Zeiss have tried hard to make a
top-class no-frills birding binocular for everyman with the 42mm Conquest HDs.
In this review, I pit the 8x42 model against its Victory SF equivalent and see
how it fares on the night sky too.
Zeiss 8x42 Conquest HD Review
I’ve always liked the 56mm models in Zeiss’ Conquest HD
range, which offer a cheaper alternative to Swarovski’s big-eye SLC HDs in a
proper European binocular from a prestige brand: no doubt great for hunters,
but for astronomers too. Then last month I tried a pair of mainstream Conquests
for the first time - the 10x42s - and found them excellent, if anything better
than their big-eye siblings.
In this review I find out if the 8x42 model, the most
traditional birding format in the entire Conquest range, is as good. To add
some extra value, though, I compare them with the 8x42 Victory SFs, Zeiss’ top
model for birders, to see what extra you get for twice the price. And I put the
astronomy performance of both to an extended dark-sky shake-out.
At A Glance
|
Magnification |
8x |
|
Objective Size |
42mm |
|
Eye Relief |
18mm measured |
|
Actual Field of View |
128m/1000m, 7.4° |
|
Apparent field of view |
59° |
|
Close focus |
2m claimed/measured |
|
Transmissivity |
90% |
|
Length |
150mm |
|
Weight |
795g claimed/measured |
Data from Zeiss/Me.
What’s in the Box?
The Conquest range share much the
same the glossy, fold-out presentation box with an arty wildlife photo, as
other Zeiss’ models. No cut-price packaging here.
Design and Build
The
Conquests are Zeiss’ largest range of binoculars in terms of the magnifications
and apertures on offer: equivalent of Leica’s Trinovid HDs and Swarovski’s
rather more expensive SLC HDs, but with more variety than either - all the way
from 8x32 to 15x56 via these birding-standard 8x42s.
All the
models seem to share a similar style and approach, with rugged made-in-Germany
build (the ad’s show them all scuffed and covered in mud) and wide fields for
their class.
The 32mm
and 42mm Conquest HD models are fairly standard roof prism binoculars,
with nothin’ fancy – no special prisms like the
HTs, no innovative optical and mechanical design like the SFs. And whilst the
56mm models are large for their spec, these are a normal compact size.
The
Conquests certainly seem like ‘proper’ Zeiss, but whether ‘Made in Germany’
means fabricated or merely assembled, I don’t know. In either case, Zeiss are
likely to support them for service and repair in a way only the European brands
do in my experience.
Body
More than
the huge 56mm models, Zeiss’ 42mm Conquest HDs share a look and feel with the
much more expensive Victory HTs and SFs too. However, the
Conquests have a more conventional design than either of those premium models, with
an armoured hinge and the focuser at the back, rather than the double-link open
bridge and huge central focuser on the SFs.
Like the SFs,
the Conquests lack thumb cut-outs. But here there isn’t the innovative
rear-biased handling to compensate by taking weight off your wrists.
Compared
to the Leica Trinovids and SW SLC HDs, these Conquests are a bit heavier at
795g vs 745g and 765g respectively; a bit larger too. And whilst they’re 25mm
shorter than Zeiss’ own SFs, they’re actually a bit heavier.
Part of
that extra weight is due to the thick two-texture anthracite-black armour. It
looks similar to the SFs’, but it’s not the same: unlike the SFs’, it smells
rubbery, has very obvious seams and is the worst for attracting prints and
fluff. The SFs’ armour looks like Leica’s; the Conquests’ reminds me of sticky
rock-boot rubber.
To me the
look and feel of the whole binocular isn’t as refined as Swarovski’s or (esp.)
Leica’s, with a rugged utilitarianism that’s typical Zeiss and attractive in
its own way.
It perhaps
goes without saying that these are fully waterproof. Independent tests have
found Zeiss to be tops on ruggedness and the Conquests look it.
Focuser
The
focuser wheel isn’t as large as some, but it’s well placed and covered in
(likely replaceable) grippy rubber. Only the outer part turns on a fixed inner
axle.
Focus action
is smooth and accurate, but not quite in the league of the SFs’ for twirly intuitiveness.
The Conquests’ is slightly ‘dry’ feeling by comparison. But, overall, the focuser
gives little to complain about, whilst being super-fast at just over ¾ of a
turn from close focus of 2m to infinity. There is some travel beyond infinity
too.
