Tell me more about the Zeiss Victory RF glass and LRF unit

[Glassaholic]

I keep reading very positive reports of the new LRF unit used in the new Zeiss Victory RF binos, for those who own these bino's, what has your overall experience been? Last year I bought the Leica HD-B 2200's and wasn't as impressed with the LRF in those units as I thought I'd be. Also, I have seen the Swarovski EL 10x42 binos and those are probably the best glass (to my eyes) that I've seen, has anyone compared the Zeiss Victory RF optical quality to the Swarovski EL and what are your thoughts? I'm wondering if the LRF unit detracts anything from the optical quality in the Victory RF's. One of the things that impressed me about the Swaro EL's is the generous DOF, on other binoculars I always seem to be dialing the focus ring to get a sharp image, but with the EL's it seemed like everything from 200 yards and out was all in focus which was really nice, how is the DOF on the Victory RF's? Thank you.

 

[lr123]

I don't have a lot of experience but I looked through both the victory and the Swaro EL's and the EL's definitely had the edge. The image appeared crisper and showed more detail in comparison to the Victory RF's. I had a hard time differentiating the Victory from the Conquest glass when viewed side by side. If I had the money I would buy the Swaro El's but I didn't and bought the Zeiss Conquest.

 

[Glassaholic]

I’ve heard that about the Zeiss in regular light, but when the light gets low that’s when the RF’s show improvement over the Conquests. Resolution should be better too. As I’ve done more research the EL’s still seem to be top dog, and everything else is compared to them. Some seem bothered by their flat field while others love it. I wonder when Swaro might upgrade their EL range to include a better LRF. For now, my Sig Kilo gets the job done for 98% of what I range and I know some new tech in LRF is on the horizon so I think I should just stick with regular binos for now. In a few days I’ll get a chance to compare some Maven B.2’s to the Swaro EL’s in low light and am very curious how that will go.

 

[264win]

I had a pair of the Geovid 2200s and second the opinion about their laser. It was very mediocre.
The new Zeiss has a fantastic laser. I would say on the DOF, that it isn't as forgiving as you describe the swaros to be. If you go from 200yds to 1000 you would need to refocus for a crisp image.
Glass is so subjective at this level, but here is my opinion. Swaro EL, best in low light. Leica best in bright light. Zeiss right between them. To my eyes, different colors "pop" better with each of these as well.

I sold the swaro and Geovids, kept the Zeiss, and am very happy with them

 

[lr123]

At this level of glass I don't feel you will go wrong with whatever you decide to buy. I felt that the Leica 3000's had a more blue tint compared to the Zeiss which seemed more true to color. Unfortunately all of my comparisons have been done in good lighting. I can say that we ranged an ipsc target at 1000 yards and a smaller 8x8 plate at 760 yards easily with the Leicas.

 

[HogsLife]

I’ve had swaros and now I run the Zeiss Victory RF 10x42’s. I’m not gonna claim that the Zeiss glass is “better” than Swaro but I will say they are equal in glass quality, low light performance -and clarity. Zeiss does not have the Field Flattening lenses ie Swarovision bit I’ve also never seen the need for it.

The Range Finder and ballistics solver is great. I’ve regularly ranged objects to 2700 yds regardless whether or not it was bright and sunny or overcast. I’m really impressed with the RF and then add to that the Zeiss glass and ballistics program and IMO it’s pretty hard to beat.

 

[MarshalC_SportOptics]

Honestly based off what I've seen getting behind all three units its pretty close. I've compared the Leica HD-B, Swaro EL Range, and the new Vic RF and at that level, glass quality is very comparable to one another. But that being said, the Zeiss actually is going to be hard not to recommend. I'm big on features and since the introduction of Bluetooth inside rangefinders, kestrels, etc, I find myself loving the new RF more and more. It is just more convenient to be able to change ballistic info on the fly with the app and then push it over to the binos. Really though at that level its all about what you're looking for that really dials in which binos to get.

