Zeiss 15X45

[woodruffhunter]

Have any of you used these binoculars? What is your opinion?

Are they in the Swarovki/Leica class??

They are very light weight and look like a good option.

 

[krp]

Unfortunately the Zeiss just doesn't do anything very well. 15X with a 50mm objective is streching it and a 45mm can't handle it. Your choices in the smaller roof objectives are limited. The Leica 10-15X50s are the best but at 2300.00 for demo's, out of my price range right now. The Zeiss 15X45s just don't cut it in more than one way. The Vortex Viper 15X50 are ok but not as good optically as the Brunton 15X51. The Bruntons are suprisingly sharp, light weight and the best of the 3 less expensive binos, they are also the least amount of money since they are half price of what they started at, around 300.00 now.

Kent

 

[CDN]

Let's start by answering the question. I have field tested and sold several pairs of the Zeiss Conquest series. The results have always been good. My pinion is that they are very well built and perform well in the field. The 15x45 have an exit pupil of 3mm. I prefer a 4mm exit pupil. This means that they will not transmit as much light as a 15x60. With that being said, I would probably opt for a 12x 45 which will give you a 3.75 exit pupil and a wider field of view. The 12x45 will work when hand held an stil reach out there when mounted on a tripod(recommend). They are good quality glass but fall short of the Zeiss Fl/ Swaro/Leicas when it comes to overall performance. But better on the pocket book. They are lighter than most of the BIG 3 when comparing like combos(powerXobjective). They are a great option if you want to spend less money. When buying optics it all comes down to what you see when you look through them. The others that krp mentionioned are worth looking at as well. Look at as many binoculars as possible. By the way, the Vortex Kaibab 15X56 is a outstanding piece of glass for the money.

krp- I hope your not condemning the entire line of Zeiss optics based on the illusion that a 15x45 will not perform as well as a 15X51 or a 15x56. I will concede the fact that Zeiss has a couple of oddball's in ther line up and that they are more difficult to mount off a tripod. But your statements are paper thin at best. While the Conquest 15X45 would not be my 1st choice they worked very well on a high mountain perch glassing coues deer in central Arizona. I seem to remember glassing up quite a few deer that day.
CDN

 

[krp]

CDN, I'm talking about the 15X45s only. Like you said they are oddball, they don't shine in any phase of glassing except they are light and probably durable being a Zeiss. Clarity out to the edges is poor, glassing early and late is very poor. Just kind of a do nothing bino, for 7-800.00 bucks.

Being a coues glasser for many years and also not being able to use the big objective roofs because my eye width is less than a chihuahua's, last time I saw a chihuahua it was pointing and laughing at me. Anyway I have run all the canidates trough the ringer and the Zeiss 15X45s just have nothing to offer in this application.

Now glassing is 90% the person sitting behind the binos, having at least workable equipment is the other 10%. The only reason these Zeiss are even considered is that they are 15X, you wouldn't buy 12X32s for glassing, don't ask me how I know this, and the 15X45s are no better.

The new Kaibabs are supposed to close down more than the swaros and I'll be checking them out. For lightweight though the Bruntons were the best overall for me. I backpack scout and hunt alot and the Brunton's glassing ability equals my heavier porros, so I save a pound.

If someone is wanting to get into the big eye glassing game the worst thing they can do is buy the least effective equipment and then give up because of the poor results. If you have alot of experience then you just realize that the purchase was the problem.

Kent

 

[CDN]

krp- It's nice to here your not slamminng Zeiss as a whole. We all need to be more careful when making blanket statements. Damage can be done and not even know it.
I don't know all the details with Woodruff's purchase or future purchase or what his budget looks, like but I suspect if he went with the 15X45 he would do just fine. I would still say that the 12X45 is the better choice of the two Conquests. If he has to have 15's then your suggestion would work to. I believe that way to much emphasis is put on power versus technique anyways.
If we use your statement that it's 90% the glasser and 10% the glass then we are splitting hairs with the glass that we are comparing. A good glasser is a good glasser whether he's using the best or mediocre glass. I have witnessed it first hand too many times. You and I sitting on the same hillside in coues country using the glass being compared would produce period.
I'm sorry to hear about the eyes being so close you can't look around a blade of grass(thanks Terry). My hunting partners have the same issue. The Vortex Kaibab worked fine for one guy when we tested them. The jury is out on the other, but we call him cyclops so it might be hopeless.
When it comes down to it buy the best glass you can afford, use a tripod and slow down with your glassing. I'll take fundamentals over the best glass any day. I to have glassed with inferior glass, but always did good when it came to finding game because of technique. Later, CDN

 

[HardcoreOutdoor]

If money is an issue and he wants 15s the only reason the Kaibabs won't work for him is fit. Even though I thought at first that Vortex should have gone all out with a 60mm objective after using them I think 56 works just fine. I was impressed with them.