I assumed
the focuser would be greaseless; but after some use, I found a trace of grease
seeping from the around the axle of the focuser on the 10x model.
Dioptre
adjust is by a ring under the right eyepiece, the traditional way many bino’s
do it. It’s functional and accurate, with a sensible weight to prevent
accidental movement.
Optics - Prisms
These 42mm Conquests
have modern-standard Schmidt-Pechan (a.k.a. Roof) prisms, not the
high-transmission Abbe-König prisms found in Zeiss’ HT range and in the 56mm
Conquests. Still, transmission is claimed at 90% - up there with most modern
roof designs, if a (noticeable I think) couple of percent down on the SFs.
Optics - Objectives
Like most
things about these binoculars, the objectives are standard stuff: a triplet comprising
a cemented doublet with a small airgap and another single element behind, like
many modern bino’s.
The ‘HD’
tag suggests they contain high-fluoride glass to cut false colour fringing, a
feature that’s rapidly becoming the norm.
The
objectives are well recessed and the lens ring is micro-baffled with fine
ridges. A knife-edge baffle sits behind the objectives, for further control of
stray light. The focuser carriage has also been ridge-baffled, but the interior
isn’t painted flat black the way some are. Interior build is interestingly
different from the SFs, which take a minimalist approach (probably to reduce
weight).
The
Conquests have Zeiss’ usual excellent T* coatings with their distinctive pink
tint that gives a cool view I like. They also get LotuTecTM dirt
and water repelling coatings. In the photo, the coatings look the
same as the SFs’, but close inspection suggests they’re actually not quite as
dark and transmissive.
Conquest HD and Victory SF both have T* coatings, but SFs’ (bottom)
are slightly more transmissive.
Optics - Eyepieces
The
eyepieces are likely a sophisticated modern design, with large (24mm) eye
lenses. Though the objectives have the virtually the same coatings as the SFs,
eyepiece coatings are quite different (see below).
Claimed
eye relief is 18mm. Unlike the 10x42s which had a bit less in reality, 18mm was
what I measured. It’s class-leading at this price point and is enough to see
the whole field with my specs on.
The
eyepieces offer a fairly typical field for the 8x42 class, at 59° apparent
and 7.4° true. It’s roughly the same as Leica’s Ultravid 8x42s’ and just
as for the Ultravids, apparent field is well down on the 10x42 model,
something you do notice. The 8x42 SFs have quite a lot more at 64° apparent,
8.6° true.
Blackouts
as you move your eyes around aren’t a big problem with these, but they have
rather more than I’d like – more than the SFs and (I think) more than I recall
in the 10x42s for some reason, perhaps just because of that millimetre or two
extra real eye relief (long eye relief and blackouts were once inextricably
linked, but less so in recent premium models like the SFs).
The
eyecups themselves are one of the areas that let these Conquests down. There
are three click-out positions, which is fine. But I use the term ‘click’
loosely, because the action is sticky and a bit rough.
Zeiss Conquest HD
and Victory SF eyepieces compared.
Accessories
The Conquests
get Zeiss’ usual neoprene strap, which fits standard lugs. Even the high-end
SFs get the same (no equivalent of Swarovski’s Field Pro at Zeiss). But simple
does mean light weight and cheap to replace.
The case
is the same as Zeiss used to ship with their FL models and different from the
more stylish item the SFs get: plain black Cordura, but likely to be
rugged and protective (unlike Leica’s stylish-but-impractical cinnamon-coloured
Trinovid pouch).
The eye
cap is a soft rubber job which is easy to push on and stays there. The end caps
are moulded in one and hang off a lanyard for attachment to the strap lugs.
Again, they just work.
Full marks
for accessories that are basic, practical, rugged and just do their job – for
me that’s the Zeiss vibe.
In Use – Daytime
Ergonomics and Handling
Handling
is fine, but then these are a fairly generic binocular with no special
innovations. By that I mean that there are no thumb cutouts or
double-bridge; no specially sculpted barrels to help with a snug fit, no
SF-style ErgoBalanceTM concept. They’re
just a typical, if shortish, 42mm roof. The barrels feel quite chunky to my
smallish hands, partially thanks to the very thick armour.