 

[Glassaholic]

Very similar to high end scopes it seems the Swaro, Zeiss and Leica all have pretty comparable products. Definitely sounds like the Victory RF has the edge in RF tech right now; however, Leica keeps upping their game, I think the Swaro EL Range has the oldest RF tech in it, but who's not to say their next release is right around the corner which could put them ahead of the game. What I have to weigh now is whether or not it is worth it to invest $3k in the Victory RF's or if I should just stick with regular binos and a dedicated LRF.

 

[Glassaholic]

I had a pair of the Geovid 2200s and second the opinion about their laser. It was very mediocre.

I'm glad I'm not the only one, I've seen some rave about the 2200's and maybe compared to LRF tech from a few years back they might have been good, but I need something more consistent for steel in bright sunlight and good on animals at distance in all kinds of conditions.

The new Zeiss has a fantastic laser. I would say on the DOF, that it isn't as forgiving as you describe the swaros to be. If you go from 200yds to 1000 you would need to refocus for a crisp image.

This does concern me a bit, even the Maven B.2's I'm checking out right now are pretty forgiving in DOF.

Glass is so subjective at this level, but here is my opinion. Swaro EL, best in low light. Leica best in bright light. Zeiss right between them. To my eyes, different colors "pop" better with each of these as well.

I agree and have found that different people have different preferences when it comes to the "look" of the glass, I tend to be someone who prefers anywhere from neutral to warm color cast and maybe leaning on the warm a bit, but blue color cast drives me nuts especially in low light - just personal preference.

I sold the swaro and Geovids, kept the Zeiss, and am very happy with them

I know that a lot of the rave these days is the Applied Ballistics solvers but curious how your experience has been with the Victory RF's ballistics solver? There's something to be said for the bino/LRF not just telling you that's 733 yards away, but also telling you to hold 5.3 mils for a shot, and I'm trying to get better at reading wind at distance through mirage, etc. so don't think wind at the shooter is absolutely crucial for long range, good to know but the wind can be doing something very different "out there" vs. where you are, especially if you're in the mountains.

 

[HogsLife]

Another thing that I would look into before purchasing a Swaro EL RF is the glass quality. I did quit a bit of research before I bought my Zeiss RF, and I kept seeing comments that the Swaro EL Range Glass, was not the same glass / coatings as the Swaro EL Binos, and that it was more inline with their CL line. This was confirmed by an individual that actually called Swaro. The reason given being Swaro wanted to keep the EL Range at a certain price point that couldn’t be obtained with the higher end glass quality. I don’t know if this is still the case, but before I dropped 3k on a set of Swaro EL Range 10x42’s, I’d call Swaro and ask. For that much $$$$ it’s better be the top end glass / coatings.

Also, I’m sure you already know this, but when comparing binoculars (Zeiss, Swaro, Leicas, make sure your comparing same same across the board. Ie same magnification, same Objective diameter or it will not be a fair comparison. An 8x42 will appear brighter than a 10x42 due to the larger exit pupil. Always compare 8x42 to 8x42, 10x42 to 10x42, etc.

Comparing a Swaro 8x42 to a Zeiss 10x42, the image will be brighter in the Swaro. Not necessarily because the glass is better but because the lower magnification has a larger exit pupil.

 

[Glassaholic]

Thank you Hog, I had heard the same about the EL Range vs. the EL, but that is the first I had heard that the EL Range did not have the same glass/coatings as the EL. The fact that the EL range does not have the best LRF unit I was not even really considering them. I'm trying to figure out whether "now" is the time to invest in something like the Victory RF or if it's better to wait as technology increases. I have a feeling in the next 2-3 years we're going to see some crazy new tech in LRF and when that comes out I will most likely want to sell whatever LRF I currently have in my possession. The question is how much will the price drop, with the Leica's it seems they drop quite a bit when a new model comes out and of course it might be a little harder to sell with everyone wanting the shiny new thing.

I'm glad you mentioned the comparison of same mag and same objective as some are not aware of the exit pupil. Typically, when I compare glass it's overall image quality (IQ) which I sum up as contrast, color, resolution and depth and not in any particular order, that's just what I look for. If I'm comparing brightness then I try to make sure everything is equal and I like to take it into low light situations to see how my eye reacts.