Funny thing is that using them right next to the Zeiss 15x60s, the Kaibabs seemed like they were a tad short of a true 15 power.

By the way, I will put CDN up against anybody in the field when it comes to finding those little grey ghosts even if he were using toilet paper tubes. Once you get over the frustration and learn to accet it, it is pretty amazing.

Wade
www.HardcoreOutdoor.com

 

[krp]

I didn't know I was making a blanket statement on all Zeiss, I was answering the original question on the 15X45s and being as nice about their attributes as possible. They are not in the Swaro or Leica 15X class, not even close. They are not even as usable as the cheaper Vortex or Bruntons. He wanted light weight 15s and wondered if the Zeiss were worth it. Nope.

I will never bad mouth someone's purchase, but will give my opinion before they spend their hard earned money if I have experience.

Did I question CDN's glassing? I would hope I never give that impression to anybody. I'm sure he is very good.

Kent

 

[HardcoreOutdoor]

You were sort of making a blanket statment, I thought on the Zeiss.

No, I was just commneting on CDN.

Wade
www.HardcoreOutdoor.com

 

[krp]

I specifically spoke of 'the' Zeiss in question. Referred to the 45 objective as a negative. Also stated there were other problems with the Zeiss, I'm not here to upset anyone that may be reading and already own these binos. Just stateing the much better options.

When told my opinion was paper thin I used the other negative of poor clarity out to the edges. They are worthless early and late.

At least I gave specific examples to answer the posters question. There was no blanket about it.

When I was young I had some cheap Tascos, gave me splitting headaches, worthless pieces of junk. I glassed a ton of coues with them though, didn't mean they were any good.

Kent

 

[woodruffhunter]

I wasn't very clear with my intentions. Here is what I
really want.

1- Something I can use in lieu of a spotting scope. I know, 15X bino's will not entirely replace them, I understand this. I just want something I can attach to a small, portable tripod.

2- I liked them for their name, weight and price. If they are 99% of the swaro 15X SLC's, it would be worth saving the extra $1000.

Bottom line is that I am not a big fan of spotting scopes. I know I should condition myself to use them more and it would make me a better hunter.

I have owned a swaro spotter (liked the quality), but hated packing it around with a large tripod. It was just a pain to pack. Decided to try a Nikon spotter and had the same results (obviously) with much less clarity.

I think personally that my ideal setup will be my 10X42 SLC's strapped on me and 15X power bino's and a small tripod in a pack. JMO, and thanks for the help!

 

[NJS]

LAST EDITED ON Jul-20-09 AT 10:20AM (MST)[p]My hunting buddy bought a pair of Zeiss 15x45's. He like them because of the size and weight being smaller and lighter than the other 15x binos on the market. I told him right up front that they wouldn't be as bright because of the 45mm objective lenses... Everyone know that a 45mm can't be as bright as a 56,58, or 60mm... right?

Well he came to visit and we set his Zeiss up and compared them to my MINOX 15x58ED... Both on tripods, side by side and glassing some does across a canyon the last hour of daylight. The Zeiss were right with the MINOX except for the last 3 minutes of daylight... and it was way do dark to start a stalk. The size and weight of the Zeiss made them much easier to carry. I hated to admit it, but the difference in objective lens didn't really matter... but we all know bigger is brighter right? In theory it is... but in practical use, the 45mm objective was not a negative. NJS

 

[SteveC]

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/big_eyes.html

This review of "Big Eyes" will give you some information.

 

[HullinPhx]

Nice write up

 

[woodruffhunter]

Wow, what a great article. Thanks for all the comments. Definately believe the Swaro's (as I suspected) would be my choice. Looks like they are definately worth the extra money.