Similarly,
the focuser wheel and dioptre adjust are standard fare (no fancy
integrated-bridge design here) but work just fine. The dioptre ring is smooth and
accurate (better than the 10x model I tried); together with the snappy focus,
it makes finding your best setting easy. One negative point I noticed is that
dioptre does wander slightly between focus settings: I had to reset it for use
at infinity on the night sky.
Eyepiece
comfort would be outstanding, with plenty of eye relief, but blackouts are
noticeable even with specs on; the eye cups are comfy, though, if you view
without.
The
Conquests look quite plain and lack the panache of Leica’s Trinovids (to me
anyway, you might disagree), but are small and unobtrusive to wear.
The View
Like the
10x model, the view immediately impressed me. It’s noticeably wider and more
immersive than most and has that real crystal clarity and detail that high-end
binoculars give. It seems even brighter than the (good) 90% transmissivity
would suggest. However, the SFs are palpably just a little brighter.
The other
big difference comparing a recent pair of Swarovski CLs with these was the
colour rendition. The Swarovskis had never seemed to me overly warm, but the
Conquests have a cooler colour balance that I actually prefer and that they
share with other Zeiss models.
Resolution
is another area where these subjectively excel. Watching a huge flock of tiny
Goldfinches in the top branches of their favourite tree 100m away, I could
still easily ID them, make out their yellow wing flashes and orange crowns. These
really are a birders’ binocular. Repeated swapping with a pair of SFs suggested
a miniscule difference in resolution, but so small I couldn’t swear to it.
The apparent
field of view is noticeably less expansive than the
10x model which features 7° extra apparent width. No, it’s not the tunnel view
of an old-skool bino’, but whilst dropping power from
10x to 8x improves steadiness and reduces some aberrations, it doesn’t give the
extra true field you might expect – just 0.7° more than the 10x42s.
Overall,
these have the best view of any 8x42 binocular I’ve tested in this price
bracket.
Flat field?
No, the
8x42 Conquests, like others in the range, don’t have the flat field of
Swarovski’s ELs or NL Pures. Even compared with Zeiss’ own SFs, the field is
more blurred beyond 50% and especially at the edge. But this isn’t the kind of
highly curved and astigmatic field old-fashioned bino’s often have and was
never a problem for me.
Rolling
ball effect when panning seemed more marked than the SFs’ for some reason,
despite the narrower, less edge-sharp field.
Chromatic Aberration
As one
of the lowest power models in the Conquest HD range you might expect these to
be well corrected for false colour and they are. What little there is, visible
when panning through silhouetted branches, is from the eyepieces and varies
with eye position, worsens a little at the field edge.
However,
false colour never really troubles the view in practice, neither of birds
roosting in top branches nor on the wing. If you’re a keen birder, HD optics do
make a difference to getting that ID under challenging conditions.
In Use – Dusk
Performance in dusk and moonlight is very good, creating a
proper light intensifier effect where you can make things out that are all
black shadow to the naked eye. For older eyes like mine, low-light performance is
only a little down on a pair of premium 7x50s because my pupil doesn’t open to
their full 7mm exit pupil.
In Use – Observing the Night Sky
Astronomy performance is strong for an 8x42, with good
eyepiece comfort, a wide sharp central area, and snappy focus, excellent
contrast.
Stars start to distort slightly from as little as 50% field
width, but the effect is very subtle until the last ~10%. The distortion is a
classic mix of some curvature and astigmatism too. However, even at the edge,
stars don’t become long lines and only the faintest stars are extinguished –
you don’t get that tunnel effect where all the stars around the edge have
smeared into a mist.
Stray light performance is good. Viewing a bright distant
security light produces short and very dim spikes, but minimal ghosting.
The Moon
You
wouldn’t choose 8x for the Moon, but still the Conquests give an excellent view
- a hard white and grey marble with bright highlands, brilliant rays, dark
maria; and with no significant ghosting, flare or false colour.
Mars
Mars,
the only available bright planet, gave a clean image: a strong deep orange
point without false colour or spikes.
Deep Sky
I had a
most enjoyable deep sky session with the 8x42 Conquest HDs late one clear,
Moonless night.
The
field is good and wide for astronomy: the whole Hyades easily fits in, as do
both Orion’s belt and sword. In both cases, the outer stars nearest the field
edge suffer only mild distortion.
Orion’s Great
Nebula, number forty two in Messier’s list, showed a
lot of misty nebulosity for this aperture, thanks to the bright optics and sharp
stars.