 

[264win]

On the ballistics silver in the Zeiss, I really haven’t used it much. It does appear to line up very well with AB so far, but I haven’t spent enough time with it to really give an informed opinion. Since a phone or Kestrel is still needed for wind, I just use it for trajectory as well

 

[MarshalC_SportOptics]

Another thing that I would look into before purchasing a Swaro EL RF is the glass quality. I did quit a bit of research before I bought my Zeiss RF, and I kept seeing comments that the Swaro EL Range Glass, was not the same glass / coatings as the Swaro EL Binos, and that it was more inline with their CL line. This was confirmed by an individual that actually called Swaro. The reason given being Swaro wanted to keep the EL Range at a certain price point that couldn’t be obtained with the higher end glass quality. I don’t know if this is still the case, but before I dropped 3k on a set of Swaro EL Range 10x42’s, I’d call Swaro and ask. For that much $$$$ it’s better be the top end glass / coatings.

Also, I’m sure you already know this, but when comparing binoculars (Zeiss, Swaro, Leicas, make sure your comparing same same across the board. Ie same magnification, same Objective diameter or it will not be a fair comparison. An 8x42 will appear brighter than a 10x42 due to the larger exit pupil. Always compare 8x42 to 8x42, 10x42 to 10x42, etc.

Comparing a Swaro 8x42 to a Zeiss 10x42, the image will be brighter in the Swaro. Not necessarily because the glass is better but because the lower magnification has a larger exit pupil.

Can confirm that^^ The Swaro EL Range was designed with that in mind.

 

[MarshalC_SportOptics]

Very similar to high end scopes it seems the Swaro, Zeiss and Leica all have pretty comparable products. Definitely sounds like the Victory RF has the edge in RF tech right now; however, Leica keeps upping their game, I think the Swaro EL Range has the oldest RF tech in it, but who's not to say their next release is right around the corner which could put them ahead of the game. What I have to weigh now is whether or not it is worth it to invest $3k in the Victory RF's or if I should just stick with regular binos and a dedicated LRF.

I mean a dedicated LRF is going to just add onto your kit which the hunter in me hates carrying more gear than I have to but the match shooter in me gets it. I will say tho I was looking through the RF 10x54 (I know big binos) during a high mirage day in Louisiana and it worked fantastically. Plus using it I still got my reads for my elevation adjustment which got me on target perfectly once I figured my wind holdover. Honestly if I took more long range hunting trips I'd only bring the Victory RF and not bring a bino and LRF just to save weight. Zeiss really did crush it with these.

 

[Glassaholic]

I mean a dedicated LRF is going to just add onto your kit which the hunter in me hates carrying more gear than I have to but the match shooter in me gets it. I will say tho I was looking through the RF 10x54 (I know big binos) during a high mirage day in Louisiana and it worked fantastically. Plus using it I still got my reads for my elevation adjustment which got me on target perfectly once I figured my wind holdover. Honestly if I took more long range hunting trips I'd only bring the Victory RF and not bring a bino and LRF just to save weight. Zeiss really did crush it with these.

I was just thinking about the 10x54's and wondering if they might actually provide a little more depth forgiveness than the 10x42's, they are 7oz heavier than the 10x42's, but in an FHF harness or connected to my Vorn will I really notice a difference?

I just saw that the 10x42 has 345' FOV at 1000y while the 10x54 only has 330' FOV at 1000y, I was thinking if anything the 54mm objective might allow for an optical formula which had greater FOV, I wonder why Zeiss went this route.

 

[HogsLife]

I was just thinking about the 10x54's and wondering if they might actually provide a little more depth forgiveness than the 10x42's, they are 7oz heavier than the 10x42's, but in an FHF harness or connected to my Vorn will I really notice a difference?

