Print Page | Close Window

Ziess Conquest 8X30’s

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Other Optics
Forum Name: Binoculars
Forum Description: Anything that requires two eyes to look through it
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=5255
Printed Date: December/10/2017 at 20:11


Topic: Ziess Conquest 8X30’s
Posted By: Jeffcamis
Subject: Ziess Conquest 8X30’s
Date Posted: December/28/2006 at 23:15
I'm thinking of buying a pair of 8x30 ziess conquests for huntingh in the hardwoods of North Eastern NJ. Don't laugh there are some big deer in these woods. Are these glasses p-coated? Does anyone have any experience with there customer service I'm pretty hard on my equipment. If anyone can give me feed back positive or negative I'd appreciate it thanks. Jeff Camiscioli

-------------
Jeff Cam



Replies:
Posted By: Tero
Date Posted: December/29/2006 at 09:04
Yes, phase coated, these are the lowest Zeiss grade to look at, skip the Diafun for sure. The 8x30 definitely are more useful than the 10x30, which are OK, but FOV just barely useable. The Zeiss service I heard about is so and so, I think people get the service but they have to get hold of the right person. The body is synthetic, not metal, so don't drive over them. If you do, I think they will just send you a new pair.
Here is the N American site
http://www.zeiss.com/sports - http://www.zeiss.com/sports

The warranty quality etc issues are probably the same as for a Monarch 8x36. I do not know which of those is brighter, but the Monarch is not heavier, and body is similar composite material.



Posted By: chmcmm
Date Posted: December/31/2006 at 13:34

I was in the same boat a few weeks ago. I live and hunt in Pa. I looked through the Conquests and Monarchs. Brightness wise they were the same but the Conquests were sharper. I ended up getting a pair of Minox 8x42 BL's. I'm very pleased. Cost was about half of the Conquests and the glass is just as good. Small and light. Perfect for hunting.

 

I had a couple of questions about the binos. The Minox customer service response was informative and timely.



Posted By: Tero
Date Posted: January/01/2007 at 11:52
Yes, several 8x42s are probably better overall than the Zeiss, and some weigh almost the same, so the Zeiss has to really grab you as somehow the binocular for you.

I use mostly 10x, but am currently leaning toward an competitor 8x32 for my 8x. In 8x, several 8x30 and 8x32 models have wider FOV than the 40mm counterparts. The Zeiss 8x30 does not impress me with FOV.

The Minox BD 8x32 BR looks like good value for the money but have not had it in my hand.



Posted By: FrankD
Date Posted: January/02/2007 at 08:16

Originally posted by Jeffcamis Jeffcamis wrote:

I'm thinking of buying a pair of 8x30 ziess conquests for huntingh in the hardwoods of North Eastern NJ. Don't laugh there are some big deer in these woods. Are these glasses p-coated? Does anyone have any experience with there customer service I'm pretty hard on my equipment. If anyone can give me feed back positive or negative I'd appreciate it thanks. Jeff Camiscioli

 

Jeff,

 

I have owned a few pairs of the 8x30 Conquests. They are indeed phase coated. I believe they are one of the better 8x30-32 mm glasses out there under $500. My other favorites would include the Pentax DCF-SP 8x32 and Nikon Monarch 8x36. I would also throw the 8x32 Minox BD BR on the list but would only be going on others opinions.

 

Imaqe quality is very good for the price. The bins are very sharp with good color and a decent sized sweet (undistorted) spot. Overall handling is very good as well. Their lightweight design and overall length make them feel exceptionally comfortable in my hands.

 

The only two negatives I have found with them involve the eye relief and true field of view/edge distortion combination. The eye relief is about 14 mm. I do not have a problem getting the full field of view but my eyelashes continue to leave marks on the glass when I use them extensively. This may not seem like a big deal but continually cleaning them can be a nuisance.

 

Now, I did mention their fairly decent sized sweet spot. It covers about 2/3rds their overall image. However, I find the other 1/3rd to not really be usable and when you combine that with the fairly narrow 360 foot field of view (compared to the 390+ on most 8x32 mm models) it gives me a bit of a tunnel effect. Not as pronounced as some models but something I felt the need to comment on regardless.

 

Good luck with whatever you purchase.



-------------
Frank


Posted By: Tero
Date Posted: January/04/2007 at 18:08
The Conquest 8x30 was on my list of things to check out. But  I went with competitor  8x32, though. The middle part is sharp enough for my uses, but edges have typical softness. I love the view though, 393ft fov.

So my target might then be 10x40 Conquest next. It is so similar to my other 10x42, though, that it will really have to impress me.


Posted By: FrankD
Date Posted: January/05/2007 at 06:02

Quote I love the view though, 393ft fov.

 

Tero,

 

I believe that to be somewhat of a misprint. In the Cab....s catalog they list that figure as well but when you go to the Zeiss website they have it at 360.



-------------
Frank


Posted By: Tero
Date Posted: January/05/2007 at 06:21
Sorry, I wrote poorly, I went with competitor, 8x32, fov is  393. They are brighter than my sports store 8x32, and a tiny bit sharper in the sweet spot. I cannot distinguish Zeiss from Monarch from EO at 8x. At 10x I can.


Posted By: FrankD
Date Posted: January/05/2007 at 07:37

Quote I went with competitor, 8x32, fov is  393. They are brighter than my sports store 8x32, and a tiny bit sharper in the sweet spot.

 

So what are you getting now that you are dissatisfied with your current 8x32?



-------------
Frank


Posted By: lucznik
Date Posted: January/05/2007 at 10:05
The Zeiss Classic 8x30 is still available.  How would it compare to the Conquest?

-------------
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?


Posted By: FrankD
Date Posted: January/05/2007 at 12:23
Take this with a grain of salt as I have not compared the two personally. From some folks I respect the optics of the classic are supposed to be better though there still are those rubber eyecups and I am not sure if they are completely waterproof/nitrogen purged, etc... I seem to remember some conflicting discussions on that issue.

-------------
Frank


Posted By: Tero
Date Posted: January/05/2007 at 17:24
Originally posted by FrankD FrankD wrote:

Quote I went with competitor (competitor) 8x32, fov is  393. They are brighter than my sports store 8x32, and a tiny bit sharper in the sweet spot.

 

So what are you getting now that you are dissatisfied with your current 8x32?


Warranty?

I like the new ones. The old sports store model was a bit dimmer and there was a slight reddish tint, noticable at sunset on a cloudy day.A sharp shinned hawk looked sharper.FOV is now 393 vs 367 with the cheapo. If I get some family memebers interested in out once a year look at eagles, we will take both along plus 10x42.



Print Page | Close Window