even though the FL's were twice the price. I also looked through a pair of 10 x 30 EL Swarv's and they were beautiful, but hard to justify 2.5x the cost at the time.
Yep, it's a point of diminishing return, but that last mile is what you pay for. :)
I’ve just purchased the Zeist bins, I’m in no way an expert on these things but Im well pleased with my purchase. I did consider getting the Swarovski bins but the £650 differential just wasn’t worth it.
I think it boils down on what fits you best. I think the Zeiss are sturdier and have bigger lenses. Good luck with yours!
Great video. I appreciate you doing that. I went with the Swaros.
Same here. Better packaging, better feel and fewer "blackouts" when viewing. Congrats!
Tucsonan Dude blackouts? Interesting. I have a Zeiss victory 8x25 pocket as my first binoculars. I notice there is a lot of blackouts not so it seems. Is this less with a larger binoculars? What do you think of the 8.5 x 42 Swarovski? Would this be a serious upgrade for me?
@@MrGflan the 8.5 x42 is the EL series, it is higher end than the SLC. it is a very serious upgrade ! (i own the EL10x42). if you wait a bit, there is the new Swarovski NL pure comming in september, wich is an upgrade over ... the EL !!
@@MrGflan I would stick with the 10X binos.
@@MrGflan I just bought the Zeiss victory 8x25 pocket binoculars and like them alot :)
I'm looking for a really top pair of 8x42 binoculars that are still pretty compact. The zeiss victory sf for example are huge.
How mush it sir
I have a pair of Steiner “predator 10X50” ..It has a left eye focus that I don’t like..I giving some thought to Swarskis..Have you done any comparisons to them?
No idea about Steiner. The are the official bino for federal agencies. So, they're probably "good enough". You might have a left eye astigmatism. I do.
We refused to sell Steiners, they were awful!!
Also thinking about trying 15X 50 what are your thoughts?
Dunno. They probably require a tripod for steady viewing.
@@TucsonDude
Thank You…I do have “Sawarski” spotting scope ..I want to put mike binoculars on a mono / binomial for scanning, then using my tripod for shooting
A $600 difference!
I could not turn the sound up on my computer to hear clearly, all other videos I am turning the sound down !
Which is the better car BMW or Audi. I think it is Audi but my wife things BMW. It is really hard to call at that point in the market.
BMW has manuals in the lower models. Not so much with Audi.
Conquest is a disappointment to me.. At first glance, sharp, clear, but when I carefully observe the image as if I were looking through a magnifying glass, very unnatural.. Vanguard Endeavor has a much more natural image, just not sharp. But I notice the most difference when I compare Conquest to Nikon SE.
I don't disagree. I sold my Conquest and kept my Swarovski's. I'll check out the Vanguards.
Interesting, I have ended up with the luxury of having a pair of 10x42 Vanguard Platinum as well as Swarovski SLC. My Swarovski SLCs are from 1992, so the close focus is disappointing; but apart from that stack up amazingly well to even my modern 8x42 in terms of brightness in low light.
I still have to try more formal comparisons, but I love the premium quality to the Swarovski optics. The Vanguards give a great image too (not quite as classy feeling image as the SLC). With closer focusing and excellent quality build, I sometimes question the 10x difference in the used price I paid for each... though that speaks more to the quality of the Vanguards. I love the SLC image despite it being a 30 year old binocular.
Hey man, can you record that coca cola number station shit and post it? It's been like 3 years
Đẹp quá
你好，给我吧
Slc is better except that idiot and soft sticky armour. This year I'm going to send them to Swarovski to change armour. Shame. Leica, SW, Zeiss is going down the slope. :-) But the marketing is stronger than ever! The materials used for their binos weaker than ever. :-) The new slogan is biodegradable. :-)
What?!?!?
Look after it! :-) There are no three NVs or NLs which optically and manually could be the same. There are a lot of issues about them.