The exit pupil on the 10x54’s (5.4) are gonna be slightly better than the 8x42’s (5.25) vs the 10x42’s (4.2) so they’re definitely gonna be brighter, but IMO thats a big Bino to be carrying for hunting. The weight / size will definitely be noticeably more than the 10x42’s.

I carry my 10x42’s in an Alaskan Guide Outfitters Kodiak Cub harness. They’re perfect IMO, but 10x54’s are quite a bit heavier and longer.

 

[Glassaholic]

The exit pupil on the 10x54’s (5.4) are gonna be slightly better than the 8x42’s (5.25) vs the 10x42’s (4.2) so they’re definitely gonna be brighter, but IMO thats a big Bino to be carrying for hunting. The weight / size will definitely be noticeably more than the 10x42’s.

I carry my 10x42’s in an Alaskan Guide Outfitters Kodiak Cub harness. They’re perfect IMO, but 10x54’s are quite a bit heavier and longer.

I also waffle between the 8x and 10x, I have never actually tested the two side by side to see what I can see with the 10x that I cannot see with the 8x, the huge FOV from the 8x (405' @ 1000y) is definitely a draw. If I'm using a spotter for waaaay out anyway, how much of a detriment will the 8x be?

Eye relief on the x54's drops to 14mm vs. 17mm on the x42's, wow, less FOV and tighter eye relief is not making a good case for the 54mm objective...

 

[HogsLife]

I also waffle between the 8x and 10x, I have never actually tested the two side by side to see what I can see with the 10x that I cannot see with the 8x, the huge FOV from the 8x (405' @ 1000y) is definitely a draw. If I'm using a spotter for waaaay out anyway, how much of a detriment will the 8x be?

Eye relief on the x54's drops to 14mm vs. 17mm on the x42's, wow, less FOV and tighter eye relief is not making a good case for the 54mm objective...

Where you hunting at? Out west? I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know, but looking over those longer distance I’d be going to the 10x all day. Back east / mid west, thick woods 8x would be perfect.

 

[MarshalC_SportOptics]

I also waffle between the 8x and 10x, I have never actually tested the two side by side to see what I can see with the 10x that I cannot see with the 8x, the huge FOV from the 8x (405' @ 1000y) is definitely a draw. If I'm using a spotter for waaaay out anyway, how much of a detriment will the 8x be?

Eye relief on the x54's drops to 14mm vs. 17mm on the x42's, wow, less FOV and tighter eye relief is not making a good case for the 54mm objective...

The 10x54 only has a real draw of providing the most light gathering potential out there. That's its real draw to it. Same being said for the HT version of those as well. If your trying to spot or hunt I'd just stick a pair of 10x42 and be happy. Enough FOV to scan for targets as well as still give you all the benefits. I have to agree with Hogs about that. If I'm hiking, hunting, shooting; a 10x42 is going to be my go to. very rarely do I even take my 8x42 binos out of the safe and just pack my 10x42. It's sorta that sweet spot IMO whatever I'm doing. Would be cool tho if they came out with like a 12x50 version for people strictly spotting with it. Just mount that bad boy up on a tripod and go to work with your shots.

 

[HogsLife]

As far as waiting for some new tech to come out, honestly man, as good as this glass is. I don’t see anything coming out that’s just gonna blow this glass away. Could it be better? Sure, but whether or not your eyes actually gonna be able to tell the difference is a whole nother story. Top tier glass is amazing and at this level it’s hard to tell the difference between any of them. Any Improvements made are gonna be small. Regarding the RF, how far do you need to range? This hits 2500+ yds consistently and quickly. Plus the ballistics program is awesome. These are a lifetime purchase for me. Don’t see the need to ever have to upgrade. Take care of them and they’ll last.

 

[Glassaholic]

As far as waiting for some new tech to come out, honestly man, as good as this glass is. I don’t see anything coming out that’s just gonna blow this glass away. Could it be better? Sure, but whether or not your eyes actually gonna be able to tell the difference is a whole nother story. Top tier glass is amazing and at this level it’s hard to tell the difference between any of them. Any Improvements made are gonna be small. Regarding the RF, how far do you need to range? This hits 2500+ yds consistently and quickly. Plus the ballistics program is awesome. These are a lifetime purchase for me. Don’t see the need to ever have to upgrade. Take care of them and they’ll last.

