Zeiss Victory 8x25
VS
Swarovski Pocket CL 8x25
So, after several binoculars of the initial price range, the period of possession of which I have stretched for several years (a couple of Pentax, Nikon, Kowa, basically all Porro), and also having quite a lot of experience in observing with binoculars of various levels (not my own) - I finally decided to get myself something normal.
I thought for a long time which format to choose. At first, my thoughts were on the 42- and 50-mm models. Comfort, versatility, but ... On reflection, I realized that at the present moment of my life, which passes in some turmoil, surrounded by small children, for real use (and not for lying on a shelf), the completely opposite option suits me better - the most compact 25-mm binoculars. Light enough, which can always be on the neck or in a backpack, and in which you can observe as if "by the way".
Well, I have decided on the general strategy. As for specific models of compacts - and, by the way, there are not so many of them in the current market (I mean high-quality branded binoculars, since I realized that only the purchase of top-class binoculars can calm me down for a while).
So, such models can be counted literally on the fingers of one hand: Zeiss Victory 8x / 10x25, Swarovski CL 8x / 10x25, Leica Ultravid 8x20 / 10x25 . There is also the Kowa Genesis 8x / 10x22 . (Regarding the price - all these models cost around 600-650 €). Perhaps this is where the whole choice among the top compacts ends.
But I had it even less because, as already mentioned, I settled on a 25 mm lens, moreover, with a magnification of 8x. The main reason is the size of the exit pupil, which at 8x25 is 3.1 mm, this is still acceptable for me. At one time, I could look in the store only in Swarovski CL, in both versions. A comparison of 8x25 with 10x25 only confirmed my assumption - an exit pupil less than 3 mm is not comfortable even with Swarovski.
So my choice came down to Zeiss Victory 8x25 and Swarovski CL 8x25.
Here I want to make a small digression from the main topic. If you look well on the manufacturers' websites, then not bad (at least in terms of characteristics - a metal case, a more or less wide field of view, water resistance), compact binoculars can also be found. As example - Minox X-Active 8x / 10x25.
Here are a few more models: Bresser Montana 8x / 10x25, Eschenbach Trophy F 8x / 10x25. And quite exotic for me models: DDoptics Lux-HR ED 8x / 10x25 and Bynolyt Seagull ED 8x / 10x25, which look like two drops of water - apparently, the same Chinese manufacturer makes them for these brands.
The cost of all these binoculars is significantly less than the top ones - about 200-250 €.
But I was very determined and decided to start with the very best - Zeiss or Swarovski. Moreover, it so happened that internally I was inclined towards the latter in advance - probably, some experience gained earlier in observations in the "big" EL and SLC had an effect (although I looked enough both in Conquest, and Victory HT and SF, but at that time I liked Swarovski binoculars more).
However, after reading reviews on birdforum, I decided to start with the Zeiss Victory 8x25. The field-of-view leader in its class, after all. Well, the fact that there was only one hinge in the design also influenced the choice.
I live in Ukraine and there is no Victory 8x25 in the stores. So, I went to the Zeiss website, looked for representatives in Germany, and wrote e-mails to several - asking whether they deliver to Ukraine, how to pay, etc. As a result, I bought in one photo store, paid through PayPal. And after 15 days I had the binoculars.
But what is interesting - the thought of Swarovski never left me - and as soon as Zeiss came to me, I could not resist and immediately ordered the Swarovski CL 8x25. Such is the unexpected step :)
I did the same. On the Swarovski website, I looked for stores in Germany, wrote emails with the same questions. Surprisingly, only one shop answered - moreover, specializing exclusively in binoculars and spotting scopes. As a result, Swarovski CL 8x25 was bought, this store did not have PayPal, so the payment was made by SWIFT transfer. And after two and a half weeks, I also had these binoculars.
Such is my story of choosing and purchasing these binoculars ... I watched for a couple of weeks in both, noted for myself their peculiarities and differences. And I want to share some of my thoughts.
What at first glance? Both binoculars have metal bodies. But Swarovski feels more solid. This is facilitated by its greater weight (350 grams versus 290 grams of Zeiss), and a little more exposed metal in the structure, and a more "solid" the case cover. Victory is completely covered with a rubber-like material that feels "easier" to the touch. And it feels lighter (which is logical) and more compact (although the dimensions are almost identical).
I want to say some words about the package bundle, although, to be honest, I wasn’t particularly interested in anything other than the neck strap. But nonetheless.
The Zeiss case - it is inconvenient, binoculars fit into it only in a fully open state, you need to constantly change the interpupillary distance. And in general - the case is not small.
