Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Zeiss Victory FL vs SF vs HT what are the difference?

Currently using Swarovski 10x42 SLC's but would like to go to 8x42's while looking online I was wondering what is the difference with these 3 versions of the Zeiss Victory binoculars?

FL is the earliest version of Victory series binos. The "FL" stands for fluorite lenses, which is a type of extra low dispersion HD glass.

HT is a newer series that shares much of the same optical design as the FL series binos, but uses what Schott calls their "HT" (high transmission) glass. Supposedly, this offers slightly improved light transmission vs the FL series.

SF is the newest series that has an "open bridge" design (like Swarovski EL series) vs. the standard continuous hinge design of the other two series. It also has greater field of view and supposedly has an "improved" focusing mechanism design in some way.

Ted has explained things well, The FL and HT both used Abbe Koenig prism systems and are very bright.

The SF is the highest Victory model, it uses SP prisms, and is similar to the Swaro. EL only better.
I own both so this is from experience over several years.
The SF has a wider FOV, has a very nice balance due to its design with the balance to the
ocular side, and its focuser is as smooth as butter, better than the Swarovision.

I have owned the FL 8x42, a very nice binocular, the HT is similar, but now discontinued.
The SF is at the top of the heap right now.

If looking at a new 8x42, be sure to check out the Victory SF. I have the 10x42, and it is very nice.

My understanding is they had the earlier version of the SF binos and a newer version. They say the new version is very special. That will be my next pair of binos 10x42

Thanks Guys, that explains a lot!

Looking at Cameralandny web site the SF is $500 more than the HT

I have 8x42 SLC, newer version. I like it better than the Zeiss FL and HT. I haven’t tried the SF, but for price I also like the SLC better than the Swarovision. +1 for 8x42 SLC if you want a 8x

I liked the HT better than the SLC. I haven't looked through an SF or EL but I couldn't imagine ever needing anything better than the HT, FL, or SLC. If you could find a used pair of FLs for a good price, I don't think you would be missing much.

Complete different experience then you had with the 8x42 SLC. My Leica 8x42 trinovids(not the new one, previous model) to me are sharper binos.

My 2 cents: Binocular series have winners and losers. In the Zeiss FL & HT series, I always thought the 8x42 was a loser, as it had a narrow sweet spot (it seemed like about 70%), which made it sort of like looking into a tunnel. The 8x32 and 10 x 42 were very good, with a sweet spot of about 85-88% of the view.

The Zeiss 10x42 FL and HT are better in low light conditions with their pumped up resolution and better CA suppression, while the Swarovski & Leica have better contrast and color representation. The new SLC's are good binoculars, but I haven't checked them out against the latest Leica's. Swarovski came out with the new SLC's for hunters, and EL's for birders.

I would like to hear someone's review of the above companies hunting riflescopes and how they compare to each other.

Most importantly there is certainly enough variation in how user's eyes/brains respond to different binos and also enough sample variation to warrant comparing for yourself, before taking anybody's opinion or relying on small differences comparing gack...imho, fwiw

I don't want to piss in any HT's owners wheaties here...but the HT's small center is very noticeable to some. I saw it every time I used the glass in daylight--noticing where the sharp focus ended. For me, the SF is certainly worth 500 bucks more money!

The HT has a low light advantage, but it is larger on paper than in actual use. For a readily discernible low light advantage larger objectives are in order. Then, the 56mm Swaro SLC also has AB prisms, unlike their 42mm class, and I believe are now available in the US to some degree. The area in focus is obviously larger, just as sharp as Zeiss' center and the overall FOV more usable--at least to me.

I think that Zeiss's small center build concept, regardless of its utility to some or the notable quality of the past FL line, will eventually go the way of the dinosaur....and the SF is the first nail in the coffin.

Maybe the new SF's are better, but the pairs I've looked through the last couple years are not impressive for what they cost. They have pincushioning at the edges that's very noticeable, they were noticeably darker than the EL's or HT's, and they sill have a slightly blue tint. Not to mention that the eye cups and rubber armor felt like they belonged on a high end bushnell and not a 2500.00 set of glass.

to me ziess binoculars don't have the same quality of feel in my hands as swaro does. I can't describe it, and its purely subjective. boring black probably doesn't help either. wish they had more interesting colors.

LOL ..you obviously have not looked thru the SF's even the old ones were superior binos . Their Field of view is 10% greater then an EL for starter and are way better balanced.

Quality of a Swaro , are you phugging crazy? NewsFlash Swaro buys Schott Glass.

Interesting read Tomk, I find my 8x32FL to be glorious and have no intention of updating, and am expecting them to last 'til I am buried.

No doubt, JS. It appears to me that Zeiss still has a ways to go to top the high water mark of the FL line. Am curious to see if they want to. I have tried to steal an "outdated" FL or two cheap, but haven't found someone lacking that much sense...yet.

Don't forget me, brother...:)

Of interest and should be added, I didn't have an issue with my new HTs in 2014. But was glassing for elk, hunting with Daughter #2 in 2015 and we switched binos to compare glass. Someone had bought her a 8x32 ELSV for a wedding gift that year and I was concerned about her feelers being hurt when she lifted the 10x54. Instead she maliciously pounced on mine, pointing out the small center. From then on I could not shake it and continued to see it...

I spent a fair amount of time comparing the 10x56 SLC (new AB prism model) to the HT this spring. In spite of the listed gack, the SLC has more usable field than the HT. There would be about 30 deer coming out each evening and they would gradually spread out across the rye field. There is a melanistic doe with two fawns. She looks black as coal in the right light and the neighbors and I have been trying to get a pic, but she is a sneaky broad with sneaky kids. Anyway, watching at yardage once the herd spread out, I would lose the focus of deer on the peripheral of the Zeiss' FOV, but not the Swaro's. A wider FOV of view it may have, but not as usable as the Swaro 56mm.

I like the SLC treatment of flat vs the traditional look with their wider center but not dead flat like the SV, and would probably gig with the Noctavid too--and that is simply a personal preference.

I think Zeiss has intentions of discontinuing the HT's, if they've not already. The SF is very nice, but huge and bulky. I prefer the overall package of the 10x50SV personally. My personal favorite Zeiss is the 10x42 T FL.

I cannot afford much so I buy the best I can, I am also that miserable with coin that Jews and Scotsmen genuflect in my direction.

Aye.

My wife is mostly French-Canuck but has a little Scot in her. Whatever the Scots throw your way, be sure and have the metal content tested....