I'm not talking about the tech for glass, I'm talking about the tech for LRF, there are advancements coming that most of us will want. That being said, these appear to be the best of the best for bino/LRF combo today. I hunt in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, so yes, the far country and I've been using my 10x successfully so I suppose I'd just stick with that combo, especially with what Marshal mentions with the 8x42's never coming out of the safe.

 

[HogsLife]

I'm not talking about the tech for glass, I'm talking about the tech for LRF, there are advancements coming that most of us will want. That being said, these appear to be the best of the best for bino/LRF combo today. I hunt in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, so yes, the far country and I've been using my 10x successfully so I suppose I'd just stick with that combo, especially with what Marshal mentions with the 8x42's never coming out of the safe.

I think you’ll be happy with them man. Unfortuently, Zeiss doesn’t have a stud or bipod mount for these like Swaro does. You’re gonna want to purchase the Outdoorsman Stud (replaces the RF battery cap) Adapter so you can tripod mount them. These are what I purchased.......

Zeiss RF Stud

This stud for the 2018 model of the Zeiss RF binocular has a unique design that requires minimal work to install. First, remove the battery cap of your binoculars. You will also remove the small rubber O-ring and the spring from the battery cap. Place the O-ring and spring in the exact same...

outdoorsmans.com

Outdoorsmans Binocular Adapter

Lightweight Machined Aluminum Securely locks binoculars in place. Part of a two part system. Studs sold separately.

outdoorsmans.com

 

[Glassaholic]

The 10x54 only has a real draw of providing the most light gathering potential out there. That's its real draw to it.

That's a big draw as well, 5.4mm exit pupil vs. 4.2mm in low light could prove beneficial when glassing after the sun goes down and before it rises, but Colorado only allows 1/2 hour before and after so it's not like I'm hunting until dark.

 

[Glassaholic]

I think you’ll be happy with them man. Unfortuently, Zeiss doesn’t have a stud or bipod mount for these like Swaro does. You’re gonna want to purchase the Outdoorsman Stud and Adapter so you can tripod mount them. These are what I purchased.......

Zeiss RF Stud

This stud for the 2018 model of the Zeiss RF binocular has a unique design that requires minimal work to install. First, remove the battery cap of your binoculars. You will also remove the small rubber O-ring and the spring from the battery cap. Place the O-ring and spring in the exact same...

outdoorsmans.com

Outdoorsmans Binocular Adapter

Lightweight Machined Aluminum Securely locks binoculars in place. Part of a two part system. Studs sold separately.

outdoorsmans.com

I appreciate that, I had already found those adapters at outdoorsmans but appreciate the links - others will as well I'm sure.

 

[Rthur]

@wjm308 , I have the older version.
While I haven't got to compare them to every newest set out there
I've never had a competitor beat the low light performance of 10x45 Victorys.
Only wish the laser was good to 2k or better.

R

 

[Glassaholic]

@wjm308 , I have the older version.
While I haven't got to compare them to every newest set out there
I've never had a competitor beat the low light performance of 10x45 Victorys.
Only wish the laser was good to 2k or better.

R

Thanks R, I've heard even the older 10x45 Victories had a pretty decent LRF unit in them, you mention 2k or better, what is the reliable max range you've found on big game as well as steel with your 10x45's?

 

[Rthur]

Thanks R, I've heard even the older 10x45 Victories had a pretty decent LRF unit in them, you mention 2k or better, what is the reliable max range you've found on big game as well as steel with your 10x45's?

In ideal conditions I've gotten returns at a mile on hide probably 1000-1100 as a standard though.
Steel 1200-1400 is usually where it gets less consistent in mid day light/smaller targets.

R

 

[Gil P.]

I had my older Zeiss 10x45 RF Next to some Swaro 15x56 SLCs and they looked very similar. We were looking at deer that were about 2 miles away using tripods. Resolution was close on both. I believe the SLCs and Zeiss RF are both the second from the best model glass wise in their bino line.