Despite the
field-edge softening, star fields looked wonderful, with the area around the
Double Cluster and that arc of stars leading out to Stock 2 a real rich-field
treat. Other bright open clusters were full of brilliant sharp stars too –
glittering Pleiades and populous Praesepe (the
Beehive), with its inner ‘hut’ shape.
Below
the Beehive, I easily found the patch of mist which is M67 at this aperture – a
much smaller open cluster in Cancer (my birth sign, but don’t lets even go
there, astronomy and astrology don’t mix).
Bright
cluster M35 resolved into masses of stars and nearby M36 and M38 (Pinwheel and
Starfish clusters) in Auriga resolved with direct vision, though M37 remained
an unresolved mist as usual for this magnification and objective size. I found
lots of smaller open clusters that Messier missed too – little TR 2 in Perseus
and NGC 1907 near to much larger M38.
With Boötes rising over my roof, I tracked up from
Arcturus to find a different type of DSO, a big fuzzy star: M3 is a globular
cluster, a strange and ancient bundle of stars on the edge of the galaxy. Left
of Denebola in Leo I found numerous faint patches of nebulosity, where masses
of spiral galaxies infest this bit of sky in Coma Berenices.
The 8x42
format is still limited for hunting smaller DSOs, though. I struggled to find
the Crab Nebula off Zeta Tauri without averted vision.
Due to
their wide field and sharp stars, good contrast, the 8x42 Conquest HDs are
among the best mid-range birding bino’s for a spot of deep sky astronomy,
despite some mild off-axis aberrations.
Built for birding, but great under a dark starry sky too.
Zeiss 8x42 Conquest HD
vs Zeiss 8x42 Victory SF
The 8x42 Victory SFs are Zeiss’ best birding bino’s and a
personal favourite. But at over double the price of these Conquest HDs, what do
you get for all that extra cash? Let’s break it down:
·
The
SFs are bigger but lighter
·
I
find the SFs rearwards weight bias less fatiguing
·
The
SFs have a wider field of view
·
Off-axis
aberrations start earlier, are slightly worse at the edge than the SFs’
·
Despite
that sharper field edge, I found the SFs gave a less pronounced rolling-ball
effect when panning
·
The
SFs focus closer
·
The
SFs’ focuser is lighter, smoother more accurate and intuitive: even my bino’
novice daughter mentioned it, though the Conquest HDs’ is still very good
·
The
SFs are slightly brighter, have a slightly cooler tone
·
Objective
coatings are very similar but close inspection suggests the SFs are slightly
better; eyepiece coatings are totally different
·
Repeated
swapping suggests the SFs have a slightly higher resolution view
·
False
colour levels on and off-axis are very slightly lower in the SFs
The SFs are just a little better in most areas, but honestly
not that much better, certainly not enough that you need those
differences for twice the price. Sure, I’m a perfectionist too, maybe just
don’t take your non-birder partner to the store to compare them if you’re
buying the SFs.
Summary
Perhaps you can tell that I’m
impressed with Zeiss’ 8x42 Conquest HDs. In this smaller size and lower-power
format, the everything-you-need-nothing-you-don’t formula just works really
well. The view is bright, sharp and full of high-resolution detail and with a
distinctive cool tone. The field isn’t flat and false colour isn’t completely
eliminated, but all aberrations are low enough you won’t notice them in
day-to-day use. Mechanically things are mostly good too, with a smooth fast
focuser and a comfy if basic hold. Eye relief for specs wearers is top notch.
Negatives? That long eye relief
comes with more blackouts than I’d like and the eye cups aren’t the best. The
field width is decent, but the apparent field is well down on the 10x42s, so
much so that you might go for the higher-powered model if you can hold them
steady.
Otherwise, Zeiss’ 8x42 Conquest HDs
are just an excellent basic (in a positive sense) pair of birding bino’s with a
great view that you can enjoy every day because they’re rugged and Zeiss will
fix them if you drop them.
The more I used these 8x42
Conquests, the louder my inner Captain Sensible whispered, ‘these are all the
binoculars you need, really’.
The 8x42 Conquest HDs make a great every day birding bino’:
inexpensive and rugged enough to take lots of hard use, but with plenty of
comfort, a fast focuser and a great view. They work well for astronomy too.
Highly recommended.
Buy Zeiss 8x42 Conquest HDs from Wex here:
