ZEISS Carl Victory FL Binoculars (8x32)

This is perhaps the best mid-size binocular available. It is incredibly sharp, very light (550g, plus strap and caps), very rugged, and very practical: with eyepiece and objective caps that work perfectly, enough eye relief to use with glasses, perfectly smooth focusing, close focus ability, incredibly bright, and a diopter that is guaranteed not to move when in use. It truly has no defect. They have essentially NO chromatic aberrations, and they are as bright in my use as my Leica 7x42.Let's look at the competition. The newer Zeiss (the FL) are perhaps better optically, in the sense that they have an even broader field of view, but they are longer, a bit heavier, and they have very impractical objective caps that are very hard to close, so -- practical, in my opinion, they are not.The Leica Ultravid 8x32 HD+ are fabulous, even a touch more contrast than these, and even a tiny bit lighter. But, the eye relief is not enough for glasses, and they are not as bright; at dusk the Zeiss FL are clearly superior.The Svarowski EL have more flare, and are longer.If in addition to the best optically, you also want the most practical, these are the very best. Only you can decide whether you want these, or other cheaper ones, but if you want the best, get these while they are still available. I like them so much, I got two pairs, one for me one for family members / friends that come birding with me.

This is actually my second pair of Zeiss Victory FL 8x32 binoculars. The first pair was lost on a trip to Mount Desert Island (I stupidly left them on a bench and, of course, they were gone by the time I got back). Someone got himself/herself a beautiful pair of free binoculars. Anyway, I punished myself by not replacing them for a couple of years. Then I couldn't take it any longer. So, now I am once again enjoying the most versatile, sharp, clear binoculars I've had the pleasure to use. They are not super compact (I have a pair of Leica Ultravid compact 8x20's for those occasions), but they are nevertheless light and compact enough to travel with, or to take with me on hikes without thinking twice about it. You can't use them if they aren't with you.If I were a dedicated birder, I might opt for a larger size. But these fit the bill for me and, honestly, they have such incredible optics, I just don't see how much more can be gained, except perhaps at extremely low light. Ergonomics are, for me, flawless. But that wanders into the realm of subjectivity, so draw your own conclusions.I'm not an expert, but there are plenty of expert reviews of the Zeiss Victory FL binoculars. The superlatives are well earned. Heck--I bought two.

Perfect birding, hiking, spotting, binoculars. I also have 10x42 Leica, excellent but have to hold steady.These spot things while walking. Very bright, and amazing field of view.Reasonably small and light, not quite pocket size but great power.

A glorious FL binocular from Zeiss, introduced approx. 2003, and while still on their website at end 2015, it is a model that is being phased out. It is being replaced by the Victory SL upgrade, and now the newest Victory HT. As of now, it remains the only 32mm objective Victory by Zeiss, however. I think this will change as the 32mm size is vaunted by birders and as the HT comes into being in the past couple of years, it is likely that a 32mm model of HT will be added. Note: the Abbe-Kroenig prisms in the 42mm HT models are, from reports, too large to have in 32mm models. The A-K prisms allow about 5% more light through (i.e. brightness) than the prisms used in the 32mm FL model; so, when objective size is coupled with the A-K prisms, the HT is the brightest binocular in the Zeiss line (and perhaps in any manufacturers' line). These are things to take into account when buying. Some will want the "latest and the greatest" despite the $2500 price tag for HTs; others are fine with flagship models from yesteryear for a thousand bucks less. I am in that latter category, and I wanted 32mm--for now, the FL is my only Zeiss choice.I own a pair of Carson 3D ED 10x42mm binoculars (23.3 ounces, $300) and compared the Zeiss FLs 10x32 (20.5 ounces, $1800) in great details and in many settings and lighting conditions. I could mention chromatic aberration, sharpness, brightness, edge fuzziness, eye relief, etc., but I will spare you the details. Although I researched all the claims and reviews of these models, the bottom line is: how are they?The answer: The Carson binoculars are about 90-95% as good as the Zeiss. Sure, I'm comparing appeles to oranges--one is 42mm, on is 32mm. On is lighter and more compact than the other. They are built differently (the build-quality, to me, is about the same). The warrantioes are both about the same, frankly. I'm just saying that, even in low-light situations, the Carson 3D ED glass is nearly the same as the Zeiss FL. The more expensive German import is very slightly more sharp for details in low light, sure. And the colors might be a touch more true (the Carsons are a tad warm). But, trust me, it's minimal. The Carson's are very good for their price...and I have zero affiliation with Carson. In fact, if you look at my review of the 3D ED, I roasted them for a case that is abysmal--truly a piece of rubbish. So, this is very unbiased.I am keeping the FLs because I need small, compact, and slightly lighter (by 15%) for birding. The amount of improved detail from the FL: meh. Nothing to write home about. I was on the fence about sending them back, to be frank. Their good but so is the Carson. So, I will keep the FLs. I also own the Victory 8x20 and 10x25 Compacts, and those are awesome (in lighted settings). Less than 8 ounces, one can wear those around their neck like jewelry. Recommended.So, bottom line, even though I can afford these FLs, and did buy and keep them, if I was needing binocs for hunting, sports, or general viewing, I would pay for the Carsons, certainly, and pocket the grand and a half difference to go on a hunting safari. The FLs are not needed. For birding in rough conditions, like the desert mountains, or while rock climbing, where accidental hit damage is a strong risk, I'd use the cheaper Carsons. If I was using the glass only in the daytime, I'd buy the Victory T Compact (likely 8x) for half the price of these FLs and appreciate their quality and lightness/low weight. If you have a field test on birds in the wild, and being graded on your ability to identify a yellow-bellied sap sucker at 500 yards, with a cash prize if you can count the exact number of his tail-feathers, then get the Zeiss FL.That's my take on it. I hope this helps, and you can "see" these models though my eyes. I have read tons and tons of reviews online, and, to be frank, non of them are blinded. I firmly believe that, completely blinded, many reviewers could not even detect much difference between these two glasses, the FL and the 3D ED. Sure, most would pick the FL as it is ever so slightly cleared/sharper, but it is not brighter (the Carson 42mm objectives cannot be overcome by 32mm objectives despite the quality of the coatings). I believe most would come to the same conclusion that I did: those binocs are very, very close in optics, and one is only worth 5x the price of the other if that marginal difference matters to them. And it is marginal, very marginal. They are both awesome glass. Just get a new case and lens/eyepiece covers if you get the Carson.There are always fanboys of the European binocs (Zeiss, Swarovski, Leica, etc.) that chine in on any review of their "pets", usually to state that the reviewer that shaded their favorite brand needs to have their eyes checked, or that they must have gotten a bad pair to test, or some other such tripe. I stand by my opinion, and have viewed these binoculars though the eyeglass-less vision at length, both on and off the tripod, in wild settings. If you have other, or opposing, ideas or opinions, I look forward to your review (adding comments are seldom seen and really help no one; just write your own review). Thanks, friends.