 

[Rthur]

I had my older Zeiss 10x45 RF Next to some Swaro 15x56 SLCs and they looked very similar. We were looking at deer that were about 2 miles away using tripods. Resolution was close on both. I believe the SLCs and Zeiss RF are both the second from the best model glass wise in their bino line.

A testament to Zeiss if it's hanging with a 56mm objective as a 45mm.

R

 

[Glassaholic]

Last week I got the chance to compare the Maven B.2 9x45 and 11x45 to some Swarovski SV 10x42 EL. The Swaro's are pretty much known as the pinnacle of binocular design and every time I look through them I am super impressed; however, the Maven's are not far behind surprisingly. Build quality is a bit lacking compared to the Swaro's as they feel a little more plasticky if that makes sense; however, optically they are truly phenomenal for the price. Also, to both my eyes and my friend I was with the 9x45 "looked" much better with regard to IQ (vs. the 11x45) and was less finicky for focus and showed great DOF. I was really debating getting the Maven's and thought long and hard over the weekend, but in the end I decided that having the RF in the binos takes away one step and having ballistics in the binos takes away 2 steps. With the Victory RF I can load my custom ballistic profiles for my rifles and the Zeiss will do everything except the wind. I am trying to get better at "reading" wind and relying less on my Kestrel especially for long range shots where wind is most likely different at distance than it is at the shooter anyway. That being said I plan to have a wind hold cheat sheet with me as reference.

I purchased the Victory RF's sight unseen; however, reviews all say they are outstanding optically so I really hope they are at least on par with the Maven's if not better. @MarshalC_SportOptics was great to work with and gave me a fantastic deal and timing worked out as Zeiss started a new promo August 1st where if you buy a Victory RF you get a free set of Terra ED binos, interesting offering since I'm already buying a set of 10x42's but will most likely just sell the Terra's hopefully for a decent price.

The Victory RF's should get here by the end of the week and I look forward to reporting back and letting you all know what I think. For all who've contributed to my thread here, thank you.

 

[MarshalC_SportOptics]

Pleasure talking to you this morning! Let me know if there is anything I can do to help out!

 

[Glassaholic]

I received my Zeiss Victory RF's last night, put them to the test in low light and they look amazing. Played with them today and set the diopter and they look so good just scanning around the yard and distant hillsides. That being said, their manual is not the greatest and I sync'd them with my Zeiss Hunting app and tried to setup a custom profile for ballistics, but when I press the "Profile" button it takes me to a screen that I cannot interact with, just blank with horizontal lines and I can't click anywhere. Anyone have any advice on how to setup custom ballistic profiles?

Edit: I figured out how to setup custom ballistics, I thought it was in the settings for the unit but it’s in a ballistics section before you connect to the unit.

 

[Glassaholic]

While I’m very impressed with the optics I did get a chance today to setup LRF and head out to test with some antelope. They were about 300-440 yards out from my position and in a grassy depression just behind a hill and on the hill. At these ranges the Victory RF had no issues identifying ranges verified by my trusty Sig Kilo, but at longer ranges it struggles more than I thought it should. On a 1000 yd hill it had difficulty pinging back on a small tree and a pile of concrete. Since I typically don’t shoot trees and concrete I need to get out when the antelope are further away to really test against real animals, but I was hoping for better performance vs my Kilo 2000. I set the LRF to both best and Last and it didn’t seem to make a difference. Conditions were late morning with overcast skies. I’ve also read the actual beam may not be centered in the aiming circle, I don’t have NV but is there another way to tell where the beam is in relation to the circle?