The size of the Swarovski case is more in line with the concept of compact binoculars. But it is impractical too: you can put binoculars in it only in a fully folded state - you also need to constantly change the IPD. Given the two hinges in the design, it is not very convenient to do this all the time.
The Zeiss case does not have its own belt. The Swarovski case has its own strap, but with only one attachment point, so wearing a case with binoculars around your neck or shoulder is inconvenient.
Both covers have loops for a waist belt (which will not help in any way if, for example, you are wearing summer shorts with an elastic band). And in both, there is not enough room for placing binoculars in them along with neck straps.
In my opinion, these covers are suitable for some long-distance transportation, but they are not suitable for constant use during observations.
And one more my opinion - I think the best option for the cover is a simple rectangular bag with a Velcro flap on top of the cover. You can get / hide binoculars from such storage very quickly, and there is no need to change the interpupillary distance. But manufacturers, probably, consider this variant of the cover too simple, and offer more "solid" cases. For some reason, while forgetting about usability.
The neck strap directly for the binoculars is more comfortable on Victory - it is softer and more elastic. CL has a very simple belt, stiff, not very comfortable in contact with the neck.
By the way, the loops on the Zeiss case provide for threading only very thin laces through them - a rather strange decision, especially considering the fact that the lugs for a wider strap in the same CL do not differ much in size.
Both binoculars have no eyepiece and lens caps (and this is superfluous for such a small size, in my opinion), but CL instead has a rather unusual rain cover.
Okay, back to the binoculars. Taking Victory in my hands for the first time, I was slightly upset - yes, a large field of view is noticeable, but how can these binoculars be positioned near the eyes so that there are no permanent blackouts?
However, after a day or two of observations, this problem practically disappeared, the hands somehow by themselves began to place the binoculars "correctly" near the eyes. Well, and of course I set the interpupillary distance exactly. But, nevertheless, the fact is obvious - Victory requires more accurate positioning. The main reason for this problem is the eyecups, which do not have enough travel to comfortably support the binoculars on the eye socket. Why this distance was not increased by at least 2-3 mm, or the eyecups themselves were not made a little longer - it is not clear for me.
At Swarovski, this is much easier - the eyecups can be extended a sufficient distance, the binoculars can be positioned with some comfort near the eyes, creating a fulcrum, blackouts do not bother.
This advantage is especially noticeable when observing during a strong gusty wind, when the hands with the binoculars tremble perceptibly, and the binoculars constantly "jump" near the eyes. In such a situation, Victory is more difficult to keep in a stable position, but with Swarovski there are no problems.
When viewed in CL just after Zeiss, it does not leave the Swarovski image "pinched". It's not that the pronounced effect of a tunnel or a "keyhole", but AFOV 60° for Victory (versus 52° for CL) do their job and the picture it gives is perceived, of course, noticeably "freer" and wider.
Now a few words about sharpness. Swarovski has a very, very insignificant decrease in clarity at the edge of the field of view - in general, almost imperceptible. With a clear, sharply defined circle of the field diaphragm, the CL image is extremely pleasing to the eye.
With Zeiss, the deterioration in image quality closer to the edge is more noticeable. Not critical, there is no frank "soap", of course - but, in comparison with CL, there is a difference. This is, in principle, to be expected given the Victory's noticeably larger field of view.
The edge of the field diaphragm in Zeiss is not so clearly visible - it is perceived with some blur. Again - this is to be expected with a wide field of view of binoculars - as far as I can tell, quite often in binoculars with a large FOV, from the point of the eye relief it is not possible to see the entire FOV and the edge of the image results is a slightly blurred, not perfectly clear circle (but this reasoning is interesting, probably, for a very narrow part of the true fans of observations with binoculars :)
In terms of color reproduction - at first it seems that Victory, in comparison with CL, gives the image a slightly cooler tone, with barely noticeable "green" (or Swarovski makes the picture a little warmer).
But on reflection, I came to the conclusion that the matter is in light transmission, and Zeiss is just a little brighter. Swarovski's image is not "warmer", just a little darker.
There is probably rationality in this assumption, since Victory 8x25, whatever one may say, belongs to the top line of Zeiss binoculars with fluorite lenses and, by definition, it should transmit a little more light, unlike CL (already a few days after wrote this, looked at the Zeiss and Swarovski websites for detailed specifications of binoculars. Indeed, the Victory's light transmission is 91%, while the CL has 88%).
As for backlit observations... I remember the extremely compact Swarovski models, which probably disappeared from the model range five years ago (8x20 and 10x25, called "pocket B"), and in which I looked a little at one time. So, in them it was difficult to observe against the Sun and even from the white cloudy sky there were glare and some kind of foggy veil in the field of view.