 

[HogsLife]

While I’m very impressed with the optics I did get a chance today to setup LRF and head out to test with some antelope. They were about 300-440 yards out from my position and in a grassy depression just behind a hill and on the hill. At these ranges the Victory RF had no issues identifying ranges verified by my trusty Sig Kilo, but at longer ranges it struggles more than I thought it should. On a 1000 yd hill it had difficulty pinging back on a small tree and a pile of concrete. Since I typically don’t shoot trees and concrete I need to get out when the antelope are further away to really test against real animals, but I was hoping for better performance vs my Kilo 2000. I set the LRF to both best and Last and it didn’t seem to make a difference. Conditions were late morning with overcast skies. I’ve also read the actual beam may not be centered in the aiming circle, I don’t have NV but is there another way to tell where the beam is in relation to the circle?

With the larger circle it’s definitely behooves you to use a Tripod to range and extended distances . It’s not the RF capability, it’s a user stability issue. It’s much easier to hold a Sig steady than it is the binos. That’s just my experience, and I’ve never seen anything regarding the laser not being centered in the circle.

My only complaint with them is the position of the RF button. It’s in a location that causes me to adjust my hands from where I would normally position them during normal glassing. I believe this goes hand in hand with the instability issue when ranging at extended distances on smaller targets.

 

[Glassaholic]

I thought the same, that is was a stability issue, so I used a tripod with the RF's to try and range the concrete pile, to be fair the Sig was only about 20% hit rate, but the Zeiss was 0% even with the tripod (also, Sig pinged the concrete at 1260yds if I remember correctly). Again, these aren't typical things I'd range in the field so I want to get back out again and see if I can get some actual animals at distance. I am however used to ranging things like trees or rocks which might be nearby game that doesn't register.

I agree with you HL, I wish they put the button in a different location, I was thinking a natural place for it would have been on the bridge itself right near the focus wheel

 

[Glassaholic]

After further investigation I found the Leica CRF 2800.COM, this is not a binocular but it does offer bluetooth connectivity with my Kestrel and can send back the ballistics data for both drop and wind, and for some it's important that the 2800.COM also feeds the Kestrel DOF (not depth of field in this case but Direction Of Fire). I contacted Zeiss and asked if they had any plans to update their Victory RF software in order to integrate with Kestrel, their response was "I have not heard of any plans to do this. Good idea.." Unfortunately this does not give me the warm and fuzzies that this is coming anytime soon. I am torn with what to do with the Victory RF's, I was hoping they would perform better than my Sig Kilo 2000 but they have not in certain circumstances but I do love they have the ballistic drop readout, though I wish they would leave the numbers up a bit longer, that being said it would sure be nice to have both drop and wind that are displayed in the display on the LRF and that's exactly what the Leica 2800.COM units do. My guess is in about 2 years we're going to see a number of LRF binos do just this, so maybe it is best I just grab the 2800.COM and keep using separate binos for the time being.

 

[Braunschweiger]

Anyone know if the super low brightness of the HUD is just me or an issue with the unit. I updated firmware first and made sure brightness was at max (11) and set the diopter. On a full sunshine day on trees it’s impossible to see the HUD

 

[Gil P.]

I can see the ranging circle and numbers in my older 10x45s on a bright day pretty easily.

 

[Braunschweiger]

I can see the ranging circle and numbers in my older 10x45s on a bright day pretty easily.

Hmmm. I was recently checked at MEPS for vision and I have perfect eyesight except for some color blindness. However I can easily pass red/green test. I’m wondering if the unit is bad or if for whatever reason my eyes don’t focus well on the red LED inside the unit against a bright green background (trees)

 

[Gil P.]

Hmmm. I was recently checked at MEPS for vision and I have perfect eyesight except for some color blindness. However I can easily pass red/green test. I’m wondering if the unit is bad or if for whatever reason my eyes don’t focus well on the red LED inside the unit against a bright green background (trees)

Did you set the diopters properly? That helped me.

 

[Braunschweiger]

Did you set the diopters properly? That helped me.

Yep. I found the US version of the manual and followed it exactly. I found myself having to shut my left eye if I want to see the LED display. In darker instances I think it’ll be just fine but against a bright background it’s very hard to see. I feel like it should be brighter than that.

 

[Gil P.]

Maybe when you look through the binos with both eyes they are off center? It's odd you can see the display when you close one eye.