In the current CL, there are no such obvious problems. Nevertheless, if you look against the sun, then in the lower part of the field of view, there are often quite noticeable glare from the prisms.
In Victory, however, there are no such problems, glare and internal reflections are practically absent when observing against the Sun. And if they do appear, then to a lesser extent than Swarovski.
Here I want to say that in any binoculars the appearance of glare when observing against the Sun depends on the height of the Sun above the horizon and the angle of incidence of the sun's rays through the binoculars. For example, I observed when the Sun was about 40-45°. In this situation, there were glare in CL, but not in Victory.
Under other conditions, when the Sun was at 25-30°, glare occasionally appeared in Victory, but they were much less pronounced than in Swarovski, in which in this situation the internal reflections were even more intense and interfered with observations.
The final impression is that the Victory is more suitable for backlighting.
Visually, I don't really like the asymmetrical hinge on the Zeiss. But in practice, this does not cause any inconvenience - on the contrary, the ergonomics are close to ideal. The small sharpness control is quite tight, it doesn't have the slightest backlash. It is completely open, located on top of the case, in contrast to the CL's drum, which is somewhat hidden in the case.
As a result, it is accessible to the fingers only from the top and bottom. Also, the Swarovski's sharpness wheel rotates much easier (this is not a plus or a minus, just unusual after Zeiss), and, to my surprise, has a slight backlash.
Let me emphasize: the backlash is in the sharpness control, the coordination of the channels in CL is ideal. Like Victory.
This point, by the way, is very important for me in binoculars: there is nothing more annoying than the mismatch of the optical channels, in which it is possible to adjust the same sharpness by turning the knob only in one direction.
Adjustment of the diopter eye difference is carried out with small wheels at the bottom of the bridge. My comment on it is similar to the previous one: the Victory has a fully open regulator, and the tuning convenience is excellent.
In CL it is hidden inside the case, only a small part of it is open for the thumbs. Accordingly, it is somewhat less convenient to set the value of the diopter correction.
But there is another side of this decision. For example, when in a backpack (without a case), the Zeiss often misses the diopter setting. And CL does not.
The rest of the moving parts - eyecups, central hinges - are equally well made for both binoculars. Twist out the eyecups gently and smoothly (they are without intermediate positions, by the way); setting the IPD, as expected, is performed with a certain correct effort in hinge.
What thoughts did I end up with after several weeks of using both binoculars?
Let me summarize as follows: I liked both binoculars, although they differ noticeably from each other in optics and mechanical parts. I think that there is nothing better than them in the class of 25-mm compact binoculars (I want to order a little later several of the above-mentioned "second-line" 25-mm binoculars, for comparison).
Swarovski looks more "impressive", its ergonomics are different, compared to Zeiss. Not in the sense of "worse" or "better" (except for the movement of the eyecups - here you can definitely say that the CL is in front; and I almost forgot - these eycups is made of metal unlike Victory's plastic variant) - it is just different. In general, despite the structural differences, it is convenient to use both binoculars when observing.
In terms of the implementation of the optical part, the conclusion is more unambiguous: Zeiss Victory 8x25 is more advanced and bypasses CL 8x25. The field of view is noticeably larger, the light transmission is also better, "immersion" in the picture is ultimately more interesting. Backlit observations are also on his side. These are unconditional advantages.
What can oppose Swarovski CL? A big plus for me is the image circle with a very clear edge, with almost the same excellent sharpness across the entire field of view. And, I repeat once more, the eyecups of this binoculars are "correct", with sufficient travel. Positioning Swarovski in the right place is easy.
And a somewhat subjective feeling - having picked up CL, you, as they say, "hold the thing". Perhaps for some, this moment also matters.
As for me, if I had to choose between these two models, I would stop at Victory.
In general, it will be interesting for me to compare these two binoculars with the same Minox 8x25 and with other compacts. I hope will be able to do this in the near future.
I liked the format of these binoculars. It is clear that this is a compromise. But 25-mm binoculars, which you use when you want, are better than 50mm binoculars that spend most of their time on the shelf. Although, the best option is a lot of binoculars, good and different!
P.S. I thought about how correct the comparison between Victory and CL is? Victory is Zeiss' top line and you can expect super quality and excellent characteristics of this model. And Swarovski's CL is just a compact binocular, along with the Companion. And you shouldn't expect any breakthrough and innovations of the EL-series from this model.
On the other hand: in terms of pricing, these two binoculars are equivalent (590-600 €). And from this side, it is interesting to understand what we get for the same price.